Will Jason Campbell return?

[Monksdown]

Don't misunderstand our angle. I think we all want him to do well. We just don't feel based on the numbers we have on him, and on our limited ability to analyze his skills, that he's going to take a huge step forward this year.

That is honestly how i feel. And i can back it up with 36 starts, just over 2 years of hard numbers. Granted, i probably put too much stock in cold hard touchdowns.

The argument that he's finally able to be in the same system 2 years in a row does hold some water. But i can't quantify that potential success with any hard numbers. You could bring up the 'Matt Hasselback developed at this pace argument'. But that argument sucks too, there are too many variables for an apple to apple comparison.

[Monksdown]

Originally Posted by SC Skins Fan

My solution does not make for good discussion board material, but my argument would be that you have to wait for this year to make a real judgment one way or the other. And the thing is, you really have nothing really to lose. If Campbell fails then his contract is up and you let him walk. If he succeeds you resign him (and if it is an uncapped year he is an RFA anyway). That is why all the trade talk with Cutler and Sanchez made no sense, except for the fact that DS thinks this team is a perennial Super Bowl contender and can win "right now." The rest of us know a little bit better and realize there are substantial potential deficiencies with this team, most notably age and depth (another reason it made no sense to execute a big time trade for a QB).

The major problem with Campbell at this point, and what most detractors are circling around with their criticism of him, is his lack of willingness to take chances with his throws. The physical tools are there, he can make the throws, he is actually an accurate passer (and has improved each year), so the question becomes whether the tentative part of his game is correctable? That is what we have to find out this year. Same system, so he should have greater confidence. If he simply lacks the athletic arrogance (which you can see in an extreme form with Cutler, and is what separates Roethisberger from Campbell despite the statistical comparability) to take some chances then he does have a limited ceiling. If he can become more agressive then he can be successful. So that is what we have to find out in 2009 ... and we do so with very little risk.

I totally agree with your analysis. Which brings me back to a concern i voiced yesterday about his athletic arrogance(as you called it). I think that's just a part of who he is. He is cautious to a fault.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Monksdown

Someone with deceptively poor statistics at the beginning of their career that turned out to be a stud???

Eli Manning? If you want to call him a stud.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by DBUCHANON101

its the league we play in.. its all on the QB

the pats D slowed the greatest show on turf. Adam V kicked the winning fg and all the cred goes to Brady.

Do you consider Snyder a good businessman? Why would a good businessman go out and spend 100 million dollars, 41 million guarenteed, on a player who doesn't matter because he's not a Quarterback. Seems like the gaffe of the century and you should be outraged!

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

How are they 'deceptively poor' stats? Are they poor or not? At that point in his career how would you classify him? If he were the QB of your team what would you be advocating to be done with him? More patience, trade, outright release?

Paintrain, what age and draft position is the player you speak of?

[Monksdown]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Eli Manning? If you want to call him a stud.

I don't really want to. But damn, that ring is shiny.

[53Fan]

Is their anyone on this board who honestly believes that if Peyton, Tom, or Ben changed systems as much as the Redskins have in the last 4-5 years, it wouldn't affect their play? Or more to the point, the teams play? Doe's anyone really believe they would win as much if they changed offensive systems every year? Let's not forget the QB is not the only one who has to learn a new system. The receiver we just signed, Roydell or whatever his name is, is pretty lost right now and he's not a rookie. He's just new to this system. JC has frustrated the hell out of me at times, but I'm waiting to pass judgement on him after he's been given a chance to completely learn and play in a system for more than 1 year. To say changing systems is just an excuse is pure BS and shows a lack of football related knowledge IMO. If Jason doesn't progress this year or continues to make the same mistakes, then he needs to go. But to completely dismiss constantly changing offensive systems as a variable in a QB's progression or for a teams lack of offensive output is crazy.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Monksdown

Don't misunderstand our angle. I think we all want him to do well. We just don't feel based on the numbers we have on him, and on our limited ability to analyze his skills, that he's going to take a huge step forward this year.

What if I told you that he already took that huge step forward last year (in my opinion), sometime between weeks 2-5, or possibly weeks 11-13, but that it was masked by the fact that every one else on offense was so terrible.

Then, as my logic follows, if the offense around Campbell is just a little less horriffic, he should pick up right where he left off, at a pro bowl level.

Here's a tip, if you have to point to a single (one) season as evidence that a player can't get it done, you're likely seeing too many other variables to know. You see his improvements as "super-slow", in the data, but the rest of us just see them as "there," and need more information to see if a breakout is coming/has already come.

[Monksdown]

Originally Posted by 53Fan

Is their anyone on this board who honestly believes that if Peyton, Tom, or Ben changed systems as much as the Redskins have in the last 4-5 years, it wouldn't affect their play? Or more to the point, the teams play? Doe's anyone really believe they would win as much if they changed offensive systems every year? Let's not forget the QB is not the only one who has to learn a new system. The receiver we just signed, Roydell or whatever his name is, is pretty lost right now and he's not a rookie. He's just new to this system. JC has frustrated the hell out of me at times, but I'm waiting to pass judgement on him after he's been given a chance to completely learn and play in a system for more than 1 year. To say changing systems is just an excuse is pure BS and shows a lack of football related knowledge IMO. If Jason doesn't progress this year or continues to make the same mistakes, then he needs to go. But to completely dismiss constantly changing offensive systems as a variable in a QB's progression or for a teams lack of offensive output is crazy.

It's not being completely dismissive. And it is a variable in a QB's development. Just not alone a very good excuse for not leaping forward. Your final analysis is accurate though...should he not perform, goodbye.

[CRedskinsRule]

Uh oh, Tripps getting arrogant again

[Monksdown]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

What if I told you that he already took that huge step forward last year (in my opinion), sometime between weeks 2-5, or possibly weeks 11-13, but that it was masked by the fact that every one else on offense was so terrible.

Then, as my logic follows, if the offense around Campbell is just a little less horriffic, he should pick up right where he left off, at a pro bowl level.

Here's a tip, if you have to point to a single (one) season as evidence that a player can't get it done, you're likely seeing too many other variables to know. You see his improvements as "super-slow", in the data, but the rest of us just see them as "there," and need more information to see if a breakout is coming/has already come.

My analysis earlier was based on 36 games started.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Monksdown

I don't really want to. But damn, that ring is shiny.

I don't actually know that it's Manning, but that's who I thought of when I saw Paintrain's numbers.

I don't know if I like a E. Manning example because he's probably not as good a QB as Campbell, just playing the odds. His play was a big reason why the Giants won the SB two years ago. But whose to say that if our defense could have gotten Jason into the playoffs at 10-6 by not imploding down the stretch, and staying in the top quadrant of defenses, he wouldn't have surprised everyone and led Zorn to a super bowl in his first year as HC?

I mean, yeah, pie in the sky scenario. But no less realistic than calling a Giants championship in 2007 or a Cardinals championship this year (which didn't happen, but you know, no fault to the QB position).

[Monksdown]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

I don't actually know that it's Manning, but that's who I thought of when I saw Paintrain's numbers.

I don't know if I like a E. Manning example because he's probably not as good a QB as Campbell, just playing the odds. His play was a big reason why the Giants won the SB two years ago. But whose to say that if our defense could have gotten Jason into the playoffs at 10-6 by not imploding down the stretch, and staying in the top quadrant of defenses, he wouldn't have surprised everyone and led Zorn to a super bowl in his first year as HC?

I mean, yeah, pie in the sky scenario. But no less realistic than calling a Giants championship in 2007 or a Cardinals championship this year (which didn't happen, but you know, no fault to the QB position).

G-What imploded last year that led to that decrease in projection? The O-line right? So how is Derrick Dockery alone going to fix that? And in turn, if the Oline flounders again due to injury(entirely possible), then Jason's gone. Possibly to flourish somewhere else. I don't think there's another way to look at it. Right or wrong.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Monksdown

My analysis earlier was based on 36 games started.

But then you aren't seeing an upwards trend, or any trend at all. That would just be a weighted average of a QBs developmental portion of his career.

I hear people using the term make-or-break around Campbell this year. To an extent, I agree. Right now, he still carries the "young prospect" label, as the first four years of anyones career tend to be the developmental stage. But he's 27. So at the end of this year, he's going to turn 28, and he'll either have "franchise Quarterback", or "journeyman".

The statistics suggest that he'll be a franchise QB. But that's probability, not certainty. The question if he doesn't fulfill his promise this year is not whether we keep him or not, that's pretty irrelevant. It's why he was unable to live up to promise, i.e. what do we need to do to make sure the next surefire prospect does not fail. It could be a team thing, or it could be structural-organizational.

[Monksdown]

I don't think 'franchise' quarterbacks throw as few td's as Jason is trending towards continuing to do. He's clearly not a consistent scoring threat for us. That consistency is based on the limited data we've got. If he makes it as a franchise qb, it wont be with the 'skins.