Gibbs' take on Campbell's situation

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

What you're saying is true in the loosest sense of the term, all those teams had iffy production from the receivers and strong passing offenses, but in a more structured sense, not one of those teams were as bad on the outside as we were.

The Browns and Seahawks were probably worse at WR than we were last year, and you can probably throw the Raiders, Rams, Bears, and Vikings in there as well. But you know what, none of those teams had any semblence of a passing game last year. So, it's not proven that an offense can function at a higher level than ours last year without a better job on the outside. We'll see. The OL should improve, but the WRs must develop because the veterans aren't likely to be more healthy than they were last year.

And do you think we did?

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

And do you think we did?

Do you want me to qualify this, or can I just leave it as an implied yes (without being taken out of context)?

EDIT
^^Probably reads as more smart alecky than intended. I was trying to ask if the sentence in the context above can stand for itself, or if you really want hard numbers that suggest our passing game was clearly better than Clevelands or Seattles.

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Do you want me to qualify this, or can I just leave it as an implied yes (without being taken out of context)?

EDIT
^^Probably reads as more smart alecky than intended. I was trying to ask if the sentence in the context above can stand for itself, or if you really want hard numbers that suggest our passing game was clearly better than Clevelands or Seattles.

I will agree with you on that. But that's not really saying much. Seattle was crushed by injured wr's and qb. Cleveland doesn't have a legit NFL QB. But having a passing game slightly better than Cleveland and a injury depleted Seattle team isn't saying much.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

I will agree with you on that. But that's not really saying much. Seattle was crushed by injured wr's and qb. Cleveland doesn't have a legit NFL QB. But having a passing game slightly better than Cleveland and a injury depleted Seattle team isn't saying much.

No, it's certainly not. Our number one goal on offense should be to make sure we build on what we began last year, and not to regress simply because our QB has his job on the line. Once that is accomplished, the next goal would be to improve the passing efficiency to score more touchdowns.

The key, obviously, is going to be in the big plays. Even when Moss is well covered, we're going to ask Kelly and Thomas to win those one on ones, and the rest should go from there. Those double moves that we like require great pass protection, and there's no guarentee that we can get that, but those vertical routes by secondary wide receivers can be run at any time...if only we get the personnel to run them.