Good for Campbell

Regardless of what Collins was actually changing at the line in his few plays this season, is there any reason to believe the protection was actually better when he was in? I mean, Collins looked great when he was in and his first read on a play came open -- he was accurate and could stick it in there -- but seemed to me that things broke down for sir scrappy just as quickly as they did for Campbell, and usually with more disastrous results.

If the point is Collins seemed to the untrained eye to be more in charge before the snap than the starter, well, great. I don't care.


Campbell never had a 4 game streak like Collins and we never would have had that 4 game streak with Campbell.

But thankfully, it doesn't matter. He is gone and we have a leader behind center, finally.

From reading this thread i kinda get the feeling the people that hate Campbell really aren't very football savvy.

Campbell never had a 4 game streak like Collins and we never would have had that 4 game streak with Campbell.

But thankfully, it doesn't matter. He is gone and we have a leader behind center, finally.I, for one, welcome our rent-a-leader overlords.

I would argue against this point. He consistently misread pre-snap coverages and when the first option was covered went straight to his checkdown ignoring the second/third reads. Nor did he "make a bunch of great throws under pressure". What was more prevalent on film was Campbell making decent throws if his first read was open or using his size and stregth to avoid a rush and make a dump-off play for solid yardage. Under pressure he often misfired, missed secondary options, or forced a pass into double/triple coverage or a bad spot in a zone.....actually he did this with no pressure too. I'd say go deeper into the season, w/film instead of assuming that six or seven games make a season. Campbell looked a lot like 2008 Campbell for the first six weeks after the bye.

Of course, a lot of the bad habits you saw reappeared in the Week 15 and 16 games, so I guess you could say he was never "above" the influence of a poor offense, just feeding off weak pass defenses. Which supports the whole "Jason Campbell is a good quarterback on a level playing field" theory. That's all I'm saying.

Like I said a million times after the season, it doesn't matter who your quarterback is if you are worse than everyone you play. The story of the Bills game is that we were a completely better team at every level than them. That's far more important that the abstract concept of QB leadership, IMO.Are you saying that JC only made 2 or less bad plays (mis-reads of coverage, blitz protection, audibles, bad progressions, bad throws) and that his play was responsible for no more than one loss last year or am I misreading what you said?Uh, no. I'm pretty sure I never said Campbell only made two bad plays.

Two a game, perhaps.

From reading this thread i kinda get the feeling the people that hate Campbell really aren't very football savvy.

I would say the same thing about anyone who defends his results.

I think Jason is a great guy and hope he takes the Raiders to the Superbowl but I would bet my firstborn that it won't happen.

JC at the end did show signs of improvement, but overall he was the same guy. You have to pull for him in Oakland or he is going to become just another journeyman backup like most ex Skins starting Qbs still in the league.

From reading this thread i kinda get the feeling the people that hate Campbell really aren't very football savvy.

Because Campbell is a middle of the road QB, he is the perfect Rorschach test onto which people project what they want. The haters will see a glass half empty. The kool aid drinkers will see a glass half full. Reasonable people will see things in the middle.

I'd say go deeper into the season, w/film instead of assuming that six or seven games make a season. Campbell looked a lot like 2008 Campbell for the first six weeks after the bye.

Of course, a lot of the bad habits you saw reappeared in the Week 15 and 16 games, so I guess you could say he was never "above" the influence of a poor offense, just feeding off weak pass defenses. Which supports the whole "Jason Campbell is a good quarterback on a level playing field" theory. That's all I'm saying.

Like I said a million times after the season, it doesn't matter who your quarterback is if you are worse than everyone you play. The story of the Bills game is that we were a completely better team at every level than them. That's far more important that the abstract concept of QB leadership, IMO.Uh, no. I'm pretty sure I never said Campbell only made two bad plays.

Two a game, perhaps.We'll just have to agree to disagree on JC's performance, and I did review the games throughout the year, just didn't have time to do the detailed write ups.

I meant 2 times per game, I know I wrote it incorrectly, sorry about that. I would argue the 2 times per game was not accurate and it was significantly more. But again, :bdh:


Anyway, time to move on, JC's a good young man and hopefully he'll prove my evaluation of him wrong. Let's hope when we look at film this year we're just splitting hairs on how the Skins could've been more dominant in their 10+ wins.

Because Campbell is a middle of the road QB, he is the perfect Rorschach test onto which people project what they want. The haters will see a glass half empty. The kool aid drinkers will see a glass half full. Reasonable people will see things in the middle.

Yep, nothing more difficult and tiring than evaluating mediocrity. Well said.

Because Campbell is a middle of the road QB, he is the perfect Rorschach test onto which people project what they want. The haters will see a glass half empty. The kool aid drinkers will see a glass half full. Reasonable people will see things in the middle.

Very well put.