Warpath  

Home | Forums | Salary Cap Info | Shop | Donate | Stay Connected




Go Back   Warpath > Redskins Forums > Redskins Locker Room > NFL Draft Central


Mark Sanchez at 13th?

NFL Draft Central


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-16-2009, 04:18 PM   #301
‎\m/
 
Mattyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 42
Posts: 83,401
Re: Mark Sanchez at 13th?

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Goat View Post
I'm just gonna repost this till I get a satisfactory answer...
I think your questions have been answered in various forms in many of our QB related threads lately.
__________________
Support The Warpath! | Warpath Shop
Mattyk is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
Old 04-16-2009, 04:50 PM   #302
Camp Scrub
 
Masshole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Cambridge, MA
Posts: 23
Re: Mark Sanchez at 13th?

Quote:
Originally Posted by SmootSmack View Post
But what about the argument that "Hey look at the Steelers. They don't have a great offensive line. Yet Roeth helped make things happen. The best QBs make something out of close to nothing. Roethlisberger with no line, McNabb with no WRs..."
Wow, I've had this argument with my brother (a Steelers fan) so many times that we've almost had to stop talking about football altogether, but the reason the Steelers won the Super Bowl this year is very simple, they had the best defense in the history of the game, BAR NONE. Better than the 85 Bears, better than 2000 Ravens, the Purple People Eaters, whoever. They played the toughest schedule in 25 years and the defense still led every single statistical category by a wide, wide margin. Christ, Kordell Stewart went to two AFC Championship games with the Steelers defense and he has a lifetime QB rating of 70.

In Football Outsiders rankings, they have Roth at 23rd in DYAR and 27th in DVOA. He was also 24th in QB rating (80.1). Incidentally, Campbell was much higher in all of those stats, and threw for more yards (to Moss, ARL, and James Thrash not Ward, Nate Washington, and Super Bowl MVP Santonio Holmes). His QB rating against the NFC East was like 57.4. I'm also pretty sure that about half of those sacks on Rothlesberger came because he holds the ball too long.

Now, I'm not arguing that Campbell is a better quarterback because Rothlesberger obviously has a Montana/Elway knack for winning games, and I think the reason his 2008 season didn't replicate his 2007 season (32-11) is because he separated his shoulder early in the season and it didn't really heal until the playoffs. But the only reason the Steelers were in all of those games where Rothlesberger made comebacks is because the defense was so good it kept them in the games. Yes, he was the best in football at orchestrating late drives, but for the first 55 minutes of the game he was really, really average. You put Peyton Manning on that team and they go 16-0.

Now, I think very few qb's in this day and age are capable of doing it by themselves, football just requires too many components. The thing that has really kept the Steelers where they are has been CONSISTENCY IN COACHING AND MANAGEMENT. That's what we need to emulate. I honestly believe that there is maybe no one in football who throws a better 8 yard out then Jason Campbell does. It's a small thing obviously, but it underscores the fact that we have a qb with great character, who has a cannon for an arm and has been extremely accurate at every level of the NFL playing in its undisputed toughest divisions (SEC, NFC East). If we could only just give this poor kid some stability, the ability to stay in the same offense, with the same coach working on the same terminology, we're going to see the guy who had a 100.7 QB rating and completed 67% of his passes the first 8 weeks of last year, and that included 3 NFC East road games. Then the line fell apart, ARL and Thrash were our top 2 receivers with Moss limping, and so did Campbell. Not to mention the fact that teams were teeing off on our plays because we were only running half the playbook. I mean, the announcers were saying that on TV, and they aren't exactly Football Outsiders. I mean, Christ we look at the players, but we made the playoffs with Todd Collins, and why was that? HE WAS THE ONLY GUY WHO KNEW THE PLAYBOOK!!!

Now, its a football truism that receivers take 2 years, they just do, period, with the exception of like 4 or 5 guys. So we trade down and take arguably the 2 highest rated receivers coming into the draft as well as the best TE to package with Cooley (which I thought was a BRILLIANT move by FO). The idea should have been that we were getting everything ready for this year, 2009 INCLUDING GIVING CAMPBELL ENOUGH TIME TO LEARN THE SYSTEM, but we started winning and people got ahead of ourselves, and now, when it would logically seem that everything that was started in 2005/06 and was leading toward fielding a consistently good team, a plan that should now be coming into fruition in 2009, and the FO is giving up on it?!??!!?1?

All we need is a top tier right tackle, the defense has been upgraded significantly since last year when it wasn't the problem in the first place. Let the receivers mature, pick up one of the nasty tackles, and let Campbell FINALLY feel comfortable in an offense he knows. You think the Colts switch playbooks every year? The Pats? Doesn't it make sense that changing strategies every year is going to have a profound effect on the team's performance.

I really don't think its the personel, its the lack of consistency in coaching and management and philosophy. The Steelers defense has been nasty since the early 90's, the names and faces are constantly changing but the system stays the same and until Danny learns settles on something, we're going to end up repeating the same mistakes, year after year.

Oh, and for the record, this DOES NOT MEAN BILL COWHER. He's a great player motivator, but not a personel guy. We need Kevin Gilbride/Scot Pioli, not Danny holding Vinny on strings.
Masshole is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2009, 04:51 PM   #303
Playmaker
 
Paintrain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL
Age: 44
Posts: 4,952
Re: Mark Sanchez at 13th?

Quote:
Originally Posted by GTripp0012 View Post
I mean, the last time we had a defense that could had been remotely competitive given the current offense of the Steelers was 2004.

Roethlisberger struggled mightily when his OL was decimated and he was getting pressure every play. But then, they found a group that worked, and that group stayed healthy though the playoffs and they won with it. It proves, you don't have to invest heavy in the OL to win, but it HAS to play well at the right time. Clearly, ours broke down at the wrong time.

McNabb having no receivers is predominantly a myth that dates back to the James Thrash era, I think. Their receivers are much better than ours, right now at least. In 2006 and 2007, their receivers finished top three in YAC each season, which greatly helped Donovan throw for yards and big plays (not unlike us in 2005). DeSean Jackson and Kevin Curtis will only help that.
I guess I have to agree with you on that point at this exact moment but I really believe that at the end of the season Moss, Thomas and Kelly will be better than Curtis, Jackson and Baskett/Greg Lewis. If they get a Boldin or Edwards they are ahead of us too. If with what we picked last year we can't be better than the Eagles WR we are in a major world of hurt.
__________________
Challenge Greatness! Be A Leader! Make A Difference!
Paintrain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2009, 06:33 PM   #304
Registered User
 
BigHairedAristocrat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 3,917
Re: Mark Sanchez at 13th?

Quote:
Originally Posted by SmootSmack
As for Zorn telling Campbell "we're in this together" what else would he say?

The general belief is, and I've said this before, "Hey, we all love Jason. He's a great guy. And we can win with him. We just don't know if we can win because of him"

And they still like Colt but think he's two years away at best.
Exactly. I dont know why some people argued so hard with me before that Zorn was genuine in his support for Campbell after the Cutler trade. Publically, Zorn had to support Campbell. Otherwise, they completely alienate Campbell.

This report that Zorn is pushing for Sanchez paints a very clear picture of why we pursued Cutler and why we're pursuing Sanchez now:

Zorn doesnt believe Campbell can succeed in his system.

Since we brought Zorn here, veryone who knows anything about football (paid professionals) have been saying the same thing: Campbell is a poor fit for the WCO. Even a hack like JLC was saying it from the beginning, although he spun more along the lines of "JLC is awesome, so why the heck did this stupid FO bring Zorn here? They should have kept Saunders and Williams but theyre idiots."

Like it or not, if the Skins get what they want - and by Skins, I mean Snyder, Cerrato, and most importantly, Zorn - Campbells days in Washington are DONE.

I don't know much about football compared to the paid professionals. Not to be rude, but neither do any of you. (While many of you know much more than me, your knowledge still pales in comparison to the people that are paid to do this 24/7, and who have been doing so for years). The reason I bring this up, is because of this fact:

The vast majority of the paid professionals think Sanchez is the real deal. Trent Dilfer compared him to Tom Brady and said he's the best, most ready to start QB in this draft AND the next. The only thing he's been criticized for is entering the draft this year... and its not because he's too raw to start in 2009 - its because he's losing millions of dollars because if he came out next year, he'd be the consensus #1 pick. (ok, of course he's been criticized for other aspects of his game, but no more than other prospective 1st round QBs entering the NFL).

If JLCs most recent "reporting" is correct, its possible Sanchez can be had (via a trade with the Seahawks) for no more than two first round picks (this years and next) and possibly for as low as a 1st and 3rd. Jason Campbell has failed. If he hadn't, then Zorn wouldnt be pushing for someone else. Zorn beleives in Sanchez.

Everyone has been screaming that this team needs consistency. Well, the best way for this TEAM to be consistent beyond 2009 is for Zorn to keep his job. The best way for Zorn to keep his job, and have a third year of being a head coach, is for snyder to give him the quarterback he wants, and then give him two years to work with him. The best thing for the Redskins is to draft Mark Sanchez. The most it will cost us is two first rounders, and we'll recoup some of that by trading Campbell. This is a deal that has to get done, and if it gets done, some of you might not like it now, but when Sanchez and Zorn are taking us to the playoffs year after year, we'll all be glad the Skins made the move in 2009.
BigHairedAristocrat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2009, 06:51 PM   #305
Special Teams
 
DIRTEE's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 256
Re: Mark Sanchez at 13th?

Masshole - I thought your entry was right on point. I feel the exact same way. Welcome to the board.

BHA - I'm against drafting Sanchez, I honestly believe he's no better than Campbell and there are other key positions that need to be filled first. If all holes were filled, I wouldn't have a problem drafting him.
DIRTEE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2009, 06:56 PM   #306
Uncle Phil
 
SmootSmack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 44,962
Re: Mark Sanchez at 13th?

Quote:
Originally Posted by DIRTEE View Post
BHA - I'm against drafting Sanchez, I honestly believe he's no better than Campbell and there are other key positions that need to be filled first. If all holes were filled, I wouldn't have a problem drafting him.
Agreed. We can't and shouldn't try to fill all our needs now. And of course, you go with the best player available in the first round...but the BPA at a position of need. And at some point we need to start addressing the lack of youth on the OL, DEs, even LB and RB.
__________________
You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You
SmootSmack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2009, 08:01 PM   #307
Impact Rookie
 
BrunellMVP?'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 726
Re: Mark Sanchez at 13th?

If we can all agree that we don't want Sanchez- and that QB is not a position of need, we have nothing to worry about as there is 0 chance (so i've been told- thanks Masshole) that he will fall to 13. The only we have to worry about is doing something stupid, like trading up for him.
__________________
in writing these daily letters and trying to make them interesting it is always possible that some sentiment may occur which has not received the severe and deliberate scrutiny and reconsideration which should attach to a State Paper.
- Churchill
BrunellMVP? is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2009, 08:13 PM   #308
Registered User
 
BigHairedAristocrat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 3,917
Re: Mark Sanchez at 13th?

Quote:
Originally Posted by SmootSmack View Post
Agreed. We can't and shouldn't try to fill all our needs now. And of course, you go with the best player available in the first round...but the BPA at a position of need. And at some point we need to start addressing the lack of youth on the OL, DEs, even LB and RB.
BPA at a position of need? Mark Sanchez fits the bill. QB is arguably the biggest position of need on our team.

People keep saying that Jason Campbell has consistenly improved; that if he gets a better O-line, more consistent play from his receivers, more time in a system, more explosive play from the running back position, more this, more that... that he'll become a solid NFL QB. Well, if you gave every 2nd and 3rd string QB in the NFL all of that, they'd probably be "solid" QBs as well. Some things are stronger than others, but theres not a single team in the NFL that doesnt have multiple needs.

The truth is, no QB gets the "perfect" environment. People keep saying over and over again that Tom Brady would be horrible on this team, behind this line and with these receivers, but that's the biggest load of crap i've ever heard. Tom Brady makes good decisions. Tom Brady knows when to throw the football. Tom Brady knows when to take a chance. Tom Brady looks deep and makes it through his reads... you get my drift. If Tom Brady came here, he might take a few more sacks; he might not get quite as many yards or completions, but he would still be Tom Brady and he would still be one of the top 3 QBs in the league The truth is, guys like Tom Brady don't rely on everything around them being just right... guys like Tom Brady have "the intangibles." Guys like Tom Brady INSPIRE everyone around them. Guys like Tom Brady MAKE everyone around them better.

If you took a poll of the 31 teams in the NFL not named the New England Patriots - the 31 teams that passed on him atleast 5 times, and you asked them if they could go back and do the 2000 draft over again, atleast 30 of them would take Tom Brady with their 1st pick - regardless of what other "needs" they felt were more pressing at the time. Why? Because they know what a guy like Tom Brady can do. They know that a QB is the most important position in all of sports - and when you get a guy like that, you can build an entire team around him and have long-success. Mark Sanchez is that kind of player.

If the Skins dont get Sanchez, they will be looking for a new coach AND a new quarterback in 2010 anyways, because they felt some other need was more pressing. Some people may not feel QB is the teams most pressing need in 2009, but if you can look beyond the season as many people have criticized the FO for failing to do in the past, you will understand why QB IS a pressing need for this team.
BigHairedAristocrat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2009, 08:28 PM   #309
Pro Bowl
 
53Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Kill Devil Hills, N.C.
Posts: 7,400
Re: Mark Sanchez at 13th?

Quote:
Originally Posted by SmootSmack View Post
Agreed. We can't and shouldn't try to fill all our needs now. And of course, you go with the best player available in the first round...but the BPA at a position of need. And at some point we need to start addressing the lack of youth on the OL, DEs, even LB and RB.
Agreed. And I think that point should be NOW.
__________________
"Cautiously And Optimistically... Looking Forward To Change"
53Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2009, 08:37 PM   #310
Pro Bowl
 
Beemnseven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Virginia Beach
Age: 40
Posts: 5,293
Re: Mark Sanchez at 13th?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paintrain View Post
Well it's not anything unique to Snyder's M.O. that we'd allegedly gotten away from. He's flash over function, style over substance. Not to say that Sanchez is not functional nor having substance, but regardless of the side of the fence we sit on in the Campbell debate, we can all agree he's not a 'sexy' QB. He doesn't have the personality or 'Madison Avenue' presence that Snyder seems to crave and covet. If Snyder can get a player of comparable or better skills and abilities that's a bigger name, he's going to pounce. I really think he'd love to have a top 3 pick so he could make a splash with a 'franchise' QB, regardless of if he panned out or not just so he could stand next to him at the press conference and say 'I did this'.

I don't think it's purely football reasons that Snyder is ready to move on from Campbell, otherwise we would have been more actively pursuing all QB options this offseason rather than just getting in on Cutler and now seemingly infatuated with Sanchez.

His lack of football knowledge manifests in not realizing that whomever is at QB will face the same issues and challenges at the QB position if the OL isn't addressed.
Two statements from this post:

1. Snyder seems to want the Clinton Portis version of a QB -- as you said, everything that Jason Campbell isn't.

2. Could it be that Snyder and Cerrato in their hearts don't think the OL is as bad as we do?
Beemnseven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2009, 08:55 PM   #311
Living Legend
 
GTripp0012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 26
Posts: 15,994
Re: Mark Sanchez at 13th?

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat View Post
BPA at a position of need? Mark Sanchez fits the bill. QB is arguably the biggest position of need on our team.

People keep saying that Jason Campbell has consistenly improved; that if he gets a better O-line, more consistent play from his receivers, more time in a system, more explosive play from the running back position, more this, more that... that he'll become a solid NFL QB. Well, if you gave every 2nd and 3rd string QB in the NFL all of that, they'd probably be "solid" QBs as well. Some things are stronger than others, but theres not a single team in the NFL that doesnt have multiple needs.

The truth is, no QB gets the "perfect" environment. People keep saying over and over again that Tom Brady would be horrible on this team, behind this line and with these receivers, but that's the biggest load of crap i've ever heard. Tom Brady makes good decisions. Tom Brady knows when to throw the football. Tom Brady knows when to take a chance. Tom Brady looks deep and makes it through his reads... you get my drift. If Tom Brady came here, he might take a few more sacks; he might not get quite as many yards or completions, but he would still be Tom Brady and he would still be one of the top 3 QBs in the league The truth is, guys like Tom Brady don't rely on everything around them being just right... guys like Tom Brady have "the intangibles." Guys like Tom Brady INSPIRE everyone around them. Guys like Tom Brady MAKE everyone around them better.

If you took a poll of the 31 teams in the NFL not named the New England Patriots - the 31 teams that passed on him atleast 5 times, and you asked them if they could go back and do the 2000 draft over again, atleast 30 of them would take Tom Brady with their 1st pick - regardless of what other "needs" they felt were more pressing at the time. Why? Because they know what a guy like Tom Brady can do. They know that a QB is the most important position in all of sports - and when you get a guy like that, you can build an entire team around him and have long-success. Mark Sanchez is that kind of player.

If the Skins dont get Sanchez, they will be looking for a new coach AND a new quarterback in 2010 anyways, because they felt some other need was more pressing. Some people may not feel QB is the teams most pressing need in 2009, but if you can look beyond the season as many people have criticized the FO for failing to do in the past, you will understand why QB IS a pressing need for this team.
You're regressing, BHA.

You're also missing the point on Brady. He, himself, wouldn't be any worse of a quarterback here than in New England. He, himself, would be the same guy. He just wouldn't win as much or make as many pro bowls as he would playing for NE. It wouldn't be his fault. I'm sure when we're 10-6 and exiting from the playoffs in the wild card round, you'll be all over Brady for his inspirational demeanor and his ability to make Santana Moss look a little bit better than he really is. Championship!

And then there's the assumption that Mark Sanchez is basically Tom Brady, and/or would have a Brady-like inspirational effect on the Redskins. Well, uh, not exactly.

Here's the deal, I enjoy you're refreshing forward induction approach here, but it's unnecessary. I don't care what system you run. You simply don't replace a 27 year old QB with similar value to Campbell if you:

a) know what you are doing
b) don't have a really, really problematic externality (can't contact your QB)

That's the problem in a nutshell. You're saying that QB will be a problem in the future, and we should address it now. That's simply not the case, contract issues aside. You have to go forward under the assumption that Jason Campbell can't go anywhere in 2010 unless the team chooses a different path. If the team is at that point right now, it's very clear they have no idea what they are doing.



Oh, and teams would not pass over Tom Brady again because he's really good, i.e. better than Sanchez will ever be. Not for any other cosmic reason.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation.
GTripp0012 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2009, 08:59 PM   #312
Living Legend
 
GTripp0012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 26
Posts: 15,994
Re: Mark Sanchez at 13th?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paintrain View Post
I guess I have to agree with you on that point at this exact moment but I really believe that at the end of the season Moss, Thomas and Kelly will be better than Curtis, Jackson and Baskett/Greg Lewis. If they get a Boldin or Edwards they are ahead of us too. If with what we picked last year we can't be better than the Eagles WR we are in a major world of hurt.
Totally agreed. Don't worry though, Mark Sanchez will save us.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation.
GTripp0012 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2009, 09:03 PM   #313
Living Legend
 
GTripp0012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 26
Posts: 15,994
Re: Mark Sanchez at 13th?

Oh and by the way, if the front office didn't think they could win with Jason Campbell, they wouldn't have gone after Albert Haynesworth. It's clear as day that their opinion of him has taken a hit over the course of the offseason while no football has been played. That's the number one piece of evidence that they don't seem to really have a clear direction -- non-events have altered that direction.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation.
GTripp0012 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2009, 09:08 PM   #314
Living Legend
 
GTripp0012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 26
Posts: 15,994
Re: Mark Sanchez at 13th?

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat View Post
The vast majority of the paid professionals think Sanchez is the real deal. Trent Dilfer compared him to Tom Brady and said he's the best, most ready to start QB in this draft AND the next. The only thing he's been criticized for is entering the draft this year... and its not because he's too raw to start in 2009 - its because he's losing millions of dollars because if he came out next year, he'd be the consensus #1 pick. (ok, of course he's been criticized for other aspects of his game, but no more than other prospective 1st round QBs entering the NFL).
Other "real deals" according to similar experts:

Ryan Leaf
Akili Smith
Cade McNown
Joey Harrington
Alex Smith
Vince Young
JaMarcus Russell

But on the other side, if our line magically improves with the picks we're not using on it, we could make any of those guys look decent.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation.
GTripp0012 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2009, 09:23 PM   #315
Camp Scrub
 
Masshole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Cambridge, MA
Posts: 23
Re: Mark Sanchez at 13th?

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat View Post
BPA at a position of need? Mark Sanchez fits the bill. QB is arguably the biggest position of need on our team.

People keep saying that Jason Campbell has consistenly improved; that if he gets a better O-line, more consistent play from his receivers, more time in a system, more explosive play from the running back position, more this, more that... that he'll become a solid NFL QB. Well, if you gave every 2nd and 3rd string QB in the NFL all of that, they'd probably be "solid" QBs as well. Some things are stronger than others, but theres not a single team in the NFL that doesnt have multiple needs.

The truth is, no QB gets the "perfect" environment. People keep saying over and over again that Tom Brady would be horrible on this team, behind this line and with these receivers, but that's the biggest load of crap i've ever heard. Tom Brady makes good decisions. Tom Brady knows when to throw the football. Tom Brady knows when to take a chance. Tom Brady looks deep and makes it through his reads... you get my drift.


86.5
85.7
85.9

Those are Tom Brady's numbers through his first three years starting. He didn't take off until his fourth year as a starter, 5th year in the league.

82.5 was Phillip Rivers' Qb rating last year. It was 105.5 this year, his fifth year in the league. Drew Brees in his first and second years starting went 76.9/67.5 then in his third year starting, fourth in the league, he went 104.7. Brett Favre 85.3, 72.9 in his first two years starting, took off in his 4th year. In 2001, Peyton Manning, in his fourth year as a starter and in the league, went 6-10 with the Colts, posted an 84.1 QB rating (about the same as Campbell's this year), then went 88.1 the next, and in his 6th year got to 99 and never looked back or went under that, nor did the Colts go anything less than 12-4 once he was locked in.

Are we seeing a trend?

Franchise QB's don't just come out ready made. Rothlesberger won early because he inherited a team that was STACKED and just needed a QB. Ryan was good, but we'll see what happens this year after teams have made adjustments. Franchise Qb's take time, they take patience and they take coaching before you get them to that level. Now, Brady experienced more on field success early then he should have because Bellichik cheated (no seriously. they played WAY over their stats, they had no business winning as many games as they did based on all of their efficiency stats. They cheated and besides completely undermining the integrity of the game, the reason the NFL won't do anything more than take away a draft pick and sweep it under the rug is because what happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas, namely paid out Super Bowl bets that would become defunct if further investigative action was taking).

However, the fact that he cheated doesn't negate the fact that Bellichik is, along with Bill Walsh, the best Coach/football mind in the modern era. And for all intents and purposes, Montana and Brady are considered the best QB's of the era (though I personally view Brady with a large astericks for the early work, now he's clearly a beast). So you can play the chicken and the egg game with them, but considering the two best qb's ever were starters at big name schools and still fell to the lower rounds tells me that many teams scouted them both and passed them over. So did all these professional scouts just miss something? Or did these two football geniuses take good qb's and make them great?

I mean, I don't necessarily know the answer to that, but what I do know is, statistically speaking, Franchise QB's make the leap between their 4th and 6th years in the league on average, and Campbell's about to hit 5th year, and really only just completed his first full season starting. So if he were a Franchise Qb (and I fully believe he has that potential), we would have only seen flashes of it by now, not the full package (like say, when he started 08 with a 100.7 QB Rating and beat the Cowboys and the Eagles with masterful performances on the road, or the Cardinals, or the comeback win against the Saints, to name a few). Bottom line is, it sure seems like you have to give qb's anywhere from 3-5 years to see what you've got, and we keep insisting on judging them in 2. And we don't win anything and haven't since Danny got here, and we ask why. That's why.
Masshole is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:36 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site is not officially affiliated with the Washington Redskins or the NFL.
Page generated in 0.45939 seconds with 9 queries

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25