Re: good news and bad news for Oakland
 

[quote=SmootSmack;697601]They said all this on Mike and Mike today?[/quote]

It wasn't today, I think it was last week. I downloaded the podcast. Both Mikes were talking about that JC may or may not be a starting QB in the league, but they felt they had not seen JC in a situation where he was allowed to proof that. I don't know if I'd go this far though, but I do feel that he needed to go elsewhere to get a 2nd chance.

[quote=Rajmahal33;697572]Good News: No one knows if Campbell is a bad QB
Bad News: No one knows if Campbell is a good QB[/quote]

Rajmahal, your quote is similar to what the Mikes concluded. That they felt no one knows whether JC is a good or bad QB. The said the same of Brady Quinn.

I think folks here make a good point, Gibbs did trade up to get JC, so there must have been something about him that they like. But, I do also believe that Gibbs wasn't into developing a young QB. So it is curious to see where did that decision to get Campbell came from.

Re: good news and bad news for Oakland
 

Good news: Great at intermediate passes.
Bad news: Inconsistent with the quick slant. Also has had miscommunications with his top WR(he throws the ball one way and the receiver goes another way).

Re: good news and bad news for Oakland
 

[quote=Ruhskins;697619]It wasn't today, I think it was last week. I downloaded the podcast. Both Mikes were talking about that JC may or may not be a starting QB in the league, but they felt they had not seen JC in a situation where he was allowed to proof that.[/quote]

Did they say that stuff about Rodgers and Snyder though?

Re: good news and bad news for Oakland
 

[quote=SmootSmack;697634]Did they say that stuff about Rodgers and Snyder though?[/quote]

No, the Rodgers thing was more of my speculation from rumors that I don't remember now where I heard them from. Although I believe they said something along the lines of Campbell falling to the Redskins.

Re: good news and bad news for Oakland
 

Yeah I don't think they were ever targeting Rodgers, no one expected him to fall to just one pick above Campbell. Would have been very interesting if we had moved up to take him though

Re: good news and bad news for Oakland
 

i agree. rogders also doesnt seem like the kind of QB Gibbs would have gone after, either, but who knows. I still am somewhat shocked that we traded for that pick so far in advance, as opposed to when Denver was on the clock. i mean, what if Rodgers and Cambpell had both been taken by 25? I wonder if Plan A was to trade both #1s to move up and select alex smith or braylon edwards.

Re: good news and bad news for Oakland
 

Good news- Once he decides to run JC is an above average scrambler that can shrug off hard hits from NFL linebackers.

Bad news- His inability to breakdown NFL defenses means that this dangerous skillset is severely underutilized and underdeveloped. It's more of a last resort option for him.

Re: good news and bad news for Oakland
 

Good news- JC throws a beautiful deep out.

Bad news- Inside the ten yard line you give up one major WR and one major TE route. JC is incapable of throwing the end zone fade and he will not target receivers on the back line of the endzone.

Re: good news and bad news for Oakland
 

The good news about Campbell is that he believes he's a starter in this league.

The bad news about Campbell is that very few teams agree with him.

Re: good news and bad news for Oakland
 

[quote=wilsowilso;697693]Good news- JC throws a beautiful deep out.

Bad news- Inside the ten yard line you give up one major WR and one major TE route. JC is incapable of throwing the end zone fade and he will not target receivers on the back line of the endzone.[/quote]

Wilso makes an excellent point here. While Gibbs was coach with JC as his quarterback, the skins were great moving the ball between 20s, however they would stall consistently thereafter. The overall stats at the end of the game would always make you wonder how the skins could lose dominating in almost ever catagory.

There were many excuses, one was made that we had no 2nd receiver to take the pressure off of Moss. Another was that Saunders offense was to complicated. Personally, I think wilso hit the nail right on the head.

Re: good news and bad news for Oakland
 

Nice thread.

You make a good point about not being able to sort through all of the perceived attributes from the real ones. Skins fans will certainly have that insight from seeing all his games. You came to the right place.

The best insight I can give is that Campbell has a big arm, but lacks consistent deep accuracy, which pretty much neutralizes his big arm benefits. He is efficient and accurate in the intermediate pass game and is an asset in the short run, but as a standup, pocket QB not having the deep threat is an extreme liability.

The past 3 years our deep threat WR, Moss, has used his veteran route-running skills and speed to have 3 & 4 steps ahead of a CB only to have deep balls sail out of bounds or over his head. On the field, Moss has been visibly frustrated by this and his numbers have been affected by not being able to connect on his most advantageous aspect, the deep ball.


Bottom line...The 2 things most attributed to Campbell are his big arm and big character. Expect one to help and the other to hurt.

Re: good news and bad news for Oakland
 

The good news is that Campbell has the physical tools, is a diligent worker, and is committed to getting better.

The bad news is that many of Campbell's turnovers seemed to come late, when a game winning drive was in order. I never got the feeling that he would develop into a great 2 minute QB.

Re: good news and bad news for Oakland
 

The good news is Jason Campbell's best years as a QB (if he's going to have any) are still ahead of him.

The bad news is he was traded for a 4th round draft pick.

Re: good news and bad news for Oakland
 

[quote=SmootSmack;697601]They said all this on Mike and Mike today?[/quote]

Mike and Mike are complete jokes. I'll never forget the day I stopped listening to them. They actually had the audacity to say that Thurman Thomas wasn't a first ballot hall of famer.

Re: good news and bad news for Oakland
 

thanks for a lot of good responses so far....

deadline is today, so if anyone else wants to chime in, do so within the next couple hours.... obviously the thread can stay open for discussion.