Re: Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse?
 

It almost even comes down to gut feeling. Like I can watch Big Ben play all day and in the end, he's not the most accurate passer, hell, he's even won a Super Bowl. He is the product of a great (not-so-great anymore) passing game and using that to set up the pass. In the end, is he still a good QB? Sure, because he makes the plays that leads his team to wins.

Statistically Brunell blew Ben out of the water, but is Brunell right for the system and does he make the plays that let the team win? No. Philip Rivers is another example. While fundamentally, he's better than Ben, he too is the result of an elite back making his job easier.

Re: Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse?
 

[quote=GTripp0012;246695]Don't get me wrong, I also believe Brady is better than Brunell. But this season, Brady isn't as good as he normally is, and Brunell is better.[/quote]

Just for clarity, are you saying Brunell was a better QB this year than Brady is right now?

Re: Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse?
 

[quote=TheMalcolmConnection;246697]Just for clarity, are you saying Brunell was a better QB this year than Brady is right now?[/quote]Sorry. I'm saying Brunell is better than Brunell's career average. Got better with age. My bad.

Re: Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse?
 

[QUOTE=GTripp0012;246695]Neither. I think he's better than Grossman and Vick...and Romo its far far too early to tell.

I will say this, those stats are based on one season. So is Brunell better than any of those remaining guys? Not even close. Has he done his job this season as well as them to this point? Most accounts say yes.[/QUOTE]

Most accounts say Brunell has done as good of a job as those other QBs? I'm not sure what other "accounts" you're referring to.

I supplement statistically analyses with my eyes, and I've seen enough games of all of those QBs to know that Brunell has not been doing a good job and I think the overwhelming majority of other eyes concur.

Re: Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse?
 

Ah. And just to play devil's advocate, we could also say that after the dinks and dunks, the receivers weren't making plays after the catch (I disagree, just wanted to throw that out there.).

Re: Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse?
 

[QUOTE=GTripp0012;246702]Sorry. I'm saying Brunell is better than Brunell's career average. Got better with age. My bad.[/QUOTE]

Brunell is not like a fine wine, he hasn't gotten better with age. I can't believe you're actually saying he's better now than he was when he was younger.

And, in any event, we're not comparing Mark to Mark, we're comparing him to other QBs and what constitutes an acceptable level of performance.

Re: Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse?
 

The problem with numbers and statistics is that they don't tell the whole story. OK, I'll give you that Brunell is better than everyone on that list statistically, but maybe he should have taped that to his jersey because no one on the team seemed to buy into that. He doesn't seem to energize the troops like Palmer or Brady or Manning or Hasselbeck or anyone else on that list. The Skins offense doesn't play with confidence, and the only way to change that is to change qbs.

And 8 tds speaks for itself. I wouldn't trade Tim Hasselbeck for Brunell right now, DVOA be damned.

Re: Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse?
 

[QUOTE=GTripp0012;246677]Either way, from a moderator on the warpath, I have come to expect a more open mind.

Whatever.[/QUOTE]

SGG has had an extremely open mind with you. He does with everyone in fact.

Look, I agree with you that Brunell isn't doing as poorly as most think. And I think it's misleading to say he doesn't spread the ball around. Now while I think long-term JC will be a great QB I don't expect a sudden explosion of points right away. However, I hope I'm dead wrong. I hope Campbell is a huge difference and we start getting convincing Ws. I think a lot of other Brunell supporters feel the same way, because above all they are Redskins fans.

But I think it's becoming increasingly clear that wins don't seem to matter to you. It's like you're personally offended by the change at QB and want nothing more than to be proven right. it's like you're hoping Campbell plays poorly and we lose so you can come back with more DPAR, DVOA, DVDA, DUMB stats to say "I told you so"

Re: Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse?
 

If we're comparing Brunell to the elite players in the league, the most telling stats are yards per pass and TDs. Brunell was twenty-sixth in TDs, even though his accuracy rating was extremely high. His yards per pass were also around the middle of the pack as well.

You look at the most INTs thrown by any team and you'll see the other bottom feeders like us. And we've only thrown 4!

Re: Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse?
 

I mean we're ranked twenty-second in passing offense. High rating, low yardage, low TDs speaks mainly to the dink and dunk mentality. Playing things a little too safe.

Re: Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse?
 

[QUOTE=GTripp0012;246677]Either way, from a moderator on the warpath, I have come to expect a more open mind.

Whatever.[/QUOTE]

First, I've had a very open mind. Like TAFKAS, I have consistently said that Brunell isn't as bad as people think. I have also said that he's not nearly as good as you claim. You may or may not recall that I started a thread praising Brunell after the Dallas game, but I did. I have also taken issue with people who have claimed that Brunell is worse than Andrew Walter, etc. So, ironically enough, I cannot understand why you claim that I do not have an open mind.

Second, I have repeatedly said that you are entitled to your opinion and that I respect that you try to back up your arguments. I also, however, have repeatedly said that I disagree with you. Those two notions are not irreconciliable.

Third, I do take serious issue with the kinds of stats you have cited. You said that they are respected, but I have yet to be proven that. Who else cites those stats? They come from some obscure website. Moreover, I disagree with their rankings of QBs based on some obscure formula. Even you seem to disagree with some of the rankings. So, I have no idea how you can challenge my refusal to accept such stats when you do not completely accept them either.

Fourth, it seems to me that you are intensely annoyed with people who bash Brunell and are, therefore, totally determined to defend Brunell at every turn. I understand and agree with your contention that he's not as bad as people make him out to be. But I disagree with how you appear to refuse to concede that anything is wrong with Brunell.

Finally, I've repeatedly stated that you are a valued member of thewarpath. So, please don't take my disagreements with you personally.

Re: Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse?
 

don't bother arguing with Tripp about the validity of stats, they're only the last word on a QB's worth as long as they don't have to "play in the rain", "have a shitty game", "play away", "play a division rival" or have "bad luck" - the reasons he gave for the poor Philly performance. as if getting back to pre-philly performance would win us any more games.

it's the defense stupid. it's the defense that made Portis, Moss, Cooley, Lloyd, Randle El and Sellers have bad seasons, and apparently Betts the next Marshall Faulk.

Re: Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse?
 

[QUOTE=TheMalcolmConnection;246722]If we're comparing Brunell to the elite players in the league, the most telling stats are yards per pass and TDs. Brunell was twenty-sixth in TDs, even though his accuracy rating was extremely high. His yards per pass were also around the middle of the pack as well.[/QUOTE]

and remember the yards per pass have a little something to do with having two of the best kick returners in the league as receivers collecting YAC, and another kick returner, Betts, racking up huge garbage yards before the first down markers and late in the game against prevent defenses. if you need proof just see how many Betts passes have been TDs.

Re: Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse?
 

Ah, true. I did forget to add garbage time TDs when defenses were set up in prevent.

Re: Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse?
 

[quote=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;246708]I supplement statistically analyses with my eyes, and I've seen enough games of all of those QBs to know that Brunell has not been doing a good job and I think the overwhelming majority of other eyes concur.[/quote]

Ditto. I'm even a person that puts a lot of stock in statistics, but the moment a wannabe professor that probably has no other understanding of the game of football other than the numbers, tells me that Mark Brunell is doing his job better than Carson Palmer and Tom Brady, is the moment I tell him he's retarded.

Instead of throwing around numbers, how about you use your eyes, and watch the performance on the field. A six yard completion on 3rd and 9 looks really nice for the passing statistics, but it does absolutely dick as far as actually winning the game. Throwing the ball away on third and long may prevent an interception, but again, give up plays don't put points on the board.

You know what happens when you put too much stock into statistics? You end up losing a close game to the Redskins, because some stupid card told you it was statistically smart to go for a two point conversion, instead of kicking the extra point in the first quarter of the game.

Re: Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse?
 

I should change the thread title to "Does Campbell End the 'GTripp' Excuse"

Re: Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse?
 

ouch, i picked right on the next 'whipping boy' after No.8, I said GTripp. what do i win?

Re: Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse?
 

[quote=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;246712]Brunell is not like a fine wine[/quote]

Yeah, he is. Look up 'corked'.

Re: Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse?
 

[quote=TAFKAS;246721]SGG has had an extremely open mind with you. He does with everyone in fact.

Look, I agree with you that Brunell isn't doing as poorly as most think. And I think it's misleading to say he doesn't spread the ball around. Now while I think long-term JC will be a great QB I don't expect a sudden explosion of points right away. However, I hope I'm dead wrong. I hope Campbell is a huge difference and we start getting convincing Ws. I think a lot of other Brunell supporters feel the same way, because above all they are Redskins fans.

But I think it's becoming increasingly clear that wins don't seem to matter to you. [B]It's like you're personally offended by the change at QB and want nothing more than to be proven right.[/B] it's like you're hoping Campbell plays poorly and we lose so you can come back with more DPAR, DVOA, DVDA, DUMB stats to say "I told you so"[/quote]I don't know why you'd say that wins don't matter to me. I think you have me completely wrong. I'm trying to bring up intelligent discussion about the QB conundrum. Food for thought if you will.

SGG has been cool about the whole QB debate, maybe a tad reactionary (every game his position on Brunell seemed to change), but nothing if not fair. So I've said this to him already, but I was calling out him for making a close minded (and out of character) post, NOT for being a close minded person. He, in general, is one of the more open minded members on this fourm, and to clarify, I think he's a great moderator.

Why would you say that I hope Campbell plays poorly? I'll defend him too if he gets unjustly attacked. I'm on record saying that. I believe, due to readings i've made, that Jason Campbell will grow to be a great NFL QB. But grow is the key term.

The point of metrics like DVOA and DPAR is not to say "I told you so." It's to try to assess performance based on eliminating factors that those players can't control. I don't know what is so horrible about that. I'm not the I told you so kind of person...never have been. When the team is losing, tensions are high. If we were as good as we were supposed to be, this would not be an issue. But is it a really horrible thing if we were to question things before accepting them as fact. I personally think not.

If anyone does, it could be difficult to get along with me over the rest of the season. I'll apoligize in advance right here.

If anyone has something to say to me, feel free to PM me, I'm here daily.

No hard feelings.

Re: Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse?
 

[quote=Southpaw;246747]Ditto. I'm even a person that puts a lot of stock in statistics, but the moment a wannabe professor that probably has no other understanding of the game of football other than the numbers, tells me that Mark Brunell is doing his job better than Carson Palmer and Tom Brady, is the moment I tell him he's retarded.

Instead of throwing around numbers, how about you use your eyes, and watch the performance on the field. A six yard completion on 3rd and 9 looks really nice for the passing statistics, but it does absolutely dick as far as actually winning the game. Throwing the ball away on third and long may prevent an interception, but again, give up plays don't put points on the board.

You know what happens when you put too much stock into statistics? You end up losing a close game to the Redskins, because some stupid card told you it was statistically smart to go for a two point conversion, instead of kicking the extra point in the first quarter of the game.[/quote]Statistics should never override common sense...but then again if you think common sense tells you to bench the league's 10th rated QB, you should probably check which side of the arguement you want to be on.

Look, I have no problem with your position on the issue, but you've never been one to debate me really. You like to look at issues on the surface and draw conclusions quickly and then be stubborn about them when they are questioned.

I disagree with that philosophy.

Re: Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse?
 

[quote=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;246734]Third, I do take serious issue with the kinds of stats you have cited. You said that they are respected, but I have yet to be proven that. Who else cites those stats? They come from some obscure website. Moreover, I disagree with their rankings of QBs based on some obscure formula. Even you seem to disagree with some of the rankings. So, I have no idea how you can challenge my refusal to accept such stats when you do not completely accept them either.[/quote]Football Outsiders' DVOA rankings double as the power rankings on FOXSports.com. At least they used to before this season, but they are still posted on FOXSports.com.

The same authors of the site are also the authors of [U]Pro Football Prospectus.[/U] It's a statistical evidence book that has drawn rave reviews from trustworthy experts like Ron Jaworski, and is I believe it to be the highest selling football book (not sure if thats by $ or by copies sold).

But if that doesn't make them important, I don't know what does.

Re: Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse?
 

I agree that statistically speaking Brunell is having a good year. I mean he is 2:1 in the TD/INT ratio (8td's/4int's), thrown for 1789 yards and has a completion percentage of 62%. That is a pretty good year so far for any QB.

Where I think the problem lies is that Brunell has two (Moss and Lloyd), and some could argue three (ARE), WR's that are known for their ability to strech the field, but Brunell lacks the arm strength to get them the ball. That is why we see a 6 yard pass on 3rd and 9. Another problem that I had said before and still think, is that Brunell has all the confidence in the world in Moss, but he is not sure yet of Lloyd. Look at how long it took Brunell to attempt to throw the ball deep to Lloyd.

Also, Brunell does spread the ball around I will say that but he is only really spreading the ball to the players he knows, Moss, Cooley, Betts. I mean it makes me wonder why did we even bring in Lloyd if Brunell was going to avoid him like the plague. And the one game when Moss sat out Brunell only threw the ball to Lloyd 3 times maybe 4?!?!

In closing I will say that Brunell was a serviceable QB for us this year up to this point. I am glad and thankful for the year that he gave us last year, boy that was fun, but as much as I dont want to admit it, his arm is not what is was last year when he was hitting Moss on the deep bombs. I am looking forward to sunday to see how Campbell will do. I love the fact that he has a strong arm and I hope that he looks for other people downfield other than #89...

Re: Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse?
 

[QUOTE=GTripp0012;246870]SGG has been cool about the whole QB debate, maybe a tad reactionary (every game his position on Brunell seemed to change), but nothing if not fair. So I've said this to him already, but I was calling out him for making a close minded (and out of character) post, NOT for being a close minded person. He, in general, is one of the more open minded members on this fourm, and to clarify, I think he's a great moderator[/QUOTE]

Not to be a smart ass, but I don't think you actually mean that I am "reactionary" (an ultra right-winger who hates liberals). If you mean that I've been somewhat inconsistent on Brunell (aka a "flip-flopper"), I must clarify my position because I think I've been consistent, not dogmatic.

I have had a major problem with Brunell since the start of the season (hence my posts in these threads). That said, I: (1) am willing to recognize that he's done good things for this organization (hence my "thanks Mark Brunell" thread); and (2) think he's played a few good games this season (hence my "give props to Mark Brunell" thread).

I don't think I'm being inconsistent by calling for Brunell's benching, but recognizing that he is not Adolf Hitler re-born (as I think some posters are close to doing) and that he's done good things for us and occasionally plays a good game. I think that's just being fair to the guy. I'm not going to be unwilling to admit it when he plays well. But just because he plays well one week and I recognize it, I don't think I've abandoned my general position that he is sub-par.

Re: Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse?
 

[QUOTE=GTripp0012;246874]Football Outsiders' DVOA rankings double as the power rankings on FOXSports.com. At least they used to before this season, but they are still posted on FOXSports.com.

The same authors of the site are also the authors of [U]Pro Football Prospectus.[/U] It's a statistical evidence book that has drawn rave reviews from trustworthy experts like Ron Jaworski, and is I believe it to be the highest selling football book (not sure if thats by $ or by copies sold).

But if that doesn't make them important, I don't know what does.[/QUOTE]

I stand corrected, I was wrong that the stats came from some obscure website. I nevertheless disagree with its QB rankings.

Re: Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse?
 

Jeez are we really still talking about this?

Campbell is now the starter, let's move on.

Re: Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse?
 

[quote=GTripp0012;246872]Statistics should never override common sense...but then again if you think common sense tells you to bench the league's 10th rated QB, you should probably check which side of the arguement you want to be on.

Look, I have no problem with your position on the issue, but you've never been one to debate me really. You like to look at issues on the surface and draw conclusions quickly and then be stubborn about them when they are questioned.

I disagree with that philosophy.[/quote]

Common sense finally told Gibbs that Brunell wasn't working out. Why don't you get ahold of him and feed him meaningless statistics that obviously have nothing to do with actually winning games.

And since you think I'm "stubborn" and can't look beneath the surface, I'll use some of your numbers to support my argument. You've said before that Brunell's horrible games have been the result of the rest of the offense playing poorly. That's an odd statement because you claim that since Brunell is ranked 10th based on DVOA, it proves that he's doing a good job, but Washington's rushing offense is ranked 9th based on DVOA. So if the rushing offense is ranked 9th, how does that hinder Brunell's performance?

The same website also has drive statistics, and in all on the times you've quoted DVOA, I've never seen you post drive statistics. Washington is ranked 16th in yards per drive, 23rd in points per drive, 22nd in TD's per drive, and tenth in punts per drive. But I'm sure there's an excuse as to why none of that has anything to do with Brunell...

Re: Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse?
 

The offense wasnt threatening with brunell, so the defenses just sat back and made tackles on the short plays, giving up some yards (explaining brunell's high qb rating) but no one felt like brunell was capable of making TD throws so they focused on the run, another reason his rating was high. 8 td throws in 9 games is embaressing. Manning can do that in two games. The THREAT is was campbell brings to the table. Defenses won't be able to just sit in zones against him.

Re: Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse?
 

Also, everyone knew that Brunell was going to throw to Moss or Cooley and thats it, so D coordinators could get a way with 1 on 1 with Lloyd because Brunell wouldn't eve look his way. In the eagle game and the Titan game Brunell threw to Moss in triple coverage, that is a throw that any veteran QB should not be making...

Re: Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse?
 

It was obvious that brunell could not beat the CBs with his throws, and he relied on Moss to beat them with his routs, and only moss is capable of getting THAT open. Hopefully Campbell can get the ball out quicker than brunell, improving the receiver timing, enabling the receivers to improve their YAC, which is crucial in this offense.

Re: Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse?
 

[quote=GTripp0012;246874]Football Outsiders' DVOA rankings double as the power rankings on FOXSports.com. At least they used to before this season, but they are still posted on FOXSports.com.

The same authors of the site are also the authors of [U]Pro Football Prospectus.[/U] It's a statistical evidence book that has drawn rave reviews from trustworthy experts like Ron Jaworski, and is I believe it to be the highest selling football book (not sure if thats by $ or by copies sold).

But if that doesn't make them important, I don't know what does.[/quote]




:bdh: :bdh: :bdh: :bdh: :bdh: :bdh: :bdh: :bdh: :bdh: :bdh: :bdh: :bdh: :bdh: :bdh: :blah: :blah: :blah: :blah: :blah: :blah: :blah: :blah: :blah: :blah: :blah:




never before have I met anyone with such conviction... I'll give you that... but thats about it. I think the pope would have sex with marilyn manson before you'd admit that brunell isnt a good quarterback.

stats do not make a good qb. results make a good qb. MB has not been a good QB since he's been here. He's been an excellent field general and game manager... but hes not a playmaker, (i know i know the first dallas game last year...) which is something you NEED in a good QB.

Low risk is great, and turnovers can kill you, but if youre not winning anyway, fucking chuck the ball dumbass! Maybe you save yourself a punt....

Did you actually watch the games, or do you just look at a spreadsheet and judge performances?


Gtripp, you are turning me into a brunell hater, and I had some respect for the guy. I can't turn away from this debacle of a thread and every time I hear hes the 10th best QB in the league I want to choke something.

I keep getting pissed off and I shouldn't. You have the right to believe whatever you want and voice your opinion and I'm damn proud to be a part of a forum and a country that allows it.

I get the feeling, though, that you look at these responses everyday and laugh at all the people taking you seriously... and I would respect that position much more than the one you're taking....

please tell me its true!

Re: Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse?
 

well, on the same site it shows drive stats which are conveniently ignored (we punt a LOT, we score very rarely etc). of course, they counter the whole, brunell is a god according the the stats argument. at FBO our run game is rated well, and moss and cooley (as receivers) have a good DVOA... which would show that brunell possibly IS the problem.

I mean, FBO also said that kevin jones would be the league MVP last year (oops) and that their research in college->pro transitions at QB would indicate that kyle boller would be the best QB EVER IN THE HISTORY OF THE GAME (which they say is obviouly not true). stats alone aren't enough, unless you've got ungodly amounts to cover every possible situation. that's not what DVOA does (not by itself), since it can't distinguish meaningful yards from garbage time or scoring % (yeah QBs get credit for TDs/INTs, but RB rushing TDs they helped set up aren't counted, or FGs, or punts, and fumbles aren't really weighted).

Re: Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse?
 

[quote=That Guy;247316]well, on the same site it shows drive stats which are conveniently ignored (we punt a LOT, we score very rarely etc). of course, they counter the whole, brunell is a god according the the stats argument. at FBO our run game is rated well, and moss and cooley (as receivers) have a good DVOA... which would show that brunell possibly IS the problem.

I mean, FBO also said that kevin jones would be the league MVP last year (oops) and that their research in college->pro transitions at QB would indicate that kyle boller would be the best QB EVER IN THE HISTORY OF THE GAME (which they say is obviouly not true). stats alone aren't enough, unless you've got ungodly amounts to cover every possible situation. that's not what DVOA does (not by itself), since it can't distinguish meaningful yards from garbage time or scoring % (yeah QBs get credit for TDs/INTs, but RB rushing TDs they helped set up aren't counted, or FGs, or punts, and fumbles aren't really weighted).[/quote]Kyle Boller's projection is REALLY low (he's outplayed his projection by 2 DPAR/G). I don't know where you found him projected as the greatest QB ever, but in the Prospectus, he's projected at lower than 1 DPAR/G. That's similar to Ryan Leaf's projection in terms of horribleness.

But at absolute worst, they are just one more opinion, so it's cool if you don't subscribe to them.

Re: Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse?
 

[quote=canthetuna;247269]stats do not make a good qb. results make a good qb.

I get the feeling, though, that you look at these responses everyday and laugh at all the people taking you seriously... and I would respect that position much more than the one you're taking....

please tell me its true![/quote]But what are stats? They certainly aren't measures of physical talent, or expierence, leadership, heart and desire etc.

They only measure the results. It's the only thing they are good for.

So yes, results are what makes a good QB. Tis true.

But if the only result that mattered was wins and losses...why even watch the game? Why doesn't the team with the better record win the game every time?

Bottom line is you have to win games in this league. And if you aren't winning games, you have to fix the problems. If you don't you will continue to lose.

And then the fans get restless.

Yes, I watch the games...not just the Redskins but [B][U]all[/U][/B] [B][U]televised games[/U][/B]. I have learned a lot from watching games...but eventaully you need to expand your horizions beyond that of the games to learn more.

I'd venture to say I watch more football than anyone else here (its my life)...but of course I can't know that for sure. Hopefully that's demonstrated in my posts. If not, go to my user profile and read some of my offseason posts.

Re: Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse?
 

[quote=GTripp0012;247322]Kyle Boller's projection is REALLY low (he's outplayed his projection by 2 DPAR/G). I don't know where you found him projected as the greatest QB ever, but in the Prospectus, he's projected at lower than 1 DPAR/G. That's similar to Ryan Leaf's projection in terms of horribleness.

But at absolute worst, they are just one more opinion, so it's cool if you don't subscribe to them.[/quote]

not his DPAR, the whole college starts + college completion % = better NFL QB (it's what you quote when you say campbell is going to be great).

Re: Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse?
 

[quote=freddyg12;245782]I hate to sound blindly optimistic, but look at the nfc, the division schedule & we have a chance. granted, it will take winning 6 of 7 at least, but its still a chance. the D has started to gell, since that stallworth td, & just maybe JC is good enough to get the O to score 17 - 20 a game. Other teams are flailing too in the nfc. We're only 3 games out of 1st & 2 back from the cowpokes, who also happen to be 1-3 in the div.
What if we win 2 in a row, are 5-6 (sound familiar?) and the div. leader is 6-5? Is it still over?[/quote]


gotta love the optimism. with no cp thats going to be a stretch. but adding JC to the mix who supposedly can make all the throws..i guess you never know. as the cliche goes...any given sunday. but my god we will need alot of those "any given sunday's"

Re: Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse?
 

[quote=Mattyk72;246919]Jeez are we really still talking about this?

Campbell is now the starter, let's move on.[/quote]

Seriously!! Sheesh!

Even I have accepted it!

Re: Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse?
 

[quote=That Guy;247324]not his DPAR, the whole college starts + college completion % = better NFL QB (it's what you quote when you say campbell is going to be great).[/quote]I know what I'm quoting. No, his (Boller's) completion % was awful in college. Thus he's projected awful.

Are you sure you are talking about Kyle Boller?

Re: Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse?
 

[QUOTE=GTripp0012;247323]
Yes, I watch the games...not just the Redskins but [B][U]all[/U][/B] [B][U]televised games[/U][/B]. I have learned a lot from watching games...but eventaully you need to expand your horizions beyond that of the games to learn more.

I'd venture to say I watch more football than anyone else here (its my life)...but of course I can't know that for sure. Hopefully that's demonstrated in my posts. If not, go to my user profile and read some of my offseason posts.[/QUOTE]

ok, i'll bite, how is it your life GTripp? sounds like you want to tell us.

Re: Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse?
 

i apologize, it was tim couch that was supposed to be gangbusters. mcnabb was also projected to be much much worse than he is, but his speed makes up for it i'd assume... plummer also projects to be quite a bit better than he actually is as well.

Re: Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse?
 

the one thing thats hard to judge coming into the nfl is a quarterbacks ability to make plays. thats why mcnabb, peyton manning, and favre are soo sucessful. turning crap into gold. no one knows if campbell will be able to do this, yet