Warpath  

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




Go Back   Warpath > Redskins Forums > Redskins Locker Room


Campbell's numbers dont lie

Redskins Locker Room


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-29-2009, 12:04 PM   #166
‎\m/
 
Mattyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 41
Posts: 79,442
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie

I'd love to see some stats picked apart from other QBs so we can see who else is not really "elite".

By the way I never said he was elite or even great, just good, and better than some are willing to give him credit for, that's all.

And again, ultimately my argument on all of this is our problems run much deeper than JC.
__________________
Support The Warpath! | Warpath Shop
Mattyk is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
Old 09-29-2009, 12:07 PM   #167
Impact Rookie
 
BrunellMVP?'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 726
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattyk72 View Post
I'd love to see some stats picked apart from other QBs so we can see who else is not really "elite".

By the way I never said he was elite or even great, just good, and better than some are willing to give him credit for, that's all.

And again, ultimately my argument on all of this is our problems run much deeper than JC.
in support of mattyk, football outsiders was very high on campbell coming into the season. He's accurate and his receivers led the league in dropped balls (i think).
__________________
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 09-29-2009, 12:10 PM   #168
Living Legend
 
Monkeydad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: PA
Age: 34
Posts: 16,275
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rajmahal33 View Post
I don't think I said that's all he throws but certainly his completion stats are padded by them. I believe I said "short and/or safe passes"...but i think it speaks to the overall point that he racks up yards and completions when we are playing from behind against a soft defense. He stays very conservative or absent for stretches during the early to middle parts of games.

But Matty, let's break it down by the quarter, to make sure we are paying "attention" to detail:
BLAH BLAH BLAH

I count 57...Look that's the nature of the WCO, i understand, but let's not make Campbell out to be something that he isnt...an elite QB. Just because he has a high completion percentage and a decent amount of passing yards, it does NOT make him a great QB. Sure he has shown improvement from last year but it's not being reflected in the W-L column or TD #'s thus far.

I was just rationalizing the reasons for the deceptive stats. Most of his yards and completions come on passes less than 10 yards. THOSE ARE THE FACTS!
The whole premise of "deceptive facts" is nothing more than petty nitpicking to try to keep your pessimism intact. I do not hear you criticizing Tom Brady for hitting Welker on short slants over 100 times last season.

This is the NFL, not Madden on your Playstation. No team can succeed and win by chucking 40-50 yard bombs every play.

Campbell has shown maturity and efficiency. He HAS been limited by some questionable playcalling by Zorn, especially in the RZ, but he has played extremely well despite having plenty of TDs dropped and been forced to hand off in critical situations.

It sounds like there is nothing JC could do to make you stop hating him.
__________________
Not sent from a Droid, iPhone, Blackberry or toaster
Monkeydad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2009, 12:14 PM   #169
MVP
 
CRedskinsRule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Pasadena, Md
Age: 46
Posts: 12,151
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie

Can I get a show of hands, How many people on this board believe that on any of our stretch left goalline plays in the last 2 games, a fake hand off/JC rollout would have scored at least 1 TD. I do.
CRedskinsRule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2009, 12:17 PM   #170
Living Legend
 
Monkeydad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: PA
Age: 34
Posts: 16,275
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie

Quote:
Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule View Post
Can I get a show of hands, How many people on this board believe that on any of our stretch left goalline plays in the last 2 games, a fake hand off/JC rollout would have scored at least 1 TD. I do.
JC would score every time on that play...also a playaction pass to Cooley could have scored.

I have no idea what Zorn was thinking. The first time, OK, bad decision...but he TRIED IT AGAIN!
__________________
Not sent from a Droid, iPhone, Blackberry or toaster
Monkeydad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2009, 12:22 PM   #171
‎\m/
 
Mattyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 41
Posts: 79,442
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie

Quote:
Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule View Post
Can I get a show of hands, How many people on this board believe that on any of our stretch left goalline plays in the last 2 games, a fake hand off/JC rollout would have scored at least 1 TD. I do.
It sure would be worth a try. Why not run a naked boot? Or how about a little play action? We're so predictable at this point you can't tell me a PA fake down there wouldn't work.
__________________
Support The Warpath! | Warpath Shop
Mattyk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2009, 12:24 PM   #172
Impact Rookie
 
dmvskinzfan08's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 968
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rajmahal33 View Post
I don't think I said that's all he throws but certainly his completion stats are padded by them. I believe I said "short and/or safe passes"...but i think it speaks to the overall point that he racks up yards and completions when we are playing from behind against a soft defense. He stays very conservative or absent for stretches during the early to middle parts of games.

But Matty, let's break it down by the quarter, to make sure we are paying "attention" to detail:
"short passes" denote short throws with YAC as determined by play-by-play commentator

NYG - 1 intermediate pass completed, 1 deep pass completed
1Q: 1-1, 7 yds
1 short pass (7 yds on 3rd and 18); ZERO deep or intermediate passes attempted
2Q: 6-10, 106 yds, 1 INT, 1 FUMBLE for TD;
5 short passes; 1 intermediate pass completed (12yds thru the air, ARE runs for 22 after a broken tackle); ZERO deep passes completed
3Q: 5-7, 37 yds
5 short passes; ZERO deep or intermediate passes attempted
4Q: 6-8, 61 yds, 1TD
5 short passes; 1 deep pass completed for 17yd-TD with 1:37 left in the game

STL - 3 intermediate passes completed; 1 deep completed
1Q: 6-10, 52 yds
5 short passes, 1 intermediate passes (15); ZERO deep passes completed
2Q: 9-15, 96 yds
7 short passes, 1 intermediate pass (15); 1 deep pass to Moss for 21
3Q: 4-5, 47yds
4 short passes, 1 intermediate pass to ARE; ZERO deep passes attemped
4Q: 4-6, 47yds
4 short passes (25yd screen pass to betts); ZERO intermediate or deep balls completed

DET - 3 intermediate passes (2 against prevent), 3 deep passes (1 against prevent)
1Q: 6-8, 80yds <--good first drive
5 short passes (1 Moss ran for 21 after breaking tackle); 1 deep pass to Thomas (18 yds)
2Q: 2-5, 21yd
2 short passes in flat with 5 YAC; ZERO intermediate or deep passes completed
3Q: 4-7, 99 yds, 1 TD, 1 INT
2 short passes, 1 intermediate pass, 1 BEAUTIFUL deep 57yd TD to Moss
4Q: 15-21, 133yds, 1 TD (no huddle offense 8-8 72yds & 4-7 for 48)
12 short passes, 2 intermediate passes, 1 deep pass to moss for 21 yds against prevent defense

TOTAL (thru 3 games): 7 intermediate passes; 5 deep passes...a WHOLE lotta short or conservative throws

I count 57...Look that's the nature of the WCO, i understand, but let's not make Campbell out to be something that he isnt...an elite QB. Just because he has a high completion percentage and a decent amount of passing yards, it does NOT make him a great QB. Sure he has shown improvement from last year but it's not being reflected in the W-L column or TD #'s thus far.

I was just rationalizing the reasons for the deceptive stats. Most of his yards and completions come on passes less than 10 yards. THOSE ARE THE FACTS!
__________________
HTTR 09 - RIP#21
HATERS << Misery Loves Company
dmvskinzfan08 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2009, 12:25 PM   #173
Living Legend
 
Ruhskins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 15,654
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie

Quote:
Originally Posted by Buster View Post
JC would score every time on that play...also a playaction pass to Cooley could have scored.

I have no idea what Zorn was thinking. The first time, OK, bad decision...but he TRIED IT AGAIN!
As I've repeatedly stated, had Zorn called a naked bootleg on that goal line 4th and 1, JC would have walked untouched. The only defender that could have gotten to him was pretty much out of position to do anything.
__________________
R.I.P. #21

New words created on The Warpath:
Rewalsr - Somretimes - Fualt - Jersesy - Itiot - Composetory
Afeard - Storgn - Empliment - Gaissn - Saftys - Minnisota
Faviort - Hatter - Phsyched - Foof - Heloing - Brutual
Stroried

"Give an opinion and move on. Your life doesn't depend on winning the internet." -FRPLG
Ruhskins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2009, 12:27 PM   #174
Special Teams
 
Rajmahal33's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Silver Spring, MD
Posts: 478
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie

Quote:
Originally Posted by Buster View Post
The whole premise of "deceptive facts" is nothing more than petty nitpicking to try to keep your pessimism intact. I do not hear you criticizing Tom Brady for hitting Welker on short slants over 100 times last season.

This is the NFL, not Madden on your Playstation. No team can succeed and win by chucking 40-50 yard bombs every play.

Campbell has shown maturity and efficiency. He HAS been limited by some questionable playcalling by Zorn, especially in the RZ, but he has played extremely well despite having plenty of TDs dropped and been forced to hand off in critical situations.

It sounds like there is nothing JC could do to make you stop hating him.
Buster, I think i made it pretty clear that i didn't expect them to bomb it a whole lot since this is a WCO (But go ahead and sensationalize my argument without offering anything but vaque generic statements that everyone knows on ur end).

I DO wanna see us complete a LOT more passes thru three games that are 15+ yards thru the air. If JC and the offense sticks with these numbers, it's gonna be much more of what we saw during the second half of last season. Let's also not forget that we played two of the WORST defenses in the NFL in St. Louis and Detroit!

Matty, i'll agree that scrutinizing their stats would probably show weaknesses in their game, but when you see QB's like Manning, Brady, Warner, Brees, and Rivers stretch the field a whole lot more than we do and have comparable yards per attempt numbers and completion percentages it seems like they take more risks (and ultimately get more rewards). For every three 10 yard plays that JC completes, they are getting a 25 yard play down the field (and maybe missing one as well). Overall, they are scoring more TD's and winning more games...

I will give u that it's still early in the season...so we will see
__________________
McNasty FTW!
Rajmahal33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2009, 12:28 PM   #175
MVP
 
CRedskinsRule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Pasadena, Md
Age: 46
Posts: 12,151
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie

Quote:
Originally Posted by Buster View Post
JC would score every time on that play...also a playaction pass to Cooley could have scored.

I have no idea what Zorn was thinking. The first time, OK, bad decision...but he TRIED IT AGAIN!
if he sets either one up and goes the other way, it will open both options up. Right now, the whole defense keys and overpursues.
CRedskinsRule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2009, 12:31 PM   #176
Living Legend
 
Ruhskins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 15,654
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rajmahal33 View Post
Buster, I think i made it pretty clear that i didn't expect them to bomb it a whole lot since this is a WCO (But go ahead and sensationalize my argument without offering anything but vaque generic statements that everyone knows on ur end).

I DO wanna see us complete a LOT more passes thru three games that are 15+ yards thru the air. If JC and the offense sticks with these numbers, it's gonna be much more of what we saw during the second half of last season. Let's also not forget that we played two of the WORST defenses in the NFL in St. Louis and Detroit!

Matty, i'll agree that scrutinizing their stats would probably show weaknesses in their game, but when you see QB's like Manning, Brady, Warner, Brees, and Rivers stretch the field a whole lot more than we do and have comparable yards per attempt numbers and completion percentages it seems like they take more risks (and ultimately get more rewards). For every three 10 yard plays that JC completes, they are getting a 25 yard play down the field (and maybe missing one as well). Overall, they are scoring more TD's and winning more games...

I will give u that it's still early in the season...so we will see
If Campbell had Russell's or Delhomme's numbers you'd have a point...in the mean time just stop going out of your way to make Campbell look bad.

Again, I don't understand the logic of placing the blame on a single player. It is the most ridiculous thing I've seen on this board (second only to people's outright hate for JC). Shit, you don't see anyone ranting about CP having a terrible year (b/c he's not Jason Campbell).
__________________
R.I.P. #21

New words created on The Warpath:
Rewalsr - Somretimes - Fualt - Jersesy - Itiot - Composetory
Afeard - Storgn - Empliment - Gaissn - Saftys - Minnisota
Faviort - Hatter - Phsyched - Foof - Heloing - Brutual
Stroried

"Give an opinion and move on. Your life doesn't depend on winning the internet." -FRPLG
Ruhskins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2009, 12:34 PM   #177
Playmaker
 
Paintrain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL
Age: 43
Posts: 4,878
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rajmahal33 View Post
I don't think I said that's all he throws but certainly his completion stats are padded by them. I believe I said "short and/or safe passes"...but i think it speaks to the overall point that he racks up yards and completions when we are playing from behind against a soft defense. He stays very conservative or absent for stretches during the early to middle parts of games.

But Matty, let's break it down by the quarter, to make sure we are paying "attention" to detail:
"short passes" denote short throws with YAC as determined by play-by-play commentator

NYG - 1 intermediate pass completed, 1 deep pass completed
1Q: 1-1, 7 yds
1 short pass (7 yds on 3rd and 18); ZERO deep or intermediate passes attempted
2Q: 6-10, 106 yds, 1 INT, 1 FUMBLE for TD;
5 short passes; 1 intermediate pass completed (12yds thru the air, ARE runs for 22 after a broken tackle); ZERO deep passes completed
3Q: 5-7, 37 yds
5 short passes; ZERO deep or intermediate passes attempted
4Q: 6-8, 61 yds, 1TD
5 short passes; 1 deep pass completed for 17yd-TD with 1:37 left in the game

STL - 3 intermediate passes completed; 1 deep completed
1Q: 6-10, 52 yds
5 short passes, 1 intermediate passes (15); ZERO deep passes completed
2Q: 9-15, 96 yds
7 short passes, 1 intermediate pass (15); 1 deep pass to Moss for 21
3Q: 4-5, 47yds
4 short passes, 1 intermediate pass to ARE; ZERO deep passes attemped
4Q: 4-6, 47yds
4 short passes (25yd screen pass to betts); ZERO intermediate or deep balls completed

DET - 3 intermediate passes (2 against prevent), 3 deep passes (1 against prevent)
1Q: 6-8, 80yds <--good first drive
5 short passes (1 Moss ran for 21 after breaking tackle); 1 deep pass to Thomas (18 yds)
2Q: 2-5, 21yd
2 short passes in flat with 5 YAC; ZERO intermediate or deep passes completed
3Q: 4-7, 99 yds, 1 TD, 1 INT
2 short passes, 1 intermediate pass, 1 BEAUTIFUL deep 57yd TD to Moss
4Q: 15-21, 133yds, 1 TD (no huddle offense 8-8 72yds & 4-7 for 48)
12 short passes, 2 intermediate passes, 1 deep pass to moss for 21 yds against prevent defense

TOTAL (thru 3 games): 7 intermediate passes; 5 deep passes...a WHOLE lotta short or conservative throws

I count 57...Look that's the nature of the WCO, i understand, but let's not make Campbell out to be something that he isnt...an elite QB. Just because he has a high completion percentage and a decent amount of passing yards, it does NOT make him a great QB. Sure he has shown improvement from last year but it's not being reflected in the W-L column or TD #'s thus far.

I was just rationalizing the reasons for the deceptive stats. Most of his yards and completions come on passes less than 10 yards. THOSE ARE THE FACTS!
Since you use size to emphasize points you deem important I figured I'd follow your path. Obviously you don't understand the nature of the WCO. The WCO is built on short passes and RAC/YAC. That is the entire premise of the WCO. If you see the WCO tree we are a direct branch of, Walsh (short passes and YAC) to Holmgren (short passes and YAC) to Zorn (short passes and YAC). It's really hard to take you seriously when your logic is so fundamentally flawed.

I have never seen anyone on this board call JC an elite or great QB, but the other spectrum has been amazing. To read it around here and other places, you'd think he's the second coming of Heath Shuler.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 44Deezel
Bottom line, whatever you think of Campbell, name one other NFL team that would sign him to be their guaranteed, bona fide starter next year if he were to leave the Skins. At best, he would be offered a chance to compete for the starting job on another shitty team. Most teams would sign him to be a backup. Just my opinion.
I'm pretty sure Carolina, St. Louis, SF, Oakland, Cleveland, Buffalo and TB would consider him an immediate upgrade to what they have. Which brings up another point. If Campbell leaves next year, who do you propose becomes the starter? Please spare me with the injured 3rd stringer who barely held onto his roster spot thanks to the aforementioned injury.
__________________
FREE RG3!
Paintrain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2009, 12:37 PM   #178
Playmaker
 
Paintrain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL
Age: 43
Posts: 4,878
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruhskins View Post
As I've repeatedly stated, had Zorn called a naked bootleg on that goal line 4th and 1, JC would have walked untouched. The only defender that could have gotten to him was pretty much out of position to do anything.
I've said the same thing numerous times. (sigh) So sad a couple of internet schmoes can figure that out yet that escapes our offensive genius of a HC.
__________________
FREE RG3!
Paintrain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2009, 12:38 PM   #179
Playmaker
 
over the mountain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: baltimore
Posts: 3,062
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie

JC played very well against the lions, he played well against the rams and did not play well against the giants.

JC's stats are in line for him to set career marks but lets not ignore JC's past stats and claim the 3 games of stats he has this year (with a huge portion of positive stats coming against the lions, rams and last 2 mins against the giants) should end all talk of JC not being more than a serviceable decent qb.

we can talk stats at the middle or end of the year; it was the lions, the freakin LIONS, and the JC lovers trot his stat sheet out like they have the cure to cancer.

let see how he looks at seasons end and talk stats. taking one or two games now and ignoring his past 20+ games doesnt seem genuine to me is your a stat lover. seems too selective to focus on one segment of numbers (3 games) and one portion of stats and not comparing them to the whole.

if the JC lovers can start this thread as an end all to the qb debate after he looked great against the lions can the JC bashers start a thread calling for his release after he looks crappy against a top 5 defense? i'd say no to both.

i dont understand either party here. he throws 1 td pass = hallelujah i told them guys JC is our man . . . he throws 1 int = gosh dangit this team is going nowhere with JC at the helm.

go skins!!

ps - this comes off as an "i told you so" thread, i dont want to hear any complaining when JC has a bad game and the JC bashers make their own thread.
__________________
RJJ Apr. 10, 2014 at 4:40pm
BOB, Where have you been hiding? Good to you around again.
BobOathKeeper Apr. 10, 2014 at 4:42pm
I had to take a break and stomp some liberals into mud-holes, just keeping in shape for what’s coming brother, RJJ. :)
over the mountain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2009, 12:39 PM   #180
Living Legend
 
Ruhskins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 15,654
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paintrain View Post
I'm pretty sure Carolina, St. Louis, SF, Oakland, Cleveland, Buffalo and TB would consider him an immediate upgrade to what they have. Which brings up another point. If Campbell leaves next year, who do you propose becomes the starter? Please spare me with the injured 3rd stringer who barely held onto his roster spot thanks to the aforementioned injury.
This is the part that kills me about some of the fans...they bitch about not building through the draft or building through the trenches, blah blah blah. If Campbell gets run out of town successfully, basically we will spend our resources on a new QB, instead of spending them on offensive linemen and linebackers.
__________________
R.I.P. #21

New words created on The Warpath:
Rewalsr - Somretimes - Fualt - Jersesy - Itiot - Composetory
Afeard - Storgn - Empliment - Gaissn - Saftys - Minnisota
Faviort - Hatter - Phsyched - Foof - Heloing - Brutual
Stroried

"Give an opinion and move on. Your life doesn't depend on winning the internet." -FRPLG
Ruhskins 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 03:56 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 0.38264 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