Redskins game balls

Beemnseven · 10-05-2009, 01:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buster

I'm not Matty but here's my answer: He's not "lighting it up" but he has shown improvement across the board (except for the 3 INTs vs. TB) and has better numbers than Cutler and Sanchez this season, so I think we made the right decision.

As far as Sanchez goes, you're right, Campbell's numbers are better which is what you'd expect when comparing a five-year veteran to a rookie.

Cutler has the same number of INTs, three more TDs and a higher QB rating. Amazingly, he has 62 fewer yards than Campbell passing.

I've said it before, but one of the hallmarks of a great, "franchise" quarterback is the ability to make players around him better. I don't see Campbell doing that. Cutler probably has a better line, and Forte right now is probably better than Portis, but as far as receivers go, I don't see how Chicago is much better than we are.

If you give Campbell a better offensive line and better playmakers, I think he'd be fine as our QB of the future. Problem is, that's not going to be the plan of action for this front office, I'm afraid.

mooby · 10-05-2009, 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mechanix544

And you believe that the two TD passes makes up for having 4 turnovers? 99% of the time in this league, if a QB throws 3 (almost 4) INT's, loses a fumble on top of that and even in the second half didnt do anything spectacular against a ridiculously poor defense, that team will lose the game. Thank god we had a defense shut them down to basically only 6 points.

Now the thing about Cutler, I never really said anything concerning him, and I sure aint on his stick, but lemme take a shot at this.

How many times has Cutler, in his career, albeit short, thrown for 350+ yards, and compare that to Campbells. How many three td games has campbell ever had? compare that to cutlers, shoot, Cutler even has a better winning pct. with much worse defenses.......Why?

Because he makes plays. Teams need to account for him. Hes a weapon. He influences games, not just manages them in a piss poor manner, hoping not to make a mistake to influence it in a negative way. Teams DO NOT look at the upcoming game with the skins and say, "We've better account for this guy every play, or hes gonna eat us alive." Know why? Because hes never done that at all in his entire career against even the POOREST of teams.(Just look at our first three games this year.)Oh, and look what Cutlers doing in Chicago, with absolutely NO receiver corps of any kind. Campbell has better weapons, hes just not a winner.

Now, let the excuses flow. (like I said, where is the allegiance to this mediocre soul coming from anywho?)

So I guess leading the team to two touchdowns and a field goal in the third quarter doesn't qualify as anything spectacular, esp. not Moss' 59 yard td catch that he caught in stride and didn't have to make an adjustment for or anything? That was pure luck right?

And let me ask you a question since you are so high on Cutler. How many times, in his career, has Cutler had a huge game but the Broncos still lost despite that effort?

You are basically saying the Redskins won this game in spite of Jason Campbell, and not because he led the team to the points that won the game.

I'm just sick how you are looking at JC's stat line and thinking that's what to expect from him. Dude has 1 career 3 pick game in almost 3 seasons as a starting qb and now all of a sudden he's some horrible quarterback. He made the plays that put the points on the board and won the game for us. No matter how you look at it that's what it comes down to.

And I can guarantee you Carolina's coaches are looking at the game film from the Bucs game and saying, we better account for Jason Campbell and keep pressure on him otherwise he's gonna go deep to Moss all game.

Beemnseven · 10-05-2009, 02:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mooby

So I guess leading the team to two touchdowns and a field goal in the third quarter doesn't qualify as anything spectacular, esp. not Moss' 59 yard td catch that he caught in stride and didn't have to make an adjustment for or anything? That was pure luck right?

And let me ask you a question since you are so high on Cutler. How many times, in his career, has Cutler had a huge game but the Broncos still lost despite that effort?

You are basically saying the Redskins won this game in spite of Jason Campbell, and not because he led the team to the points that won the game.

I'm just sick how you are looking at JC's stat line and thinking that's what to expect from him. Dude has 1 career 3 pick game in almost 3 seasons as a starting qb and now all of a sudden he's some horrible quarterback. He made the plays that put the points on the board and won the game for us. No matter how you look at it that's what it comes down to.

And I can guarantee you Carolina's coaches are looking at the game film from the Bucs game and saying, we better account for Jason Campbell and keep pressure on him otherwise he's gonna go deep to Moss all game.

I'm not Mechanix544, but I'll chime in here -- that 59-yarder to Moss was a thing of beauty, but Campbell misses on those way more than he connects. The downfield accuracy just isn't there for JC, though I do believe with more attempts he could get better.

firstdown · 10-05-2009, 02:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

If at the end of the day there's a 'W' then yeah I'd say he made up for the turnovers.

No he did not make up for the Ints it was the D that made up for the 4 turnovers by not allowing TB to convert them into points.

mooby · 10-05-2009, 02:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

I'm not Mechanix544, but I'll chime in here -- that 59-yarder to Moss was a thing of beauty, but Campbell misses on those way more than he connects. The downfield accuracy just isn't there for JC, though I do believe with more attempts he could get better.

I know and agree he misses on a lot of deep balls, but my point was that at least it shows we are capable of going deep and executing, which will put fear into opposing defenses. That wasn't the first time Campbell's gone deep to Moss and connected, I remember a certain Saints game last year where we got the winning points off a Campbell to Moss deep ball. My point is that Mechanix says he doesn't do anything spectacular, or anything at all in the second half that helped the team, when that's clearly not the case.

Edit: I also want to give Greg Blache props for putting Tryon in the slot, where he stepped up and made plays and generally looked and played way better than Smoot has recently. I hope this trend continues.

Mechanix544 · 10-05-2009, 05:59 PM

I am not defending Cutler, like I said in my first post, I've never even mentioned his name before the above post. But you did make my point for me. If Cutler had the defense that JC does, u think the Broncs still go 8 - 8 last year? Hell No. Cut and dry, plain and simple, Cutler is a better quarterback than JC.

Now, let me also get this straight before people start lobbing rotten tomatoes, used condoms, and brussel sprouts (?) my way. I am not a JC hater. I hope he leads us to the Super Bowl. I am just tired of the excuses and waiting for some explosiveness. Our team hasn't gone over the 20 point mark, in what, 20+ games? Id love for him to succeed just as much as the next guy, shoot, I root for him on Sunday ticket and love watching the burgandy and gold every sunday. But I also, as a fan, cant help but look at the Mannings, Bradys, Ryans, Flaccos, Rothlisbergers, Rivers, Brees', shoot, even the Warners of this league and wish my team could have what they have. A Strong QB, not just one who slides by, week by week. Not hatin', just wishin' I guess.

NYCskinfan82 · 10-05-2009, 10:00 PM

Defense

44Deezel · 10-05-2009, 10:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by davy

I voted other.

I give it to Tampa for being so bad even we could beat them.

I voted other for their Kicker

44Deezel · 10-05-2009, 10:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

As far as Sanchez goes, you're right, Campbell's numbers are better which is what you'd expect when comparing a five-year veteran to a rookie.

Cutler has the same number of INTs, three more TDs and a higher QB rating. Amazingly, he has 62 fewer yards than Campbell passing.

I've said it before, but one of the hallmarks of a great, "franchise" quarterback is the ability to make players around him better. I don't see Campbell doing that. Cutler probably has a better line, and Forte right now is probably better than Portis, but as far as receivers go, I don't see how Chicago is much better than we are.

If you give Campbell a better offensive line and better playmakers, I think he'd be fine as our QB of the future. Problem is, that's not going to be the plan of action for this front office, I'm afraid.

Valid point and I agree that Campbell would do fine on a team that was stacked everywhere else, like the Titans of last year or the Ravens Super Bowl team. Unfortunately, it doesn't appear that the Skins will be that kind of team anytime soon.

That said, it's reasonable to think that Campbell will not be here next year, and if he's not here I highly doubt he'll be starting for any other team. I could be wrong and would be the first to admit it if I was (gleefully), but I believe he's destined to be another in a long line of Redskins starting QBs that go on to become someone else's backup.

When was the last time we had a QB that other teams coveted? Other than Trent Green and Brad Johnson (who eventually went on to become a backup), I can't remember the last time we had a QB that another team actually wanted to make their starter.

GTripp0012 · 10-05-2009, 10:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

As far as Sanchez goes, you're right, Campbell's numbers are better which is what you'd expect when comparing a five-year veteran to a rookie.

Cutler has the same number of INTs, three more TDs and a higher QB rating. Amazingly, he has 62 fewer yards than Campbell passing.

I've said it before, but one of the hallmarks of a great, "franchise" quarterback is the ability to make players around him better. I don't see Campbell doing that. Cutler probably has a better line, and Forte right now is probably better than Portis, but as far as receivers go, I don't see how Chicago is much better than we are.

If you give Campbell a better offensive line and better playmakers, I think he'd be fine as our QB of the future. Problem is, that's not going to be the plan of action for this front office, I'm afraid.

Is Cutler making his receivers any better though? Where's the Greg Olsen breakout season everyone was predicting? What about the rapport he's supposed to have with Earl Bennett?

Johnnie Knox is having a great year, but do we really know enough about Knox to say he's a product of Cutler? Maybe he's just an explosive player.

BaltimoreSkins · 10-05-2009, 11:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by firstdown

No he did not make up for the Ints it was the D that made up for the 4 turnovers by not allowing TB to convert them into points.

We all expect the D to be able to hold especially to what we perceive as a team we should beat. I would like to see continued aggressive play calling with the potential of some quick strikes. If it leads to an Int, let the D handle the pressure.

jsarno · 10-06-2009, 02:03 AM

Wow...14 votes for Campbell?

The guy throws for 3 ints, and has 2 fumbles, 1 lost (4 total turnovers)...throws for only 170 yards and 54.5% comp (especially considering how people are thumping his stats as reasons why we should extend him, or why he's so good etc), but somehow people think he's MVP? LVP maybe, but MVP...PFFFF. How ANYONE can say a person with 2 tds and 4 turnovers is MVP is well...you can fill in the blank. Yet again, Campbell shows us why he doesn't deserve to be our starter, this time he backed it up with concrete stats.

GTripp0012 · 10-06-2009, 02:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jsarno

Wow...14 votes for Campbell?

The guy throws for 3 ints, and has 2 fumbles, 1 lost (4 total turnovers)...throws for only 170 yards and 54.5% comp (especially considering how people are thumping his stats as reasons why we should extend him, or why he's so good etc), but somehow people think he's MVP? LVP maybe, but MVP...PFFFF. How ANYONE can say a person with 2 tds and 4 turnovers is MVP is well...you can fill in the blank. Yet again, Campbell shows us why he doesn't deserve to be our starter, this time he backed it up with concrete stats.

Convenient, isn't it?

jsarno · 10-06-2009, 02:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Convenient, isn't it?

Sarcasm noted.

Campbell is just like Obama...UNTOUCHABLE. Why everyone thinks he is the next champion is beyond me. We won DESPITE campbell. Congrats to the Skins for overcoming the ineptitude of our QB!

Hey, I was on the campbell side at one time...I thought he needed more time, and he showed glimpses of being good...but he's either amazingly slow developing, or we are just HOPING he turns into what we want.

mooby · 10-06-2009, 05:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jsarno

Sarcasm noted.

Campbell is just like Obama...UNTOUCHABLE. Why everyone thinks he is the next champion is beyond me. We won DESPITE campbell. Congrats to the Skins for overcoming the ineptitude of our QB!

Hey, I was on the campbell side at one time...I thought he needed more time, and he showed glimpses of being good...but he's either amazingly slow developing, or we are just HOPING he turns into what we want.

Yeah, despite the 4 turnovers Campbell didn't do anything in the third quarter that gave us the lead and was the reason why we won the game. The D scored those points with their outrageously good play

.

View Poll Results: Who gets your game ball for the Skins 16-13 win over the Bucs?
Portis	15	8.43%
The D	66	37.08%
Moss	18	10.11%
Cooley	33	18.54%
Hall	12	6.74%
Campbell	20	11.24%
other	14	7.87%
Voters: 178. You may not vote on this poll

10-05-2009, 05:59 PM	#66
Mechanix544 The Starter Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Fort Bliss, TX Posts: 2,277	Re: Redskins game balls I am not defending Cutler, like I said in my first post, I've never even mentioned his name before the above post. But you did make my point for me. If Cutler had the defense that JC does, u think the Broncs still go 8 - 8 last year? Hell No. Cut and dry, plain and simple, Cutler is a better quarterback than JC. Now, let me also get this straight before people start lobbing rotten tomatoes, used condoms, and brussel sprouts (?) my way. I am not a JC hater. I hope he leads us to the Super Bowl. I am just tired of the excuses and waiting for some explosiveness. Our team hasn't gone over the 20 point mark, in what, 20+ games? Id love for him to succeed just as much as the next guy, shoot, I root for him on Sunday ticket and love watching the burgandy and gold every sunday. But I also, as a fan, cant help but look at the Mannings, Bradys, Ryans, Flaccos, Rothlisbergers, Rivers, Brees', shoot, even the Warners of this league and wish my team could have what they have. A Strong QB, not just one who slides by, week by week. Not hatin', just wishin' I guess.

10-05-2009, 10:00 PM	#67
NYCskinfan82 Playmaker Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Queens, NYC Age: 45 Posts: 3,459	Re: Redskins game balls Defense

10-06-2009, 02:03 AM	#72
jsarno Franchise Player Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: 31 Spooner St. Age: 40 Posts: 9,534	Re: Redskins game balls Wow...14 votes for Campbell? The guy throws for 3 ints, and has 2 fumbles, 1 lost (4 total turnovers)...throws for only 170 yards and 54.5% comp (especially considering how people are thumping his stats as reasons why we should extend him, or why he's so good etc), but somehow people think he's MVP? LVP maybe, but MVP...PFFFF. How ANYONE can say a person with 2 tds and 4 turnovers is MVP is well...you can fill in the blank. Yet again, Campbell shows us why he doesn't deserve to be our starter, this time he backed it up with concrete stats. __________________ Zoltan is ZESTY! - courtesy of joeredskin

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Redskins game balls

Redskins Locker Room