Colt Brennan vs Rookie class

Ruhskins · 02-16-2010, 03:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by redskins202

Fair enough. But Jason Candle isn't a winning QB at all and isn't an elite, even with the best everything he's a game manager at best. I don't even want this guy back as our starter till Bradford comes because we will potentially not beat any good teams but struggle with bad ones. When everything works( like it did early 08) he'll put up a 1td and no int's and look OK with a 100 yard rushing RB and the WR's doing pretty good.

Wow, what a freaking concept, you mean that if you put some talent around a QB and he will do a good job. What are the odds of that happening?

Quote:

Originally Posted by redskins202

His 77% of 10 yards and less throws sickens me. He's obviously afraid to go deep and the OL is an excuse when Collins can hit a 45 yarder twice on the first play in the Giants and Chefs game. He's not the best guy or our answer but he showed he had enough time to throw deep. I think we could have done better with Colt Brennan or Collins, a 4-12 record is absurd.

In case you haven't noticed, there is a big difference between the play of a backup QB when he comes in relief of a starter and when teams can gameplan against them.

Here's an example from last season. When Matt Ryan fell to injury, Chris Redman came in and played a really good game. The next game that Atlanta played with Redman as the starter, he sucked. Why? Because the opposing team had time to gameplan. Collins has far more experience than Campbell, and that's why he looks good when he comes in quickly to sub in. In the long run, Collins would be dead.

I'm not advocating for Campbell, it is just frustrating to see the simple mindedness of some fans that completely overlooks the big elephant in the room (our offensive line's horrible play) and has the attitude of "if we just get rid of Campbell everything will be ok."

SmootSmack · 02-16-2010, 03:54 PM

I think most of us recognize Campbell isn't quite as awesome and blameproof as some here would say and not nearly the loser that others think. He falls somewhere in between.

Mattyk · 02-16-2010, 03:54 PM

The OL was garbage last year and has been in a steep decline the last 2 seasons. Sorry, but that's fact, not an excuse. I'm not going to bother getting into the whole JC debate. The issue has been beaten to death around here.

Mc2guy · 02-16-2010, 03:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by redskins202

A shanahan type of QB is a Jay Cutler or Bret Favre type, un-afraid gunslinngers.

That's BS. Shanahan found success with only one quarterback, Elway. That came after he was able to reduce the amount of passes Elway had to attempt (i.e. reverse the gunslinger tendencies), through a strong running game.

I have watched all I need to of CB and Bradford. Both are limp-armed, short, spread offense passers with average release times; who were successful in systems where their receivers were 4-5 yards open. That game doesn't fly in the NFL, which is why Colt is a pine rider and always will be. Deal.

I'm not saying JC is the long-term solution, but he's not the team's worst problem right now and Bradford is nowhere even close to being worth the 4th pick. He isn't worth a first round pick, much less 4th overall.

Ruhskins · 02-16-2010, 04:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by redskins202

His 19-32 record( sad to say its a record despite his players .)

His stats are overrated. Do you really believe he deserves a 100.QB rating in the MNF eagles game that ended up blowing us out?. OR his 77% COMP rating in week one of the Giants?. See what I'm saying.

And don't bring up all the OL excuse, this kid doesn't read the defense, read the blitz,coverages ,etc. Portis made that loud and clear for a reason. And JC is very inaccurate in big down the field plays and is not a Shanahan type. A shanahan type of QB is a Jay Cutler or Bret Favre type, un-afraid gunslinngers.

So you want a QB that leads the league in INTs like Cutler? And I guess you weren't around when everyone was criticizing Favre and how his "gunslinger" attitude cost them the NO game.

redskins202 · 02-16-2010, 04:12 PM

Quote:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

Wow, what a freaking concept, you mean that if you put some talent around a QB and he will do a good job. What are the odds of that happening?

In case you haven't noticed, there is a big difference between the play of a backup QB when he comes in relief of a starter and when teams can gameplan against them.

Quote:

No , I'm saying when he had alot he still did average. We won the Lions game because of Moss honestly and Portis.

-We won the Dallas game due to good defense and a overall good game by the Redskins. Best game Jason Candle had.

-We beat the Eagles because of Portis and our defense holding them down and Shawuns FG's that where 100% good. Overall tho Jason Candle did manage the game at best.

-We beat the Browns because of Portis. And the Browns are horrible.

Honestly our 6-2 record was overrated if anything.

Quote:

Here's an example from last season. When Matt Ryan fell to injury, Chris Redman came in and played a really good game. The next game that Atlanta played with Redman as the starter, he sucked. Why? Because the opposing team had time to gameplan. Collins has far more experience than Campbell, and that's why he looks good when he comes in quickly to sub in. In the long run, Collins would be dead.

Collins knew the playbook but he never started for it. And honestly there was a very good article about how Collins does in training Camp and probably a very smart QB. So he knew the playbook but knowing it doesn't cause you to get big games or accurate throws or accurate TD passes or ETC. You are what you are. I believe the system does mean something but playbook is an excuse if anything. Jay Cutler is a WCO QB but went to the Bears who didn't run it and put up 27 td's 26 int's with no WR's at all but people never credit Cutler for 27 td's and look at his 26 ints. He beat out Bret Favre and a healthy Vikes team legit.

I

Quote:

'm not advocating for Campbell, it is just frustrating to see the simple mindedness of some fans that completely overlooks the big elephant in the room (our offensive line's horrible play) and has the attitude of

"if we just get rid of Campbell everything will be ok."

We are better without Candle. The OL is bad but when given time he does the same thing. OL does not let you:.

-Throw more accurate passes.
-Throw down the field perfect
- Make u read plays on the defense
-ETC

helps give you time and pick up the blitz better but for the OL to get better the QB has to read the plays. It won't happen all the time but Candle ability to not read any blitzes or coverages on the field made our OL worst than how it should of been. When given time he isn't good.

We had Chris Samuels for 10 years now and drafted him. It was a very good move, we had a very good OL with him about 7 years out of 10 and with any QB we had back there they didn't do anything.

Brunell had his last gas in 05 and he was a good part of a success of our playoff run but if we had a Tom Brady or real franchise QB back there than we probably would have won the SB. Our D was nasty with a good Portis and great Moss .

Todd Collins 07: Mysteriously our OL gets better as we'll as our offense and every thing around us. The D played a bit better( not saying it was cause of Todd) but we did better. The Seahawks just outplayed us and thats how it is in the playoffs. Even with an great OL you'll end up playing great defenses that would make your OL look AVG. Comes down to how good the D is and which QB plays better.

Jason Candle with time can't do anything. I find it very shelfish of him as we'll to try and get traded if we pick up a franchise QB. He isn't a starter for no one.

We can do better without Campbell because we have shown it. since our 6-2 record broke and combining it is a record of 6-42 I think. Something close to that and its unacceptable. Great reason for the 6-2 record was also based on nobody taking Zorn seriously and when they did we seen how it was.

celts32 · 02-16-2010, 04:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mc2guy

That's BS. Shanahan found success with only one quarterback, Elway. That came after he was able to reduce the amount of passes Elway had to attempt (i.e. reverse the gunslinger tendencies), through a strong running game.

I have watched all I need to of CB and Bradford. Both are limp-armed, short, spread offense passers with average release times; who were successful in systems where their receivers were 4-5 yards open. That game doesn't fly in the NFL, which is why Colt is a pine rider and always will be. Deal.

I'm not saying JC is the long-term solution, but he's not the team's worst problem right now and Bradford is nowhere even close to being worth the 4th pick. He isn't worth a first round pick, much less 4th overall.

Your Bradford analysis is off base. Bradford is 6-4 with well above average release and arm strength. There are questions about his transition to a pro style offense, but he has the physical tools to be an elite NFL QB which is why he will be drafted in the top 10 in April. To toss him in a barrel with Colt Brennan who was barely even drafted is not even close to acurate.

redskins202 · 02-16-2010, 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mc2guy

That's BS. Shanahan found success with only one quarterback, Elway. That came after he was able to reduce the amount of passes Elway had to attempt (i.e. reverse the gunslinger tendencies), through a strong running game.

I have watched all I need to of CB and Bradford. Both are limp-armed, short, spread offense passers with average release times; who were successful in systems where their receivers were 4-5 yards open. That game doesn't fly in the NFL, which is why Colt is a pine rider and always will be. Deal.

I'm not saying JC is the long-term solution, but he's not the team's worst problem right now an

Quote:

d Bradford is nowhere even close to being worth the 4th pick. He isn't worth a first round pick, much less 4th overall

.

How is that BS???? isn't a Jay Cutler- Bret Favre type of QB is the type of QB he likes?.

Jake Plummer was one.
Brian Grieseses was sorta kinda one but he was un-afraid of things.
Jay Cutler was one
John Elway was one
-Steve Young (when his days at 49ers as an OC) was one.

How is that BS?. Shanahan favorite QB and fan of is Bret Favre. If Bret Favre was released today he would pick him ip ASAP.

redskins202 · 02-16-2010, 04:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

Quote:

So you want a QB that leads the league in INTs like Cutler? And I guess you weren't around when everyone was criticizing Favre and how his "gunslinger" attitude cost them the NO game

.

I'm sorry did you say Bret Favre cost them the game?. His best weapons all fumbled on him 5 turn overs if anything. How can you say you wouldn't Want Favre who led a very good Vikes team to one game to the SB. Honestly the Saints cheated out the Vikes. Bret Favre had a career year and I would take him over Jason Candle any type of years , even Bret-Jet-Favre .

And Jay Cutler is a pro-bowler who is good and is a INT thrower but he is also a TD machine Thrower.

Both are pro-bowlers. One has a SB.

Jason Candle doesnt have neither or was considered one. And your acting like Candle never cost us the game at all?????he makes us look bad against bad teams. Bring in Favre or Cutler I bet our O would do better no way our O can look as bad as this.

redskins202 · 02-16-2010, 04:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by celts32

Your Bradford analysis is off base. Bradford is 6-4 with well above average release and arm strength. There are questions about his transition to a pro style offense, but he has the physical tools to be an elite NFL QB which is why he will be drafted in the top 10 in April. To toss him in a barrel with Colt Brennan who was barely even drafted is not even close to acurate.

Agreed. Sam Bradford is a good QB for Shanahan to have even Jimmy Clausen. I liked Colt Brennan but he doesn't have the mechanics in the throwing motion to do good.

Sam Bradford is very accurate and has been compared to almost a Peyton Manning accuracy . Jimmy Clausen has the quickest sharpest throws. Both can be good. Candle is not good.

GTripp0012 · 02-16-2010, 04:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by redskins202

I'm sorry did you say Bret Favre cost them the game?. His best weapons all fumbled on him 5 turn overs if anything. How can you say you wouldn't Want Favre who led a very good Vikes team to one game to the SB. Honestly the Saints cheated out the Vikes. Bret Favre had a career year and I would take him over Jason Candle any type of years , even Bret-Jet-Favre .

And Jay Cutler is a pro-bowler who is good and is a INT thrower but he is also a TD machine Thrower.

Both are pro-bowlers. One has a SB.

Jason Candle doesnt have neither or was considered one. And your acting like Candle never cost us the game at all?????he makes us look bad against bad teams. Bring in Favre or Cutler I bet our O would do better no way our O can look as bad as this.

Given the Favre argument you made above (i.e. it's everyone elses fault), the bolded statement is not only easily defensible, but should be obvious to you.

CultBrennan59 · 02-16-2010, 04:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buster

He's the reason we won 4 games alright...we were a 1 or 2-win team without him. He put up good stats with no line and was taking a huge beating every week. A team with no offensive line or running game won't make the playoffs with ANYONE at QB. You can't put any (or much) blame about 4-12 on Campbell, he's one of the few players who actually tried in all 16 games and put up respectable numbers despite his team.

The O-line argument is very valid. If you were actually paying attention, you'd see him getting hit before dropping back even 3 steps a lot of the time. He couldn't make good decisions when he didn't have time to do anything. You'd see a center who can't snap the ball into his hands from the shotgun formation. Even when not getting hit, his linemen didn't know how to keep the defenders from batting the ball for INTs and defensive TDs.

Campbell's not our new Jurgenson, Kilmer or Theisman, but he's far better than he gets credit for. He showed a ton of toughness and leadership last season and kept us in most games all by himself. With a 4-12 record, we weren't blown out of games at all. He brought us back on many occasions. We nearly beat the Saints thanks to him and lost thanks to Suisham.

Did you ever look at the flip side and say that Jason made our OL look bad by HOLDING ONTO THE BALL TOO LONG??? Put Brees, Manning, Brady, Roethlisberger behind our OL and I gurantee you we win more games. It's the QB thats the problem, then the OL. JC has no pocket awareness what so ever. Quit backing him up, he sucks, get over it, end of arguement.

GTripp0012 · 02-16-2010, 04:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CultBrennan59

Did you ever look at the flip side and say that Jason made our OL look bad by HOLDING ONTO THE BALL TOO LONG??? Put Brees, Manning, Brady, Roethlisberger behind our OL and I gurantee you we win more games. It's the QB thats the problem, then the OL. JC has no pocket awareness what so ever. Quit backing him up, he sucks, get over it, end of arguement.

I see what you did there.

Redemption points, however, for spelling 'Roethlisberger' correctly.

redskins202 · 02-16-2010, 04:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CultBrennan59

Did you ever look at the flip side and say that Jason made our OL look bad by HOLDING ONTO THE BALL TOO LONG??? Put Brees, Manning, Brady, Roethlisberger behind our OL and I gurantee you we win more games. It's the QB thats the problem, then the OL. JC has no pocket awareness what so ever. Quit backing him up, he sucks, get over it, end of arguement.

Thank you. IDK how can any body think Jason Candle is our best option . So every thing has to be an excuse of Jason Candle. I can't stand fans who don't want us to win games.

But true stuff man. Me and you will be good friends for sure here.

SmootSmack · 02-16-2010, 04:31 PM

You keep calling him Candle it's hard to take any even legitimate critique you have of him seriously.

02-16-2010, 03:54 PM	#32
SmootSmack Mad Men Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 43,095	Re: Colt Brennan vs Rookie class I think most of us recognize Campbell isn't quite as awesome and blameproof as some here would say and not nearly the loser that others think. He falls somewhere in between. __________________ You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You

02-16-2010, 03:54 PM	#33
Mattyk ‎\m/ Join Date: Feb 2004 Age: 40 Posts: 72,652	Re: Colt Brennan vs Rookie class The OL was garbage last year and has been in a steep decline the last 2 seasons. Sorry, but that's fact, not an excuse. I'm not going to bother getting into the whole JC debate. The issue has been beaten to death around here. __________________ Support The Warpath! \| Warpath Shop

02-16-2010, 04:31 PM	#45
SmootSmack Mad Men Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 43,095	Re: Colt Brennan vs Rookie class You keep calling him Candle it's hard to take any even legitimate critique you have of him seriously. __________________ You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You

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

Colt Brennan vs Rookie class

Redskins Locker Room