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.