Skins/Falcons goat of the day

[MTK]

Campbell struggled but that was a direct result of the crappy pass protection. Too often he had guys running at him totally unblocked. Not sure what anyone would expect him to do.

I don't know how anyone can blame JC when the D gave up 200+ on the ground. I guess it goes back to that blame Brunell for everything syndrome.

[Big C]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Campbell struggled but that was a direct result of the crappy pass protection. Too often he had guys running at him totally unblocked. Not sure what anyone would expect him to do.

I don't know how anyone can blame JC when the D gave up 200+ on the ground. I guess it goes back to that blame Brunell for everything syndrome.

when the offense cant convert 3rd downs, the defense is on the field too long. his turnover had a direct effect on the defense, and the momentum for the rest of the game

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Big C

when the offense cant convert 3rd downs, the defense is on the field too long. his turnover had a direct effect on the defense, and the momentum for the rest of the game

C'mon don't let the D off the hook so easy. We still won the TOP battle, so don't tell me the D was tired.

I agree the offense didn't do much in the 2nd half but let's get real, 256 yards given up on the ground is inexcusable and will lose you the game almost every time.

[Big C]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

C'mon don't let the D off the hook so easy. We still won the TOP battle, so don't tell me the D was tired.

I agree the offense didn't do much in the 2nd half but let's get real, 256 yards given up on the ground is inexcusable and will lose you the game almost every time.

im not letting the D off the hook. im making sure campbell doesnt get off easy, which it looks like so far he has. the defense was bad, but so was campbell and i havent seen anyone discussing that yet. again, if this was brunell he would have been slaughtered but everyone here is too enamoured with campbell

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Big C

im not letting the D off the hook. im making sure campbell doesnt get off easy, which it looks like so far he has. the defense was bad, but so was campbell and i havent seen anyone discussing that yet. again, if this was brunell he would have been slaughtered but everyone here is too enamoured with campbell

Of course the big difference is Campbell is making his 3rd start while MB was a 500 year vet. I think that's why people are willing to cut him some slack.

[Hog's Breath]

I voted for Campbell. But, hey, it was only his third start. I'm in no way saying he should be benched. He made newbie mistakes. Big deal. I expect him to make more. As long as he is learning from them and progresses from week to week, which I have full confidence he will, that's all I care about.

As far as blaming the defense, I don't agree with it. You can't expect the D to win every game for us. I think our offense hasn't scored more than 17 points in the last 4 games or something like that. Campbell did make some poor decisions which ultimately cost the game.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Hog's Breath

I voted for Campbell. But, hey, it was only his third start. I'm in no way saying he should be benched. He made newbie mistakes. Big deal. I expect him to make more. As long as he is learning from them and progresses from week to week, which I have full confidence he will, that's all I care about.

As far as blaming the defense, I don't agree with it. You can't expect the D to win every game for us. I think our offense hasn't scored more than 17 points in the last 4 games or something like that. Campbell did make some poor decisions which ultimately cost the game.

The D didn't have to win the game, but c'mon man 250 yards given up on the ground?

I'm really amazed at how some are so quick to let the D off the hook, not only in this game but all season long.

When Travis Henry ripped us for 180 all we heard was how bad Brunell was.

I really don't get it.

[Hog's Breath]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

The D didn't have to win the game, but c'mon man 250 yards given up on the ground?

I'm really amazed at how some are so quick to let the D off the hook, not only in this game but all season long.

When Travis Henry ripped us for 180 all we heard was how bad Brunell was.

I really don't get it.

Yeah, 250 yds to the league's #1 rushing offense. What did you expect? I'm not saying the D is completely absolved from any blame, but we gotta put more than 14 points on the board. That only wins you games when you have a defense like the Bears.

Don't get me wrong, I love Campbell, but our passing game was terrible today. Even though we had some critical dropped passes, it wasn't good. We were not very good on third down conversions either which is normally a passing down. There was no reason we should not have scored more points than we did, IMO. Atlanta's D is nothing to write home about.

My biggest prob with our defense is that we didn't create any turnovers. THAT is not doing the O any favors.

[Gmanc711]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

The D didn't have to win the game, but c'mon man 250 yards given up on the ground?

I'm really amazed at how some are so quick to let the D off the hook, not only in this game but all season long.

When Travis Henry ripped us for 180 all we heard was how bad Brunell was.

I really don't get it.

I'll let the D off the hook because really we only scored 14 points...which won't win you too many NFL games. Yes the D gave up 24, but Campbell pretty much handed them 7 too. They didnt play well, but I dont think they were the sole reason why we lost, it was kinda a team effort in sucking (as ususal lol)

That being said I voted Campbell because I thought he played the worst out of anyone today. Basically he made the mistakes that were the reason we wanted him to start this year for, so that we can avoid them in the future. I'm absolutley fine with it, but I really thought his one INT was the difference in the game. Again, he made the rookie mistakes we expected him to make, I'm not mad or worried about it at all. If anything, making mistakes like that will help him in the future, and the whole reason he is playing is so we can be better in the future. If him doing that today means he wont do it in the playoffs in 2 years, then thats why we choose to start him now. I just dont want people to take this as piling on Campbell. I just thought if were picking an individuall goat, looking at just the game, I'd choose him. Although I dont think he was put in great spots either.

[backrow]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

I really don't get it.

I get it Matty! But I blame MB for this loss as well!

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Campbell struggled but that was a direct result of the crappy pass protection. Too often he had guys running at him totally unblocked. Not sure what anyone would expect him to do.

I don't know how anyone can blame JC when the D gave up 200+ on the ground. I guess it goes back to that blame Brunell for everything syndrome.

You are right, Matty. A lot of people assumed that even without seeing JC take a snap, that putting him in would be an improvement over Brunell. I hope the more objective of these fans are starting to see how that isn't the case.

Campbell has certainly brought an element with the deep ball that Brunell didn't have. But so far, he has struggled to complete passes underneath and move the chains. He has made up for it with running sometimes, but a lot of our drives are stalling because we either pick up 15 yards at a time, or we throw 3 incompletes in a row. Our offensive efficency has suffered.

To date, Campbell has done a good job taking care of the football, but he looked more like a rookie than a second year player today. THAT is why Brunell gives us the best chance to win.

Now I'll shift gears and reiterate why making the switch was a good decision. After the Philadelphia loss, we didn't have a realistic shot to win the division. We did however have a realistic shot to make the playoffs if we stayed with MB and the defense improved. But only as a wild card. And in my opinion, and I believe that of Joe Gibbs, getting lucky and getting the WC would not have accomplised our goals. So after the division got away, we made the switch, IRed Portis (as opposed to having him sit for 3 weeks, and play the rest of the year with a torn labrum), and moved toward the the future. So it was better to go about .500 with Campbell and miss the playoffs by 2 games than to stay with Brunell and and still have a good chance to miss. I'll buy that decision.

Back to the game, the defense did play the way it was playing all season. But I ask myself this: If they had given up only 17 defensive points (including the Campbell INT, giving them a short field), did the offense play well enough to win? I'm not so sure it did. Betts and the running game did it's part, but we've become predictable in our run pass playcalling based on personel packages, and protection issues aside, Campbell didn't even complete 50%. If he's not getting the football to his teammates (not even his backs), he can't be absolved of blame.

It's not his fault we lost...but I'm not sure he played well enough to win.

[hooskins]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

You are right, Matty. A lot of people assumed that even without seeing JC take a snap, that putting him in would be an improvement over Brunell. I hope the more objective of these fans are starting to see how that isn't the case.

Campbell has certainly brought an element with the deep ball that Brunell didn't have. But so far, he has struggled to complete passes underneath and move the chains. He has made up for it with running sometimes, but a lot of our drives are stalling because we either pick up 15 yards at a time, or we throw 3 incompletes in a row. Our offensive efficency has suffered.

To date, Campbell has done a good job taking care of the football, but he looked more like a rookie than a second year player today. THAT is why Brunell gives us the best chance to win.

Now I'll shift gears and reiterate why making the switch was a good decision. After the Philadelphia loss, we didn't have a realistic shot to win the division. We did however have a realistic shot to make the playoffs if we stayed with MB and the defense improved. But only as a wild card. And in my opinion, and I believe that of Joe Gibbs, getting lucky and getting the WC would not have accomplised our goals. So after the division got away, we made the switch, IRed Portis (as opposed to having him sit for 3 weeks, and play the rest of the year with a torn labrum), and moved toward the the future. So it was better to go about .500 with Campbell and miss the playoffs by 2 games than to stay with Brunell and and still have a good chance to miss. I'll buy that decision.

Back to the game, the defense did play the way it was playing all season. But I ask myself this: If they had given up only 17 defensive points (including the Campbell INT, giving them a short field), did the offense play well enough to win? I'm not so sure it did. Betts and the running game did it's part, but we've become predictable in our run pass playcalling based on personel packages, and protection issues aside, Campbell didn't even complete 50%. If he's not getting the football to his teammates (not even his backs), he can't be absolved of blame.

It's not his fault we lost...but I'm not sure he played well enough to win.

Very well put.

[jdockser]

Jon Jansen!

[Citizens for 81]

I would expect the defense not give up a mile of rushing yards though.

[Hog's Breath]

Originally Posted by Citizens for 81

I would expect the defense not give up a mile of rushing yards though.

Hahaha...very true.

But the Falcons are one the best rushing teams in the league. I don't care if it is all Vick or not. I think we could cut our D some slack on that one. It still doesn't excuse our lack of offensive production.