Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse?

[illdefined]

Originally Posted by hesscl34

All I'm saying is that I do think giving JC a chance is a good idea so that he can gain experience, but I'm upset that we had to make that choice. Playoffs, Superbowl... gone...

[He Whom Shall Not Be Named] was the real guarantee we wouldn't make the playoffs Hess. he could manage a team with an excellent defense but that was just completely not the case this year, and he just did NOT have what it takes to do any more than that.

Campbell will throw picks sure, but i'm also confident he can score at ANY time. imagine throwing a bomb on the RUN. on a blitz, instead of throwing it away, or to Betts, he'll throw downfield past the safeties. yeah, young QBs can do that.

all the receivers are REALLY going to try and get separation now, because they know Campbell has the arm to really get it to them. even out of the pocket. the whole character of this team has changed. watch and see.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by illdefined

all the receivers are REALLY going to try and get separation now, because they know Campbell has the arm to really get it to them. even out of the pocket. the whole character of this team has changed. watch and see.

*saves post*

Unfortunately the defense STILL sucks, and the offensive line STILL holds. You have to love Randle El's versatility, but as a wideout he is worse than average. Lloyd has been even worse than him so far, although he's starting to make some big catches in 1 v 1 coverage (what he's paid to do).

Not saying they won't pick it up, just don't see any reason why they will.

But I appreaciate your conspiracy theroy that they weren't really trying for MB.

[illdefined]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

*saves post*

Unfortunately the defense STILL sucks, and the offensive line STILL holds. You have to love Randle El's versatility, but as a wideout he is worse than average. Lloyd has been even worse than him so far, although he's starting to make some big catches in 1 v 1 coverage (what he's paid to do).

Not saying they won't pick it up, just don't see any reason why they will.

But I appreaciate your conspiracy theroy that they weren't really trying for MB.

oh i've got a ton of your posts saved as well.

i don't know how you can make a conclusion about any of our wide receivers this season other than Betts. if you are judging them by how often they get the ball, consider, for just a minute, maybe that's why no.8 was benched and not the receivers.

it was far from a conspiracy theory, its what happens when teams lose hope, which in spite of your FO stats, matters very much in a football game. by this time everyone in the league knew what to expect from no.8, every defensive coordinator, every defensive back and sadly our own receivers. Lloyd was the first to show his frustration at the offense.

Gibbs saw the team's spirit sag along with no.8's passes. and thats why he made the change, the theory you made earlier, that Gibbs listened to the fans for this change, is far more ridiculous than any comment about the team's morale. something neither you nor FO acknowledge.

[RobH4413]

One thing I can say, when Lloyds number has been called as a receiver... he's responds almost every time.

I've been very pleased with that acquisition.

[hooskins]

Originally Posted by RobH4413

One thing I can say, when Lloyds number has been called as a receiver... he's responds almost every time.

I've been very pleased with that acquisition.

Me too, Lloyd has done all he could, I just hope he isnt upset with the situation because he seems like a solid reciever. Another thing about Lloyd, is his passion for the game. He seems to be one the few guys with a pulse, when we are getting destroyed. I love his energy, he acts like a little kid playing football in the park, and that is very refreshing to see from this team of deadbeats.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by illdefined

oh i've got a ton of your posts saved as well.

i don't know how you can make a conclusion about any of our wide receivers this season other than Betts. if you are judging them by how often they get the ball, consider, for just a minute, maybe that's why no.8 was benched and not the receivers.

it was far from a conspiracy theory, its what happens when teams lose hope, which in spite of your FO stats, matters very much in a football game. by this time everyone in the league knew what to expect from no.8, every defensive coordinator, every defensive back and sadly our own receivers. Lloyd was the first to show his frustration at the offense.

Gibbs saw the team's spirit sag along with no.8's passes. and thats why he made the change, the theory you made earlier, that Gibbs listened to the fans for this change, is far more ridiculous than any comment about the team's morale. something neither you nor FO acknowledge.

It's not a conclusion, it's just an evaluation to this point. Quality of play flucuates so much during a season, not only on a team level, but on a personal level. It would be silly to write the Lloyd and Randle El moves off this early since they have only been Redskins for 9 games. Even if they don't improve this year, recievers more than any other position can have extreme high years and extreme low years. Case in point, Mushin Muhammad. Top WR in the league in 2004, below average in 2005, and has performed very well so far this season.

But what we know about Randle El and Lloyd through nine games is this: if you remove them not getting the ball often, remove Randle El's versatility, remove all contract issues about how much they are paid because that really doesn't matter in-season, and you have two guys that as receivers though 9 games have played worse situationally than you would expect from a replacement level receiver.

DPAR is not a percetage stat, and although not getting the ball will affect totals, when you are NEGATIVE, there is no one to blame but yourself. Considering if you never saw the ball once, your DPAR would be 0.0, and Randle El and Lloyd have posted numbers worse than that so far, they have yet to 'get it done', if you will.

If you want to blame Mark Brunell for seriously ALL the team's problems, continue to do so, but with what he had to work with he did better than expected. It's his fault the team's morale is low, its his fault the defense can't get off the field, it's his fault that anytime we get something going offensively, we commit a stupid penalty.

If we have lost hope, we have nothing to blame but losing itself.

[illdefined]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

IBut what we know about Randle El and Lloyd through nine games is this: if you remove them not getting the ball often, remove Randle El's versatility, remove all contract issues about how much they are paid because that really doesn't matter in-season, and you have two guys that as receivers though 9 games have played worse situationally than you would expect from a replacement level receiver.

DPAR is not a percetage stat, and although not getting the ball will affect totals, when you are NEGATIVE, there is no one to blame but yourself. Considering if you never saw the ball once, your DPAR would be 0.0, and Randle El and Lloyd have posted numbers worse than that so far, they have yet to 'get it done', if you will.

If you want to blame Mark Brunell for seriously ALL the team's problems, continue to do so, but with what he had to work with he did better than expected. It's his fault the team's morale is low, its his fault the defense can't get off the field, it's his fault that anytime we get something going offensively, we commit a stupid penalty.

If we have lost hope, we have nothing to blame but losing itself.

whats the standard for a 'replacement player?' on the 2 or 3 times A MONTH that Randle El and Lloyd got the ball, did they run BACKWARDS or something? wouldn't it be about 10,000x times more likely is that it was a poorly thrown ball?

if you're going to keep spitting obscure stats to us here, you should do a better job of illustrating exactly how they work. while you're at it, you may want to forward your findings to coach Gibbs, the team, the NFL, and the NFL press.

and that last sentence? um, WHAT? :confused:

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by illdefined

whats the standard for a 'replacement player?' on the 2 or 3 times A MONTH that Randle El and Lloyd got the ball, did they run BACKWARDS or something? wouldn't it be about 10,000x times more likely is that it was a poorly thrown ball?

if you're going to keep spitting obscure stats to us here, you should do a better job of illustrating exactly how they work. while you're at it, you may want to forward your findings to coach Gibbs, the team, the NFL, and the NFL press.

and that last sentence? um, WHAT? :confused:

Fair enough. I pulled some blurbs from FO to explain replacement level:

Originally Posted by Football Outsiders

[W]e've determined that a replacement level player has a DVOA of roughly -13.3%.

Actually, while in general replacement level is -13.3%, technically it is different for each position depending on whether we are measuring passing, rushing, or receiving. And, of course, the real replacement player is different for each team in the NFL. (Kansas City started 2005 with Larry Johnson as the backup running back, while Houston had Vernand Morency. Big difference there.) No starter can be blamed for the poor performance of his backup, so we create a general replacement level for use across the league.

The idea of replacement level says that when a regular player gets injured, he isn’t usually replaced by an average player; all the average players are starting for other teams. He gets replaced by a replacement level player. In baseball, that’s a minor leaguer or bench scrub; in football, that’s a backup quarterback riding the bench, or a free agent some other team dropped in preseason, or a fourth receiver who suddenly finds himself playing opposite Randy Moss.

So now, an average player who can be used repeatedly — thus opening up other parts of the offense and gaining yards on a regular basis — becomes more valuable. Because if you lose him, you aren’t replacing him with a similar player. You’re replacing him with a significantly worse player.

[O]ur best approximation is that a team made up entirely of replacement-level players would be outscored 407 to 260, finishing with a 4-12 record. Conveniently, this is close to the average record of the last four expansion teams.

The last sententce says, quite obviously, that any hope or morale lost this season was lost due to losing, and losing alone. Morale doesn't have to be measured because it's a simple concept. You win, people are happy. You lose, people aren't.

[illdefined]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Fair enough. I pulled some blurbs from FO to explain replacement level:

The last sententce says, quite obviously, that any hope or morale lost this season was lost due to losing, and losing alone. Morale doesn't have to be measured because it's a simple concept. You win, people are happy. You lose, people aren't.

thanks for the explanation, now all you have to do is make sure you let Gibbs and Saunders know.

course people aren't happy when they lose, and WRs are people too. in fact all players are people, including the O-Line having to maintain infinite pass protection to see the ball fly over their heads, and the defense trying to win the game all by themselves, and running backs trying to run into stacked wide zones set up by the QB's throwing tendencies. QB play affects alot more than just whatever stat you're clinging to.