Will JC Get a Contract Extension From His Stats or Playoff Berth?

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

Right now, its highly unlikely JC voluntarily stays on as QB next year. Zorn will definitely be fired by the end of the season and Campbell isnt going to want to stick around to learn a new system every 2 years. If Shanahan or Holmgren becomes HC and promises to keep the same offensive system... then MAYBE we can convince him to stay. But thats the only way I can see it happening.

Now thats funny a statement.

[SC Skins Fan]

I have been a consistent Campbell supporter, very much so, but I was watching the Shortcut of the Jacksonville game last night and I had this revelation. Jason Campbell is David Garrard, David Garrard is Jason Campbell. Both are statistically accurate passers, and neither has ever thrown a ton of TDs or INTs. Neither is a great timing and anticipation passer, but they can hit throw when players are open. Campbell probably has superior arm strength, but they can both make NFL throws. Neither has tremendous pocket awareness and their lack of timing and anticipation leads them to hold the ball too long at times. You can certainly win with either quarterback, especially if you have a strong running game, but neither will carry a team. They will put up workman like statistics, and even have flashes at times, but their upside is ultimately limited.

Jacksonville went ahead and gave Garrard a big new deal after 2007 and he has been an adequate player since that time. Given a strong run game and good defense he will win games, absent that he will not. I think that is exactly what we have with Campbell. I think both of them of an upside potential of 3,600-3,800 yards with 15-18 touchdowns. That is better than what a lot of NFL teams have at the position, but probably not enough to win championships without a dominant defense, which the Redskins do not have.

[roth74va]

Originally Posted by SC Skins Fan

That is better than what a lot of NFL teams have at the position, but probably not enough to win championships without a dominant defense, which the Redskins do not have.

HUH? What team are you watching? Our defense was ranked 4th last year, and with the additions could be even better. We have a championship caliber defense IMO, I dont see how you can say we dont.

[SC Skins Fan]

Originally Posted by roth74va

HUH? What team are you watching? Our defense was ranked 4th last year, and with the additions could be even better. We have a championship caliber defense IMO, I dont see how you can say we dont.

The point has been covered ad infinitum on this board, but I am not among those who believe the Redskins defense was dominant in 2008 or that it has been close to dominant in 2009. Being "ranked 4th" is a fairly useless statistic and clearly is not an indication of the Skins having the 4th best defense in 2008. I will defer to Football Outsiders pro football prospectus on 2008 because they cover it much better than I can, but by DVOA in 2008 they ranked 11th and that is a much more accurate measure of their place in the league. They also declined as the season progressed and were absolutely horrible in the losses to Cincinnati and San Francisco. They were very good at getting off the field on third down, which is part of made them "4th" in yards allowed (along with the fact that they faced a lower number of drives, largely because of the offensive style), but they were not a dominant team in the way that Baltimore, Pittsburgh, or Philadelphia were in 2008. Slightly better than average does not equal dominant, but certainly is enough to win games when they play their best (and lose them when they did not).

So far in 2009 Haynesworth has made a huge difference in the running game, but the defense remains vulnerable on the back end. They also have not been able to get off the field on third down, which was such a large reason of why they were good last year. You ask what game I was watching, I was watching the one where the Rams, who are clearly among the bottom three teams in the league, with bad line play and one legitimate offensive threat, converted 50% of their third downs. That is not a dominant defensive effort in my world. If you want dominant watch the Jets-Pats game from last week and then tell me that the Redskins have a dominant defense. But strictly using net yards allowed the Redskins rank higher than the Jets. Another example of how net yards allowed is a completely BS statistic.

So when I say that Campbell and Garrard are the types of players who will not win championships without a dominant defense I mean '08 Steelers dominant, not pretty good sort of. Too many Skins fans (and players I might add) have this delusion that the defense is really great, when that is not supported by any empirical evidence. They have a couple of dominant players, Haynesworth most notably, but they are very vulnerable in the passing game (especially D. Hall).

[DBUCHANON101]

On espn it has that with JC as the starter, our offense avg's 1.74 td's a game. This has to change for him to stay.