Hey all, SORRY if this has been posted in the past. I have seen this discussed in a couple of discussions, but I can't seem to find them because they are all spread out. Anyway, I am leaning towards wanting to bring this guy into Cleveland. Here are his ratings for 4 years as a professional...
2006- 76
2007- 77
2008- 84.3
2009- 85.8
This guy is probably the best veteran QB out there who will be available for free agency. Do you think we should take a stab at him?
I would love to sign this guy and then draft a stud halfback behind him. (Along with a solid RT)
He seems like everything Quinn is supposed to be. An accurate passer who doesn't take a lot of chances, but puts the ball on the money.
I don't know a lot about him, so what do you guys think?
Height: 6-5 Weight: 230 Age: 27
I'm watching a taped Redskins/Philly games.
The guy looks pretty solid at this point.
Brady Quinn > Jason Campbell
I have watched him since high school.......
NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!
He is a poor mans Mcnabb. Only slower and less smarts. So......
NOOOOOOO!!!!!!! 
Deep South, what has he done that has turned you off so bad from him?
No thanks, he's not that good.
My intent in talking about him wasn't to find the next hall of famer for the Browns. It was to bring in an average/good qb with some years under his belt that we can build around until we draft "the guy". He looks leaps and bounds ahead of DA and Quinn from the game I'm watching. (Taped the WAS/ PHILLY game to scout him).
Guy throws a beautiful ball.
Good luck getting many to back up their opinions.
I like Campbell. Not sure I like him here but I do like him. Smart and accurate. the way I'm feeling abut his team now is that no matter who we'd bring in for a QB Mangini would have him doubting himself by the time the games start.
Campbell will only go as far as his OLine allows.
A good OLine and he is productive, without an OLine he becomes a liability.
It really is that simple.
As a QB we have no idea what he can do with line calls. If you watched Monday's game a comment made by Clinton Portis relayed by the announcers was that the last time he heard a line of scrimmage play change was when he was in Denver.
Oh Boy, now that explains a lot about Washington's ineptness, or perhaps Campbell.
Campblell has directed a NFL offense worse than ours last year only they have only played 1 team that had even a single win when they played (Philly last weekend)
The ball in the air looks as beautiful as they come....just like JeMarcus Russell.....and just like Russell, the ball is rarely to the correct receiver and even less often accurate by NFL standards.
he is better than JeMarcus.....but I'm not certain he's better than Quinn or Anderson either.
Quote:
Brady Quinn < Jason Campbell
Fixed 
Quote:
Campbell will only go as far as his OLine allows.
A good OLine and he is productive, without an OLine he becomes a liability.
It really is that simple.
As a QB we have no idea what he can do with line calls. If you watched Monday's game a comment made by Clinton Portis relayed by the announcers was that the last time he heard a line of scrimmage play change was when he was in Denver.
Oh Boy, now that explains a lot about Washington's ineptness, or perhaps Campbell.
I mostly agree with you, Charger.
It's no secret that I'm a fan of Campbell. When he came out, I had him rated as a developmental QB who would be a good but not great QB. That's enough for me.
To this point in his career, he's about where I expected him to be. The things I saw with him that were positives remain so, as are his negatives, and I've privately kept a VERY close eye on him since he came into the league, because I know what kind of fickle idiot Snyder can be.
Campbell's positives:
Throws a GREAT ball........that becomes an important element because of where we play. His spirals are tight and he doesn't throw flutters. Very accurate as a pocket passer.
Big, strong, and can make every throw required in the league. Can throw with touch on short routes, can throw bombs with the best of'em.
Mentally, stays calm under pressure and doesn't panic.
Team leader that players and fans can rally around, and is very coachable.
More mobility than you'd expect from a guy his size.
Negatives:
A little slow in the pocket reading defenses.
Despite good mobility, seems to have mediocre pocket-awareness.
As noted, if he doesn't have a good line, he isn't capable of carrying a team on his shoulders.
Can get a little down on himself when the team doesn't win.
Despite his size, isn't as physically strong as one would expect, and because of that, he can put the ball on the ground if sacked.
All in all, I'd LOVE to get Campbell here. He was my plan B behind Rodgers 
and when compared to what I've expected him to be, he's right on target.
People may or may not agree with my opinions, but I know QB's, and I know that Campbell is an instant upgrade over what we've got. Put him behind a decent line with at least some marginal talent at receiver and he becomes a good QB that we can win a playoff game with.
Question: Do you think Washington will resign him?
Answer:
If I can predict what that psycho Dan Snyder is going to do, then I MYSELF need to be committed! 
Will they resign him...................Dude, it's a damned tough call. My gut tells me they'll restrict him so they can control his future by either keeping him if they can't come up with another plan at QB, or to acquire picks if he's deemed not the answer. Why do I feel that way? Because he's going to be the best QB on the "open" market, and because of that, they'll be able to get something for him.
Maybe all these draft picks Mangini has collected can be put to good use afterall 
Quote:
Brady Quinn > Jason Campbell
I am not a J.Campbell fan, But....I will say this, We should not sign or do anything at the QB position UNLESS we sign a Average RT, & a Legit RB, without those two aras taking pressure off the QB, the def. are still gonna do what they have done this year, changing QB wont make a diffrence, unless it's Payton or Bree's
jc...
To me he is a replica of Quinn... so why not just hold onto Quinn and let it play out. Spend the money on something else of need. Don't think Campbell is the answer.
OL
Experience for wideouts
RB
THEN you can figure out who's going to play QB.
Quote:
OL
Experience for wideouts
RB
THEN you can figure out who's going to play QB.
If we sign the top RT available, get a mauler at RG, and upgrade our starting RB, then ANY QB will be an improvement over this year.
Quote:
Brady Quinn > Jason Campbell
How would anyone know that Quinn is/isn't better than Campbell when we really haven't seen him play?
A better comparison is Campbell vs DA...and I know who I'd take..
If EM is still here, we are going to have to severely over pay, maybe 35% more to go out and bring in Campbell, after the way we've done Quinn.
Plus I truly believe if EM is here, we will target Kellen Clemens, not a joke, i'm dead serious.
The same guy who made Mangini go out and get Favre.
I agree with most of the people saying we need a RT before we get a QB. If we can't protect the QB's we have now, then we shouldn't go out and get a new one. We do currently have 11 draft picks, so I assume we will be taking an O-Linemen with one of those picks.
I will also say that I think Jason Campbell is broken. And I don't think our current coaching staff has the tools to fix him. This is a guy who has had at least 8 different offensive coordinators since college. To fix Campbell we would need a coach that a QB can trust (i.e. Shanahan, Holmgren.) We don't currently have that guy on our staff.
Quote:
I agree with most of the people saying we need a RT before we get a QB. If we can't protect the QB's we have now, then we shouldn't go out and get a new one. We do currently have 11 draft picks, so I assume we will be taking an O-Linemen with one of those picks.
I will also say that I think Jason Campbell is broken. And I don't think our current coaching staff has the tools to fix him. This is a guy who has had at least 8 different offensive coordinators since college. To fix Campbell we would need a coach that a QB can trust (i.e. Shanahan, Holmgren.) We don't currently have that guy on our staff.
+1
Fix the right side of the line, get a RB, sign a free agent impact WR/TE, and maybe look at a 2nd/3rd round QB. We should have a ton of picks to address a lot of our problem area.
One thing I do have faith in is that Mangini will fix the line. Look what he did in New York:
1st year: Drafts D'Brick with the 4th pick and Mangold 29th.
2nd year: Nothing significant.
3rd year: Signed Faneca and Damien Woody.
I get the impression that he values the line a hell of a lot more than Savage did.
Quote:
I get the impression that he values the line a hell of a lot more than Savage did.
possible, but Savage did sign Bentley to the richest ever deal for an OC....signed Shaffer to a rich LT deal....signed Steiny for OT money to play OG.....drafted JT #3 overall (bypassing Peterson)
not all those moves panned out, but it showed he did focus on OL at times....he just didn't do a good job building depth there.
But the only player he actually drafted (I'm not counting Sowells or Jon Dunn) was JT.
Well we did only have one 1st round pick that year. He did sign add 4 quality o-linemen just like EM.
I count two. You can also find Mangini spending many mid rounders on linemen, something Savage did once.
Campbell is GARBAGE!!!
I live in redskin territory and forced to watch their games all the time. He has so many weapons around him and still cant do well(Moss, Randall el, Portis, Cooley). He's very streaky and makes poor decisions continously. I would rather have Frye back.
I wouldn't say he has so many weapons. Moss is inconsistent, Portis is past his prime, his line sucks, and Randel el isn't that good of a wide out.
Quote:
I wouldn't say he has so many weapons. Moss is inconsistent, Portis is past his prime, his line sucks, and Randel el isn't that good of a wide out.
I like Devin Thomas though....they guy was routinely getting open (when they showed downfield at least).....too bad Campbell wasn't throwing him the ball (outside the TD pass)
Quote:
Campbell is GARBAGE!!!
I live in redskin territory and forced to watch their games all the time. He has so many weapons around him and still cant do well(Moss, Randall el, Portis, Cooley). He's very streaky and makes poor decisions continously. I would rather have Frye back.
I live in Redskins territory too..
IMO Toad's analysis is spot on.
With all due respect I gotta disagree with your statement that Campbell is surrounded by a bunch of talent.
the OL is wrecked
Randall-El is overrated
Portis is old and can no longer carries the load
the backs miss blocks
Campbell is running for his life and has had zero stability in an organization that has gone to hell b/c of an owner that stabs everyone,including the fans, in the back.
Do I think Campbell is the second coming of Peyton Manning??
Heck no,but he is an average starter and right now average looks awfully good.
Quote:
jc...
To me he is a replica of Quinn... so why not just hold onto Quinn and let it play out. Spend the money on something else of need. Don't think Campbell is the answer.
From what I've seen, the similarities between Quinnband Campbell are slow reactions and adjustments to the defense and the tendency to check down often. But, Campbell is far more accurate than Quinn with all of his throws and especially when he does throw downfield and will push it downfield more often. The worst part of his game is the fumbles. One poster stated we would need a RT and good RB and I agree. I'm hoping we fill those spots in next year's draft over picking a QB. I wouldn't mind a short 3 year contract with Jason Campbell.
The more I think about it, the more I want Eric Berry.
I don't see Locker or Clausen coming out early, and in my opinion they're the only QB's that would deserve the top draft pick we will have.
Another question. Does anyone see Sam Bradford falling out of the 1st round because of durability issues? I don't think he will, but is it a possibility?
I'm 99% certain that Clausen and Locker will both come out. The rookie cap is coming next year.
Quote:
I don't see Locker or Clausen coming out early, and in my opinion they're the only QB's that would deserve the top draft pick we will have.
Another question. Does anyone see Sam Bradford falling out of the 1st round because of durability issues? I don't think he will, but is it a possibility?
I think both Locker and Clausen come out early, i also predict a flood of juniors coming out as well. This could be the last big pay day for rookie contracts. The more picks the better in this draft!!
I think Bradford can fall alot. FIrst off, even before the injury he had a weak arm. Did you see him after he tried to come back this year- even less zip on that ball. Don't laugh, but third round would be a good spot for him.
Do you have any information backing that up or is it just a gut instinct?
I think Clausen is more likely to come out early.
But this is Locker's first year in a pro style offense. He was out almost all of last year and Washington is built around him having success. He was also born and raised in Washington.
I know the rookie salary scale is probably coming for the 2011 draft. But I still see Locker staying.
We're gonna see more underclassmen than ever declaring this year. Locker would be stupid to stay.
Depends on what Locker wants.
If Locker wants to get paid he'll come out.
If Locker wants to be a legitimate NFL QB, he'll stay.
Locker isn't ready. He's a gifted athlete playing quarterback, not a quarterback who's athletically gifted.
Just to Re-Iterate....
Mass vs. Moss
Stucki vs. Randel-El
Robiskie vs. Thomas
Royal vs. Cooley
Portis vs. Lewis
I'd say the Redskins have above average weapons. We have bottom of the barrel.
I think it's a sad state of affairs for us as fans when we are hoping for a marginally average QB to be on this team because it WOULD be a significant upgrade.
*sigh*
Quote:
I think it's a sad state of affairs for us as fans when we are hoping for a marginally average QB to be on this team because it WOULD be a significant upgrade.
*sigh*
Exactly. Campbell's garbage. Toad has a nice way of saying it ... but the end result is he's not much of an upgrade at all over what we got.
Sad state of affairs is true. I'm completely indifferent anymore to anything this team does.
I'd Pass - no pun intended. He does have a very strong arm but:
1 - He isn't very adept at reading defenses
2 - His throwing motion is too long. By the time he winds up any decent Cb will read him and quickly close the gap.
3 - Not a very strong leader (as best I could tell).
4 - No, he isn't that accurate. You fooled because you are use to watching DA. True Campbell is more accurate than DA but no where near as accurate as an NFL Qb should be.
NRTU, Rish.
Campbell does have more weapons than we do.
NAVY has more weapons than we do. 
To defend Campbell, because I think he can approach the high 80's and maybe even reach 90 in rating before his career is over, he's on a team with a pathetic offensive line, and is playing QB for a guy who's never even been an offensive coordinator before. The last actual job Zorn had was that of a QB's COACH, not a play-caller.
Campbell went down 38 times last year, and is on pace to go down 40 times by his 14th game. 
Despite it all, he's still getting a little better each year. He's in a pathetic situation now, where they hired a guy who was calling Bingo at a retirement home two weeks ago to come in and call plays. 
I'd also say that Campbell IS a very accurate passer. In terms of being an NFL QB, his arm is special. He can put touch on short passes and fire rockets down the field. He continues to improve in that category.
There are honest criticisms with Campbell. The number of fumbles is alarming. That's a combination of mediocre pocket-awareness and a pathetic offensive line. He also isn't the kind to grab his players by the facemask and chew them out. Of course guys like Eli Manning, Ryan, and Flacco aren't that either.
Right now, Campbell is an average starting NFL QB. He does some good things, he does some bad things. But what's important is that he's trending upwards despite being in a horrific situation. He came into this season KNOWING he wasn't wanted by the people that sign his paychecks. If those same people had a track record of success, I'd be worried about my own evaluation, but we're talking about Dan Snyder and Vinny Cerrato here. These are the guys that fired Marty for Steve Spurrier.
Campbell would be an instant upgrade for this team, and he IS going to get better. Do I think he'll ever be a pro-bowler? Nah, but I never did. The thing is, you don't need a pro-bowler to win the Super Bowl. 
Quote:
The thing is, you don't need a pro-bowler to win the Super Bowl.
Serious question who was the last non-pro bowl QB to win the superbowl? Would it be Dilfer? Cause Big Ben, Eli and Peyton Manning, and Tom Brady have been to pro-bowls Honestly Toad it appears now you do need a pro-bowler to win the super-bowl.
My question: Do pro-bowl QBs grow on trees and where can we get one?
Easier said than done IMO......
l isten to Redskins talk radio every day.Jason Cambell has a segment on the LaVar Arrington show. Campbell refuses to blame anyone for that mess and if anything he is a class act.His team mates have alot of support and respect for him.
The play calling in DC: it's the execution that is horrible especially the blocking.
I have a feeling,although JC doesn't say it, that if he had a chance he would get away from the totalitarian police state that Daniel Snyder and his evil henchmen are running.And I do mean evil......
Monday night Campbell got hit 16 times.
Cooley went down for the year.
Chris Samuels, their left tackle, went down with what is probably a career ending injury a few weeks ago as did Randy Thomas their starting guard.
Stephon Heyer is their LT now and he was their RT and is really no more than a back-up anyway.
Is Jason Campbell THE answer here?
JMO, until we can get a legit pro-bowl QB he is probably a better option than we have right now.
But the Redskins may not let him get away b/c they don't have a better option either.
IMO the Redskins would let JC go if they thought they could get one of the high rated rookies in the draft.
If we could trade down with them in a package deal for Campbell I would go for it in a heartbeat.
Were there rumors of us going after him last off-season? I think I remember that we were, but I've been known to make a mistake or two in my life. ha ha.
The Redskins were in the Jay Cutler sweepstakes.
I don't believe that JC can be happy about that,although he does not say.
Also, JC was benched 2 games ago ,and again although he won't say it, he is prolly be less that thrilled about that as well.
IMO Campbell would not be opposed to coming to Cleveland if it meant getting out of the present H3LL that he is in now. Dan and Vinny don't want him and have made that clear.....
Quote:
Quote:
The thing is, you don't need a pro-bowler to win the Super Bowl.
Serious question who was the last non-pro bowl QB to win the superbowl? Would it be Dilfer? Cause Big Ben, Eli and Peyton Manning, and Tom Brady have been to pro-bowls Honestly Toad it appears now you do need a pro-bowler to win the super-bowl.
Eli Manning two years ago (73.9 rating). He wasn't a pro-bowl QB. Ben Roethlisberger in 2006 (75 rating). He wasn't a pro-bowl QB. Backing up a little bit, Brad Johnson in 2003 (81 rating, 21 td's 20 int's). He wasn't a pro-bowl QB. And of course Dilfer in 2001.
BUT, it's not that simple of an answer. If you look at all the teams that have won Super Bowls, was it because of the QB's, or because of the rest of the team?
Of the last 8 Super Bowl winning teams, 5 were won by the Steelers and the Patriots. They won because of defense.
Yes, of course having a pro-bowl QB helps, but if the rest of the team is sound, suddenly good QB's............like Johnson, Manning, and Rottenberger..............become great ones.
People want to just reach out and find a pro-bowl QB. Goodluck with that. Sometimes you have to take something a little less perfect when the entire team needs help.
you mention the Steelers and Patriots....and they did win with their defense.
however, they also had QBs (and offenses) who you not only believed could run down the field and score with 2 minutes, but you expected them to do it.
so, while you don't need a probowl QB, you better have a QB who you trust making that last drive of the game.
I agree with that. But I think it's worth pointing out that those QB's were in development when they won their Super Bowls. The offensive lines were in good shape, they had bigtime defenses and running games as well. They were in positions to succeed. NOBODY, and I mean NOBODY can tell me Jason Campbell has been in a position to succeed over there.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
The thing is, you don't need a pro-bowler to win the Super Bowl.
Serious question who was the last non-pro bowl QB to win the superbowl? Would it be Dilfer? Cause Big Ben, Eli and Peyton Manning, and Tom Brady have been to pro-bowls Honestly Toad it appears now you do need a pro-bowler to win the super-bowl.
Eli Manning two years ago (73.9 rating). He wasn't a pro-bowl QB. Ben Roethlisberger in 2006 (75 rating). He wasn't a pro-bowl QB. Backing up a little bit, Brad Johnson in 2003 (81 rating, 21 td's 20 int's). He wasn't a pro-bowl QB. And of course Dilfer in 2001.
BUT, it's not that simple of an answer. If you look at all the teams that have won Super Bowls, was it because of the QB's, or because of the rest of the team?
Of the last 8 Super Bowl winning teams, 5 were won by the Steelers and the Patriots. They won because of defense.
Yes, of course having a pro-bowl QB helps, but if the rest of the team is sound, suddenly good QB's............like Johnson, Manning, and Rottenberger..............become great ones.
People want to just reach out and find a pro-bowl QB. Goodluck with that. Sometimes you have to take something a little less perfect when the entire team needs help.
Roethlisberger's rating in 2005...their Superbowl year, was 98.6. 17 TD's 9 INT's.
They went 8-8 when he had the 75.4 QB rating. I'll argue Ben's performance that year killed them. I wish he could smash his face into a windshield more often...
Brad Johnson had a 92 rating the Bucs Superbowl year (2002)...22 TD's 6 INT's.
I don't know why you're choosing the year AFTER they won the Superbowl to make your argument.
The Eli and Dilfer arguments are legit...but Eli played on a whole other level in the playoffs in 2007.
Quote:
IMO Campbell would not be opposed to coming to Cleveland if it meant getting out of the present H3LL that he is in now.
Out of the frying pan and straight into the fire.. 
The only reason Campbell might come here is because he would be Mangini's boy, therefore he would get every chance to succeed... unlike those who are NOT Mangini's boys.
Quote:
Quote:
IMO Campbell would not be opposed to coming to Cleveland if it meant getting out of the present H3LL that he is in now.
Out of the frying pan and straight into the fire..
The only reason Campbell might come here is because he would be Mangini's boy, therefore he would get every chance to succeed... unlike those who are NOT Mangini's boys.
would you want to play or work for Hitler and Goring ????
Quote:
I don't know why you're choosing the year AFTER they won the Superbowl to make your argument.
Well, for one, I had the years mixed up because I'm doing this while doing menu revisions for work.
But thanks for the corrections, hehehe.
Still, by showing they had flawed years, it just proves that it doesn't take a Peyton Manning to win a Super Bowl. Maybe those players had pro-bowl years but were they the Super QB's that everyone seems to believe you must have to win the big game? No, they weren't.
Great teams win Super Bowls, not great QB's. You don't have to have a pro-bowl QB to win it all.
Quote:
Still, by showing they had flawed years, it just proves that it doesn't take a Peyton Manning to win a Super Bowl. Maybe those players had pro-bowl years but were they the Super QB's that everyone seems to believe you must have to win the big game? No, they weren't.
Great teams win Super Bowls, not great QB's. You don't have to have a pro-bowl QB to win it all.
That's sort of true, but it's kind of like the argument, "You don't need a salary cap in baseball because every once in a while the Rockies or Marlins win the world series."
No, you don't NEED a pro-bowl QB to win the superbowl.. but look at the teams that are fixtures in the playoffs, they all have very consistent high level play from the QB...
Yes...........but why?
All tend to have good-to-great offensive lines, running games, and skill position players. All tend to have good-to-great defenses. All that leads to good QB play.
We're getting close to splitting hairs here. I think this is becoming a polarizing group effect where the opinions naturally begin to seep out towards the extreme.
To win with a bum like Dilfer is rare..........virtually impossible. The other extreme is a belief that you have to have one of the top-5 QB's in the league to win a Super Bowl. All a team REALLY needs is a good............team. As long as the QB is solid, that's enough.
I believe we're stuck right now mentally because teams like the Pats and Steelers have won most of the last several Super Bowls. It's natural to then believe it takes QB's like 'Berger and Brady to win it all, when a guy like Brad Johnson can win it just as easily.
So let's back this up and get it back to Campbell. Right now he's an average NFL QB. I believe most would agree. He does some good things, he has some flaws. My side of this discussion revolves around his lack of stability around him as well as his continual trending upwards throughout his career.
So, because you have to assume he's going to be available to have this discussion, the question then becomes would we be better served to have someone like Campbell come in, or risk spending a 1st rounder on a developmental QB?
We aren't splitting hairs because we agree more than we disagree, so let's get that out there first...
Quote:
All tend to have good-to-great offensive lines, running games, and skill position players. All tend to have good-to-great defenses. All that leads to good QB play.
Yes, good players make a QB better... but good QB play also makes everybody else better... no need on beating each other up over the chicken and egg, which is more important... they are both important to some degree.
Quote:
To win with a bum like Dilfer is rare..........virtually impossible. The other extreme is a belief that you have to have one of the top-5 QB's in the league to win a Super Bowl. All a team REALLY needs is a good............team. As long as the QB is solid, that's enough.
Maybe this is the hair we need to split... do you want to be good? or do you want to be great? Good teams tend to have one or the other, great teams have both. We've sucked for so long that yes, "good" sounds wonderful right now... Peyton Manning would make our current team better.. probably couldn't even get us to "good" and certainly couldn't get us to "great"... we need improvement all around, my point is that if/when we get those other key players, to be great, we need a really really good QB.
Quote:
It's natural to then believe it takes QB's like 'Berger and Brady to win it all, when a guy like Brad Johnson can win it just as easily.
A guy like Brad Johnson can win it.. can he win it just as easily? Not even close. Here are the last 17 super bowl champion QBs... other than Johnson one year and Dilfer one year, every other QB on that list is either already considered great, or very well could be at some point.. and not just flash in the pan great, consistently great.
Troy Aikman, Dallas Cowboys - SB XXVII
Troy Aikman, Dallas Cowboys - SB XXVIII
Steve Young, San Francisco 49ers - SB XXIX
Troy Aikman, Dallas Cowboys - SB XXX
Brett Favre, Green Bay Packers - SB XXXI
John Elway, Denver Broncos - SB XXXII
John Elway, Denver Broncos - SB XXXIII
Kurt Warner, St. Louis Rams - SB XXXIV
Trent Dilfer, Baltimore Ravens - SB XXXV
Tom Brady, New England Patriots - SB XXXVI
Brad Johnson, Tampa Bay Buccaneers - SB XXXVII
Tom Brady, New England Patriots - SB XXXVIII
Tom Brady, New England Patriots - SB XXXIX
Ben Roethlisberger, Pittsburgh Steelers - SB XL
Peyton Manning, Indianapolis Colts - SB XLI
Eli Manning, New York Giants - SB XLII
Ben Roethlisberger, Pittsburgh Steelers - SB XLIII
So can it happen with a mediocre QB? Yes.. is it "just as easy"? not even close.
Now, I went back 17 years for a reason. If you go back farther than that, you get into the Rypiens, and Hostetlers, and Phil Simms, and McMahon, and Doug Williams.. to me that shows you how the NFL has changed. It's a pass happy, vertical game these days, you have to have a QB that is smart enough to pick up the complexity, mobile enough to move around, accurate enough to hit his target, and strong enough to get it down field.. those guys are rare and the two areas hardest to find are the smarts and the accuracy.. those, IMHO, are the two most important and if I was drafting, that is what I'd be looking for first.. smarts and accuracy. I don't care if you can run around like Vick or Young or throw it 50 yards on your knees like Russell... I want a guy that is smart and accurate.
Quote:
So, because you have to assume he's going to be available to have this discussion, the question then becomes would we be better served to have someone like Campbell come in, or risk spending a 1st rounder on a developmental QB?
If you are proposing Campbell as a band-aid, I would be more on board and here's why... I'm not convinced he's that much better than what we have right now, BUT.. he doesn't have the baggage either of our QBs have. So if that's what it takes to have a year or two without a QB controversy, while we build the other pieces, then ok, go for it.... then draft your franchise QB.. I don't think Campbell is the franchise QB.
Quote:
So can it happen with a mediocre QB? Yes.. is it "just as easy"? not even close.
We could build a new forum for the ensuing discussion regarding whether those QB's were great by their own accord, or if they had amazing talent all around them. So while showing all those teams would make a compelling argument, I'm of the opinion that the parts became the whole, so the QB isn't great by his own standards, but rather great because he's good and the rest of his team was great.
Quote:
Now, I went back 17 years for a reason. If you go back farther than that, you get into the Rypiens, and Hostetlers, and Phil Simms, and McMahon, and Doug Williams.. to me that shows you how the NFL has changed. It's a pass happy, vertical game these days, you have to have a QB that is smart enough to pick up the complexity, mobile enough to move around, accurate enough to hit his target, and strong enough to get it down field.
Which begs the question: Is the "greatness" of these QB's a result of this pass-happy era? Who's to say that the QB's from the early 90's and late 80's couldn't have racked up the "great" numbers of today's QB's? The league has favored more passing and thus opened up for QB's. Such things as protecting the QB has gone a long way in helping that, because it allows offenses to open up more than in years past.
We can use Rypien and Williams as great examples because they were good QB's who became great on a great team. I don't believe you can discount them because they didn't fall into this era of the vertical game. They had receivers that would be stars today........but they also had good defenses with HOF players and a running game and offensive line to be proud of.
I think the protection afforded QB's as well as the further development of the passing game has made these QB's the "stars" that they are today. Given the same opportunities, I think QB's of the 80's and early 90's would be producing like-numbers.
So all this comes back to Campbell. Can he be great? Does it matter if he's only "very good?"
I believe if we build a team worthy of winning a Super Bowl, he's good enough to get it done. I DON'T believe he's the kind of guy that can take a team to the Super Bowl by his own playmaking ability, like a Roethlisberger or a Manning. BUT, expecting or hoping to find that guy is futile. Sometimes you have to upgrade with what's available.
Quote:
So while showing all those teams would make a compelling argument, I'm of the opinion that the parts became the whole,
Toad, all of the parts are the reason they won championships, but the QBs, by their own right, were great.... that's why Tom Brady has won 3 and Payton Manning has won 1... even though I think Manning is the better QB. He suffered for years with little to no defensive help while Brady had a more complete team.
Quote:
so the QB isn't great by his own standards, but rather great because he's good and the rest of his team was great.
Just like any other position on the team or any other occupation in life, some QBs are great. It takes help to win games and win championships, but some QBs are great. Was Jim Brown great or was he good and his blocking and team made him great?
Quote:
Is the "greatness" of these QB's a result of this pass-happy era?
No more than the greatness of MJ is because the refs let him get an extra step and called fouls on anybody that touched him... Aikman, Manning, Brady, Favre.. they are great quarterbacks in the era in which they played.. just like Unitas and Tarkenton were great in their day. We need a QB that will be great for the next 10 years, not one that would have been great in the 80s.... even though some just transcend, Joe Montana would have been great in any era, as would Manning and Unitas... because they are great and they have all of the tools.
Quote:
I don't believe you can discount them because they didn't fall into this era of the vertical game. They had receivers that would be stars today........but they also had good defenses with HOF players and a running game and offensive line to be proud of.
I discounted them for just that reason. They played with WRs who were great, they had good running games and good defenses, their supporting casts stayed relatively constant because players weren't being shuffled in and out every year... yet guys like Rypien, Williams, Hostetler.. they had 1, maybe 2, good years... they had the talent around them and for whatever reason they had 1 really good season, they couldn't sustain it even with the talent around them.. why? Because they weren't that good... they lacked that consistency that it takes to play at that level... like a Manning or a Brady or a Favre or an Aikman that did it year after year after year after year.
Quote:
I think the protection afforded QB's as well as the further development of the passing game has made these QB's the "stars" that they are today. Given the same opportunities, I think QB's of the 80's and early 90's would be producing like-numbers.
This is completely irrelevant to the discussion.. go back and look at Foutz, Tarkenton, Unitas, Bradshaw, Staubach... there have been great qbs in the vertical passing game through all of the eras of football.. Go back to the period in question, 80s and early 90s... Why did the Redskins win a super bowl or 2, the Giants won 1 or 2, the Bears won 1, the Raiders won 1.. but the 49ers won 5.. why? Consistent QB play... that's the biggest single thing that separates them from the others... so yes, some QBs from other generations would be producting like numbers today.. Rypien, Williams, Hostetler and McMahon just aren't on that list.
Quote:
So all this comes back to Campbell. Can he be great? Does it matter if he's only "very good?"
No it doesn't, certainly not at this point... if he doesn't suck it will be an improvement. Seriously, if he can be very good and then become our weak link, then I will be extremely happy because that will mean we have built one heck of a team....
Quote:
I believe if we build a team worthy of winning a Super Bowl, he's good enough to get it done. I DON'T believe he's the kind of guy that can take a team to the Super Bowl by his own playmaking ability, like a Roethlisberger or a Manning. BUT, expecting or hoping to find that guy is futile. Sometimes you have to upgrade with what's available.
If Rypien, Hostetler, Williams, and Dilfer can win a super bowl then there is NO reason for me to believe that Jason Campbell can't.. but then again there is no reason for me to believe that Brady Quinn or Derek Anderson can't either... This is where we are talking about two different things, a lot of things have to happen to build a team that can win a super bowl with a mediocre QB (and that's what I think Campbell is)... I think we need to build a BETTER team, then go get a playmaker at QB.
I kind of agree with what your saying Toad. My idea would be to sign Campbell and give him a few years to prove himself by providing talent around him through the draft and FA. If we still suck we can draft Matt Barkley in future to be our true franchise QB.
Wonder if he will be benched as really it just isn't him, it is the entire team that has them at 2-5!
Quote:
My idea would be to sign Campbell and give him a few years to prove himself by providing talent around him through the draft and FA. If we still suck we can draft Matt Barkley in future to be our true franchise QB.
If we're in a position to draft Barkley, we really will suck.
Realistically, our next QB will serve as punching bag for a year or two.
Form opinions from there, but that's the truth.
Phil, I can't agree with that because what we're doing now opens up the ability to sign true quality guys next year.
The last good offensive line we had.........2007.........was built by free-agent money. The signings of Stein, McKinney, Bentley, and Shaffer proved it. Now people can say what they want about what happened in subsequent years, but the fact remains we were able to sign those guys because of what we sacrificed the previous years. Hence, the next QB we get won't be a punching bag IMHO.
Now will he have any receivers to throw to? That's more of a pertinent question to me........
If we aren't going to bring in quality offensive linemen keep Anderson or bring Campbell in. Let them get beat up until or O-Line can prevent sacks.
If we do bring in quality offensive linemen draft and can protect the QB then draft a QB and start him from day one.
At this point in time I would be thrilled with a QB that puts up consistent 85 ratings.
A better line and he would do better.