Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
On Twitter: RedskinsInsider and PostSports  |  Facebook  |  E-mail alerts: Redskins and Sports  |  RSS

Campbell encouraged by arrival of Shanahan

After the most trying season of his NFL career, Redskins quarterback Jason Campbell received an unexpected boost last week from Coach Mike Shanahan.

At Redskins Park on Wednesday to attend Joe Bugel's retirement news conference and luncheon, Campbell encountered Shanahan as Campbell was leaving the complex and they spoke briefly, Campbell said in a phone interview. The conversation was among the most encouraging Campbell has had in a long time, he said.

"It was good," said Campbell, who plans to leave town today to begin his offseason vacation. "As far as everything we talked about, that's between us and I'll keep that private, but it was good to just speak to Coach Shanahan for a little while about the team and what he wants to do.

"You hear what a great coach he is and you know about the success he's had winning Super Bowls. But he's also done a great job helping the quarterbacks he's had reach that higher level. He understands what it takes to be successful as an offense."

Playing behind one of the league's worst offensive lines, Campbell was battered throughout the season as the Redskins went 4-12 and finished last in the NFC East for the second consecutive year. Aaron Rodgers of the Green Bay Packers and Ben Roethlisberger of the Pittsburgh Steelers - each sacked 50 times - were the only quarterbacks sacked more than Campbell (43).

This season, Campbell set personal bests in completions (327), attempts (507), completion percentage (64.5), yards (3,618), touchdowns (20) and passer rating (86.4). He also threw a career-high15 interceptions.

"Coach Shanahan is already watching film and I think he understands a lot of the reasons why we struggled as an offense the way we did this season," Campbell said. "You know Coach Shanahan has always had great passing attacks and his teams score points, but they also run the ball, which only helps your quarterback.

"When you think about working with a coach like that, it just gets you excited to get back at it and work hard. I always work hard because that's what I have to do; I owe that to myself and my teammates.

"But it just makes you feel good about the possibilities. You just know Coach Shanahan knows what he's doing. He's proven that."

And Shanahan also runs a tight ship, Campbell said. Former coach Jim Zorn, fired Jan. 4, did not have control of the locker room, many veteran players said.

"I definitely think Coach Shanahan will hold guys accountable," Campbell said. "He's going to expect guys to be in good shape when they come in and be ready to work. That's what your coach should do."

Today in the Zone

The question of the day in the Redskins Tailgate Zone: Has Daniel Snyder changed his management style?

By Jason Reid  |  January 18, 2010; 7:00 AM ET
Categories:  Jason Reid  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Smith clarifies comment on new leaders, old friend
Next: Report: Gray hired to coach Seahawks' defensive backs

Comments

Good for you, JC...

Posted by: mmck | January 18, 2010 7:14 AM | Report abuse

I'm curious to hear what Suisham will have to say. Not that him making two field goals would've really made a difference with the outcome. He's a horrible kicker but he doesn't want to believe it. Where are all the people crying over Suisham getting cut? He's a horrible kicker! But Suisham would tell you he's the most accurate kicker in Redskins history!!!

Posted by: rachel216 | January 17, 2010 3:52 PM | Report abuse
----------------------------

No offense, Rachel, but I'm pretty sure you were one of those people. Maybe even called gano's signing "ridiculous". And I almost definitely recall you lamenting it being unfair that suisham was made a scapegoat and that he'd come back to haunt us like David Akers.

Posted by: AdamCr | January 18, 2010 7:17 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: AdamCr | January 18, 2010 7:21 AM | Report abuse

Well you didn't hear any crying about SUISHAM from me. My only complaint about GANO is the way DAN SMITH altered his kicking style. The man has great depth and directional abilities on his kickoffs, and should be allowed to utilize those strengths instead of kicking shallow so a kick return team can allow a start outside the twenty instead of inside it. I put that on coaching. Everybody could see what GRAHAM can do with the kickoff when given the chance in his first two games. SMITH has got to go.

Posted by: glawrence007 | January 18, 2010 7:41 AM | Report abuse

If CLAUSEN, SUH, or OKUNG are at #4, stand pat and pick.

Posted by: glawrence007 | January 18, 2010 7:44 AM | Report abuse

Seven yards per attempt. That is awful. With all of the holes on the team, the Redskins have no choice but to offer Campbell a one year deal, but he is a terrible QB and as soon as he leaves Washington he'll go on to a life of obscurity as a career backup like Todd Collins.

Posted by: tkoho | January 18, 2010 7:45 AM | Report abuse


I just love how football analysts and other self-proclaimed "experts" fall head over heels in love with the teams that win on Wild-Card Sunday and then completely forget just why the teams that earned a bye...well, earned a bye. I mean, picking 3 out of 4 teams to upset the top-seeded teams is plain idiotic. And this year's divisonal round proved most of pundits to be just that.

Posted by: brownwood26 | January 18, 2010 7:37 AM | Report abuse

Just curious, brownwood -- how many "football analysts and self-proclaimed 'experts'" picked 3 out of 4 teams to upset the top-seeded teams? Which pundits were proved to be idiotic?

Posted by: League-Source | January 18, 2010 7:51 AM | Report abuse

Bottom line is this guy's kickoffs are short and he can't make any clutch kicks... not to mention very SHORT clutch kicks. Suisham's a great guy but I'm glad he's no longer our kicker.

Posted by: rachel216 | December 8, 2009 4:08 PM

Have to back Rachel on this one Adam, she was always on the anti-Suisham side of the debate.

Posted by: geotherm21 | January 18, 2010 7:52 AM | Report abuse

Geotherm, if that's the case I stand corrected. I'd have to look back but I thought I remembered it differently.

Posted by: AdamCr | January 18, 2010 8:00 AM | Report abuse

We will not find a better QB next season than Campbell. We need to sign him to a one year contract and if Shannahan brings him to the next level pay him what he deserves. I would like to see what he is capable of behind an adequate line. You have to admit he is tough as nails and a total class act.

Posted by: RedskinJim1 | January 18, 2010 8:01 AM | Report abuse

Just curious, brownwood -- how many "football analysts and self-proclaimed 'experts'" picked 3 out of 4 teams to upset the top-seeded teams?

Posted by: League-Source | January 18, 2010 7:49 AM


I can't remember exactly who, but there were a couple ESPN talking-heads that had the Chargers over the Jets as a lock and the other three games as upsets. I'll never get why clown coaches like Norv and Wade get all this confidence while guys like Jim Caldwell and Sean Payton are supposedly chopped liver.

Posted by: brownwood26 | January 18, 2010 8:05 AM | Report abuse

Seven yards per attempt. That is awful.

Posted by: tkoho | January 18, 2010 7:45 AM


Really? Because Peyton Manning had 7.9 yards per attempt this year. Pretty sure 7 yards per attempt is actually pretty good.

Try again...

Posted by: brownwood26 | January 18, 2010 8:11 AM | Report abuse

Just to further highlight how dumb it is to gripe about Campbell's YPA, JC ranked 15th in the league in that category, ahead of Jay Cutler, Mark Sanchez, Matt Ryan and Carson Palmer.

Keep Campbell, fix the O-line.

Posted by: brownwood26 | January 18, 2010 8:17 AM | Report abuse

Seven yards per attempt. That is awful.

Posted by: tkoho

A lot of things you can criticize JC for, but this isn't one of them, since Zorn was running a WCO.

Posted by: geotherm21 | January 18, 2010 8:24 AM | Report abuse

OMG!!!Another year of Campbell say it isn't so . We should have gotten Mark Sanchez, Mark's been in the league 1yr and he's already better than this bozo we have.

Posted by: davidgrodriguez1 | January 18, 2010 8:26 AM | Report abuse

Get a QB and fix the O-line.

I'm tired of reading these grandmothers who seem to think you can't do both.

Campbell sucks like an Electrolux, and Shanahan knows it.

He won't be here next season.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 8:28 AM | Report abuse

Get a QB and fix the O-line.

I'm tired of reading these grandmothers who seem to think you can't do both.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 8:28 AM


Nobody's saying you can't do both. Just trying to let you JC haters know that you can't fix both OVERNIGHT. You can get yourself a shiny, new rookie QB and promptly get him killed or turn him into the next Patrick Ramsey/Heath Shuler to get pummeled into mediocrity. I'll never understand why you JC haters can't see the upside in a guy who puts up his best numbers yet in a lousy offense like the one here last season. If he regresses under Shanny, I'll be the first to beat the drum to get him outta here. But now that he'll play in a legit offense, how about giving the guy the benefit of the doubt?

Posted by: brownwood26 | January 18, 2010 8:39 AM | Report abuse

Get a QB and fix the O-line.

I'm tired of reading these grandmothers who seem to think you can't do both.

Campbell sucks like an Electrolux, and Shanahan knows it.

He won't be here next season.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 8:28 AM | Report abuse

Boring, are we going to reargue this again? We have to fix Oline, pure and simple. And with Shanny and Allen, we will. I suspect we will resign JC to a 2 or 3 year contract, with low salary and high incentive bonuses. Next year we may draft a qb to groom, but this year we focus on rebuilding OL, and we get a rb to assist CP. It may not be sexy, but you all will just have to live with it.

Posted by: frediefritz | January 18, 2010 8:41 AM | Report abuse

Hmmm. Let's see, JC just had his best year yet, in passing yds, completion rate, td's, and passer rating. And all this behind an Oline that could not protect. I think it's time to get rid of him, and get new shiny toy. Huh???

Posted by: frediefritz | January 18, 2010 8:46 AM | Report abuse

I can't remember exactly who, but there were a couple ESPN talking-heads that had the Chargers over the Jets as a lock and the other three games as upsets. I'll never get why clown coaches like Norv and Wade get all this confidence while guys like Jim Caldwell and Sean Payton are supposedly chopped liver.


Posted by: brownwood26 | January 18, 2010 8:05 AM | Report abuse

I felt pretty sure the Jets were going to beat the Chargers because Norval Turner has no business coaching in the playoffs. That game brought back many painful memories of how Norval would snatch defeat from the jaws of victory!!

Posted by: RedskinJim1 | January 18, 2010 8:47 AM | Report abuse

"Coach Shanahan is already watching film and I think he understands a lot of the reasons why we struggled as an offense the way we did this season," Campbell said. "You know Coach Shanahan has always had great passing attacks and his teams score points, but they also run the ball, which only helps your quarterback.


I hope Campbell is not saying that he owns no part of the ineffectiveness of this past season's offense. There were times he had plenty of protection and either held it too long, threw it inaccurately, or turned it over.

I am Campbell's worst critic, but I think Shanahan is taking the right approach to be absolutely sure this dude is garbage...having said all of that...as a fan I hope I'm wrong, and I will eat every crow in the DMV area!

Posted by: rickyroge | January 18, 2010 8:48 AM | Report abuse

OMG!!!Another year of Campbell say it isn't so . We should have gotten Mark Sanchez, Mark's been in the league 1yr and he's already better than this bozo we have.

Posted by: davidgrodriguez1 | January 18, 2010 8:26 AM | Report abuse

Mark Sanchez playing behind the Redskins O-line would have been considered a huge bust. Sanchez would probably have been placed on the IR by week 6.

Posted by: RedskinJim1 | January 18, 2010 8:50 AM | Report abuse

Boring, are we going to reargue this again? We have to fix Oline, pure and simple. And with Shanny and Allen, we will. I suspect we will resign JC to a 2 or 3 year contract, with low salary and high incentive bonuses. Next year we may draft a qb to groom, but this year we focus on rebuilding OL, and we get a rb to assist CP. It may not be sexy, but you all will just have to live with it.

Posted by: frediefritz | January 18, 2010 8:41 AM |

Throw in the decision to go to 3-4 full time, or a hybrid defense like the Jets, the Skins would have to focus some resources to the defense again this off-season.

Posted by: TWISI | January 18, 2010 8:51 AM | Report abuse

Perfect. This post will help continue the ever fascinating JC sucks vs those who think he needs an OL and legit coaching argument.

Like that argument needed the help of this post to keep it alive.

On another note, my favorite play from yesterday was when Kennedy sacked romo and planted his face into the field. Loved it! Next were the two missed FG.

F dallas.

Posted by: Skins930 | January 18, 2010 8:53 AM | Report abuse

Romo got to see how it was being JC all year with his offensive line being killed by the Vikes yesterday. And how did Romo fair with this; TERRIBLE. So maybe with a good offensive line JC might not be so bad.

Posted by: fearturtle44 | January 18, 2010 8:55 AM | Report abuse

Here's what you JC supporters miss...

Aaron Rodgers...Mark Sanchez....you can trot out Campbell's stats all you want, but these guys are LEADERS. Sanchez has a ton of INT's but he plays with passion and makes quick decisions.

Campbell does not have that "IT" factor...and you guys know it. He's been here long enough. Portis and Cooley have practically said it.

Posted by: rickyroge | January 18, 2010 8:56 AM | Report abuse

Get a QB and fix the O-line.

I'm tired of reading these grandmothers who seem to think you can't do both.

Campbell sucks like an Electrolux, and Shanahan knows it.

He won't be here next season.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 8:28 AM | Report abuse

The Way I See It, we will be doing some new stuff on D. Actually, we already have most of the pieces. Think back 2 years, when GG had the D swarming to the ball. It doesn't matter so much whether it's 4-3 or 3-4, if everyone is swarming. I'm in favor of an attcking D, and I think a "combo" D will confuse many OL's. But I think Haslett will have our guys swarming the ball again, and that really improves tackling. So I think we will like the changes we see in the D, and with an improved OL and better ground game, we will be competitive again.

Posted by: frediefritz | January 18, 2010 9:03 AM | Report abuse

If you have a rookie QB leading the ball club, the Skins will need to find a dominate rushing attack during this off-season. Otherwise, that QB will get killed in the NFC East.

Posted by: TWISI | January 18, 2010 9:05 AM | Report abuse

Throw in the decision to go to 3-4 full time, or a hybrid defense like the Jets, the Skins would have to focus some resources to the defense again this off-season.

Posted by: TWISI | January 18, 2010 8:51 AM | Report abuse
Sorry, my 9:03 comments were addressing this comment by TWISI.

Posted by: frediefritz | January 18, 2010 9:07 AM | Report abuse

rickyroge have you watch the Jets game? Have you listen to Sanchez coach and talking heads? His coach tells him not to lose the game. The Jets runs 90% of the time and play to their strength which is the D. Not sure how you can say that Sanchez has the it factor when his coach tells him not to lose the game. Some of you allow your hatred for JC blind your thinking.

Posted by: jm220 | January 18, 2010 9:08 AM | Report abuse

I do not think we should make too much out of this. If Shannahan and Allen get any kind of draft picks out of trading Campbell. They should do it. I am not naive to think that in 1 year a coach can come in and take a 4-12 club, make them 12-4. We need draft picks aglore. Campbell is getting better every year, his stats are kind of misleading though. He got most of his yds when the game was over. I do like the fact that he got 20 tds. Redskins last Pro-Bowl QB was Brad Johnson who threw 24 TDs back in 99. Most mock draft boards have Clausen going number 1, Suh number 2, McCoy number 3. So Redskins will be in the right spot to grab Okung. I believe most of us will applaud that move. I will also be willing to go with trading down for more picks. I know trading is hard but there will teams eager to trade up and grab a stud like Berry. The off season will surely be interesting.

Posted by: Redskin4Life1 | January 18, 2010 9:08 AM | Report abuse

Get a QB and fix the O-line.

I'm tired of reading these grandmothers who seem to think you can't do both.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 8:28 AM | Report abuse
---------------------------------

Ok, then whose your QB, and who do you bring into the line? I mean, if this grandmother missed a secret stock of amazing FA QBs who are better than Campbell, please enlighten me.

And if Okung gets taken before us at #4, what are we going to do? Limit ourselves to QB/OT? If that's the case, then it's got to be Bradford, Mr. Tissue Paper himself.

But then who do we pencil in at LT? Are we going to find one in round 2? In other words, is the 4th or 5th best OT in the draft going to be our all-pro solution? Or do we try to bring in a FA? Oh, wait, most of the decent FA's next year are locked up due to the CBA junk, and would require draft pick compensation.

If you are lucky, you might get 3 starters from a good draft, so we would really have to strike gold for it to be LT, QB, and RT. It's just not probable.

Posted by: mattsoundworld | January 18, 2010 9:10 AM | Report abuse

Campbell does not have that "IT" factor...and you guys know it. He's been here long enough. Portis and Cooley have practically said it.

Posted by: rickyroge | January 18, 2010 8:56 AM | Report abuse

Out of curiosity, when has Cooley inferred this?

Posted by: RomoLongballs | January 18, 2010 9:10 AM | Report abuse

frediefritz I agree with you. I think a defense with no standard base is what I'm hoping for. I would like a creative, attacking defense.

Posted by: TWISI | January 18, 2010 9:11 AM | Report abuse

It is interesting how Campbell kind of throws Zorn under the bus here. So, Campbell throws Zorn under the bus, Portis throws Campbell under the bus, Rogers throws Snyder under the bus, Haynesworth throws Blache under the bus - what we have here is a total absence of accountability. The fact of the matter is, no one on the team had a flawless performance last year. I've heard Shanahan make comments in trying to re-focus this team. He's taken several opportunities to emphasize the offseason program. There is going to be total shock in the training room the first time a player is disciplined, but I think the reality sinks in at that point.

Posted by: RedSkinHead | January 18, 2010 9:11 AM | Report abuse

Campbell does not have that "IT" factor...and you guys know it. He's been here long enough. Portis and Cooley have practically said it.

Posted by: rickyroge | January 18, 2010 8:56 AM


Nobody's claiming he does. I'm what you'd call a JC supporter, but I don't have any illusions that he's an elite NFL QB. But he's a solid starter and you "fire him now" people forget that this uncapped year won't allow ANY quality QBs to make it to the open market. Plus the draft ain't producing a Week 1 starter, not with this turnstile O-line. So if the choice is JC or some slappy like Shaun Hill or damaging a rookie QB for life, I'll choose JC for a year.

All the JC haters have such a strong passion for the problem and have yet to provide an adequate solution.

Posted by: brownwood26 | January 18, 2010 9:15 AM | Report abuse

There is going to be total shock in the training room the first time a player is disciplined, but I think the reality sinks in at that point.

Posted by: RedSkinHead | January 18, 2010 9:11 AM | Report abuse

Agreed. When your coach is planning out in advance who to scream at and the most effective time to do so, then environment becomes one with which the players will not eff.

Posted by: RomoLongballs | January 18, 2010 9:16 AM | Report abuse

All the JC haters have such a strong passion for the problem and have yet to provide an adequate solution.

Posted by: brownwood26 | January 18, 2010 9:15 AM

Brownwood they have given Grossman, Rosenfels,and Garcia as options.

Posted by: TWISI | January 18, 2010 9:20 AM | Report abuse

It is amazing to me that people continue praise Sanchez's veresus JC's performance despite the Jets having arguably the best offensive line in the league and the best rushing attack. People keep forgetting that Sanchez threw over 20 INTs. People keep forgetting that the Jets are winning because of a good run offense, a good defense, and limiting Sanchez's mistakes by limiting his passing attempts. Sanchez has thrown only 38 passes in the playoffs. With the exception of a few, every other playoff QB has thrown about twice as much more passes in two games or more passes in one game than the total number Sanchez has attempted.

Some people on here still follow the Ceratto philosophy that football is not a team sport.

Posted by: MyPostIDisAfake | January 18, 2010 9:23 AM | Report abuse

Jason Campbell has consistently improved under the most adverse conditions, with this season being the worst. He lost his pro-bowl o-linemen, TE and RB. He played behind 11 different o-lines patched up with players that should have been on the practice squad. His RBs were from the practice squad. His receivers were just starting to learn how to run their routes. His Head Coach got his play calling duties taken away, leaving Jason with the wackiest system in the league. Yet, all he did was work extremely hard and never quit on his team. That he continued to work and improve despite all the turmoil surrounding him, shows the type of character the man has; and with the arrival of Shanahan, it's looking more and more like Jason will finally be rewarded for all his hard work with a great offensive system. Well, it's about time!

Posted by: postwell1 | January 18, 2010 9:24 AM | Report abuse

Where are your JC fan club jackets?

...ok here's the solution...

1) Sign Campbell to a 1 or 2 year, incentive laden deal.

2) Draft a QB to groom and push JC.

3) Obviously, fix the O-line

Posted by: rickyroge | January 18, 2010 9:25 AM | Report abuse

I am not naive to think that in 1 year a coach can come in and take a 4-12 club, make them 12-4.

Posted by: Redskin4Life1 | January 18, 2010 9:08 AM


Right, but apparently the JC haters are that naive. The reason to keep JC isn't because he'll wake up one day Donovan McNabb 2.0, but because A) there's no major upgrade available this year and B)this team isn't gonna contend in 2010. Franchise QBs aren't something simply acquired, they're BUILT to be franchise QBs by patience and good coaching. JC has yet to get that and some rookie won't walk in here with that on Week 1.

So again: roll with JC in 2010, build the O-line, THEN go for a franchise QB.

Posted by: brownwood26 | January 18, 2010 9:25 AM | Report abuse

Where are your JC fan club jackets?

...ok here's the solution...

1) Sign Campbell to a 1 or 2 year, incentive laden deal.

2) Draft a QB to groom and push JC.

3) Obviously, fix the O-line

Posted by: rickyroge | January 18, 2010 9:25 AM

Welcome to the light.

Posted by: TWISI | January 18, 2010 9:27 AM | Report abuse

All this talk aboutJC17. We got COLT BABY!

Posted by: iH8dallas | January 18, 2010 9:28 AM | Report abuse

The Dolphins and Falcons did it

Posted by: iH8dallas | January 18, 2010 9:31 AM | Report abuse

Looks like I'm on my own today...

Year 1 Excuse for Campbell..."hasn't had the same system for two straight years."

Year 2 Excuse for Campbell..."Al Saunders' playbook is too complicated"

Year 3 Excuse for Campbell..."O-line broke down at the end of the season"

Year 4 Excuse for Campbell..."He has no one to throw to"

Year 5 Excuse for Campbell..."He has no time to throw"

Prediction...

Year 6 Excuse for Campbell..."He's learning yet another system"

Posted by: rickyroge | January 18, 2010 9:33 AM | Report abuse

Brownwood they have given Grossman, Rosenfels,and Garcia as options.

Posted by: TWISI | January 18, 2010 9:20 AM


Grossman is an INT machine, Rosenfels IS Campbell without the mobility, and Garcia is going on 40. Besides, the only guy I'd consider even a little bit of an upgrade is Garcia. But again, behind that line Garcia would be on IR by Week 4.

That said, I'd be all for getting Garcia to replace Collins as the #2 QB.

Posted by: brownwood26 | January 18, 2010 9:34 AM | Report abuse

1) Sign Campbell to a 1 or 2 year, incentive laden deal.

2) Draft a QB to groom and push JC.

3) Obviously, fix the O-line

Posted by: rickyroge

Agree 100%

Posted by: jm220 | January 18, 2010 9:34 AM | Report abuse

1) Sign Campbell to a 1 or 2 year, incentive laden deal.

2) Draft a QB to groom and push JC.

3) Obviously, fix the O-line

Posted by: rickyroge

Agree 100%

Posted by: jm220 | January 18, 2010 9:34 AM | Report abuse

I want a QB that will take control of the huddle

I want a QB that has the awareness to throw the ball away and avoid a sack at all costs

I want a QB that can lead a 2 minute drive for a score.

I want a QB that will lead a 4th quarter winning drive.

We don't have that QB...

We do however have a QB with padded stats on a team that ranks first in passes under 10 yards.

Posted by: rickyroge | January 18, 2010 9:36 AM | Report abuse

Should be easy to find a QB next year since all these QB's can't handle pressure and will probably be released.

Philip Rivers sucked under heavy pressure in his last game.
Tom Brady sucked under heavy pressure in his last game.
Kurt Warner sucked under heavy pressure in his last game.
Tony Romo sucked under heavy pressure in his last game.
Donovan McNabb sucked under heavy pressure in his last game.
Carson Palmer sucked under heavy pressure in his last game.

Not sure about Mark Sanchez since he hardly ever throws the ball, but since a monkey could replace him in their system he might be available too.

Posted by: geotherm21 | January 18, 2010 9:36 AM | Report abuse

AdamCr: Hmmm... interesting that you are so sure you know what I thought. Well you don't have very good memory then. I criticized Suisham a lot. I went back to prove it:

I'm so over this team and their stupid decisions!

Posted by: Lisa_R | December 8, 2009 12:37 PM | Report abuse

Why is this a stupid decision? Even Tony Dungy would've cut him. This team showed they want accountability with this move. It's a smart move. I don't know what I would do if he missed another critical kick. His kickoffs have been poor as well.

Posted by: rachel216 | December 8, 2009 2:45 PM

Get over it. What use is a kicker who can't make any critical kicks? He's been poor at kickoffs as well. True that he's a nice guy but it's all about business.

Posted by: rachel216 | December 8, 2009 4:01 PM

tele1- Thanks for mentioning the 2007 playoff game vs. the Seahawks. I completely forgot about that. What a momentum killer that was. Bottom line is this guy's kickoffs are short and he can't make any clutch kicks... not to mention very SHORT clutch kicks.

Suisham's a great guy but I'm glad he's no longer our kicker.

Posted by: rachel216 | December 8, 2009 4:08 PM

Boneheaded move by Vinny and Danny. Why wasn't Laron Landry cut - now he really sucks. At least Shaun has proven himself. Maybe if the season was on the line, but for what?!!! So we could be 4-8, rather than 3-9. Great move Vinny and Danny. Proven once again what boneheaded,ignorant football people you are.

Get the hell out of this town!

Posted by: cfrazier91

Shaun's proven himself in what way? He's never been able to make a clutch kick when he's had the opportunity...

If we were to cut Laron, who would we replace him with?

Posted by: rachel216 | December 8, 2009 4:11 PM

So next time why don't you get your facts straight before you go accusing people of saying things they never said. Trust me, I think I'd know what I said better than you.

Posted by: rachel216 | January 18, 2010 9:29 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: rachel216 | January 18, 2010 9:36 AM | Report abuse

1) Sign Campbell to a 1 or 2 year, incentive laden deal.

2) Draft a QB to groom and push JC.

3) Obviously, fix the O-line

Posted by: rickyroge | January 18, 2010 9:25 AM


Wrong order, dude. Try this:

1) Fix the O-line
2) Fix the O-line some more
3) Tender JC as a restricted FA
4) Draft "QB of the future" in 2011

So here forget that it's not "sign JC long term or let him go". You tender him as a RFA and you get him one more year on the cheap. Get Garcia now for a two year, vet minimum deal and draft your "franchise QB" NEXT offseason when the cost will be less because of a possible rookie salary structure.

So easy a caveman can do it.

Posted by: brownwood26 | January 18, 2010 9:38 AM | Report abuse

Here's what you JC supporters miss...
Aaron Rodgers...Mark Sanchez....you can trot out Campbell's stats all you want, but these guys are LEADERS. Sanchez has a ton of INT's but he plays with passion and makes quick decisions.

Posted by: rickyroge | January 18, 2010 8:56 AM | Report abuse

If Sanchez throws a ton of INT's, he must be making a lot of quick BAD decisions. INT's and decisions can only be qualified with BAD.

Posted by: Ejayraptor | January 18, 2010 9:40 AM | Report abuse

What a bunch of billy goats. JR recycles a JC quote from 2 weeks ago and sits back and laughs as the same people have the same argument over and over again.

Here's the deal...JC is an average NFL QB.

He is #9 on the top 10 list of things to correct in the offseason and with any luck we may have enough resources to fix the top 4 or 5. Tender his contract, go 8-8 with a competent coaching staff and FO and then make a decision on the QB position in 2011.

I’d rather talk about Tom Hanks, Spielberg, Avatar, or Megan Fox’s thumbs.

Posted by: Diesel44 | January 18, 2010 9:43 AM | Report abuse

I want a QB that will take control of the huddle

I want a QB that has the awareness to throw the ball away and avoid a sack at all costs

I want a QB that can lead a 2 minute drive for a score.

I want a QB that will lead a 4th quarter winning drive...

Posted by: rickyroge | January 18, 2010 9:36 AM


Yeah, you and about 15-20 other NFL teams.

Hopefully the FO knows better than some of the fans do that QB ain't the problem here.

Posted by: brownwood26 | January 18, 2010 9:43 AM | Report abuse

Boring, are we going to reargue this again? We have to fix Oline, pure and simple. And with Shanny and Allen, we will. I suspect we will resign JC to a 2 or 3 year contract, with low salary and high incentive bonuses. Next year we may draft a qb to groom, but this year we focus on rebuilding OL, and we get a rb to assist CP. It may not be sexy, but you all will just have to live with it.

Posted by: frediefritz | January 18, 2010 8:41 AM |
-----------------------------

I'm guessing you can't walk down the street and chew gum at the same time.

Retarded mantra of "we have to fix the O-line this year," as if that somehow PRECLUDES doing anything else this year.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 9:44 AM | Report abuse

Ok everyone just STOP! We all know what is the problems with this team.
So with all the great coaching brains on this blog, we should be dicussing on what it will take to fix these problems.
Research whos going to help us with the oline,FAs draft personal,undrafted pickups.
This is what I would love to read about in the next few months.
We need gems in the ruff kind of players, so where are we going to get them?

Posted by: gregblanchsucks | January 18, 2010 9:45 AM | Report abuse

I want a QB that will take control of the huddle

I want a QB that has the awareness to throw the ball away and avoid a sack at all costs

I want a QB that can lead a 2 minute drive for a score.

I want a QB that will lead a 4th quarter winning drive.

Posted by: rickyroge | January 18, 2010 9:36 AM | Report abuse

I want a QB with a short skirt and a looooooooooong.....jacket!

Sorry, that Cake song just popped into my head.

Posted by: RomoLongballs | January 18, 2010 9:46 AM | Report abuse

By the way, thanks for backing me up geotherm21. =)

Also I didn't mean to sound rude to you, AdamCr.

Posted by: rachel216 | January 18, 2010 9:46 AM | Report abuse

Campbell plans to leave town today to begin his offseason vacation.

By Jason Reid | January 18, 2010; 7:00 AM ET

This struck me as weird. You don't have a contract and your potential new boss, Kyle Shanahan, is showing up this week. So how do you make a good impression? Not by leaving on your offseason vacation. Maybe he has nonrefundable tickets?

Posted by: League-Source | January 18, 2010 9:46 AM | Report abuse

If Redskins are backed up to their own 7 yard line with 2 time outs and 1:50 on the clock and we need a field goal...

Do we have a QB on this roster that can get this done?

Posted by: rickyroge | January 18, 2010 9:46 AM | Report abuse

To RickyRogue, good points there my friend. LoL!!!!! Do not worry if another team wants Campbell and is willing to send draft picks for our QB. Shannahan/Allen will be more than willing to ship him out. I also do not see how Cooley and Davis are both coming back. Skins will be busy in the Off-Season with trades.

Posted by: Redskin4Life1 | January 18, 2010 9:46 AM | Report abuse

You can get yourself a shiny, new rookie QB and promptly get him killed or turn him into the next Patrick Ramsey/Heath Shuler to get pummeled into mediocrity.

Posted by: brownwood26 | January 18, 2010 8:39 AM |
-----------------

We already have mediocrity. His name is Jason Campbell.

What's astounding are the idiots who want to cheer for a team, but fret and mutter about "change" and "new QBs" as if the one the team has is any good after 50 starts.

He's a POS QB, period. And everyone except his family and friends seem to know it.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 9:47 AM | Report abuse

I’d rather talk about Tom Hanks, Spielberg, Avatar, or Megan Fox’s thumbs.

Posted by: Diesel44 | January 18, 2010 9:43 AM

Not shti! Anything would be better than this tired old song about JC.

Posted by: Skins930 | January 18, 2010 9:48 AM | Report abuse

Colt Colt Colt Colt Colt Colt Colt

Posted by: iH8dallas | January 18, 2010 9:49 AM | Report abuse

I just wanted to point out that Sanchez made some great decisions when given the opportunity. And very very accurate downfield. Did I mention he was very very accurate? And he's only a rookie?

Just sayin.....

Posted by: 4thFloor | January 18, 2010 9:50 AM | Report abuse

I’d rather talk about Tom Hanks, Spielberg, Avatar, or Megan Fox’s thumbs.
Posted by: Diesel44 | January 18, 2010 9:43 AM | Report abuse

I saw Book of Eli last night, Gary Oldman in another bad guy role (roll?poll?pole?). Good flick that was still somehow not very satisfying. But as you might guess, Lorenzo does eff some sh!t up.

I know, you didn't mean that literally, but I was going to mention it anyways.

Posted by: RomoLongballs | January 18, 2010 9:53 AM | Report abuse

Aaron Rodgers had a shi*ty Oline...

I'd take him over Campbell 7 days a week and twice on Sundays.

Posted by: rickyroge | January 18, 2010 9:54 AM | Report abuse

@ Brownwood26

Are you suggesting Jason Campbell is as good as Peyton Manning? Despite playing in two fewer games, Manning passed for 4,500 yards, 33 TD's, and had 59 passes go for more than 20 yards. Aaron Rogers, who was sacked more often than Campbell, passed for 4,400+ yards and 30 TDs. Rothlisberger passed for 4,300+ and 26 TDs. Both made it to the playoffs with lines so weak they allowed MORE sacks the the Redskins.

I'm pleased to hear the "he's played under a new system" excuse was shelved for at least one season. Of course, Farve and Sanchez were both playing under a new system this season and they managed to make it to their respective championship games.

Campbell sucks. I have never heard him take the fall for any of his crappy games. I have never heard him say, "yeah, I was really bad today. I rushed my throws and gave up on my progression. I called the wrong protection. I wasn't very accurate and hung my receivers out to take big hits in the secondary. I failed to get the guys up to the line and in the right formation in time and as a result we used up too many time outs early in the game. I couldn't get things done in the red zone and so I left it up to my kicker to get points on the board."

Posted by: tkoho | January 18, 2010 9:54 AM | Report abuse

We already have mediocrity. His name is Jason Campbell.

What's astounding are the idiots who want to cheer for a team, but fret and mutter about "change" and "new QBs" as if the one the team has is any good after 50 starts.

He's a POS QB, period. And everyone except his family and friends seem to know it.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 9:47 AM


Let me ask you this: who in the post Gibbs 1.0 era was better at QB than Jason Campbell? Give me the list. Be honest.

Posted by: brownwood26 | January 18, 2010 9:54 AM | Report abuse

The one consistent throughout the past five years has been JC17's mediocre or worse performance. Regardless of scheme, line or support he is quite simply and unapologetically, a loser.

Posted by: Vic1 | January 18, 2010 9:54 AM | Report abuse

Year 6 Excuse for Campbell..."He's learning yet another system"

Posted by: rickyroge | January 18, 2010 9:33 AM |
-------------------------

Of course.

It doesn't matter to some people that he's inaccurate even when he DOES have time to throw, that he can't make quick decisions, that he can't lead men, that he never inspires any confidence late in games when the team is trailing - and never gets it done, that his completion % is bolstered by the fact that he completes so many check-downs for 5 and 6 yards, that his footwork is awful, that he still can't slide after 4 years in the NCAA and 5 years in the NFL.

And I laugh at the people who want to give him an "incentive laden contract." Ha. He had all the incentive a man can ask for going into this season, knowing his contract was up.

He did nothing. Because his O-line sucked, because his WRs sucked, because the play-calling sucked, because the secondary sucked, because it was raining, because it was dark out, because it was an odd-numbered year, yada, yada, yada.

He's a frigging zero.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 9:56 AM | Report abuse

"Year 6 Excuse for Campbell..."He's learning yet another system"

Posted by: rickyroge"

It's almost like you enjoy arguing against an imaginary opponent.

Funny, throughout this entire thread of comments, not once have I seen any poster provide an "excuse" for Campbell. Yet you continue to throw out the same response you've given for the last year. What gives? I've seen arguments that he improved yet again, that he set career highs in nearly every category, that he's the best of the prospective FA lot, that a rookie QB likely won't be successful under the current offensive conditions, that QB is significantly low on the list of needs, and that the team isn't overflowing with draft picks and resources need to be spread.

None of that is an excuse for JC. Yet you still attempt to portray that as an argument, and then further it by trying to rebut it.

It's almost comical at this point.

Posted by: psps23 | January 18, 2010 9:57 AM | Report abuse

We can win games with Cambell,we just need a punishing oline and a stud running back combo.
And a stomp your azz defence.
Look at the Jets and rember what the Ravens did to the Gmen in the Super bowl.
DEFENCE WINS CHAMPIONSHIPS PERIOD!

Posted by: gregblanchsucks | January 18, 2010 10:01 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: RomoLongballs | January 18, 2010 9:53 AM

I was originally intrigued by the trailers but shied away after the reviews.

Sounds to me like you’re going to give it an average rating similar to JC.

Four star scale for movies.
4: Manning, Brady, Brees
3: Rivers, Rodgers, Big Ben
2: JC, Orton, Young
1: Alex Smith, Quinn, Delhomme

Posted by: Diesel44 | January 18, 2010 10:02 AM | Report abuse

Hmmm. Let's see, JC just had his best year yet, in passing yds, completion rate, td's, and passer rating. And all this behind an Oline that could not protect. I think it's time to get rid of him, and get new shiny toy. Huh???

Posted by: frediefritz

I guess I'm a hater since my opinion of JC is opposite brownwoods.

I know if/when JC struggles this year it will be the cascade of: Yet another system, a new playbook, a new coach, new O-linemen, (hopefully, maybe a new WR.... He has never had to accept failure as he always has a crutch or two to blame. I'm not saying the line is great, of course it needs to be fixed. But as others have pointed out, he has had time even this last year and he consistently chooses to dump off rather than hit the wr on a long downfield throw. Time for JC and us fans to have a new start, .."change will do you good".....

Posted by: 1965skinsfan | January 18, 2010 10:03 AM | Report abuse

AdamCr was pwned by Rachel....

"Let me ask you this: who in the post Gibbs 1.0 era was better at QB than Jason Campbell? Give me the list. Be honest.

Posted by: brownwood26"

This is straight retarted brownwood. Look I sit firmly on the Soup fence and if Shanny decides to bring him back with a better line, scheme ect...fine with me. But don't puke garbage to make your point. Let me answer your dumb azz question: Theisman, Williams, Humphries, Rypien. Maybe I will give you Schroeder although even that is debatable. You don't have to denigrate proven WINNERS who have track records, stats etc to make your point. Take a nap my man you have crossed into the typical Brownwood argue to lond and make a dumb point.

Posted by: chrislarry | January 18, 2010 10:04 AM | Report abuse

Sanchez may one day be a elite QB in this league, but right now he is just a rookie. Jets are in the AFC title game because of good coaching and 1 Def, 1 offense line. Manning will disect that great Jets D and find a way to get his team to the SuperBowl. Jets are not going to the SuperBowl. Sanchez is playing good for a rookie but he is not the reason why the Jets are winning.

Posted by: Redskin4Life1 | January 18, 2010 10:05 AM | Report abuse

I'm sure DC can find a QB that wins more than 35% of over three seasons worth of starts that can read a D and throw an accurate ball on time.

Posted by: Realness1 | January 18, 2010 10:07 AM | Report abuse

Sounds to me like you’re going to give it an average rating similar to JC.

Four star scale for movies.
4: Manning, Brady, Brees
3: Rivers, Rodgers, Big Ben
2: JC, Orton, Young
1: Alex Smith, Quinn, Delhomme
Posted by: Diesel44 | January 18, 2010 10:02 AM | Report abuse

Nice! Yes, it would be a 2.5, or the McNabb of movies--just good enough to be tantalizing but fail at the end. It's like it just ran out of gas.

Posted by: RomoLongballs | January 18, 2010 10:08 AM | Report abuse

Are you suggesting Jason Campbell is as good as Peyton Manning?

Posted by: tkoho | January 18, 2010 9:54 AM


Not at all. I was simply dispelling the argument that 7 yards per attempt isn't "awful", as an elite NFL QB did only 0.8 yards better.

I just hate when ignorant fans say "Campbell sucks". Is he middle-of-the-road? Yes. Has he lived up to expectations? No. But to say he "sucks" is foolish.

Jamarcus Russell sucks. Ryan Fitzpatrick sucks. Jake Delhomme sucks. Jason Campbell isn't great, but he doesn't suck.

And don't point to Favre and Sanchez as "both playing under a new system this season". Sanchez is in an offense that isn't asking him to throw much and Favre is running THE EXACT SAME OFFENSE HE RAN IN GREEN BAY. If Sanchez changes offenses every 2 years and still plays well, THEN and only then do you have an argument.

Bottom line is it's foolish to blame Campbell for this team's problems. It's the team that f'ed him up. I guarantee if you put Bradford or Clausen (or whomever you find to be "the answer") here in the same conditions JC had to endure, I promise you get WORSE results.

Gotta grade on the curve here. An 86 QB rating not only doesn't "suck", it's pretty damn good when you take into account what he was working with.

Posted by: brownwood26 | January 18, 2010 10:09 AM | Report abuse

If Redskins are backed up to their own 7 yard line with 2 time outs and 1:50 on the clock and we need a field goal...

Do we have a QB on this roster that can get this done?

Posted by: rickyroge | January 18, 2010 9:46 AM

There may not be a QB in the league who can get that done behind our O-line on any regular basis. We had too many guys starting on our OL who couldn't crack the lineup of any other NFL team.

goetherm @0938 AM already documented how many elite QBs, including Tom Brady, performed this year under the type of pressure our QB faces just about every week.

Big Ben was sacked more than JC17 this year and his Super Bowl quality team missed the playoffs despite a defense that's actually good enough to score points on the regular. Coincidence?

Posted by: Alan4 | January 18, 2010 10:10 AM | Report abuse

I am not naive to think that in 1 year a coach can come in and take a 4-12 club, make them 12-4.

Posted by: Redskin4Life1 | January 18, 2010 9:08 AM


Right, but apparently the JC haters are that naive. The reason to keep JC isn't because he'll wake up one day Donovan McNabb 2.0, but because A) there's no major upgrade available this year and B)this team isn't gonna contend in 2010. Franchise QBs aren't something simply acquired, they're BUILT to be franchise QBs by patience and good coaching. JC has yet to get that and some rookie won't walk in here with that on Week 1.

So again: roll with JC in 2010, build the O-line, THEN go for a franchise QB.

Posted by: brownwood26
------------------

Have we forgotten that we just missed the playoffs Marty's first year when we won 8 out of the last 11 games with Tony Banks at QB? The team was able to achieve because Marty was a disciplinarian and Shanahan is said to be the same way. Given that the team is more talented than it was under Marty, I expect Shanahan to at least make the team competitive the first year.


Posted by: postwell1 | January 18, 2010 10:11 AM | Report abuse

This is straight retarted brownwood. Look I sit firmly on the Soup fence and if Shanny decides to bring him back with a better line, scheme ect...fine with me. But don't puke garbage to make your point. Let me answer your dumb azz question: Theisman, Williams, Humphries, Rypien. Maybe I will give you Schroeder although even that is debatable. You don't have to denigrate proven WINNERS who have track records, stats etc to make your point. Take a nap my man you have crossed into the typical Brownwood argue to lond and make a dumb point.

Posted by: chrislarry | January 18, 2010 10:04 AM


CL, I have no idea where you're going with this...I said POST Gibbs 1.0 era, meaning somebody who started at QB here after 1993. Listing guys DURING Gibbs 1.0 doesn't have anything to do with what I said.

Posted by: brownwood26 | January 18, 2010 10:13 AM | Report abuse

CL, Schraeder led DC to he playoffs and went to the Pro Bowl. Jeff Rutledge rallied from 15 back at halftime to win too.

Posted by: Realness1 | January 18, 2010 10:14 AM | Report abuse

If Shanahan keeps Campbell he will be making a huge mistake... Gibbs couldn't win with Campbell and Campbell was the reason the Skins got rid of both Saunders and Zorn (BOTH who came in to make Campbell better). Don't know what Shanahan said .. I hope it was just a lot of crap to make Campbell think he's wanted.. while Shanahan really works the phones looking for some team to trade hinm to...

Posted by: sovine08 | January 18, 2010 10:15 AM | Report abuse

Well, looks like I spoke too soon.

Posted by: psps23 | January 18, 2010 10:15 AM | Report abuse

Nice! Yes, it would be a 2.5, or the McNabb of movies--just good enough to be tantalizing but fail at the end. It's like it just ran out of gas.

Posted by: RomoLongballs | January 18, 2010 10:08 AM

Kind of a bummer to hear as I am looking forward to watching this.

Where would you rate Avatar? I would give that a Rivers type rating.

Posted by: Skins930 | January 18, 2010 10:17 AM | Report abuse

Let me ask you this: who in the post Gibbs 1.0 era was better at QB than Jason Campbell? Give me the list. Be honest.

Posted by: brownwood26
************************************************

Hey Brownwood, I've been following the dialog this morning and find that I tend to agree w/ you a bit more on this debate.
I really like your question which I pasted above:
My answer? Trent Green, Brad Johnson
and we got rid of both of those guys!!
Johnson led Tampa to a SB championship
Green had great years in KC

Posted by: RedskinRay1 | January 18, 2010 10:19 AM | Report abuse

Just come out and say "I want to give Campbell one more year because I really like him" and stop with the BS about how Bradford, Clausen, Carr, Collins, Pennington, Colt, or Conan O'Brien would do worse.

They were frigging 4-12; it isn't going to get any worse under Shanahan.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 10:20 AM | Report abuse

Where would you rate Avatar? I would give that a Rivers type rating.

Posted by: Skins930 | January 18, 2010 10:17 AM | Report abuse

I might give it a Brees, but not a Manning. Rivers is fair.

Posted by: RomoLongballs | January 18, 2010 10:24 AM | Report abuse

Predictions of playoff games?
Written down on paper I was only 2-2 the first weekend missing on Ravens and Cardinals wins.
This weekend I missed only the Jets games, but I still lost.
My 16 year old son had all 4 correct!!
He has already reminded me of this...

Posted by: RedskinRay1 | January 18, 2010 10:24 AM | Report abuse

'Retarded mantra of "we have to fix the O-line this year," as if that somehow PRECLUDES doing anything else this year.'

When you project needing 4 new starters along the line, are attempting to transition from a 4-3 to a 3-4, are looking to 'clean house' with aging veterans, and only have 5 draft picks (two in the first three rounds), then yes, it precludes a lot from happening this year.

Retarded mantra of 'we have an entire offseason, so we can fix everything in one shot,' as if that's realistic given the list of problems with this team.

Posted by: psps23 | January 18, 2010 10:24 AM | Report abuse

JLC on Kornhieser right....now.

Posted by: Diesel44 | January 18, 2010 10:25 AM | Report abuse

The Skins already have a decent backup QB in Colt. Why is no one talking about him? He will be back and be healthy. Todd will be gone.
Also, don't think a rookie QB can't start and be effective. Payton Manning has never missed a start. Big Ben did all right his first year and won a SB. Sanchez is doing OK. Ryan is very good in Atlanta. I'd take my chances with a rookie QB if I don't have to struggle watching Soup another year. Shanny can take average running backs and make them good. I think he can take a Qb with good skills and make him into a very good QB.

Posted by: diamond_jim | January 18, 2010 10:25 AM | Report abuse

Have we forgotten that we just missed the playoffs Marty's first year when we won 8 out of the last 11 games with Tony Banks at QB?

Posted by: postwell1 | January 18, 2010 10:11 AM


I didn't.

But that kinda proves my point--JC is far from the worse we've seen here. He's a decent QB that can win when you put solid pieces around him. This team played good football with a solid D, a solid O-line and Tony f-ing Banks at QB. If you give that same benefit and same level of coaching with JC at QB, you've got a chance to be competitive.

In '01, Tony Banks had a 71.3 QB rating and completed an awful 53% of his passes. If you can win 8 out of 11 with that kind of lousy QB play, how do you call a guy who posts an 86 rating and completes 65% of his throws the problem?

Posted by: brownwood26 | January 18, 2010 10:25 AM | Report abuse

Fix the O-line.....it doesn't matter who's back there if you can't protect the QB. Hello? Campbell is a solid and tough QB...give him a running game and some protection. Hail!!

Posted by: Smiley2 | January 18, 2010 10:27 AM | Report abuse

Just come out and say "I want to give Campbell one more year because I really like him" and stop with the BS about how Bradford, Clausen, Carr, Collins, Pennington, Colt, or Conan O'Brien would do worse.

They were frigging 4-12; it isn't going to get any worse under Shanahan.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 10:20 AM


soup lovers can't overcome the 35% winning and provide excuses about every other part of the team. They're OK w/ the team losing as long as admiral butthead continues to start it seems.

Posted by: Realness1 | January 18, 2010 10:27 AM | Report abuse

I still cannot believe the Jets won yesterday.
Sanchez was so horrible.
I the first half the Jets had 6 possessions.
Never threatened to score, and 4 possessions were three and out!!

That Jet defense kept the Jets in the game and then created a couple of TO's in the second half.
I also did not understand the Onside Kick!
The Chargers only needed a FG.

Chargers also had a TO remaining and the 2:00 timeout as well!

Posted by: RedskinRay1 | January 18, 2010 10:27 AM | Report abuse

JC17:

Positives: Has a big arm, above average mobility.

Negatives: Questionable leadership ability, plays without passion, INDECISIVE, INCONSISTENT.

My main problem with JC17 is REDZONE PRODUCTION. If he had a feel for the endzone I could over look any of his short comeings. But He has shown me little in scoreing points. Then there is no other options at QB in my opinion in FA or in the first round. QB in the later round like where the Eagles picked up their QB of the Future KOLB, he looks like a A Rodgers clone. All signs pointing to another at least one more year for JC17. Shanny like the arm strength.

Posted by: sthai75 | January 18, 2010 10:29 AM | Report abuse

Hey Brownwood, I've been following the dialog this morning and find that I tend to agree w/ you a bit more on this debate.
I really like your question which I pasted above:
My answer? Trent Green, Brad Johnson
and we got rid of both of those guys!!
Johnson led Tampa to a SB championship
Green had great years in KC

Posted by: RedskinRay1 | January 18, 2010 10:19 AM


Exactly my list too, Ray. Brad Johnson in '99 and Trent Green the year before. That's it. That's the list. And both guys left and ended up even better.

Stuff tends to happen in 3s...

Posted by: brownwood26 | January 18, 2010 10:30 AM | Report abuse

Watching the Cowgirls get clubbed was master piece theatre. Their kicker missed some crucial kicks where have we seen the picture before? I hope Jerry Jones does not end up with Cowher as headcoach. Cowher actually picked the Jets to win on Sunday. Rumors have it that Cowher is waiting for the Giants job. Cowgirls linebacker lost his cool at the end of the game. He did not mind his team blowing out the Eagles for two straight weeks. If you can dish it you better man enought to take it. Sored Losers........thats CowGirls for you!

Posted by: Redskin4Life1 | January 18, 2010 10:30 AM | Report abuse

When you project needing 4 new starters along the line, are attempting to transition from a 4-3 to a 3-4, are looking to 'clean house' with aging veterans, and only have 5 draft picks (two in the first three rounds), then yes, it precludes a lot from happening this year.

Retarded mantra of 'we have an entire offseason, so we can fix everything in one shot,' as if that's realistic given the list of problems with this team.

Posted by: psps23 | January 18, 2010 10:24 AM |
-----------------------------

Yes, because all the options are limited to draft picks; they can't acquire O-line help in FA or anything.

You're the thickest Campbell supporter on here and that lame "Whoever said Campbell had to learn another new system on THIS thread?" post proved it.

Go back and read, meathead

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 10:31 AM | Report abuse

Jason Campbell has consistently improved under the most adverse conditions, with this season being the worst. He lost his pro-bowl o-linemen, TE and RB.
_____
Better?? The team has gone from 5-7 to 8-8 to 4-12. And he still had his pro bowl lineman, TE and RB when he lost to the Lions..and barely beat the Rams!!! Anyone who thinks replacing a linemen or two is going to make Campbell a winner is NUTS!!! Campbell lacks leadership.. lacks the ablility to throw deep, lacks the abilitly to raise his game in the final 2 minutes. His stats improved because he throws 80% of his passes under 10 yards and still does it at garbage time when the other teams gives him yards.. I am so TIRED watching this guy walk off a field after another LOSS!!! Shanahan has to try someone else back there.. Colt.. anybody!!! But I can see it now after another losing season Campbell's excuse will be.. well it was another new system Campbell had to learn he needs ANOTHER year.. ENOUGH EXCUSES.. GET RID OF CAMPBELL NOW!!

Posted by: sovine08 | January 18, 2010 10:32 AM | Report abuse

My bad Brownie...I read it wrong...

But I would still give you: Trent Green, Brad Johnson, Gus Ferrotte...

Right now I view JC as a Tony Banks, especially analogous if you loomat Bank's time with the Rams.

Posted by: chrislarry | January 18, 2010 10:32 AM | Report abuse

To all the 'JC sux' camp:

Forget stats, winning %, intangibles. Whose the QB in 2010?

Anyone can criticize a player who hasn't had success. So why not grow a spine and toss a candidate into the ring?

Whose the starter in 2010 and what proof do you have that they will be an improvement?

Posted by: mattsoundworld | January 18, 2010 10:34 AM | Report abuse

Skins must trade a few veterans as well for draft picks. they must look for new blood, and inexpensive FA to sign.
I'd like to see about 20 new Redskins next Fall.

Posted by: RedskinRay1 | January 18, 2010 10:34 AM | Report abuse

soup lovers can't overcome the 35% winning and provide excuses about every other part of the team. They're OK w/ the team losing as long as admiral butthead continues to start it seems.

Posted by: Realness1 | January 18, 2010 10:27 AM


That's because football is a TEAM SPORT. Just like JC doesn't get full credit when he plays well, he doesn't get full blame when they lose. Allotting a W/L record to a QB is the single dumbest stat in all of pro football. If you're not gonna do it for starting DEs or for the backup TE, why give a W/L record to QBs?

Shaun Hill has a great W/L record. Is he the best QB in the NFL?

Posted by: brownwood26 | January 18, 2010 10:34 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: Redskin4Life1 | January 18, 2010 10:30 AM

Bum's son was signed to a 2 year extension and Romo was given a 5 year extension earlier this season.

Posted by: Diesel44 | January 18, 2010 10:35 AM | Report abuse

But that kinda proves my point--JC is far from the worse we've seen here. He's a decent QB that can win when you put solid pieces around him.

Posted by: brownwood26 | January 18, 2010 10:25 AM |
----------------------------

Really? What he has ever won of signifigance?

Also, love the "86 QB rating." That and 99 cents will buy you some spicy chicken tenders at Wendy's.

In 50 starts, Campbell has never done a damn thing worth remembering in this league. And the year the team had a good running game, a decent O-line, and a decent defense, he sputtered and stalled and (thankfully) got injured, which allowed Collins to lead the team to the playoffs. Campbell sure as hell wasn't going to do it.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 10:35 AM | Report abuse

Jason Soup Campbell is alergic to the endzone!

Posted by: diamond_jim | January 18, 2010 10:35 AM | Report abuse

I'm not saying I am for this:
but does anyone think Shanahan might try to talk Brian Griese out of retirement to be a backup to JC next year, in case he wants to pull JC?

Posted by: RedskinRay1 | January 18, 2010 10:37 AM | Report abuse

"This season, Campbell set personal bests in completions (327), attempts (507), completion percentage (64.5), yards (3,618), touchdowns (20) and passer rating (86.4). He also threw a career-high15 interceptions...Aaron Rodgers of the Green Bay Packers and Ben Roethlisberger of the Pittsburgh Steelers - each sacked 50 times - were the only quarterbacks sacked more than Campbell (43)."

He also set his personal worst in the most important category - wins, of which he had 4. Not all of that is his fault obviously but Aaron Rodgers was in the playoffs and Big Ben may not have been but the Steelers did not seem to have a problem moving the ball or scoring. BR is in his 6th year (with 2 SB wins) and AR is in his 5th year, second as starter, and the Green Bay offense has continually played well... JC is not either of those two.

Posted by: amaranthpa | January 18, 2010 10:37 AM | Report abuse

"soup lovers can't overcome the 35% winning and provide excuses about every other part of the team. They're OK w/ the team losing as long as admiral butthead continues to start it seems.

Posted by: Realness1"

Soup haters can't wrap their brain around the fact that 'Soup Lovers' aren't clamoring for him to be the franchise QB, just to hold the position until other needs are rebuilt first.

Soup haters even lean on the mind-numbingly infantile analysis of using Mark Sanchez as an AFC-title game QB as their evidence for drafting a QB, while ignorantly bypassing the fact that the Jets went through years of a mediocre Pennington, Clemens, and even an injured Favre while re-tooling their offensive line, running game, and defense BEFORE they took a chance on a top 10 QB.

It's as if someone stuck a pencil in your guys ears, and all you can repeat to yourselves is "4-12" vs. "9-7", with zero thought or critical analysis behind it.

Posted by: psps23 | January 18, 2010 10:37 AM | Report abuse

Just once I would like to see our QB come up to the line and start barking instructions like Manning or Favre. Show some leadership skills for hell sakes. I don't see it happening.

Posted by: diamond_jim | January 18, 2010 10:38 AM | Report abuse

Right now I view JC as a Tony Banks, especially analogous if you loomat Bank's time with the Rams.

Posted by: chrislarry | January 18, 2010 10:32 AM


No way, JC is better than TB by a country mile. Banks had only two seasons where he posted an 80 QB rating or higher. JC has 2 in a row over 80, and never lower than 76.

I'd put him more on par with Frerotte than I would Banks.

Posted by: brownwood26 | January 18, 2010 10:41 AM | Report abuse

I'll throw this out, if the Skins are resigned to not picking a QB in rd 1 their ability to trade back and acquire more picks increases. The skins have four teams that potentially will be in the QB market(Seahawks,Browns, Raiders, Bills). With1 maybe two QB still on the board at #4, the Skins can trade back 1 if not two times depending on the trading partner.

Posted by: TWISI | January 18, 2010 10:42 AM | Report abuse

Soup haters can't wrap their brain around the fact that 'Soup Lovers' aren't clamoring for him to be the franchise QB, just to hold the position until other needs are rebuilt first.


Posted by: psps23 | January 18, 2010 10:37 AM |

Translation: I LOVE Jason Cambell so much I'll create any argument to keep him around.

You're a frigging joke. This team was 4-12. They can dust off Ed Rubbert and start him at QB next year as far as I'm concerned.

Anyone but that ignorant hick who needs ten minutes to read a newspaper headline.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 10:42 AM | Report abuse

JLC brought up a good point about Flacco and Sanchez--that they were unable to produce three or four big plays on 1st or 3rd down.

I'm not statistically inclined (=lazy), but I wonder if the "7 minutes left in the game" stat guy could easily compare numbers of JC, Flacco, and Sanchez on first and third downs and see who comes out on top. I seem to remember a certain #17 that had like a 109.0 rating on first down, but that may have been in the first 53 minutes of the game and thus not garbage time. Sigh.

Posted by: RomoLongballs | January 18, 2010 10:44 AM | Report abuse

Does anyone know if Shanahan liked Patrick Ramsey?
Don't forget Ramsey was the back up on Shanahan's last Denver team...
Just wondering what Shanahan is thinking that's all...

Posted by: RedskinRay1 | January 18, 2010 10:44 AM | Report abuse

Forget stats, winning %, intangibles. Whose the QB in 2010?

Anyone can criticize a player who hasn't had success. So why not grow a spine and toss a candidate into the ring?

Whose the starter in 2010 and what proof do you have that they will be an improvement?

Posted by: mattsoundworld

I think we have a 3 year rebuild here if we're honest. I think we can be much better next year, but not a serious candidate for SB. Given that, do you try to keep JC(he may want out), or draft, acquire another QB, to learn the system as the team gets better? Colt B. will have a chance, but he seems fragile to me, as does Bradford and McCoy. Keeping JC if possible, does it hinder the teams progress? His ceiling may have been reached is what I think.

Posted by: 1965skinsfan | January 18, 2010 10:44 AM | Report abuse

Diesel44, Fox reported during the game that Jones has yet to extend a contract to Wade. I thought Wade did a great job coaching up that defense. Will that be enought to save his job? Jones is just like Snyder......impatient. Jones drove Jimmey Johnson and Parcel away. Expect changes coming out of Dallas. Eagles will probably part ways with McNabb. I for 1 do not want McNabb on the Skins roster. He is a older version of Campbell.

Posted by: Redskin4Life1 | January 18, 2010 10:45 AM | Report abuse

Jamarcus Russell sucks. Ryan Fitzpatrick sucks. Jake Delhomme sucks. Jason Campbell isn't great, but he doesn't suck.
Posted by: brownwood26
_____
Is that the NEW standard for Redskin QB.. that he doesn't SUCK??? If that's the case put Collins or Colt back there.. they don't suck either and this way we don't have to give Campbell a new contract. I mean if protection is all it takes protect Collins, he has already shown to be MORE successful than Campbell.. and draft a new QB or give Colt a shot to be the QB of the future. Look Skins will look for a QB of the future and Campbell said last year if the Skins drafted Sanchez he wanted out. So why sign Campbell to a new contract, force him to learn a new system if he will be gone in 2011 anyway??? I say give Colt a shot at starting have Collins or another veteran (maybe Pat Ramsey, he did play 2 years for Shanahan) as a backup.. and draft further down the draft for a QB in case Colt faulters...

Posted by: sovine08 | January 18, 2010 10:45 AM | Report abuse

It's as if someone stuck a pencil in your guys ears, and all you can repeat to yourselves is "4-12" vs. "9-7", with zero thought or critical analysis behind it.

Posted by: psps23 | January 18, 2010 10:37 AM


Don't forget the brilliant pointing to TEAM record and stats to backup that his INDIVIDUAL play is lacking. Since the stats don't back them up, gotta go to the trump card of "the team lost so he's a loser".

By that logic, Chris Cooley sucks. So does 'Rak since, you know, the team was better than 4-12 without him...

Posted by: brownwood26 | January 18, 2010 10:47 AM | Report abuse

Does anyone know if Shanahan liked Patrick Ramsey?
Don't forget Ramsey was the back up on Shanahan's last Denver team...
Just wondering what Shanahan is thinking that's all...

Posted by: RedskinRay1 | January 18, 2010 10:44 AM |

I thought about that, then I thought about this OLine. Would Ramsey want to put his body through that abuse again? Doubt it.

Posted by: TWISI | January 18, 2010 10:48 AM | Report abuse

Forget stats, winning %, intangibles. Whose the QB in 2010?

Anyone can criticize a player who hasn't had success. So why not grow a spine and toss a candidate into the ring?

Whose the starter in 2010 and what proof do you have that they will be an improvement?

Posted by: mattsoundworld

I think we have a 3 year rebuild here if we're honest. I think we can be much better next year, but not a serious candidate for SB. Given that, do you try to keep JC(he may want out), or draft, acquire another QB, to learn the system as the team gets better? Colt B. will have a chance, but he seems fragile to me, as does Bradford and McCoy. Keeping JC if possible, does it hinder the teams progress? His ceiling may have been reached is what I think.

Posted by: 1965skinsfan | January 18, 2010 10:44 AM | Report abuse
----------------------------

At least you are evaluating the options. Colt and Bradford are both injury red flags in just about everyone's book, so I don't think they are viable solutions.

Posted by: mattsoundworld | January 18, 2010 10:49 AM | Report abuse

JC17 is a able armed QB without the intangables. And yes I would take Kevin Kolb, Mark Sanchez, Matt Shaub, Matt Moore( the Kid from the panthers)maybe take a colt in the late 3rd as a gamble.
the only way that JC17 has any success is if we had a D that dominated like the Ravens had during their glory yrs!

Posted by: sthai75 | January 18, 2010 10:49 AM | Report abuse

Whose the starter in 2010 and what proof do you have that they will be an improvement?

Posted by: mattsoundworld
---------------------------------

A) Who could be worse after 50 starts?

B) I don't think you approach it on the basis of "Gee, I'd like to make a change from my sub-par, never-won-anything-of-signifigance starting QB, but I'm askeered the next guy might be worse."

The real concern for Jason Campbell, his agent, and his supporters is that the Redskins don't offer him a contract - and no one else does either.

And I could easily see that happening.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 10:49 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: Redskin4Life1 | January 18, 2010 10:45 AM

Some a-hole said the deal was done last night on facebook. I just checked and it looks like the deal is close but not done yet.

Schefter-

For all the midseason speculation that the Cowboys would decline a one-year option for 2010 in coach Wade Phillips' contract, it's now more likely he will wind up landing an extension, sources close to the situation have said.

Posted by: Diesel44 | January 18, 2010 10:50 AM | Report abuse

Anyone but that ignorant hick who needs ten minutes to read a newspaper headline.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 10:42 AM


Not saying I'm one of those people, but some here might take that as a bit racist. Just so you know.

Posted by: brownwood26 | January 18, 2010 10:51 AM | Report abuse

Jamarcus Russell sucks. Ryan Fitzpatrick sucks. Jake Delhomme sucks. Jason Campbell isn't great, but he doesn't suck.
Posted by: brownwood26

Gee, I think he sucks. Did you miss that last Hail Mary pass in the last game. WTF!

Posted by: diamond_jim | January 18, 2010 10:54 AM | Report abuse

I'd put him more on par with Frerotte than I would Banks.
Posted by: brownwood26
____
Well Banks had a 5 game winning streak don't think Campbell ever reached that.. and Campbell is more on par with Frerotte?? Look I liked the fire Gus had but he never lead the Skins into the playoffs. Saying JC is like Gus is no reason to keep Campbell...

Posted by: sovine08 | January 18, 2010 10:55 AM | Report abuse

Not saying I'm one of those people, but some here might take that as a bit racist. Just so you know.

Posted by: brownwood26 | January 18, 2010 10:51 AM |
--------------------------------

I appreciate your concern, but I couldn't care less.

And I seriously doubt you'd be serving up that lame post if I had called Colt Brennan an ignorant hick (and I may yet, if he ever plays and performs like Campbell).

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 10:55 AM | Report abuse

I don't believe that we will draft a lineman in the first round if he doesn't fit into what Shanny's system. Like it or not we could end up drafting a QB or trading down. Then, get a lineman in the 2nd and 4th rounds and pickup a running back later in the draft. I agree lineman is the top priority, but not necessarily going to happen in the first if the right player isn't there.

Posted by: Redskins001 | January 18, 2010 10:56 AM | Report abuse

Is that the NEW standard for Redskin QB.. that he doesn't SUCK???

Posted by: sovine08 | January 18, 2010 10:45 AM


No. There's nothing new about that standard, in case you missed the last 18 years of Redskin football.

That's all you can ask for when you're in the midst of rebuilding. Get guys that don't suck. Too many here have this ridiculous Madden mentality that you can take a 4-12 team and make it elite overnight.

When was the last time the Redskins had a franchise QB? Probably not since Theismann. Go down the line and look at how long it takes teams to get one. The Steelers went a good 20 years between Bradshaw and Big Ben. The Browns and Bears haven't had one in my lifetime. Just because you WANT an elite QB doesn't mean one is gonna fall out the sky.

JC is a placeholder. And to think you can easily go out and get a better option is at best misinformed.

Posted by: brownwood26 | January 18, 2010 10:58 AM | Report abuse

I thought about that, then I thought about this OLine. Would Ramsey want to put his body through that abuse again? Doubt it.
Posted by: TWISI
____
And Campbell does?? I thought the point is to improve the OL AND get a BETTER QB to run the offense...

Posted by: sovine08 | January 18, 2010 10:58 AM | Report abuse

I'll take a QB w/ a 68 rating that wins 65% of his starts for DC over a QB w/ an 86 rating that wins 35% of his starts because I want the team to win.

HTTR

Posted by: Realness1 | January 18, 2010 10:59 AM | Report abuse

My bad Brownie...I read it wrong...

cL, brownie should've specified that he meant St. Joe "post-ascension".

That said, you could say that JC is a "Danny Wuerrfel, with some upside".
But that would be very, very mean.

Posted by: daggar | January 18, 2010 11:00 AM | Report abuse

A) Who could be worse after 50 starts?

B) I don't think you approach it on the basis of "Gee, I'd like to make a change from my sub-par, never-won-anything-of-signifigance starting QB, but I'm askeered the next guy might be worse."

The real concern for Jason Campbell, his agent, and his supporters is that the Redskins don't offer him a contract - and no one else does either.

And I could easily see that happening.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 10:49 AM | Report abuse
-----------------------------------

So can I put you down for, "I can't offer a viable replacement candidate in 2010", which is what I asked for?

Posted by: mattsoundworld | January 18, 2010 11:00 AM | Report abuse

Diesel44, thanks for the update. I am content with the CowGirls keeping Wade. Thinking of Cowher roaming the sidelines is kind of unnerving. I was listening to Mike&Mike and Greenie mentioned that Sanchez just tied the franchise record of two play off wins with Joe Namath. Chad Pennington also has 2 playoff wins. I though the Skins had it bad. Wow 2 wins! How long have the Jets been playing football?

Posted by: Redskin4Life1 | January 18, 2010 11:01 AM | Report abuse

Allotting a W/L record to a QB is the single dumbest stat in all of pro football. If you're not gonna do it for starting DEs or for the backup TE, why give a W/L record to QBs?

Shaun Hill has a great W/L record. Is he the best QB in the NFL?

Posted by: brownwood26 | January 18, 2010 10:34 AM

Not entirely true. You do it for the QB because it is the most important position on the team and because so much of what happens relies on the QB. There are QBs that have great talent and can't win, regardless of the team. There are QBs that have mediocre talent but make the plays that need to be made giving the team the opportunity to win (the better the team, the more capable they are of actually winning). I don't know what you mean with the Shaun Hill reference. He won at MD by making plays and he has about a .500 record with the 49ers, which is not too shabby. I don't know how we get from there to the "best QB" question but he strikes me as a QB with minimal talent that can make some timely plays. JC is the opposite...a QB with a lot of talent that does not make the timely plays that need to be made.

Posted by: amaranthpa | January 18, 2010 11:01 AM | Report abuse

"We already have mediocrity. His name is Jason Campbell."

Mediocre qualified him as one of the better players on the offensive side of the team this year. The o-line couldn't SEE mediocre from where they were playing, and no QB can excel in that situation.

Is JC elite? Of course not. Was he the only thing standing between us and a successful season in 2009? Give me a break. Is he the best on our roster? Probably. I haven't seen Colt play well against first class opposition yet - stat padding against the WAC and preseason time against guys who for the most part didn't make regular season rosters doesn't count.

The Ravens won a SB with Trent Dilfer, for crying out loud. The rest of our team won't be that good in the next couple of years, but in an offseason with many needs, replacing JC shouldn't be a high priority. If an offer with multiple draft picks comes in (but really, how likely is that?), jump on it. Otherwise, take care of first things first.

Posted by: zimbar | January 18, 2010 11:02 AM | Report abuse

Again using the 2 slightly better than the rest QBs as trade back bait is better than drafting one of them at #4 IMO. I'd be willing to part with a second round pick for a vet on some other team that has shown potential, such as Dennis Dixon, rather thandraft Bradfors or Clausen at #4.

Posted by: TWISI | January 18, 2010 11:02 AM | Report abuse

"Translation: I LOVE Jason Cambell so much I'll create any argument to keep him around."

You're right. Nothing in my argument holds water. The offensive line isn't in worse shape than the QB position. We won't be looking to clean house of aging veterans like Randle El, Fred Smoot, Ladell Betts, or Renaldo Wynn. We're brimming with assets like our 5 draft picks in 7 rounds. Our defense would be fully functional in a 3-4 as currently constructed. No way is it logical to think a 64+%, 20TD, 3600 yard, 86 rating QB is adequate enough at this point to look to prioritize assets elsewhere.

"They can dust off Ed Rubbert and start him at QB next year as far as I'm concerned. Anyone but that ignorant hick who needs ten minutes to read a newspaper headline."

Nice. Good to know your underlying concern is to upgrade the QB position. You're showing your true colors, MrRedskin. And you call me the joke.

Posted by: psps23 | January 18, 2010 11:02 AM | Report abuse

That's all you can ask for when you're in the midst of rebuilding. Get guys that don't suck. Too many here have this ridiculous Madden mentality that you can take a 4-12 team and make it elite overnight. Just because you WANT an elite QB doesn't mean one is gonna fall out the sky.
Posted by: brownwood26
____
Not elite but the Dolphins were 1-15 got Chad Pennington and won the AFC east. The Falcons I believe were 5-11 drafted Matt Ryan and won the NFC south.. so things can turn around fast with the right QB leading the team...

Posted by: sovine08 | January 18, 2010 11:02 AM | Report abuse

I'll take a QB w/ a 68 rating that wins 65% of his starts for DC over a QB w/ an 86 rating that wins 35% of his starts because I want the team to win.

HTTR

Posted by: Realness1 | January 18, 2010 10:59 AM | Report abuse
-----------------------------------

Anyone in that category fit the bill for 2010?

Posted by: mattsoundworld | January 18, 2010 11:03 AM | Report abuse

I'll take a QB w/ a 68 rating that wins 65% of his starts for DC over a QB w/ an 86 rating that wins 35% of his starts because I want the team to win.

HTTR

Posted by: Realness1 | January 18, 2010 10:59 AM


Right, because it's that simple to make that happen.

I mean, no chance there are other, more pressing problems that lead to a QB losing 35% of his games despite posting an 86 rating.

I guess Dan Marino winning a Super Bowl every single season in the league since he was consistently the best QB should have tipped me off to that.

Also the run of extended and sustained championship success in Indy with Peyton Manning. Silly me...

Posted by: brownwood26 | January 18, 2010 11:04 AM | Report abuse

Is that the NEW standard for Redskin QB.. that he doesn't SUCK???

Posted by: sovine08 | January 18, 2010 10:45 AM

They're Campbell-supporters in a big way. They just don't want to admit that they want him back in 2010 because they really like him.

Instead they go to Byzantine lengths to come up with new and interesting arguments as to why we CAN'T CHANGE QBs.

LOL... One of them even said that both Bradford and Brennan are not "viable." Really? Neither one has ever played a down of NFL football in a game that matters, but we already KNOW they aren't "viable" so we had better stick with the sub-par meathead aka #17 and count our blessings.

It's too funny.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 11:04 AM | Report abuse

Brooking-

"I thought it was totally classless and disrespectful. This is the NFL, that's not what this is about. I don't think there's a place for that ... I was looking for [Vikings coach Brad] Childress. I didn't think it was right, but they've got to see us next year."

Hey Keith...waaaaaaahhhhhh.

Posted by: Diesel44 | January 18, 2010 11:04 AM | Report abuse

Not elite but the Dolphins were 1-15 got Chad Pennington and won the AFC east. The Falcons I believe were 5-11 drafted Matt Ryan and won the NFC south.. so things can turn around fast with the right QB leading the team...

Posted by: sovine08 | January 18, 2010 11:02 AM | Report abuse
------------------------------

Helps if you draft Jake Long, invent the WildCat, and have the NFLs best rushing attack. Minor details, I suppose, as they are perennial Super Bowl contenders now... oh, wait.

Posted by: mattsoundworld | January 18, 2010 11:08 AM | Report abuse

So can I put you down for, "I can't offer a viable replacement candidate in 2010", which is what I asked for?

Posted by: mattsoundworld | January 18, 2010 11:00 AM |
---------------------------

Ask in one hand, spit in the other and see which one fills up first.

I've already stated that Campbell is a POS. Therefore, whoever they bring in is fine by me - Collins, Brennan, Pennington, Carr, Bradford, et al.

You, on the other hand, are the world-class intellect who declared that both Bradford and Brennan are not "viable."

Based on what? Your feelings? Are you psychic? Is that how you evaluate talent?

You're as transparent in your defense of this piece of junk QB as any of them.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 11:08 AM | Report abuse

Please, stop this madness. Both sides have made their arguments re JC. Time to sit back and see what Judge Shanahan does with JC.

Posted by: donj1963 | January 18, 2010 11:09 AM | Report abuse

Not elite but the Dolphins were 1-15 got Chad Pennington and won the AFC east. The Falcons I believe were 5-11 drafted Matt Ryan and won the NFC south.. so things can turn around fast with the right QB leading the team...


Posted by: sovine08 | January 18, 2010 11:02 AM


First of all, when those two divisions become the NFC East, give me a call.

Secondly, if all that changed for those teams were the QBs, you'd have a point. But they changed coaches, philosophies and a lot of personnel. NOBODY wins at QB here with the O-line the way it is. NOBODY.

So whether it's JC or Marino in his prime, it's the REST of the team that needs changing before JC. I've never said that JC is the long term answer here. Just waaaay down the line if you're doing it in a proper order.

Posted by: brownwood26 | January 18, 2010 11:11 AM | Report abuse

Instead they go to Byzantine lengths to come up with new and interesting arguments as to why we CAN'T CHANGE QBs.

LOL... One of them even said that both Bradford and Brennan are not "viable." Really? Neither one has ever played a down of NFL football in a game that matters, but we already KNOW they aren't "viable" so we had better stick with the sub-par meathead aka #17 and count our blessings.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 11:04 AM | Report abuse
--------------------------------

So, you are now supporting promoting Colt or drafting Bradford? A simple 'yes' or no will suffice.

Posted by: mattsoundworld | January 18, 2010 11:12 AM | Report abuse

I think the funniest part of this whole argument is the Campbell haters that refuse to accept stats that suggest Campbell is alright, but are all for any stats/comparisons that make him look bad.

Another good one is suggesting Colt Brennan as the starter. He looked pretty bad in preseason against 2s and 3s. What makes you think he would do any better during the regular season against starters?

Posted by: PortisPocketsStr8 | January 18, 2010 11:13 AM | Report abuse

Brooking is right - throwing for a TD on fourth down in that situation is classless. And if the fact that Brett Favre lacks class is news to you, go talk to Aaron Rogers for chapter and verse. But complaining about it is just weak. We all know what we saw - you should be more worried about the ones he threw while the game was in doubt.

Posted by: zimbar | January 18, 2010 11:14 AM | Report abuse

Brooking-

"I thought it was totally classless and disrespectful. This is the NFL, that's not what this is about. I don't think there's a place for that ... I was looking for [Vikings coach Brad] Childress. I didn't think it was right, but they've got to see us next year."

Hey Keith...waaaaaaahhhhhh.

Posted by: Diesel44


Brooking needs to focus on stopping the opposing team, not on the particular play being called. Boo-hoo.....

Posted by: 1965skinsfan | January 18, 2010 11:16 AM | Report abuse

Another good one is suggesting Colt Brennan as the starter. He looked pretty bad in preseason against 2s and 3s. What makes you think he would do any better during the regular season against starters?

Posted by: PortisPocketsStr8 | January 18, 2010 11:13 AM |
-----------------------------

After Colt (or Bradford, Pennington, Clausen, Carr, Collins, et al) has 50 starts as Redskin, THEN you can criticize their play.

Until then, shhhhhhh.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 11:16 AM | Report abuse

MrRedskin21 = Carnival cruise comic, circa 1974.

Posted by: mack1 | January 18, 2010 11:18 AM | Report abuse

After Colt (or Bradford, Pennington, Clausen, Carr, Collins, et al) has 50 starts as Redskin, THEN you can criticize their play.

Until then, shhhhhhh.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 11:16 AM | Report abuse

Let me know when Colt earns a starting job in the NFL...

If Campbell is terrible and Colt can't win a starting job from him, what does that say about Colt?

Fact is Colt Brennan looked worse this preseason than he did his rookie year.

Posted by: PortisPocketsStr8 | January 18, 2010 11:18 AM | Report abuse

Fact is Colt Brennan looked worse this preseason than he did his rookie year.

Posted by: PortisPocketsStr8 | January 18, 2010 11:18 AM


He doesn't care about that. What matters is his preseason W/L record.

(eye roll)

Posted by: brownwood26 | January 18, 2010 11:20 AM | Report abuse

JC is a placeholder. And to think you can easily go out and get a better option is at best misinformed.

Posted by: brownwood26 | January 18, 2010 10:58 AM

I'd take Colt Brennan, draft a non-first round QB and look to get a grizzled vet (or keep our current one) along with resigning Campbell. Make it an open competition and let the guy who can show he can score, start. If Orton somehow gets on the open market, I would sign him in a heartbeat. Drafting a winning QB does not always work out but it will never work out if you don't draft any.

Posted by: amaranthpa | January 18, 2010 11:20 AM | Report abuse

Anyone know the answer to this question?
What about the Practice Squads of NFL Teams?
My guess is those guys are off limits now?
That we had our chance once Bruce Allen came in to raid a couple of young prospects for our OL next year...
But that opportunity would now be concluded.
Is that correct?
Anyone?

Posted by: RedskinRay1 | January 18, 2010 11:20 AM | Report abuse

I hope some of you JC bashers watched the playoff games this weekend
and had enough sense to see that offensive lines create offense.

How pleasant it was to see Romo get knocked on his a%$ all day and hurried , but you also saw the result of not having adequate protection. It shows no matter what weapons a team has offensively without an offensive line it does not matter.


Each of the teams in the playoofs some of them with former Redskin sastoffs had one thing in common they had some sort of professional offensive line.

They also had playmakers guys who had the authority to improvise if a play was not available to make a play

Posted by: TheBeatDontStop | January 18, 2010 11:21 AM | Report abuse

Collins and Colt are still under contract. soup does not have one.

Posted by: Realness1 | January 18, 2010 11:21 AM | Report abuse

I'm so tired of Zorn getting all the blame - not having control of the locker room - poor offense - etc. Give me a break!

These guys are making tons of money and they need someone to hold their hand to keep them accountable???? Cerrato so hand-cuffed Zorn - it's not funny. Why did certain players get special treatment? Cerrato and Snyder made it so - that's why.

Why did our offense stink? Because Cerrato and Snyder wanted Haynesworth and did not care about the O-line.

If Zorn had been given the same authority and control over the team as Shanahan appears to have been given, he would have been very successful. How many head coaches in the NFL only get to pick 4 of their 15 coaches? None!

Quit with making Zorn the scapegoat. Cerrato and Snyder were the real problem. You should be thanking Zorn for his integrity and honesty, and the fact that it was under his reign that we finally got rid of Cerrato.

Posted by: SkinsFan2111 | January 18, 2010 11:22 AM | Report abuse

COMP ATT % YARDS AVG TD INT
1,631 2,469 66.1 17,804 7.2 102 64

Stat lovers, rejoice! There is your new QB.

Say hello to Chad Pennington.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 11:23 AM | Report abuse

donj1963...

Who made you judge? I haven't made my closing arguments yet!

Posted by: rickyroge | January 18, 2010 11:23 AM | Report abuse

First time poster; I'm a life-long skins fan who's been in NYC most of my adult life so have come to like the Jets as I can watch them every week on TV- obviously hate the Giants and loathe the Cowboys. Here's the difference between Sanchez and Campbell: Sanchez is fearless and he's enthusiastic- both qualities can be tempered and coached down but are impossible to coach up.

Posted by: DonBoslerBaby | January 18, 2010 11:24 AM | Report abuse

"I thought it was totally classless and disrespectful. This is the NFL, that's not what this is about." Brooking
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

This of course is the same Brooking who during Pregame leads his team in shouts of how they are going to kick _____ as he is doing his best Ray Lewis imitation.

Brooking: pregame yelling how they will kick ____
post game crying about losing 34-3
Anyone else find this so ironic and so comical?

Posted by: RedskinRay1 | January 18, 2010 11:25 AM | Report abuse

I've already stated that Campbell is a POS. Therefore, whoever they bring in is fine by me - Collins, Brennan, Pennington, Carr, Bradford, et al.

You, on the other hand, are the world-class intellect who declared that both Bradford and Brennan are not "viable."

Based on what? Your feelings? Are you psychic? Is that how you evaluate talent?

You're as transparent in your defense of this piece of junk QB as any of them.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 11:08 AM | Report abuse
------------------------------------

The fact that you raise my intellect as somehow relevant to the argument at hand is a smoke screen to avoid having to defend your own position.

I'm slowing nailing jello to the wall, however, and you will eventually have to defend your choice to go with "Collins, Brennan, Pennington, Carr, Bradford, et al."

What grounds do you have to suggest that they will be better than JC in 2010? Or that anyone of them but Carr would even survive the season?

Posted by: mattsoundworld | January 18, 2010 11:25 AM | Report abuse

Yeah......Zorn was a good coach. And he'll have another chance to be a HC in the NFL.

Posted by: sthai75 | January 18, 2010 11:25 AM | Report abuse

When JC is re-signed, I hope all the JC nay-sayers just shut up. PLEASE just shut your stupid mouths. If you want to sound like idiots, there are plenty of other topics for you to expound on - for example, federal tax policy. I'm sure you will proves yourselves to be just as educated on that subject.

There is no one in the DC area that sounds less informed than someone who keeps chirping the tired line "Campbell isn't any good." Just give it a rest, mouthbreathers.

Posted by: whughes1 | January 18, 2010 11:27 AM | Report abuse

COMP ATT % YARDS AVG TD INT
1,631 2,469 66.1 17,804 7.2 102 64

Stat lovers, rejoice! There is your new QB.

Say hello to Chad Pennington.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 11:23 AM | Report abuse

Pennington is coming off his 3rd major shoulder sugery and he's not even sure if he'll ever play again. Only you would be dumb enough to consider him a viable starting candidate for 2010.

Posted by: PAskinsfan17 | January 18, 2010 11:28 AM | Report abuse

I'd take Colt Brennan, draft a non-first round QB and look to get a grizzled vet (or keep our current one) along with resigning Campbell. Make it an open competition and let the guy who can show he can score, start. If Orton somehow gets on the open market, I would sign him in a heartbeat. Drafting a winning QB does not always work out but it will never work out if you don't draft any.

Posted by: amaranthpa | January 18, 2010 11:20 AM


Now, that makes sense.

It's the "dump JC and somebody...ANYBODY will be better" crowd that is stark, raving mad.

If Colt beats out JC and fits this offense better, I'd be all for him playing IF HE PROVES IT ON THE FIELD. If JC is the best QB on the roster, he should play. Regardless of how much he does or doesn't yell at the line of scrimmage.

Posted by: brownwood26 | January 18, 2010 11:29 AM | Report abuse

What grounds do you have to suggest that they will be better than JC in 2010? Or that anyone of them but Carr would even survive the season?

Posted by: mattsoundworld | January 18, 2010 11:25 AM |
-----------------------------

COMP ATT % YARDS AVG TD INT
1,631 2,469 66.1 17,804 7.2 102 64

Those are Pennington's stats.

Now get back to nailing that Jell-O to the wall.

I'll await your next post, which is sure to state: Pennington is old (he's 33 to Campbell's 28) and/or Pennington has been injured in the past.

LOL.... Enjoy.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 11:29 AM | Report abuse

donj1963...

Who made you judge? I haven't made my closing arguments yet!

Posted by: rickyroge | January 18, 2010 11:23 AM

Ever watch the movie 12 Angry Men? Sometimes it sounds like that in here. Most can't see the facts because they have their own reason for judging JC guilty or innocent.

Posted by: donj1963 | January 18, 2010 11:29 AM | Report abuse

If Campbell is terrible and Colt can't win a starting job from him, what does that say about Colt?
Fact is Colt Brennan looked worse this preseason than he did his rookie year.
Posted by: PortisPocketsStr8
____
Fact is Colt looked better than Campbell his rookie year in preseason. In 2009 Colt was hurt in the first preseason game so hard to judge how good he would have played if he was healthy. And reason Colt didn't get a shot to replace Campbell in 2009 was because he was on IR the whole season. Look Colt is an unknown.. but he was good enough to draft and good enough to look good when healthy in the NFL. Campbell has had 5 years!! Even his supporters say he is mediocre.. Nothing to lose trying someone with the bigger upside..

Posted by: sovine08 | January 18, 2010 11:30 AM | Report abuse

Everyone has stong points on why the Skins should keep or get rid of Campbell. All points are valid. Colt? The only rationale behind that is we as Skins fans fall in love with the back up QB. If you look back through the years at how this town always supports the back-up. When Brunell was starting, we were yelling for Campbell. I always get a warm fuzzy feeling thinking of how Collins marched us into the playoffs back in 07.

Posted by: Redskin4Life1 | January 18, 2010 11:31 AM | Report abuse

soup does not read defenses and throw the ball on time at a starters level. Can't excuse that away.

Posted by: Realness1 | January 18, 2010 11:33 AM | Report abuse

Now get back to nailing that Jell-O to the wall.

I'll await your next post, which is sure to state: Pennington is old (he's 33 to Campbell's 28) and/or Pennington has been injured in the past.

LOL.... Enjoy.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 11:29 AM | Report abuse
---------------------------

So you aren't denying that Pennington is a major injury risk, if he's even available? Which means there is a good chance we have to go to the bullpen for an extended amount of time. So who you have in mind for the #2?

Posted by: mattsoundworld | January 18, 2010 11:33 AM | Report abuse

soup does not read defenses and throw the ball on time at a starters level. Can't excuse that away.

Posted by: Realness1 | January 18, 2010 11:33 AM | Report abuse
-------------------------------

Fine. Whose the starter in 2010?

Posted by: mattsoundworld | January 18, 2010 11:35 AM | Report abuse

So you aren't denying that Pennington is a major injury risk, if he's even available? Which means there is a good chance we have to go to the bullpen for an extended amount of time. So who you have in mind for the #2?

Posted by: mattsoundworld | January 18, 2010 11:33 AM |
-------------------------------

Everyone is a risk. That's the NFL.

Maybe you should become a fan of all-star poker.

By the way, the fact that you're now relegated to asking who the #2 would be says it all.

I'll give you a hint: It isn't Campbell.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 11:36 AM | Report abuse

It's the "dump JC and somebody...ANYBODY will be better" crowd that is stark, raving mad.

If Colt beats out JC and fits this offense better, I'd be all for him playing IF HE PROVES IT ON THE FIELD. If JC is the best QB on the roster, he should play. Regardless of how much he does or doesn't yell at the line of scrimmage.
Posted by: brownwood26
____
One probelm Campbell isn't signed for this year. Colt is still under his rookie contract so makes sense to let him compete. Campbell will have to be signed and if you think he will accept a low bid or even short term contract your dreaming.. He'll want starting QB wages and he'll want at least 3 years. Why pay Campbell that if the Skins just want him as a placeholder for a year?? Better give it to Colt give him a true shot with a veteran like Collins (also under contract) or Ramsey (who will accept short cheap contract) to fill in as a placeholder if Colt faulters...

Posted by: sovine08 | January 18, 2010 11:37 AM | Report abuse

soup never competed to be the starter, it was handed to him so Danny could try to get return on his investment.

Posted by: Realness1 | January 18, 2010 11:38 AM | Report abuse

Pennington is coming off his 3rd major shoulder sugery and he's not even sure if he'll ever play again. Only you would be dumb enough to consider him a viable starting candidate for 2010.

Posted by: PAskinsfan17 | January 18, 2010 11:28 AM |
-----------------------------

What's your source for Pennington saying he is not sure he'll ever play again?

Because I've got one thats says he wants to start for a team in 2010.

Quid Pro Quo, PA.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 11:38 AM | Report abuse

If Campbell is terrible and Colt can't win a starting job from him, what does that say about Colt?

Fact is Colt Brennan looked worse this preseason than he did his rookie year.

Posted by: PortisPocketsStr8 | January 18, 2010 11:18 AM

JCs second year preseason rating was about 50. CBs second year was about 49. The stat that does interest me is the following:

JC (5 YEARS) - 2 TDs in preseason
CB (2 YEARS) - 4 TDs in preseason

Posted by: amaranthpa | January 18, 2010 11:38 AM | Report abuse

COMP ATT % YARDS AVG TD INT
1,631 2,469 66.1 17,804 7.2 102 64

Stat lovers, rejoice! There is your new QB.

Say hello to Chad Pennington.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 11:23 AM


Nice. I also hear that Sonny Jurgenson still has a little zip in his arm.

Maybe the remains of Sammy Baugh could put up an 86 rating, since it's so easy to do that only 14 QBs did better than JC in that regard.

So how many first-rounders do you think we get for Orakpo? Twelve, thirteen? I mean, we were 4-12 with him here so he's GOT to suck, right?

Posted by: brownwood26 | January 18, 2010 11:39 AM | Report abuse

I am posting this comment to express a refusal to enter the "tender JC17" vs. "get JC17 out of town debate".

Seriously, anytime JReid feels like he needs to up the "hits" on his blog, all he has to do is post an information-less bit abot JC17.

So what exactly did JReid tell us?

Shanahan and JC17 had a conversation.

JC17 won't tell us what it was about.

That's some insider stuff.

Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 11:39 AM | Report abuse

When JC is re-signed, I hope all the JC nay-sayers just shut up. PLEASE just shut your stupid mouths. If you want to sound like idiots, there are plenty of other topics for you to expound on - for example, federal tax policy. I'm sure you will proves yourselves to be just as educated on that subject.

There is no one in the DC area that sounds less informed than someone who keeps chirping the tired line "Campbell isn't any good." Just give it a rest, mouthbreathers.

Posted by: whughes1

Well said, Mrs. Campbell. Your son is a model citizen coming off of his best year, leading the Redskins to A RECORD OF 4-12. We look forward to watching him choke in the final 2 minutes of games for years to come. We'll try to temper our expectations next year. After all, it's a "new system". Hopefully, an improved O-line will give him more time to misread defenses and throw into coverage.

Posted by: Kenbeatrizz | January 18, 2010 11:40 AM | Report abuse

soup does not read defenses and throw the ball on time at a starters level. Can't excuse that away.

Posted by: Realness1 | January 18, 2010 11:33 AM | Report abuse
-------------------------------

Fine. Whose the starter in 2010?

Posted by: mattsoundworld | January 18, 2010 11:35 AM

Not soup.

Posted by: Realness1 | January 18, 2010 11:41 AM | Report abuse

BTW.

Hey, JReid.

Whay haven't you been able to get Suishy on the hone yet??

Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 11:41 AM | Report abuse

What's your source for Pennington saying he is not sure he'll ever play again?

Because I've got one thats says he wants to start for a team in 2010.

Quid Pro Quo, PA.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 11:38 AM | Report abuse

He just had his surgery in October and hasn't even started throwing again. He can want to start next season but the only thing that matters is if he can even throw the ball.

Posted by: PAskinsfan17 | January 18, 2010 11:42 AM | Report abuse

Nice. I also hear that Sonny Jurgenson still has a little zip in his arm.

Maybe the remains of Sammy Baugh could put up an 86 rating, since it's so easy to do that only 14 QBs did better than JC in that regard.

So how many first-rounders do you think we get for Orakpo? Twelve, thirteen? I mean, we were 4-12 with him here so he's GOT to suck, right?

Posted by: brownwood26 | January 18, 2010 11:39 AM |
---------------------

Dude. You're a JC ball-lapper. There's no other term for it.

And when you're reduced to hyperbole, what's left?

Also, I love how you fixate on this season, ignoring the seasons when Campbell had a very good running game, and a decent O-line, and still sucked like a $5 Mexican 'ho.

Why sit up here and lie continuously? Just admit you really like Jason Campbell and that's why - despite his never doing anything worth remembering in 50 starts - you defend him.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 11:45 AM | Report abuse

When JC is re-signed, I hope all the JC nay-sayers just shut up. PLEASE just shut your stupid mouths. If you want to sound like idiots, there are plenty of other topics for you to expound on - for example, federal tax policy. I'm sure you will proves yourselves to be just as educated on that subject.

There is no one in the DC area that sounds less informed than someone who keeps chirping the tired line "Campbell isn't any good." Just give it a rest, mouthbreathers.

Posted by: whughes1


This guy sounds like the Chris Crocker of Redskins...

"Leave Jason alone...JUST LEAVE HIM ALONE!!"

Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 11:45 AM | Report abuse

JC (5 YEARS) - 2 TDs in preseason
CB (2 YEARS) - 4 TDs in preseason

Posted by: amaranthpa | January 18, 2010 11:38 AM | Report abuse

Wow Colt Brennan threw 4 TDs against guys that didn't make rosters. Impressive.

He was supposed to be competing for the backup job, and ended up competing with Chase Daniel just for a roster spot.

Posted by: PortisPocketsStr8 | January 18, 2010 11:46 AM | Report abuse

One probelm Campbell isn't signed for this year. Colt is still under his rookie contract so makes sense to let him compete. Campbell will have to be signed and if you think he will accept a low bid or even short term contract your dreaming.. He'll want starting QB wages and he'll want at least 3 years. Why pay Campbell that if the Skins just want him as a placeholder for a year?? Better give it to Colt give him a true shot with a veteran like Collins (also under contract) or Ramsey (who will accept short cheap contract) to fill in as a placeholder if Colt faulters...


Posted by: sovine08 | January 18, 2010 11:37 AM


Seriously, dude...get a clue. The rules under the uncapped year is that guys with less than 6 years experience can't be FAs. So JC will be a RFA this year, not UFA. So you tender him and you pay him a little over a million dollars for 2010. He's got a chance to prove he's the guy, the Skins get a cheap placeholder until their young guy (Colt or rookie) is ready. It's a win-win.

THAT is the chief reason why I think the "dump JC" crowd is retarded. You'd rather pay Kyle Orton (who is every bit as mediocre as Campbell) a multi-year deal to be here instead of sticking with the devil you know for cheap. That's nothing short of insane.

Again...I don't see anyone here saying Campbell is the long term answer. He's the guy for 2010 and you move on. You people act like doing that would keep this team out of the Super Bowl next season. Hate to break it to ya, but we're not gonna be a contender next year!

Posted by: brownwood26 | January 18, 2010 11:46 AM | Report abuse

Don Bosler, you wrote here's the difference between Sanchez and Campbell: Sanchez is fearless and he's enthusiastic. You can label Sanchez enthusiastic all day and I wont say a word. I do not know how many games you have watched Campbell play this year. The hits he took were mind numbing. He was Rocky this year. Campbell is fearless and Sanchez is enthusiastic. Alright.......case closed.

Posted by: Redskin4Life1 | January 18, 2010 11:47 AM | Report abuse

Here's the bottom line...

JC is not the entire problem, nor is he the solution. The Skins have to figure out what to fix first and what's the short and long term plan. No amount of blogging will make me like JC as a QB. I've seen enough of him to know that I see things in him that are not there that above average QB's have (not even elite). For me, I am admitting that I am a complete bandwagoneer when it comes to JC. When he proves me wrong, I'll believe.

Ron Jaworksi said, "you can win with JC". Translation..."He's alright"

I'M FRIGGIN TIRED OF ALRIGHT!

Posted by: rickyroge | January 18, 2010 11:47 AM | Report abuse

He just had his surgery in October and hasn't even started throwing again. He can want to start next season but the only thing that matters is if he can even throw the ball.

Posted by: PAskinsfan17 | January 18, 2010 11:42 AM |
-------------------------------

I asked what your source was for your claim that Pennington said he is not sure he'll ever play again.

You're a liar, and you'll lie anytime Campbell needs defending on this blog, but I already knew that from your previous posts. You have no source for it.

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/sports/dolphins/on-the-rehab-trail-chad-pennington-hopes-he-67487.html

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 11:47 AM | Report abuse

When JC is re-signed, I hope all the JC nay-sayers just shut up. PLEASE just shut your stupid mouths. If you want to sound like idiots, there are plenty of other topics for you to expound on - for example, federal tax policy. I'm sure you will proves yourselves to be just as educated on that subject.

There is no one in the DC area that sounds less informed than someone who keeps chirping the tired line "Campbell isn't any good." Just give it a rest, mouthbreathers.

Posted by: whughes1


This guy sounds like the Chris Crocker of Redskins...

"Leave Jason alone...JUST LEAVE HIM ALONE!!"

Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 11:45 AM

I was about to call the whaaaambulance.

Posted by: Realness1 | January 18, 2010 11:48 AM | Report abuse

Brownwood...

You are a formidable foe on the JC front and you make a valid argument that I can live with.

Posted by: rickyroge | January 18, 2010 11:51 AM | Report abuse

Brownwood...

You are a formidable foe on the JC front and you make a valid argument that I can live with.

Posted by: rickyroge | January 18, 2010 11:51 AM | Report abuse

If Colt beats out JC and fits this offense better, I'd be all for him playing IF HE PROVES IT ON THE FIELD. If JC is the best QB on the roster, he should play. Regardless of how much he does or doesn't yell at the line of scrimmage.

Posted by: brownwood26 | January 18, 2010 11:29 AM


I would also say a tie or near-tie goes to Colt. I think we have seen JCs upside. I am OK with a lower rating and a few more picks from a rook or young player, as long as they are making plays and SCORING. Can the QB lead the team down field and score a couple times a game? That is what we need to see and what we have never seen out of Campbell.

Posted by: amaranthpa | January 18, 2010 11:53 AM | Report abuse

One probelm Campbell isn't signed for this year. Colt is still under his rookie contract so makes sense to let him compete. Campbell will have to be signed and if you think he will accept a low bid or even short term contract your dreaming.. He'll want starting QB wages and he'll want at least 3 years. Why pay Campbell that if the Skins just want him as a placeholder for a year?? Better give it to Colt give him a true shot with a veteran like Collins (also under contract) or Ramsey (who will accept short cheap contract) to fill in as a placeholder if Colt faulters...

Posted by: sovine08 | January 18, 2010 11:37 AM | Report abuse

I'm sorry I know this is a horrible insult around here but that sounds like something Vinny would do. Starting Colt and brining in Ramsey (a QB with no mobility in a system that requires a QB that can rollout frequently)? I'm all for letting Colt compete but for now the plan should be to bring in a rookie (Bradford/Clausen in the first or McCoy/LeFevour in the second)and have all the QB's on the roster compete, with the only guaranteed roster spot going to the rookie QB.

In the meantime the front office will tender JC and either go into the season with him as the starting QB or hope someone offers a second for him (unlikely). Other then that we see what Campbell can do in a quality offensive system with a good O-Line.

Posted by: CapsXXVI | January 18, 2010 11:53 AM | Report abuse

Again...I don't see anyone here saying Campbell is the long term answer. He's the guy for 2010 and you move on. You people act like doing that would keep this team out of the Super Bowl next season. Hate to break it to ya, but we're not gonna be a contender next year!

Posted by: brownwood26 | January 18, 2010 11:46 AM | Report abuse


And here's where I don't understand about the "we really need to tender JC next year" crowd.

If we are talking about utlizing him as a 1-year place warmer on a team that is not going to be competitive anyways, then that makes JC17 pretty expendable.

If we are talking about finding a suitable 1-year placeholder, then why is it better to bring back JC17 for a year and have the coaching staff pour time and energy into teaching him a new offense from scratch, rather than simply bringing in some other vet backup-type who already knows the Shanny offense, can run it for a year and be mediocre while the rest of the team gets fixed, and can then resume the role of a backup/tutor for a younger QB?

Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 11:53 AM | Report abuse

Everyone is a risk. That's the NFL.

By the way, the fact that you're now relegated to asking who the #2 would be says it all.

I'll give you a hint: It isn't Campbell.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 11:36 AM | Report abuse
-----------------------------------

I'll agree that the fact that you are NOT asking who the #2 is despite advocating a QB who has had 3 surgeries to his throwing shoulder does, indeed, tell it all.

That was the Vinny approach - "53 players, Bah! Who needs depth behind old/oft injured linemen? We got 22 starters! Thats all we need!"

Posted by: mattsoundworld | January 18, 2010 11:53 AM | Report abuse

Shanahan: "There's nobody out there that we can get in FA. And the QB's in the draft aren't impressing me either. We're stuck with you for another year."

Campbell: "Thanks coach! That means the world to me!"

Posted by: ga8085 | January 18, 2010 11:53 AM | Report abuse

Power Rankings > "WaPost/JLaC/JReid have no sources" meme > JC good/bad/stay/go barf-fest

Posted by: 4-12 | January 18, 2010 11:54 AM | Report abuse

Wade Phillips returning for 2010 season
January, 18, 2010
JAN 18
10:22

By ESPNDallas.com

A source has told Ed Werder that the Dallas Cowboys have decided to bring back head coach Wade Phillips for the 2010 season.

Much more to come from the ESPN Dallas crew out at Valley Ranch.

Posted by: TWISI | January 18, 2010 11:55 AM | Report abuse

I'll agree that the fact that you are NOT asking who the #2 is despite advocating a QB who has had 3 surgeries to his throwing shoulder does, indeed, tell it all.

That was the Vinny approach - "53 players, Bah! Who needs depth behind old/oft injured linemen? We got 22 starters! Thats all we need!"

Posted by: mattsoundworld | January 18, 2010 11:53 AM |
------------------------

I already told you the #2 wouldn't be Campbell.

For your purposes (as a JC ball-lapper) what else do you need to know?

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 11:56 AM | Report abuse

I asked what your source was for your claim that Pennington said he is not sure he'll ever play again.

You're a liar, and you'll lie anytime Campbell needs defending on this blog, but I already knew that from your previous posts. You have no source for it.

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/sports/dolphins/on-the-rehab-trail-chad-pennington-hopes-he-67487.html

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 11:47 AM | Report abuse

How did I lie? Once again you are too stupid to understand what I said. I said he doesn't even know if he'll ever play again. Right now he has no contract. How can he possibly know he'll play again when he's not even on a team? All you did was provide a link to an article saying he wants to play again. Barry Bonds wanted to play again. How did that work our for him?

Posted by: PAskinsfan17 | January 18, 2010 11:56 AM | Report abuse

My bad, I forgot Ramsey played for Shanahan. Still the idea of handing over the reigns to Colt before training camp has even started is a little crazy.

Posted by: CapsXXVI | January 18, 2010 11:56 AM | Report abuse

If we are talking about finding a suitable 1-year placeholder, then why is it better to bring back JC17 for a year and have the coaching staff pour time and energy into teaching him a new offense from scratch, rather than simply bringing in some other vet backup-type who already knows the Shanny offense, can run it for a year and be mediocre while the rest of the team gets fixed, and can then resume the role of a backup/tutor for a younger QB?

Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 11:53 AM | Report abuse
------------------------------

I'd be all for it if you can find a guy who fits that description. Anyone?

Posted by: mattsoundworld | January 18, 2010 11:56 AM | Report abuse

Stop the insanity! There is no question that JC17 will be outta here. It's just in disagreement with the time frame and manner he will be gone. No one is salivating at the chance to trade draft picks for him, and there is nothing better out there to get in return. I'd give up a third rounder straight up for him. Shanny is playing it right saying the right things so not to diminish JC17 value if someone were to foolishly want him. I do see JC17 sticking around under these times of an uncapped year, and no other alternatives available. But there is no way he is and will be considered a franchise QB after he leaves DC in one more "doesn't suck" year.

Posted by: sthai75 | January 18, 2010 11:59 AM | Report abuse

Wade Phillips returning for 2010 season
January, 18, 2010
JAN 18
10:22

By ESPNDallas.com

A source has told Ed Werder that the Dallas Cowboys have decided to bring back head coach Wade Phillips for the 2010 season.

Much more to come from the ESPN Dallas crew out at Valley Ranch.


Posted by: TWISI | January 18, 2010 11:55 AM | Report abuse


Awesome news!

I'm already looking forward to the Great Late-Season Cowboys Collapse in 2010!!!

Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 11:59 AM | Report abuse

I'd be all for it if you can find a guy who fits that description. Anyone?

Posted by: mattsoundworld | January 18, 2010 11:56 AM |
------------------------

There is no guy that fits that description for YOU unless his name is Jason Campbell.

It's clear you're not going to be happy with ANY choice if it isn't Jason Campbell.

So your participation in this debate is over.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 12:00 PM | Report abuse

Dude. You're a JC ball-lapper. There's no other term for it.

And when you're reduced to hyperbole, what's left?

Also, I love how you fixate on this season, ignoring the seasons when Campbell had a very good running game, and a decent O-line, and still sucked like a $5 Mexican 'ho.

Why sit up here and lie continuously? Just admit you really like Jason Campbell and that's why - despite his never doing anything worth remembering in 50 starts - you defend him.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 11:45 AM


Last time I address you, simply because trying to reason with the unreasonable is pointless...

There hasn't been a time where JC had a solid team around him. When he had a decent O-line (and never for a fully season, I might add), he didn't have receivers. When the young WRs showed up this year, the season was already lost and the O-line in shambles.

And on top of those deficiencies, he had to learn new offenses.

So if you don't see that, agree to disagree. You want to play a one-armed, injury prone Chad Pennington behind the worst line in football and I want the sturdy guy who put up decent numbers behind that line to come back for one more year until we get a better option lined up. You want to fire up Madden and create your own franchise QB, and I want to live in reality and deal with the fact that you can't just pull an All-Pro QB out of your ass, no matter how bad you want one.

You don't have to be a "ball-lapper" to root for the QB on your favorite team and hope that things improve around him. Seems to me that pining for mediocre QBs on other teams like Pennington and Orton is closer to "hyberbole" than anything I'm doing.

Posted by: brownwood26 | January 18, 2010 12:01 PM | Report abuse

"Last year in his final news conference Dolphins coach Tony Sparano gave Chad Pennington a ringing endorsement, naming the savvy veteran the team's starting quarterback for 2009.

This year in his final news conference Sparano praised Chad Henne, who was 7-6 as a first-year starter. But Sparano stopped short of anointing Henne the starting quarterback heading into 2010.

"I have to sit back now and look at the entire body of work and see what Chad did really well, and what Chad didn't do really well. But I am really pleased with what Chad did, I really am," Sparano said. "This guy, he is a pretty curious guy. He likes to get better at the things he is not good at … I really like what I have seen in Chad right now."

Henne completed 60.8 percent of his passes for 2,878 yards and 12 touchdowns. But he threw 14 interceptions, most of which came in the fourth-quarter, and was sacked 26 times.

Pennington, who suffered a season-ending shoulder injury in the third game, will be an unrestricted free agent, and it's doubtful he'll be re-signed because he wants to compete for a starting spot."

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 12:01 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 11:53 AM | Report abuse
------------------------------

I'd be all for it if you can find a guy who fits that description. Anyone?

Posted by: mattsoundworld | January 18, 2010 11:56 AM | Report abuse


THe names have already been floated.

Rex Grossman has been the backup in Houston with Kyle Shanahan, and was playing on a one-year contract, so I believe he'll be an FA.

PAtrick Ramsey was a backup in Denver when Big SHanny was there.

Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 12:01 PM | Report abuse

I already told you the #2 wouldn't be Campbell.

For your purposes (as a JC ball-lapper) what else do you need to know?

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 11:56 AM | Report abuse
-----------------------------------

Just tell me what your plan is for when Pennington goes down. Even you have to admit his chances of going down are better than finishing the season (3 completed seasons in 8)

Posted by: mattsoundworld | January 18, 2010 12:04 PM | Report abuse

There are a number of NFl starting QBs who are better or worse than their stats, but Jason isn't one of them. He's right where the numbers suggest -- a solid middle-of-the-pack 'game manager' who stays on the field and doesn't kill you with his mistakes. He won't be a gunslinger like Cutler or Aaron Rodgers and he openly acknowledges his dependence on a strong running attack. If the Skins improve the offensive line and rushing game, he should blossom. If they can't, he'd be better off in Carolina or San Francisco.

Posted by: Samson151 | January 18, 2010 12:06 PM | Report abuse

Yikes. I'd take JC over Grossman 11 out of 10 times.

Posted by: ga8085 | January 18, 2010 12:06 PM | Report abuse

You want to play a one-armed, injury prone Chad Pennington behind the worst line in football.

Posted by: brownwood26 | January 18, 2010 12:01 PM |
--------------------------------

Oh? So you not only want Campbell back, you want him back behind the worst O-line in football again in 2010?

You're suggesting that is what Pennington would be playing behind in 2010, but not Campbell? Because for some bizarre reason Shanahan won't address the O-line if Pennington is the QB? Have you had your coffee yet?

Campbell is a 50-start bust. He's garbage, a cipher, a zero, nil.

You like him why? Because he went to Auburn? Because he's black? Because he wears #17? What exactly is there to like about this void of a QB after 50 starts?

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 12:07 PM | Report abuse

THe names have already been floated.

Rex Grossman has been the backup in Houston with Kyle Shanahan, and was playing on a one-year contract, so I believe he'll be an FA.

PAtrick Ramsey was a backup in Denver when Big SHanny was there.

Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 12:01 PM | Report abuse
--------------------------

Ok, so Ramsey or Grossman over Campbell. I still need some convincing that either of them are an improvement, but at least we are starting to have some options defined so we can discuss them.

Posted by: mattsoundworld | January 18, 2010 12:07 PM | Report abuse

If we are talking about finding a suitable 1-year placeholder, then why is it better to bring back JC17 for a year and have the coaching staff pour time and energy into teaching him a new offense from scratch, rather than simply bringing in some other vet backup-type who already knows the Shanny offense, can run it for a year and be mediocre while the rest of the team gets fixed, and can then resume the role of a backup/tutor for a younger QB?

Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 11:53 AM


Because this team is better off with the devil you know over the devil you don't.

What former Shanny QB is out there? I'd pass on one of his 3rd string, practice squad slappies from 2001 because I seriously doubt he'd be better than JC. Plus that kills the argument of "I'm tired of mediocrity" from the anti-JC crowd.

I'm for getting someone else over JC if and only if that player proves he's better. Nobody on this roster is better, and unless Tom Brady gets cut this offseason, there won't be a better option in FA.

I'm spent. See y'all tomorrow.

Posted by: brownwood26 | January 18, 2010 12:09 PM | Report abuse

Yikes. I'd take JC over Grossman 11 out of 10 times.

Posted by: ga8085 | January 18, 2010 12:06 PM | Report abuse


Why?

And remember the question is not: "Is Rex Grossman a better NFL QB overall than JC17?"

We've already etablished that we are talking about finding a 1-year placeholder to work the SHanny offense while a young guy gets groomed and the rest of the team gets built.

So - within the confines of that scenario, please tell us why you think JC17 is a better pick than Rex Grossman.

Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 12:09 PM | Report abuse

Another glowing endorsement of Jim Zorn.

Posted by: vegasskinsfan | January 18, 2010 12:10 PM | Report abuse

I'll re-post this since matt apparently reads slowly (he and his buddy JC share that common trait)....

I'd be all for it if you can find a guy who fits that description. Anyone?

Posted by: mattsoundworld | January 18, 2010 11:56 AM |
------------------------

There is no guy that fits that description for YOU unless his name is Jason Campbell.

It's clear you're not going to be happy with ANY choice if it isn't Jason Campbell.

So your participation in this debate is over.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 12:10 PM | Report abuse

Boring, are we going to reargue this again? We have to fix Oline, pure and simple. And with Shanny and Allen, we will. I suspect we will resign JC to a 2 or 3 year contract, with low salary and high incentive bonuses. Next year we may draft a qb to groom, but this year we focus on rebuilding OL, and we get a rb to assist CP. It may not be sexy, but you all will just have to live with it.

Posted by: frediefritz | January 18, 2010 8:41 AM |
-----------------------------

I'm guessing you can't walk down the street and chew gum at the same time.

Retarded mantra of "we have to fix the O-line this year," as if that somehow PRECLUDES doing anything else this year.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 9:44 AM | Report abuse

Yes, MeRed, fixing the OL does preclude fixing QB. You are not going to get a QB fix in FA, they are just not available. Nor is the LT fix available in FA. So you need the #4 pick for either OL or DL, depending on who is available. 2nd rd pick will probably either OT or another Oline pick, depending on who we get at #4. Then you are left with picks in 4th, 5th and 7th rd. You are not getting a qb fix for 2010 with any of those picks. So how do you chew gum and walk down the street?

Posted by: frediefritz | January 18, 2010 12:11 PM | Report abuse

You like him why? Because he went to Auburn? Because he's black? Because he wears #17? What exactly is there to like about this void of a QB after 50 starts?

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 12:07 PM


None of the above.

And the answer is so simple, it'll stun you.

Because as of now, the way the team is currently constructed, in my opinion, he gives us the best chance to win.

Nothing less, nothing more.

If only your reasoning were so straight-forward...

Posted by: brownwood26 | January 18, 2010 12:13 PM | Report abuse

So - within the confines of that scenario, please tell us why you think JC17 is a better pick than Rex Grossman.

Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 12:09 PM | Report abuse

Hmm, I'll go with the fact that Grossman has more INTs than TDs.

Posted by: PAskinsfan17 | January 18, 2010 12:13 PM | Report abuse

Because this team is better off with the devil you know over the devil you don't.

Posted by: brownwood26 | January 18, 2010 12:09 PM | Report abuse


I agree, but here is where your thinking breaks down.

In the actual real-time scenario of this team, with the Shanahan's in charge, the "devil that you know" is NOT JC17. "The devil that you know" is a QB that has played in a SHanny system.

"The devil that you know" is Ramsey or Grossman.

The devil that SKINS FANS know maybe JC17, because we've been watching him play on Sundays for the past several years, but that is irrelevant.

THe system, coaches and structure have changed.

Once again, unless Shanny is planning on re-hiring Jim Zorn and using his playbook, then the "devil that you know" is NOT JC17.

Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 12:14 PM | Report abuse

I give frediefritz his props. He makes no bones about being an unabashed Campbell supporter.

He not only wants Campbell re-signed, he wants him re-signed to a 2-3 year contract!

LOL... Yeah, he's earned it.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 12:14 PM | Report abuse

So - within the confines of that scenario, please tell us why you think JC17 is a better pick than Rex Grossman.

Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 12:09 PM | Report abuse

Because even if its a rebuilding year, I don't want my QB throwing INT's left and right and making bone headed decisions with the football. I still want to field a competitive team. I think David Carr might be available. I'm curious to see if he's rebounded from his initial shock in Houston and can be the QB he was projected to be coming out of college.

Posted by: ga8085 | January 18, 2010 12:15 PM | Report abuse

"If we are talking about finding a suitable 1-year placeholder, then why is it better to bring back JC17 for a year and have the coaching staff pour time and energy into teaching him a new offense from scratch, rather than simply bringing in some other vet backup-type who already knows the Shanny offense, can run it for a year and be mediocre while the rest of the team gets fixed, and can then resume the role of a backup/tutor for a younger QB?

Posted by: p1funk"

Why limit yourself to one or the other? You can re-sign JC for cheap by placing a tender on him (or receive compensation for him) and sign a journeyman FA like Grossman or Ramsey who have played under the Shanahan system.

You can probably get both for cheaper than Todd Collins, and Collins is older than both.

Then you can let them compete with Colt for the starting spot.

But why let an asset walk when you can easily retain him for cheap or get compensation? Seems backwards to me.

Posted by: psps23 | January 18, 2010 12:17 PM | Report abuse

Ok, so Ramsey or Grossman over Campbell. I still need some convincing that either of them are an improvement, but at least we are starting to have some options defined so we can discuss them.

Posted by: mattsoundworld | January 18, 2010 12:07 PM | Report abuse


First, why do you need to be convinced that they are an "improvement", when we've already established that we don't intend to be really competitive next year anyways? Remember, we are talking about a 1-year placeholder.

Second, those guys automatically get the benefit of the doubt over JC17, BECAUSE THEY ALREADY KNOW THE COACHES AND THE SYSTEM.

We have 4-5 years of firsthand data to see how JC17 performs in the first year of a new system. We already know from empirical evidence that he does not perform well.

Why does JC17 get the benefit of the doubt over another QB that may not be super-talented, but knows the offense?

Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 12:17 PM | Report abuse

Yes, MeRed, fixing the OL does preclude fixing QB. You are not going to get a QB fix in FA, they are just not available. Nor is the LT fix available in FA. So you need the #4 pick for either OL or DL, depending on who is available. 2nd rd pick will probably either OT or another Oline pick, depending on who we get at #4. Then you are left with picks in 4th, 5th and 7th rd. You are not getting a qb fix for 2010 with any of those picks. So how do you chew gum and walk down the street?

Posted by: frediefritz | January 18, 2010 12:11 PM | Report abuse

right because no tackle taken with the #4 pick has ever been a bust so obviously the only viable option is to not sign a tackle or two like:

Mike Gandy
Jermon Bushrod
Alex Barron
Ben Hamilton (Denver guy Shanny my like)
Winston Justice
Marcus McNeil
Michael Roos
John Tait
Adam Terry
Eric Winston

All of those guys are set to be FAs. Obviously not all of them will be but there are more options then just drafting only oline. Personally, I don't think that much of Campbell and I think we could get the same level of play from a rookie with greater upside. However, I trust Mike and will be on board with whatever he decides to do, but its silly to think the only option is to hang on to Campbell and draft oline.

Posted by: zjfr2 | January 18, 2010 12:19 PM | Report abuse

suiSHAM showed his true colors again, heart lodged in throat,shanking kicks as usual this guy looks similar to a young jim zorn..weak,sullen,dim. it is absurd that many azz-holes here are still comparing m. sanchez with campbell and still can't admit because of their own racist, bigot,neanderthal minds that the jets have a far better team and organization than washington the left side of their o-line and center are going to the pro-bowl this year with the number 1 run game in the league, along with a top defensive that has many players who are nationally known by the average fan, not this jive azz so-called defense in washington that can't stop the run or stop a team at crunch time and only has 1 or 2 players in the secondary who can actually tackle. shanahan can't make avg running backs look good that is a lie he is not the wizard of oz" draft a good running back 2-3rd and stop make believing in your own stupid lies that shanahan can turn water into wine" and give a scare crow"(shuisam,zorn)a heart.

Posted by: wathu19 | January 18, 2010 12:19 PM | Report abuse

He's a frigging zero.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 9:56 AM | Report abuse

You're frigging zero, MrRed. What single positive though have you had? Please, name names of QB's available, either in FA or draft, that would be available without using multiple draft picks.

Posted by: frediefritz | January 18, 2010 12:19 PM | Report abuse

So - within the confines of that scenario, please tell us why you think JC17 is a better pick than Rex Grossman.

Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 12:09 PM | Report abuse

Hmm, I'll go with the fact that Grossman has more INTs than TDs.

Posted by: PAskinsfan17 | January 18, 2010 12:13 PM | Report abuse


Fine.

And I'll counter your fact, with the fact that Rex Grossman has actually QBed a team to a Superbowl, whereas JC17 has yet to get to a postseason.

Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 12:19 PM | Report abuse

If CLAUSEN, SUH, or OKUNG are at #4, stand pat and pick.
Posted by: glawrence007 | January 18, 2010 7:44 AM
Surprise! Of all you mentioned above, expect only SUH, if he fell that far, with 3-4 Def.
looming, their is no better addition. O Line
and RB claims the rest of the picks.

Posted by: abxinc | January 18, 2010 12:19 PM | Report abuse

Because as of now, the way the team is currently constructed, in my opinion, he gives us the best chance to win.

Nothing less, nothing more.

If only your reasoning were so straight-forward...

Posted by: brownwood26 | January 18, 2010 12:13 PM |
--------------

Oh, but it is straight-forward.

However, I'll accept as your argument your OPINION that Campbell gives the team the best chance to win, and that's why you want him back.

I disagree 100%, because there is nothing in his portfolio of work as Redskins starting QB that suggests he gives the team the best chance to win on Sunday. Not in 50 starts, and not going forward.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 12:19 PM | Report abuse

Because even if its a rebuilding year, I don't want my QB throwing INT's left and right and making bone headed decisions with the football. I still want to field a competitive team. I think David Carr might be available. I'm curious to see if he's rebounded from his initial shock in Houston and can be the QB he was projected to be coming out of college.

Posted by: ga8085 | January 18, 2010 12:15 PM | Report abuse


OK. David Carr is another name to put on the list, assuming Kyle Shanny was in Houston with him.

As far as INTs go, I will add that many of us were begging for JC17 to take more risks and throw more balls downfield even if it resulted in more INTs.

Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 12:22 PM | Report abuse

Why limit yourself to one or the other? You can re-sign JC for cheap by placing a tender on him (or receive compensation for him) and sign a journeyman FA like Grossman or Ramsey who have played under the Shanahan system.

You can probably get both for cheaper than Todd Collins, and Collins is older than both.

Then you can let them compete with Colt for the starting spot.

But why let an asset walk when you can easily retain him for cheap or get compensation? Seems backwards to me.

Posted by: psps23 | January 18, 2010 12:17 PM | Report abuse


OK. Sure. That's reasonable.

Again my exercise with this discussion is to try to illustrate that there are alot of other reasonable and sensible options out there other than deciding that this team MUST give JC17 the reins next year, because that's the ONLY sensible course of action.

My point is that it's not.

The Shannys have ZERO experience with JC17.

The Shanny's are NOT running Zorn's playbook.

Maybe to you and me and the fans, JC17 is a familiar guy, but to the people who matter that are running the Skins offense, JC17 is as big a question mark as anyone else out there.

Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 12:26 PM | Report abuse

OK. David Carr is another name to put on the list, assuming Kyle Shanny was in Houston with him.

Maybe 1 year, and by halfway through that year, Carr was through -

Campbell is better than Carr - given the same set of circumstances, he performed at a higher level.

Posted by: JohnDinHouston | January 18, 2010 12:30 PM | Report abuse

Why?

And remember the question is not: "Is Rex Grossman a better NFL QB overall than JC17?"

We've already etablished that we are talking about finding a 1-year placeholder to work the SHanny offense while a young guy gets groomed and the rest of the team gets built.

So - within the confines of that scenario, please tell us why you think JC17 is a better pick than Rex Grossman.

Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 12:09 PM | Report abuse
----------------------------------

Well, for starters, Grossman has more INTs (36) than TDs (33). His best year was 23 TDs 20 INTs. 54% career completion.. Not jumping off the page at me.

Posted by: mattsoundworld | January 18, 2010 12:32 PM | Report abuse

OK. David Carr is another name to put on the list, assuming Kyle Shanny was in Houston with him.

Maybe 1 year, and by halfway through that year, Carr was through -

Campbell is better than Carr - given the same set of circumstances, he performed at a higher level.

Posted by: JohnDinHouston | January 18, 2010 12:30 PM | Report abuse


The dimensions of the discussion are:

"Who would be a good/suitable/better 1-year placeholder for the Skins next year while the rest of the team develops and a young QB gets groomed?"

Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 12:33 PM | Report abuse

Fine.

And I'll counter your fact, with the fact that Rex Grossman has actually QBed a team to a Superbowl, whereas JC17 has yet to get to a postseason.

Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 12:19 PM | Report abuse

That is not a fact at all. Rex Grossman didn't QB the team to the super bowl. If you actually watched that team play then you'd know how stupid that statement is. Rex Grossman hitched a ride to the superbowl on the backs of Devin Hester and Brian Urlacher. That's why you don't attribute team accomplishments to one player.

Posted by: PAskinsfan17 | January 18, 2010 12:33 PM | Report abuse

Fine.

And I'll counter your fact, with the fact that Rex Grossman has actually QBed a team to a Superbowl, whereas JC17 has yet to get to a postseason.

Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 12:19 PM | Report abuse

That is not a fact at all. Rex Grossman didn't QB the team to the super bowl. If you actually watched that team play then you'd know how stupid that statement is. Rex Grossman hitched a ride to the superbowl on the backs of Devin Hester and Brian Urlacher. That's why you don't attribute team accomplishments to one player.

Posted by: PAskinsfan17 | January 18, 2010 12:33 PM | Report abuse


OK. So you are saying it is not a fact that Rex Grossman was the starting quarterback for a team that went to a Superbowl?

That's not a fact?

Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 12:35 PM | Report abuse

I'm going to go with p1funk here, JC17 is an uknown in Shanny's system so saying he would be better then other QB's in that system is not correct.

Shanny will do what he wants and I will support it because he knows what he's doing.

I would tender JC and if he is not the guy you want take whatever you can get for him.

If he is the guy you want then resign him and go from there.

Posted by: Flounder21 | January 18, 2010 12:36 PM | Report abuse

Well, for starters, Grossman has more INTs (36) than TDs (33). His best year was 23 TDs 20 INTs. 54% career completion.. Not jumping off the page at me.

Posted by: mattsoundworld | January 18, 2010 12:32 PM | Report abuse


THere is precious little about JC17's stats that jump off the page to me.

But once again, we are not talking about who is going to necessarily be a better overall NFL QB in the big picture.

We are talking about who is a sensible selection to run the Shanny offense for a year while we groom a young guy.

Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 12:37 PM | Report abuse

Re: comparing Campbell to Sanchez

Jets are the #1 or #2 rushing offense in the NFL. They. Have. An. Offensive. Line.

Posted by: BrooklynSkins | January 18, 2010 12:37 PM | Report abuse

Campbell is better than Carr - given the same set of circumstances, he performed at a higher level.

Posted by: JohnDinHouston | January 18, 2010 12:30 PM | Report abuse

I can't argue if he was or wasnt because I didn't watch much of him. But, he got sacked like 30 more times then JC did..

Posted by: ga8085 | January 18, 2010 12:38 PM | Report abuse

Redskin4Life1- Don't get me wrong: On the basis of 4 or 5 TV games over the last couple years and one trip to FedEx I saw Campbell get pummeled in all of them and admired his grit and determination. Leadership comes in many styles but just "surviving" with dignity is not enough. I want to see him get mad.

Posted by: DonBoslerBaby | January 18, 2010 12:39 PM | Report abuse

Soup haters can't wrap their brain around the fact that 'Soup Lovers' aren't clamoring for him to be the franchise QB, just to hold the position until other needs are rebuilt first.


Posted by: psps23 | January 18, 2010 10:37 AM |

Translation: I LOVE Jason Cambell so much I'll create any argument to keep him around.

You're a frigging joke. This team was 4-12. They can dust off Ed Rubbert and start him at QB next year as far as I'm concerned.

Anyone but that ignorant hick who needs ten minutes to read a newspaper headline.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 10:42 AM | Report abuse

Well, this argument has gone from sublime to ridiculous. Ed Rubbert? Is that the best you can do? Retard. Just one name, please.

Posted by: frediefritz | January 18, 2010 12:39 PM | Report abuse

Ok, went for lunch and came back to a reasonable debate with actual QBs. I'm all for signing Grossman or Carr, but bring them in to compete with JC. Worse comes to worse, you have a seasoned backup QB.

I don't, for the life of me, see how you let your first rounder walk for nothing when you can tender him and see if someone thinks he's worth a #2. If someone trades us a #2 and we can get one of those guys, then you have some trade bait to sneak a RFA from someone else or load up in 2011 (if there is 2011). But simply running JC outta town? No way.

Posted by: mattsoundworld | January 18, 2010 12:39 PM | Report abuse

LOL... Other QBs NEVER take their team to the playoffs or a Super Bowl; they all hitch a ride on some other apsect of the roster.

It's amazing. Some people will try to move heaven and earth to defend this loser Redskins QB.

I can't wait until the final humiliation, if no NFL team tries to sign him.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 12:41 PM | Report abuse

You also can't say we need JC because of how bad the O-line was, Shanny will fix the o-Line he is not Vinny.

The running game will be much better as well.

Posted by: Flounder21 | January 18, 2010 12:41 PM | Report abuse

OK. So you are saying it is not a fact that Rex Grossman was the starting quarterback for a team that went to a Superbowl?

That's not a fact?

Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 12:35 PM | Report abuse

No, I said he didn't QB the team to the super bowl. There is a difference. The way you intially stated it suggests that Grossman's play at QB was the reason the team went to the superbowl. That is not accurate. Now you're saying he simply started for the team in the super bowl. That is accurate. The Bears made it to the super bowl despite the poor play of Rex Grossman not because of it.

Posted by: PAskinsfan17 | January 18, 2010 12:42 PM | Report abuse

THere is precious little about JC17's stats that jump off the page to me.

But once again, we are not talking about who is going to necessarily be a better overall NFL QB in the big picture.

We are talking about who is a sensible selection to run the Shanny offense for a year while we groom a young guy.

Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 12:37 PM | Report abuse
-----------------------------------

Shanahan has somewhat of a reputation for merging his system with the guys available, so that might destroy any 'system' advantage other guys might bring. Something to consider.

Posted by: mattsoundworld | January 18, 2010 12:43 PM | Report abuse

Ok, went for lunch and came back to a reasonable debate with actual QBs. I'm all for signing Grossman or Carr, but bring them in to compete with JC. Worse comes to worse, you have a seasoned backup QB.

I don't, for the life of me, see how you let your first rounder walk for nothing when you can tender him and see if someone thinks he's worth a #2. If someone trades us a #2 and we can get one of those guys, then you have some trade bait to sneak a RFA from someone else or load up in 2011 (if there is 2011). But simply running JC outta town? No way.

Posted by: mattsoundworld | January 18, 2010 12:39 PM | Report abuse


Great. We are pretty much on the same page, then.

Although, sadly, I just don't know what we could actually get for JC17.

Remember, he is not a Shanny investment. I'm not sure if Shanny/Allen care if the team gets anything back for him.

Maybe Vinny did b/c that pick happened with Vinny in the building, but that's irrelevant.

Do we NEED to run him out of town? No. But I will understand if Allen/Shanny decide that the whole JC17-QB-drama is a big albatross around the organization's neck and they decide to make a clean cut.

Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 12:44 PM | Report abuse

OK. So you are saying it is not a fact that Rex Grossman was the starting quarterback for a team that went to a Superbowl?

That's not a fact?

Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 12:35 PM | Report abuse

Didn't Kyle Orton win alot of games for them that year? Or was that the year before?

Posted by: ga8085 | January 18, 2010 12:44 PM | Report abuse

"They're Campbell-supporters in a big way. They just don't want to admit that they want him back in 2010 because they really like him."

I'm warming up to him coming back.

I guess I figure if Shany can't make him any good then no one can.

That and I REALLY don't want Grossman here.

I'd like to see the Redskins trade down a few spots, pick a couple linemen, and wait until next year for a QB.

I just don't like any of the QB's coming out this year for some reason.

- Ray

Posted by: rmcazz | January 18, 2010 12:47 PM | Report abuse

No, I said he didn't QB the team to the super bowl. There is a difference. The way you intially stated it suggests that Grossman's play at QB was the reason the team went to the superbowl. That is not accurate. Now you're saying he simply started for the team in the super bowl. That is accurate. The Bears made it to the super bowl despite the poor play of Rex Grossman not because of it.

Posted by: PAskinsfan17 | January 18, 2010 12:42 PM | Report abuse


Your word-parsing is ridiculous.

So Rex Grossman was the starting QB for a Superbowl team, but he never actually "QBed" that season?

He started as a QB, and he played the QB position - which involved running plays and throwing the ball...but he didn't "QB".

Please.

Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 12:48 PM | Report abuse

soups inability to consistently read a D and throw the ball on time is a big part of the reason the team he started over 50 times for has won 35% of those starts. No one else can read the D for him.

Posted by: Realness1 | January 18, 2010 12:49 PM | Report abuse

Hmm, I'll go with the fact that Grossman has more INTs than TDs.

Posted by: PAskinsfan17 | January 18, 2010 12:13 PM | Report abuse


Here, PA.

I'm going to play your game with you.

Here is the above "fact" that you stated.

So are ALL of those INTs solely the fault of Rex Grossman?

NONE of those INTs were the result of a wrong route being run by a receiver? Or a tipped ball that fell into a defender's hand?

Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 12:50 PM | Report abuse

Don Bosler Baby. Yes well said, Campbell really does not show any kind of emotion on the field. His demeaner is like Eli Manning with the G-Men, they both show no emotion. Skins fans went ballistic when Campbell fired back at Portis. I even think Shanny got a kick out of that. He needs to find a way to channel that fire on the field, definately in the redzone.

Posted by: Redskin4Life1 | January 18, 2010 12:51 PM | Report abuse

These comments are making me dumber. Please stop! Don't want to work on this slow day but you guys are making me want to shut down my browser. Ugh!

Posted by: donj1963 | January 18, 2010 12:51 PM | Report abuse

LOL... Other QBs NEVER take their team to the playoffs or a Super Bowl; they all hitch a ride on some other apsect of the roster.

It's amazing. Some people will try to move heaven and earth to defend this loser Redskins QB.

I can't wait until the final humiliation, if no NFL team tries to sign him.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 12:41 PM | Report abuse

No way brah!! Football is a 1 man sport. That's why the Bears and the Chiefs are so good this year. All they did was replace their QBs with super awesome franchise QBs and now they're going to the super bowl!!! That's all we have to do, just replace the QB!!! It's so simple!!!

Posted by: PAskinsfan17 | January 18, 2010 12:51 PM | Report abuse

Do we NEED to run him out of town? No. But I will understand if Allen/Shanny decide that the whole JC17-QB-drama is a big albatross around the organization's neck and they decide to make a clean cut.

Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 12:44 PM | Report abuse

That's kinda been my point. I think unless Mike is convinced that JC is capable of being a franchise QB if I were him all tiebreakers go to cutting him and starting fresh. Same with CP, if I'm looking at those guys I might think they represent 5 years of mediocrity, underachievement and are #1 and #2 (not sure which order) of representation on the roster of frustration and controversy. Obviously the owner is the absolute leader in controversy about this franchise, but you can't get rid of him. You can get rid of JC and CP though and start fresh. If I'm Shanny I think I'd have to be convinced that JC and CP are markedly better than anything else I can get, otherwise, if I think I can get similar play without inheriting the controversy I'm moving on and up.

Posted by: zjfr2 | January 18, 2010 12:51 PM | Report abuse

JC made good plays and the O-line sucked. But it's the bonehead plays I cannot stand. How many times did he step out of bounds before releasing the ball while scrambling? That's Peewee football 101. How many times did he overthrow or underthrow a wide open receiver? How many times did he check down a pass to a running back rather than go for the throat to Santana on a bomb? Say what you will about Zorn, but with all his shortcomings, he always tried to work on JC's decision making process. How many times did Zorn talk about JC choosing the wrong receiver or overlooking a wide open receiver down the field? You only get 2-3 shots down the field a game. Rarely did Campbell make the right decisions in those instances and rarely did he connect when he did make the right decision. After 50+ starts? Terrible. JC would not have made the play that Mark Sanchez made in the end zone yesterday,. He would have stepped out of bounds with the ball. He hesitates to muach. Part of it is being afraid to turn the ball over and part of it is being conditionned to not having enough time to hit receivers downfield. It's not his physical abilities I am concerned about. It's his head.

Posted by: mustang_johnny1 | January 18, 2010 12:52 PM | Report abuse

Didn't Kyle Orton win alot of games for them that year? Or was that the year before?

Posted by: ga8085 | January 18, 2010 12:44 PM

Year before.

Posted by: Realness1 | January 18, 2010 12:55 PM | Report abuse

"Again my exercise with this discussion is to try to illustrate that there are alot of other reasonable and sensible options out there other than deciding that this team MUST give JC17 the reins next year, because that's the ONLY sensible course of action."

My gut feeling is that you won't find many people up here that feel this way.

What you will find, though, are people that do not feel it's sensible to simply let JC walk.

I'm one of those people.

If Shanahan decides he's found another QB of the future, so be it. I'll trust it. If he decides that this team would be well served by bringing in a former backup vet, I'll trust it.

But independent of those two decisions, I still feel that JC should be tendered, either for retention purposes or compensation purposes. He's proven himself to be a solid if unspectacular starting QB. You can (and many teams have in the past) do worse than him. If the others beat him out, fair enough. But at the very least if they can't beat him out next season, you'll have the option of a solid starting QB.

Posted by: psps23 | January 18, 2010 12:56 PM | Report abuse

Here, PA.

I'm going to play your game with you.

Here is the above "fact" that you stated.

So are ALL of those INTs solely the fault of Rex Grossman?

NONE of those INTs were the result of a wrong route being run by a receiver? Or a tipped ball that fell into a defender's hand?

Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 12:50 PM | Report abuse

If you want to play my game then you're off to a poor start. I said he has more INTs than TDs so it doesn't matter whose fault it is. I never specified.

Posted by: PAskinsfan17 | January 18, 2010 12:57 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: mustang_johnny1 | January 18, 2010 12:52 PM | Report abuse

Well put.

Posted by: ga8085 | January 18, 2010 12:59 PM | Report abuse

This season, Campbell set personal bests in completions (327), attempts (507), completion percentage (64.5), yards (3,618), touchdowns (20) and passer rating (86.4). He also threw a career-high15 interceptions.

Whats the O/U for the amount of times Reid says this throughout the offseason.

Posted by: ATLredskin | January 18, 2010 1:00 PM | Report abuse

Jason Campbell has consistently improved under the most adverse conditions, with this season being the worst. He lost his pro-bowl o-linemen, TE and RB.
_____
Better?? The team has gone from 5-7 to 8-8 to 4-12. And he still had his pro bowl lineman, TE and RB when he lost to the Lions..and barely beat the Rams!!! Anyone who thinks replacing a linemen or two is going to make Campbell a winner is NUTS!!! Campbell lacks leadership.. lacks the ablility to throw deep, lacks the abilitly to raise his game in the final 2 minutes. His stats improved because he throws 80% of his passes under 10 yards and still does it at garbage time when the other teams gives him yards.. I am so TIRED watching this guy walk off a field after another LOSS!!! Shanahan has to try someone else back there.. Colt.. anybody!!! But I can see it now after another losing season Campbell's excuse will be.. well it was another new system Campbell had to learn he needs ANOTHER year.. ENOUGH EXCUSES.. GET RID OF CAMPBELL NOW!!

Posted by: sovine08
--------------------

Sovine08, you don't understand what an excuse is. Clearly, you cannot blame TEAM losses on Campbell. Zorn and the o-line were inept from day one. Randy Thomas went down week 2, Chris Samuels not long after that. The WRs had been underperforming the whole time while the running game was close to nonexistent. All these things were going on from the beginning of the season. Around the middle, Chris Cooley went down, Zorn lost his play calling duties, and Portis packed it all in. How is any QB expected to perform well--no, period--under these conditions? Campbell did a valiant job under such stress, and to say that his stats were padded during garbage time is an absolute lie. Throughout the season, Campbell was able to move the team down the field; and it was Zorn's play calling that kept the team out of the end zone. Any casual observer will notice that Jason started throwing TD passes after Zorn was no longer allowed to call the plays. It's really a good thing that Shanahan understands football much better than the average observer and will evaluate Jason based on reality, not some fan's misunderstanding about the QB position.


Posted by: postwell1 | January 18, 2010 1:02 PM | Report abuse

This season, Campbell set personal bests in completions (327), attempts (507), completion percentage (64.5), yards (3,618), touchdowns (20) and passer rating (86.4). He also threw a career-high15 interceptions.

Whats the O/U for the amount of times Reid says this throughout the offseason.

Posted by: ATLredskin | January 18, 2010 1:00 PM

He loves soup, so he'll say it even after he doesn't get a contract in DC.

Posted by: Realness1 | January 18, 2010 1:04 PM | Report abuse

Wow Colt Brennan threw 4 TDs against guys that didn't make rosters. Impressive.

He was supposed to be competing for the backup job, and ended up competing with Chase Daniel just for a roster spot.

Posted by: PortisPocketsStr8 | January 18, 2010 11:46 AM

And Campbell has been unable to throw preseason TDs (or reg season TDs) vs starter/scrubs/anybody. Tom Brady was lucky to make the NEP roster his first year, starting the season as the 4th QB behind a guy named Michael Bishop. That is not to compare CB, JC or any other qb the Redskins have with Brady. The point is that fighting for a backup job in preseason is a crap shoot. Jason Campbell has not shown the ability, in preseason or regular season, in 5 years to consistently sustain drives, score points, or make timely plays. With CB, all we have to look at is preseason, which admittedly is not much. Pre-starter years, JC played against the scrubs too and was still unable to put points on the board. CB has.

Posted by: amaranthpa | January 18, 2010 1:06 PM | Report abuse

If you want to play my game then you're off to a poor start. I said he has more INTs than TDs so it doesn't matter whose fault it is. I never specified.

Posted by: PAskinsfan17 | January 18, 2010 12:57 PM | Report abuse


So why did you share that "fact" with us?

What was your point in taking the time to post it here?

Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 1:06 PM | Report abuse

If you want to play my game then you're off to a poor start. I said he has more INTs than TDs so it doesn't matter whose fault it is. I never specified.

Posted by: PAskinsfan17 | January 18, 2010 12:57 PM | Report abuse


And furthermore, when I said that Grossman QBed a team to a Superbowl, did I say it was a one-man show? Did I say he was the only reason they went? Did I say no one else contributed? I also did not specify that.

Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 1:08 PM | Report abuse

How is any QB expected to perform well--no, period--under these conditions?

Posted by: postwell1 | January 18, 2010 1:02 PM

Ask Roethlisburger, Ben.

Posted by: amaranthpa | January 18, 2010 1:10 PM | Report abuse

Campbell did a valiant job under such stress, and to say that his stats were padded during garbage time is an absolute lie.

Posted by: postwell1 | January 18, 2010 1:02 PM | Report abuse

I'll agree with you that Zorn's idiotic playcalling and injuries gets the blame too. But let me ask you this: Don't you find is funny that in alot of games, JC couldn't do ANYTHING as far as getting the team to score, but when the game was out of hand, all of a sudden he's leading the team down the field for scores? Please, anybody watching the games could see that alot of his yds and TD's did come when the defense was in prevent. And when the team was down by a TD or less late in the 4th, did he ever make a play?

Posted by: ga8085 | January 18, 2010 1:11 PM | Report abuse

So why did you share that "fact" with us?

What was your point in taking the time to post it here?

Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 1:06 PM | Report abuse

It's still relevant that's why. He also has 30 TDs. Are all those his fault? Did somebody ever break a tackle and turn a bad throw into a long TD? The point behind that fact is that Grossman is a crappy QB. TD/INT ratio and completion percentage are a pretty good way to guage a QB. JC has the edge in both those categories. Grossman is a backup because of those numbers.

Posted by: PAskinsfan17 | January 18, 2010 1:11 PM | Report abuse

Rachel, very sorry. Confused you with Lisa, which is obviously not good either confusing the two prominent female posters. My bad. This is the post I was thinking of:
----------------------------------

This was yet another boneheaded move by our FO. I know most of you do not agree with me but I'm truly sad about this.

Suisham is a WONDERFUL guy - very involved in the community (was part of the children's holiday shopping trip last week AND the Thanksgiving event to name a few). He spent most of the summer here working by himself on his kicking. Absolutely CLASS ACT guy. He has only missed 3 field goals all season - and one of them was 50 something yards. Nick Folk in Dallas has missed 5 of his last 10 and still has a job.

With 4 flippin' weeks to go, this idiotic management decides to make the kicker the goat to "show accountability"????? Insane!

This after they tried to trade our QB away all offseason, brought in a new set of eyes, emasculated the coach RIGHT before MNF which made us the laughingstock of the sports world and now they cut a kicker to show accountability?????

In 4 weeks they are going to let our QB walk away when he is playing his best football and we will be stuck with what? A rookie QB - probably from Notre Dame - who they most likely will draft with our first round pick.

Posted by: Lisa_R | December 8, 2009 3:50 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: AdamCr | January 18, 2010 1:11 PM | Report abuse

How is any QB expected to perform well--no, period--under these conditions?

Posted by: postwell1 | January 18, 2010 1:02 PM

Ask Roethlisburger, Ben.

Posted by: amaranthpa | January 18, 2010 1:10 PM | Report abuse
----------------------------------

Ask him who he'd like on our roster to swap with his...

Posted by: mattsoundworld | January 18, 2010 1:15 PM | Report abuse

Confused you with Lisa, which is obviously not good either confusing the two prominent female posters.

Posted by: AdamCr | January 18, 2010 1:11 PM

For the record there are four confirmed female posters. Lisa, Rachel, Suzanne, & League-Source.

Posted by: Diesel44 | January 18, 2010 1:15 PM | Report abuse

So why did you share that "fact" with us?

What was your point in taking the time to post it here?

Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 1:06 PM | Report abuse

It's still relevant that's why. He also has 30 TDs. Are all those his fault? Did somebody ever break a tackle and turn a bad throw into a long TD? The point behind that fact is that Grossman is a crappy QB. TD/INT ratio and completion percentage are a pretty good way to guage a QB. JC has the edge in both those categories. Grossman is a backup because of those numbers.

Posted by: PAskinsfan17 | January 18, 2010 1:11 PM | Report abuse


And the experience of being the starting QB on a team that goes to the Superbowl is also relevant when you are gauging a QB...is it not?

Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 1:17 PM | Report abuse

For the record there are four confirmed female posters. Lisa, Rachel, Suzanne, & League-Source.

Posted by: Diesel44 | January 18, 2010 1:15 PM | Report abuse
---------
ok, cool. Guess I don't post enough to remember Suzanne and didn't know LS was a lady.

Posted by: AdamCr | January 18, 2010 1:21 PM | Report abuse

nd when the team was down by a TD or less late in the 4th, did he ever make a play?

Posted by: ga8085 | January 18, 2010 1:11 PM | Report abuse
-------------------------------

The entire team lacked 4th quarter mojo, to be fair.

Posted by: mattsoundworld | January 18, 2010 1:22 PM | Report abuse

The point behind that fact is that Grossman is a crappy QB. TD/INT ratio and completion percentage are a pretty good way to guage a QB. JC has the edge in both those categories. Grossman is a backup because of those numbers.

Posted by: PAskinsfan17 | January 18, 2010 1:11 PM | Report abuse


And once again.

The dimension of the discussion is "Who would be a better 1-year placeholder for this team while a young QB gets groomed?"

The conversation assumes that we are talking about QBs that we don't intend to use a franchise long-term starters.

So that fact that Grossman is a "backup" is a moot point. We already know that we are talking about "backup" quality QBs.

Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 1:23 PM | Report abuse

ufb...still debating JC...wow...


lol @Diesel44...

Posted by: Skins930 | January 18, 2010 1:23 PM | Report abuse

ok, cool. Guess I don't post enough to remember Suzanne and didn't know LS was a lady.

Posted by: AdamCr | January 18, 2010 1:21 PM | Report abuse

LS is a lady only in the streets kind sir.

Posted by: ga8085 | January 18, 2010 1:24 PM | Report abuse

Got to love the passion that is always displayed when the debate is about the starting QB. Too bad there wasn't a blog during the Sonny and Billy days, what a debate that was. People even broke out bumper stickers to support their guy. I am neither a JC lover or hater. He is currently an average QB who is not likely to put a team on his back and carry them to victory, but also won't cost a good team wins. Bottom line is only one opinion matters and he hasn't weighed in yet. However, some food for thought for you statistic guys. If you want to get a feel for JC's potential check the first 8 games of last year when the team was mostly clicking (blocking, running, good playcalling). That is the JC you probably will have if the rest of the team is functioning. I believe he played fairly well and had decent stats.

Posted by: lifelongfan | January 18, 2010 1:27 PM | Report abuse

Sources: Seahawks hire Gray

The Seattle Seahawks have hired former Washington Redskins defensive backs coach Jerry Gray as defensive backs coach, league sources told ESPN NFL Insider Adam Schefter on Monday.

Seattle has also decided to retain Gus Bradley as its defensive coordinator.

New Seahawks head coach Pete Carroll will have a heavy influence over the defense with his background, but Bradley and Gray will work closely together to try to make sure the Seahawks improve their defense next season.

The Seahawks had the league's 24th-ranked defense in 2009, allowing 356.4 yards per game, and tied for 25th with the Miami Dolphins in points allowed, with 24.4 points per game.

Gray, an assistant on Jim Zorn's staff in Washington, had interviewed for the Redskins' head coaching job.

Posted by: Skins930 | January 18, 2010 1:27 PM | Report abuse

And the experience of being the starting QB on a team that goes to the Superbowl is also relevant when you are gauging a QB...is it not?


Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 1:17 PM | Report abuse

Not when you had the best scoring defense and special teams during that run and you only had a QB rating of 75 and only completed 55% of your passes. He also threw 20 picks and lost 5 fumbles. If he had played even mediocre then yeah he would get some of the credit but he played terrible. Like I said, the Bears made that super bowl in spite of his poor play. Did you even watch that super bowl? He was terrible. He threw for 165 yards, 1 TD and 2 picks.

Posted by: PAskinsfan17 | January 18, 2010 1:28 PM | Report abuse

Ask him who he'd like on our roster to swap with his...

Posted by: mattsoundworld | January 18, 2010 1:15 PM

That was not the question. The question was how can anyone expect a QB to perform well under the types of circumstances described. BR had similar issues as JC to deal with and performed signicantly better.

Posted by: amaranthpa | January 18, 2010 1:31 PM | Report abuse

Campbell did a valiant job under such stress, and to say that his stats were padded during garbage time is an absolute lie.

Posted by: postwell1 | January 18, 2010 1:02 PM | Report abuse


No it's not.

I threw some stats and analysis from 4-5 games up on this blog a couple months back that broke down drive-by-drive when JC17 was accumulating his good numbers.

When the Skins were down by 10+ points, JC17 tended to accumulate better numbers than when the Skins were tied or down by one score; and several of those scenarios were end-of-game situations/drives when the Skins were down by multiple scores.

If you agree that defenses tend to play "softer" when they are protecting leads, especially in end-of-game scenarios when the outcome is already wrapped up, it certainly suggests that JC17 is at his best when defenses are laying back...we would call that stuff "garbage-time" stats.

Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 1:31 PM | Report abuse

The dimension of the discussion is "Who would be a better 1-year placeholder for this team while a young QB gets groomed?"

The conversation assumes that we are talking about QBs that we don't intend to use a franchise long-term starters.

So that fact that Grossman is a "backup" is a moot point. We already know that we are talking about "backup" quality QBs.

Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 1:23 PM | Report abuse

What the heck are you talking about a 1 year placeholder for? I'm talking about a 3 year starter ata least.

Posted by: PAskinsfan17 | January 18, 2010 1:31 PM | Report abuse

How many LB coaches do we need?

The summer of Shanahan
By Jeff Legwold

Former Broncos defensive coordinator Bob Slowik may have spent the better part of a year sharing office space with Mike Shanahan, reviewing game video from future NFC East opponents and others and he may have even taken a training camp tour with Shanahan that included stops with the Patriots and Steelers to look at 3-4 defenses.

But Slowik is not going to be Shanahan’s defensive coordinator in Washington, that title having already been given to Jim Haslett. Slowik will be on Shanahan’s new staff and look for him to be coaching outside linebackers.

That’s a bit of a surprise to many around the league, but it should be a little more proof to just how seriously Shanahan is taking his new job. And just how badly he wants to win.

http://blogs.denverpost.com/broncos/2010/01/17/the-summer-of-shanahan/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+dp-blogs-broncos+%28Denver+Post:+Sports:+Broncos:+Blog%29

Posted by: Skins930 | January 18, 2010 1:32 PM | Report abuse

So what exactly did JReid tell us?

Shanahan and JC17 had a conversation.

JC17 won't tell us what it was about.

That's some insider stuff.

Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 11:39 AM


Thinking the samething.

Also, can't wait to hear what any of these dudes has to say about Swiss Ham.....

Posted by: 4thFloor | January 18, 2010 1:33 PM | Report abuse

Whether or not we sign Campbell has a good bit to do with Campbell, doesn't it?

What if he doesnt want to be here? He already said he preferred road games to Home games(he doesnt get booed as much on the road).

People want to lock him up for 2-3 years? At what cost? He is going to want more money than he makes now, and probably will ask for more on the later years. So releasing him after a year will hit us financially.

So you want to have a potential backup making starter money, when you dont feel he is the long term answer at that position? Look at Portis and see how well that is looking for the team if we decide to dump him.

This is assuming that the Owners and the Union come to sort of agreement on the Labor terms.

Campbell will want a lot more money to stay here. So for all of the Campbell supporters who feel that a 2-3 year contract would be a good idea, are you sure?

If we tender him for the lowest possible amount and length of contract and someone grabs him from us and we get picks, awesome. If no one takes him, cool, run with him for a year.

I dont see the above paragraph happening with a low year deal, he is going to want to be PAID, and for more than a year.

To have Campbell back for another year while grooming takes place makes a ton of sense. To pay him like a top tier talent to stay for a short time however, does not.

Posted by: gatorskinz2000 | January 18, 2010 1:36 PM | Report abuse

Norv Turner vs. Wade Phillips in Pro Bowl
Posted by Gregg Rosenthal on January 18, 2010 12:20 PM ET
The official return of Wade Phillips to the Cowboys confirms one of the least consequential outcomes of divisional round weekend: The Pro Bowl coaches.

Phillips and his staff will face off against Norv Turner and the Chargers staff in a matchup of hard-luck coaches that many thought would square off a week later in Miami.

Traditionally, the conference championship game losing coaching staffs handled the Pro Bowl. But with the all star showcase moved to before the Super Bowl, the honor falls to the highest seeded coaching staff that loses in the divisional round.

Florio, MDS, and I will be on hand for the game. We'll take suggestions for questions to the coaching staffs in the comments.

Posted by: Skins930 | January 18, 2010 1:36 PM | Report abuse

JC stats first 8 games 2008 (6-2)

NYG (L) - 15-27-133-1-0
NO (W) - 24-36-321-1-0
AZ (W) - 23-31-204-2-0
DAL (W) - 20-31-231-2-0
PHI (W) - 17-30-194-1-0
STL (L) - 18-26-208-0-0
CLE (W) - 14-23-164-1-0
DET (W) - 23-28-328-1-0

Not HOF numbers but pretty decent especially 9 TDs and 0 Ints. And of course after this the wheels came off the bus and the whole team fell apart.

Posted by: lifelongfan | January 18, 2010 1:42 PM | Report abuse

And the experience of being the starting QB on a team that goes to the Superbowl is also relevant when you are gauging a QB...is it not?


Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 1:17 PM | Report abuse

Not when you had the best scoring defense and special teams during that run and you only had a QB rating of 75 and only completed 55% of your passes. He also threw 20 picks and lost 5 fumbles. If he had played even mediocre then yeah he would get some of the credit but he played terrible. Like I said, the Bears made that super bowl in spite of his poor play. Did you even watch that super bowl? He was terrible. He threw for 165 yards, 1 TD and 2 picks.

Posted by: PAskinsfan17 | January 18, 2010 1:28 PM | Report abuse


But PA, you are the one who beats the drum of "football is a team sport and you can't pin success/failure on one guy".

And yet you want to completely rationalize away the fact that Rex Grossman was the starting QB for a team that went to the Superbowl.

You don't get it both ways.

You want to use a career TD/INT ratio to say something about the QB. It's a poor ratio and so it works with your low opinion of him, but that TD/INT ratio is contingent on other factors - line play, WRs, etc.

On the other hand you take the fact that he started all season for a SUperbowl-contending team and dismiss that as a non-factor...why? Because other people contributed to that success.

So when the "fact" indicates that Rex Grossman isn't very good it counts against him.

But when the "fact" indicates that REx Has had some success as a QB it doesn't count.

You don't get it both ways.

Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 1:44 PM | Report abuse

Ask him who he'd like on our roster to swap with his...

Posted by: mattsoundworld | January 18, 2010 1:15 PM

That was not the question. The question was how can anyone expect a QB to perform well under the types of circumstances described. BR had similar issues as JC to deal with and performed signicantly better.

Posted by: amaranthpa | January 18, 2010 1:31 PM | Report abuse
-------------------------------------

The only thing they have in common is a high sack number, and that stems more from BRs style than the line dropping blitzers in his lap all game. You go position by position, the Steelers have a better team than the Skins have fielded in any of the last 4 years.

Posted by: mattsoundworld | January 18, 2010 1:45 PM | Report abuse

What the heck are you talking about a 1 year placeholder for? I'm talking about a 3 year starter ata least.

Posted by: PAskinsfan17 | January 18, 2010 1:31 PM | Report abuse


Then you weren't following the thread of the discussion from the beginning.

Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 1:45 PM | Report abuse

So when the "fact" indicates that Rex Grossman isn't very good it counts against him.

But when the "fact" indicates that REx Has had some success as a QB it doesn't count.

You don't get it both ways.

Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 1:44 PM | Report abuse

I do get it both ways because there is no fact that says Grossman was ever good.

Posted by: PAskinsfan17 | January 18, 2010 1:48 PM | Report abuse

JC discussion

Posted by: Diesel44 | January 18, 2010 1:48 PM | Report abuse

LMAO as people debate who is worse, Grossman or Campbell... That's like asking who is uglier: Janet Reno or Eleanor Roosevelt.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 1:49 PM | Report abuse

JC discussion

Posted by: Diesel44 | January 18, 2010 1:49 PM | Report abuse

To have Campbell back for another year while grooming takes place makes a ton of sense. To pay him like a top tier talent to stay for a short time however, does not.


Posted by: gatorskinz2000 | January 18, 2010 1:36 PM | Report abuse


Why would that make a "ton" of sense when the coaching staff would have to teach JC17 an entirely new offense from scratch only to replace him a year later?

Wouldn't it make a "ton" more sense to bring in a backup-type vet who already knows the Shanny offense (Carr, Grossman, Ramsey) to play for a year, and then he can become backupQB/tutor for the new guy?

Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 1:50 PM | Report abuse

Beep Beep everyone

Posted by: RedskinRay1 | January 18, 2010 1:51 PM | Report abuse

Gibbs was asked about Campbell before the start of last season - he said something like, "At some point your QB is gonna have to drive you down the field during a hailstorm with no time outs left..." Gibbs didn't say whether he felt that Campbell was capable of doing this. I think after 5 years if you don't know - it means you do know. Campbell would be the perfect backup and should be signed for that role.

Posted by: coparker5 | January 18, 2010 1:51 PM | Report abuse

Not elite but the Dolphins were 1-15 got Chad Pennington and won the AFC east. The Falcons I believe were 5-11 drafted Matt Ryan and won the NFC south.. so things can turn around fast with the right QB leading the team...


Posted by: sovine08 | January 18, 2010 11:02 AM | Report abuse
Falcons had just spent 2 years rebuilding their OL when they drafted Ryan. That argument doesn't hold water.

I do believe that Skins can be competitive in 2010, if they improve OL and running game. They have already traded in a poorly designed offense plan for Shanny's. With good OL, they will be competitive.

Posted by: frediefritz | January 18, 2010 1:52 PM | Report abuse

JUST WHAT THE REDSKINS NEED A NO NONSENSE TYPE OF COACH. WE NEEDED THIS SHAKE-UP FOR THE GUYS WHO THOUGHT THEY HAD A GUARANTEED STARTING POSISTION. WHY WASNT PORTIS PRACTICING BECAUSE HE KNEW HE HAD A STARTING JOB PRACTICE OR NOT. NOW THE DEPTH CHART IS EMPTY. THERE ARE NO COACHES PETS OR FAVORITES SO WHOEVER DESREVES THE SPOT WILL PLAY ALL ACROSS THE BOARD AND WHOEVER CANT CUT MUST HIT THE ROAD

Posted by: cpt55back | January 18, 2010 1:52 PM | Report abuse

If Shanahan is taking the team in a whole new direction from what Zorn had, then it makes NO SENSE to offer Campbell a 1-year deal.

If you're Shanny, you either want him as the starter in your long-term plans, or you don't.

If you do, you sign him to a lengthy deal; if you don't, you cut him loose.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 18, 2010 1:54 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 1:44 PM | Report abuse

I do get it both ways because there is no fact that says Grossman was ever good.

Posted by: PAskinsfan17 | January 18, 2010 1:48 PM | Report abuse


Of course not.

Because in the PA universe, you rationalize those facts away with a predictable canned "you can't attribute any of that success to him because other people were good" response.


You know what PA?

I'm a perfect parent.

When my kids are good it's a reflection of me.

Of course when my kids misbehave it's a reflection of their mother.

And by that little trickery of logic, there are absolutely no facts to suggest that I'm anything less than a perfect parent.

Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 1:56 PM | Report abuse

And by that little trickery of logic, there are absolutely no facts to suggest that I'm anything less than a perfect parent.

Posted by: p1funk | January 18, 2010 1:56 PM | Report abuse


Grossman had a crappier competion percentage, crappier QB rating, crappier TD/INT ratio, and fumbles more than JC but if you think that's a trickery in logic then I could see why you're having such a hard time with this. Just don't tilt your head back before you swallow your drool. I wouldn't want you to drown.

Posted by: PAskinsfan17 | January 18, 2010 2:02 PM | Report abuse

There is no QB in the draft, or in free agency, that is better than Jason Campbell. Claussen is a waste of a pick, as would be Bradford, and even Colt McCoy all will be too fragile for the NFL and none of them warrant an early round pick - certainly not the #4 pick. Tebow bugs me but I'd honestly have to say I'd take him over any of those other guys. If you take a QB, it may as well be a sleeper in round 6 because you still have Colt Brennan and Andre Woodson in the background and I guarantee Shanahan will give them both a look. Take Okung and move forward.

Posted by: AsstGM | January 18, 2010 2:23 PM | Report abuse

All the the people writing about how we should get rid of JC, clearly have never, either played organized football or have no clear concept of the unfortunate predicament JC has been in, since his arrival in Washington.

To achieve personal bests statistically in a number of categories, with a dismantled OL, speaks volumes about his ability.

Playing behind a healthy OL, how well did Rivers or Romo look yesterday, when faced with continuous pressure? Also, didn't both quaterbacks make bad throws, resulting in untimely interceptions? What about the numerous fumbles? These are the same things JC was accused of with only 2 starting O linemen.

Posted by: Apache218 | January 18, 2010 2:57 PM | Report abuse

JC stats are no different from the so called elite qbs in the nfl. What makes JC exceptional is that he has to deal with all the bs, a half of an o-line, an idiot coach, no running game, and not so bright fans. JC is the wrong color. if JC was white,he would be considered great!!!!! Colt is a joke, Flacco can't deliver can't move, if Sanches has to throw over 20 passes a game his true value will show, The great Phillip Rivers has a candy arm, JC stats were better all across the board then Carson Palmers,Tom Brady showed you what he can do under pressure Nothing !!!!!!! JC had to compete under pressure all year long. and still shined like a light it has to be his skin tone!

Posted by: gwest1 | January 18, 2010 3:09 PM | Report abuse

No gwest1 - if Campbell were white he'd be Elvis Grabic (sp?). Campbell would never be considered a great QB no matter his skin color.

Posted by: coparker5 | January 18, 2010 4:09 PM | Report abuse

JC put up his best numbers in a abominal situation.... what do we have in the cupboard ???? u pick up a QB with 4th in the draft... they will not be a hit the first year, guarantee... the same people screaming that JC is not good and we should get rid of him will be the same people whining why we wasted a pick on a rookie QB then lived and died with him suffering! The last time I checked 20-24 is not bad kicking... his problem, his misses were crucial. Again, in a bad season, you look for the easiest to pick on, well heck, lets pick on a kicker, he's worthless and expendable... and thats exactly what they did. If this new kid starts off the year bad, do you want his head too? The problem with Redskin fans is that you expect perfection and when something goes wrong, yoru lookingfor someone to blame. if you take your heart out of it (whether your a skins fan or not) and turn on your football brain on, yo uwould know what the issue is. the reason JC had a 7yrd ave per completion is he had 1.5 seconds to throw the ball. you cant really throw deep with 1.5 seconds before getting hit! Reason why he got sacked was they used 10 different starting line ups. Satistically, he fared better than Carson Palmer and a few other notable QB's that everyone would classify as better than JC.... he did not have a running game so it was open season on him on almost every play.... What we need is a solid, strong line and a explosive running attack. You have that, you spread the field and make the Defense play straight up and nopt give them more chances to come at you. I agree, you give Campbell one year and then get yourself a QB to groom, if JC is not your man. If we go in blind with an unexperienced QB, we wont win more the 5-6 games next year.

Posted by: rvanags | January 18, 2010 4:25 PM | Report abuse

Shanahan has a lot more to worry about than qb. Jc is acceptable and deserves a shot behind a decent o line. The o line has to be priority #1 followed by running back and the secondary. Jc has shown that despite a slow release he has learned how to check down and not stare down receivers. Any qb that shows improvement year after year in spite of tremendous adversity has earned the benefit of the doubt in my book. I certainly don't want to see a rookie back there or we're looking at 4 more years of obscurity. This ain't the afc west.

Posted by: papple | January 18, 2010 4:57 PM | Report abuse

: tkoho how is campbell terrible please explain to me. because no oline , no run game , no consistent weapons. any qb in the nfl could not succeed with how team was put together.

You can say doesnt read thing right not quick in read or is a leader. can even bring up his win/loss record which means nothing cause of what he has to deal with.

JC beginning of the year pressed because he thought he had to do everything on his own because kelly thomas davis werent producing and the oline and running game where not a factor . but when he had time he made plays and runs. Hard to judge a qb when zorn and offense coach had to reel back the playbook and do more slants and screens because the oline wasnt givening campbell enough time to make reads because pocket broke and he scrambled>

look at the jets this year sanchez had a terrible year statisically and look at him now he has a solid run game, good pass protection and the number 1 defense give him great field position .

Campbell is not a career back in this league he could start for any of the bottom 20 teams in this league given him time and Shanahan will make him better because he wants to build around him.

How do we know Campbell not the franchise QB we all want . its unfair to Judge Campbell on how not successful he has been just because team has not been successful. Campbell has not been put in a successful situations here from beginning. Cant count rookie start in his 3rd year and last year and this with a gm and owner of delusion thinking they put together a playoff team when it wasnt.

Posted by: cjdwolfpack | January 18, 2010 5:30 PM | Report abuse

No gwest1 - if Campbell were white he'd be Elvis Grabic (sp?). Campbell would never be considered a great QB no matter his skin color.

Ithink you ment Elvis GrbAc, check out his stats FROM 2000
Grbac signed with the Kansas City Chiefs to be their starting quarterback. His best season statistically came in 2000 when he passed for 4,169 yards and 28 touchdowns with a passer rating of 89.9 en route to the Pro Bowl.

I'll take ELVIS and JC over Colt, Flaccoo, Romo, Rivers,Palmer,Cutler ,Sanches,and Collins. Whatta know Elvis is alive!!!!!!!

Posted by: gwest1 | January 18, 2010 6:12 PM | Report abuse

Seven yards per attempt. That is awful. With all of the holes on the team, the Redskins have no choice but to offer Campbell a one year deal, but he is a terrible QB and as soon as he leaves Washington he'll go on to a life of obscurity as a career backup like Todd Collins.

Posted by: tkoho | January 18, 2010 7:45 AM
tkoho..

I think your clueless about Campbell he has all the skills to be a good QB he just needs a O-line.. If you have protection and you can go thru your progressions you will complete passes for more then 7 yards. With no protection you have no progressions and forced into bad situations dump offs etc.. and interceptions.. I JUST WISH THAT PEOPLE WHO MAKE COMMENTS REALLY HAVE KNOWLEDGE OF THE GAME INSTEAD OF BEING A MONDAY MORNING QB..

Posted by: NYSkinFAN | January 18, 2010 6:21 PM | Report abuse

gwest1 - you're a bonehead. I've said this before; JC threw a Hail Mary out of bounds. Enough said...he just doesn't have the acuracy that is necessary to win multiple games. Heck, he can't even hit an easy slant half the time. We'll keep JC one more year but he'll probably get beat in camp by Brennan, as crazy as that sounds. Colt just fits Shanny's style better. We'll get Okung and hope for a franchise QB next year. Maybe Brady will bail on NE by then...hmmmmm

Posted by: SoCalSkinsFan | January 18, 2010 7:20 PM | Report abuse

Hmmm...I seem to recall a certain few media types claiming Campbell wouldn't even want to be here next year after what the team did to him this past year. After reading the above comments from Campbell, I think it's pretty obvious they were WRONG

Posted by: Barno1 | January 18, 2010 7:34 PM | Report abuse

OK redskin fans, who exactly is going to replace Campbell? I do not think that Peyton Manning is available. As to drafting a quarterback, how long would he last with the offensive line being what it is? As to Sanchez, the Jets do a few things the skins do not do like block and tackle. They run the ball, play defense and ask Sanchez to throw the ball 15 times per game. Their defense does not force Sanchez to have to play catchup every game. Campbell throws the ball 15 times in a quarter as the offensive line does not open holes for a running game to work. Are skin fans willing to wait 3 or 4 years for a new QB and offensive line to gel? With Campbell you have a tough kid who can take a hit. PS you do not get an offensive line to gel in one year, it takes time. Campbell can take the hits without quitting. He can buy the time needed for your new coach to put together the personnel they need to be successful. Some of you guys are worse than Danny boy, you think that it is Super Bowl time next year.

Posted by: gvelanis | January 18, 2010 8:02 PM | Report abuse

The best thing in the Vikes-Cowpies game? Nope not Suisham as the Redskins revenge . It was the Vikes going "Hi Tony - welcome to Jason's world". ...and Tony didn't handle it nearly as well as Jason, so practice, Tony, practice, practice, ... limp, you wimp!

Posted by: fr3dmars | January 18, 2010 11:43 PM | Report abuse

Let's see, what do we need more than a new QB? Hmm - quality RB, make that 2. Oh yeah, strength AND depth for the OL, oops almost forgot, competent corners, and, I hate to say this, but Fletcher can't last forever - a quality understudy MLB/defensive play-caller.

Wonder what we can get for Portis, MEAngelo and Albert? What? There was a stupidity bubble in NFL salaries too? Dang!

Posted by: fr3dmars | January 18, 2010 11:50 PM | Report abuse

Seven yards per attempt. That is awful. With all of the holes on the team, the Redskins have no choice but to offer Campbell a one year deal, but he is a terrible QB and as soon as he leaves Washington he'll go on to a life of obscurity as a career backup like Todd Collins.

Posted by: tkoho | January 18, 2010 7:45 AM

What the heck do you expect when the pass protection is so bad your coach takes deep drop pass plays COMPLETELY out of the game plan? Hard to hit those long passes when you have to throw the ball in 3 seconds or less.

Posted by: kenboy1 | January 19, 2010 12:06 AM | Report abuse

If CLAUSEN, SUH, or OKUNG are at #4, stand pat and pick.

Posted by: glawrence007 | January 18, 2010 7:44 AM
I know defense is the last of our concerns, but if Berry were there, I'd consider him also.

Posted by: kenboy1 | January 19, 2010 12:08 AM | Report abuse

OMG!!!Another year of Campbell say it isn't so . We should have gotten Mark Sanchez, Mark's been in the league 1yr and he's already better than this bozo we have.

Posted by: davidgrodriguez1 | January 18, 2010 8:26 AM
Try giving this "Bozo" the offensive line and running game Sanchez has and see how he does.

Posted by: kenboy1 | January 19, 2010 12:09 AM | Report abuse

I'll take a QB w/ a 68 rating that wins 65% of his starts for DC over a QB w/ an 86 rating that wins 35% of his starts because I want the team to win.

HTTR

Posted by: Realness1 | January 18, 2010 10:59 AM

So, I guess you would take Brad Johnson, Mark Rypien, and that HOF QB Trent Dilfer over Dan Marino, because they won superbowls, and Dan did not. Think it may have been that Dan was actually saddled with defenses better named the "killer nats" instead of the killer bees"? Maybe even the best QB's in football cannot make up for significant deficiences in other areas of the team. Did any of you see how Brady, Warner, and Romo, the first two being possible HOF's one day, really had TERRIBLE games as they were getting their butts knocked all over the place? Paraphrasing that sage philosopher Charlie Brown, "Kinda makes ya wanna give JC a little more respect, doesn't it"?

Posted by: kenboy1 | January 19, 2010 12:52 AM | Report abuse

Concentrate both through the draft and free agency to get offensive lineman. As evident by alot of the playoff games, when the QB doesn't have protection you are more likely to lose.

JC was statistically good considering his line and poor play calling. Now what he needs to do is to become a leader and step it up a notch. What I've seen from him is improvement and not digression. So on that alone will I welcome him back as a the starting QB. Until he becomes worse than he was the previous season, will I see the need for the Skins to draft a QB in the high rounds...but yeah, you still have to have somebody ready to go just in case.

Posted by: impact32 | January 19, 2010 2:00 AM | Report abuse

anyone who bashes campbell must've never played a down at the qb position in their life. it's ok to have an opinion if you have the knowledge to back up your reasoning. unfortunately, people who choose to compare campbell to the likes of sanchez forget the most crucial elements. the jets have more game changing plays on defense than the redskins. all you need to do is go to nfl.com and look at how many defensive td's the jets have vs the redskins (who by the way didn't have any turnovers for a td). also the jets have a running game to take pressure off the qb's back. when looking at how the jets won on sunday, it wasn't so much sanchez that beat the chargers as it was their defense shutting down sd's offense. sanchez only had 100 passing yds and 1 td. their running back broke for a 53 yd running score. how many long td runs have the skins had? don't hate w/ ignorance because that would put you in the same category as a cowboy fan. they win 1 fuqqin game and the fans are yelling "superbowl champs baby!!!!" look at the cowboys now. the offensive line dictates everything the offense does in general. even if they provided campbell w/ decent protection, they couldn't run block for shyt! and if we can't run, all we can do is pass. and if all we can do is pass, you can best believe someone in the o line will falter...(heyer is a prime example). also sovine, how dumb can you be because when the dolphins made the turn around, it wasn't because of pennington...parcells lifted that team. the wildcat offense lifted that team (so much so that it's been implemented in madden 2010). ronnie brown and ricky williams had more to do w/ the success for the dolphins than pennington ever did. as for the falcons, matt ryan certainly didn't make them better. having michael turner made the team better. having a coach w/ a solid run game philosophy made the team better. when you think about it, portis led the league in rushing for the first half of the season only to end the season in 4th place. guess who lead the league in rushing? michael turner. i'm not just a redskins fan...i'm a football fan. before you throw stupidity out in the open, know your football stats. if you need help, ask the kid sitting next to you on the short yellow bus.

Posted by: charronegro1971 | January 19, 2010 2:56 AM | Report abuse

btw, my reference to portis and turner is from the 2008 season

Posted by: charronegro1971 | January 19, 2010 2:59 AM | Report abuse

anyone who bashes campbell must've never played a down at the qb position in their life.
Posted by: charronegro1971
______
Sonny Jurgensen bashed Campbell.. and he played a little QB in his life. He said the Skins would have been better with Collins at QB... So why don't you tell us all the QB experience you had to contradict him...

Posted by: sovine08 | January 19, 2010 9:34 AM | Report abuse

as for the falcons, matt ryan certainly didn't make them better.
Posted by: charronegro1971
____
Here's a perfect example of why people shouldn't drink before they post...

Posted by: sovine08 | January 19, 2010 9:40 AM | Report abuse

Why is there such hostility to replacing Campbell? With his fumbling and late game interceptions, he has lost more games for us than he has won (Giants/Eagles just this year). He has done absolutely nothing in his five years for this team.

We know what he can do, and it isn't that impressive. Next year is a lost year because even his supporters know that he can't grasp a new system quickly. So why not try someone else? We know he will suck, so even if the new guy does too it's a wash. There is only upside in giving someone else a chance.

Posted by: ggt546 | January 19, 2010 9:53 AM | Report abuse

OK redskin fans, who exactly is going to replace Campbell? Posted by: gvelanis
______
We don't have to go far.. for a year Collins could fill in as he has had more success than Campbell the last time they both played. Colt could start now.. yes he is an unknown.. but ALL QB's start as an unknown.. we'll never know until we play him how good he is. Campbell we do know.. he played almost every snap the last 2 years and has been unsuccessful. And yeah all you Campbell lovers want to blame the OL or Zorn.. But Campbell lost to or barely beat the worse teams in the league.. they had no pass rush and he still couldn't win. Campbell's contract is now up.. it would be foolish to sign him to a new one.. in which he would demand starters QB pay and probably 3 years if even his biggest supporters call him mediocre. Outside the team how about Chad Pennington or David Carr as possible short term answers.. Yes the Skins will draft a QB and he doesn't have to be in the first round. You think it's either OL or QB.. no it's BOTH.. improve the OL AND the QB.

Posted by: sovine08 | January 19, 2010 9:57 AM | Report abuse

i laugh at people who believe Collins is better then Campbell. Listen Collins lovers yea he had a string of 4 straight wins got us to the playoffs but there where more factors then just Collins!! We dont know if Campbell was still healthy that year if Campbell would have lead them. but for alot of people to base it on just that year are crazy . COllins would have not lasted 4 games behind the oline. he pnly played as a starting qb for 3 years .

Look back last year give u this 6-2 Campbell because portis was rushing well, the oline was given Campbell time to hit his guys> Campbell had 8 td to 0 int things feel apart because Portis got banged up and oline broke down. to start that year 6-2 is something to look at because Campbell can win in this league and Shanahan will be a big difference

Posted by: cjdwolfpack | January 19, 2010 11:42 AM | Report abuse

If I have to see JC as our QB for one more year I think I may be sick!! Campbell is not and never will be a true starting NFL QB. If you think otherwise, you are either are biased and support him because you have something in common with him or you simply don't know football. For all of you who talk about his numbers, you do realize that a big portion of his stats were accomplished at the end of games...garbage yards because the other team was ahead and knew they were going to win but just had to waste some time. Seriously, did any of you watch the immediate impact Collins had the moment he came into the game, he would accomplish more in minutes time than JC had done all game. The OL wasn't very good but what many of you fail to understand is that a good QB makes his OL, WR's, RB's, defense...makes everyone look better. The OL doesn't have to block as long because the QB is making the proper pre-snap reads, he's getting rid of the ball on his 3rd or 5th step, he looks past the rush and doesn't worry about getting hit, he burns teams that blitz against him and when he decides to throw it doesn't take him a long time throw the ball...he has a quick and accurate release. I think the two longest passes (ball traveling in the air) came from Collins. Btw, putting up average numbers against the Chargers back ups and still losing the game is not very impressive to me. I hope Shanahan will watch the film and see all of the mistakes and WR's JC missed over and over again so we can finally move on.

Posted by: rj3743 | January 19, 2010 11:53 AM | Report abuse

Who cares what jason clownble thinks, he's as good as gone in the offseason.

Posted by: dc1020008 | January 19, 2010 2:08 PM | Report abuse

Unless Jake Locker is in this year's draft, there isn't a good enough q to waste an early pick on.
1. Fix O-line
2. Get a stud running back
3. Keep Campbell on for another year or two.

Posted by: gbenzo | January 19, 2010 3:25 PM | Report abuse

um a good oline makes a qb not the other way around rj3743 thats funny though !!! u realize everytime a QB or RB has a successful season they praise there oline> Championship are built on dline and oline you have both and everything else works around it. Collins has 4 snaps and everyone fall in love lol Did Campbell have garbage yards against Saints no watch the games and learn that Campbell was either on his ass after the play or sacked> get things right , watch and football game put aside ur hatred and dislike for Campbell and realize Not Collins, Not a draft pick would have done anything last year. Campbell coming back get over it !!!

Posted by: cjdwolfpack | January 19, 2010 3:51 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, lets talk a little Sonny Jurgensen. His first year starting at QB, he was 10-4, then, in consequent years, 3-9-1, 2-6-1, 6-8, 6-7, 7-7, 5-6-3, and 4-8. Taking away that obvious first year fluke, that's a winning percentage of roughly 39%. And he had the likes of Charley Taylor, Bobby Mitchell, and Jerry Smith, plus a couple of all pro O linemen. What, the Skins had no D you say? But he lost the games! Isn't that the bottom line? So what if the D allowed 40 points, where was the closing drive to score 41? What a looser. How the heck did he ever make it to the HOF? What were the Skins thinking when they traded that gunslinger Norm Snead to Philly to get him? They must have been nuts! Obviously I am being sarcastic in a huge way, but I think you get my point re: JC, and, no, I'm not in any way comparing JC with Sonny, but please stop throwing those won loss records around like they are holy scripture, they mean little when a QB is swimming around in a sea of chaos and incompetency.

Posted by: kenboy1 | January 19, 2010 4:12 PM | Report abuse

Hey IF Campbell was scoring 40 points like Sonny was even if he was losing no one would be complaining.. but I'm suppose to think he is something special because he can complete a 4 yard pass. And the Redskins have been one of the lowest scoring teams during his time also. I truly wished Zorn had let Collins play a couple of games just to show it wasn't just the OL that was the problem.. Campbell is not a good QB period.. I can't wait till he is on some other team next year and he is still losing.. of course the blame everyone but Campbell crowd will just blame someone other than JC on that team to... Biggest problem is finding a team stupid enough to want Campbell.. His supporters maybe blind but people in the NFL can tell a sub par QB when they see one.. Remember when Cutler last year came out and said he was looking else where.. teams came out all over the place to try and get him.. Campbell is available but does anyone hear any team interested in him??? I don't.. Is there a better sign than that Campbell is overrated???

Posted by: sovine08 | January 19, 2010 5:12 PM | Report abuse

Hey IF Campbell was scoring 40 points like Sonny was even if he was losing no one would be complaining.. but I'm suppose to think he is something special because he can complete a 4 yard pass. And the Redskins have been one of the lowest scoring teams during his time also. I truly wished Zorn had let Collins play a couple of games just to show it wasn't just the OL that was the problem.. Campbell is not a good QB period.. I can't wait till he is on some other team next year and he is still losing.. of course the blame everyone but Campbell crowd will just blame someone other than JC on that team to... Biggest problem is finding a team stupid enough to want Campbell.. His supporters maybe blind but people in the NFL can tell a sub par QB when they see one.. Remember when Cutler last year came out and said he was looking else where.. teams came out all over the place to try and get him.. Campbell is available but does anyone hear any team interested in him??? I don't.. Is there a better sign than that Campbell is overrated???

Posted by: sovine08 | January 19, 2010 5:12 PM

Oh, so now its stat time again. When JC supporters give stats to support him, JC haters say stats don't matter, its only winning. When you point out that a HOF beloved Skins QB had terrific stats but a not so great winning record, stats matter again. Like I said, give JC Bobby Mitchell, Charley Taylor, Jerry Smith, and a 2010 equivelant of Len Hauss, and see how he does.

Posted by: kenboy1 | January 19, 2010 9:55 PM | Report abuse

sovine, you prove to us all that you're a fuqqin idiot but that's nothing new. when the redskins lost, it wasn't solely on campbell's shoulders. you can't even name one game in which the redskins won that our defense wasn't also responsible for the loss. name just one from this past season and i'll prove you wrong. you know nothing about football and when you open your mouth, sheer stupidity comes out. your comment about other teams in the nfl knowing sub par qb's says it all. teams in the nfl see a qb that does makes mistakes but more importantly sees an o line that can't block for the rb's or their qb. they see receivers that can't shed the cb, they see portis not practicing w/ the o line to build cohesion, they see haynesworth hurt every other play, they see rogers and landry biting on double moves, they see a talented orakpo not on the line of scrimmage as a de where he should be, they saw a former gm that refused to draft protection for the qb and undermine the hc, they saw a team owner sue a geriatric ticket holder and ban signs in the stadium and if they read your post, they's see a moron who doesn't know shyt about basic football. i've got more football knowledge in my wrinkled left nut than you have in your whole body. go ahead and reply because i'll be more than happy to put your silly a-s-s in your proper place.

Posted by: charronegro1971 | January 20, 2010 3:39 AM | Report abuse

you can't even name one game in which the redskins won that our defense wasn't also responsible for the loss.
Posted by: charronegro1971
_____
WHAT?? Name a game the Redskins won but the defense lost???? This is why I have to go back and say people shouldn't drink when they post...

Posted by: sovine08 | January 20, 2010 10:53 AM | Report abuse

Oh, so now its stat time again. When JC supporters give stats to support him, JC haters say stats don't matter, its only winning.
Posted by: kenboy1
____
Hey you were the one who said "please stop throwing those won loss records around like they are holy scripture" so I did and now your complaining about that. Look Campbell is no Jurgensen no matter who the WR's are. That's a FACT. Second if your saying put a HOF OL and HOF WR's around Campbell and he will be good.. I say OF COURSE.. but do that and ANYONE would be good.. we could have kept Pat Ramsey you don't think he would be good??? Make Collins the starter you don't think he would be good with those kind of players around him??? In fact name a QB in the NFL who wouldn't be good surrounded by HOF's??? The point is yes a better 10 guys around the QB makes him better BUT a good QB makes the 10 players around him better to. He's the leader!!! The Vikes had pretty much the same team last year but one player Favre made the difference. The Saints had a avgerage QB in Brooks for years.. but getting Brees MADE the difference.. Look go ahead love Campbell.. but he will never be that good of a QB. And since the other teams are not going to hand the Skins their HOF players to help him.. the Skins need to get better at the QB position itself... that means replacing Campbell...

Posted by: sovine08 | January 20, 2010 11:09 AM | Report abuse

just like i thought, sovine....you talk alot of bullshyt but in the end, you can't back it up. from the armchair it's easy to assume you know what you're talking about but in the end, you prove only to dumber than the rest. do yourself a favor and stop while you're ahead.

Posted by: charronegro1971 | January 21, 2010 1:12 PM | Report abuse

sovine, for all the bullshyt you talk, you can't even substantiate what you say. ranting about campbell w/o talking about the deficiencies of other players on the team only means you're basing your dislike on sheer ignorance. when you reply back to me, you'll only be exposed for the idiot you truly are. face it...you don't know football. if you did then you'd be able to break down every play and see how each player impacts the offensive and defensive side of the ball.

Posted by: charronegro1971 | January 21, 2010 1:20 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company