The Quarterback of the Future, Today
by John Morgan on Sep 2, 2009 4:43 PM PDT
107 comments
Jason Campbell is playing in the final year of his rookie contract. The Washington Redskins have done everything short of cutting him. They paid big to trade up for him in 2005, trading a first, third and fourth round pick to Denver to move back into the first round. Washington has expressed their buyer's remorse with benchings and rumors. Daniel Snyder made no bones about his interest in Jay Cutler and Mark Sanchez. He missed out, and now Campbell is the Redskins starter by default.
He won't be next year. If Campbell plays poorly or only average to good, Washington will not re-sign him. If he plays well, the perennially cash-strapped but prodigal Redkins will not be able to sign him. He could just say no. Franchising Campbell would cost $15 million or more. Snyder could advantage the uncapped year and throw money at the situation, as he's wont to do, but even that seems like grasping at straws. Snyder has waged an ongoing campaign to disarm and discredit Campbell, and pitted the two in a way that doesn't speak of a long-term contract.
Do you care? Should you care? For almost two years, since around the time Campbell was benched for Todd Collins - Campbell had been injured and Collins had the hot hand - I have been convinced Tim Ruskell would sign Campbell. He imported half of Auburn's 2004 roster and its two best receivers. He is known for his conservative drafting and aversion to spending high picks on quarterbacks. He was part of Buccaneers organization that signed 33-year old retread Brad Johnson in 2003 and watched Johnson lead Tampa to a Super Bowl victory in 2004. And Tim Ruskell is known for finding undervalued assets.
Campbell is not a great quarterback. His three years starting have been remarkably similar. He had 5.5 A/NYA in 2006, 5.3 in 2007, 5.5 in 2008 and 5.4 for his career. Skin lines have been adequate to bad, as has their skill position players, and as ever, in Washington there are the starters and behind them, the fastest dude at the College Park Home Depot. Or fattest, if we're talking defensive line.
When Washington traded up to draft him in 2005, it was the Darius Heyward-Bay move of that draft. Analysts were split between thinking they overpaid and wondering how long until Campbell was cut. Campbell has won supporters and lost them. He has gained critics and rewarded them. He shares apologist with Alex Smith and that's never good. The Lewin Projection System loved him and Football Outsiders with it. Pro Football Reference ranked him 13th in future quarterback value and put him in the "You like what you've got" tier. Brian Burke theorized Campbell was hurt by Jim Zorn's overly conservative play calling and that Campbell would benefit from throwing more interceptions. That is, more interceptions in the effort to convert more first downs.
Me? Well I don't know. I haven't studied Campbell enough to guess at his potential. I've always been impressed with him, but however you spin it, his career so far has been very mediocre. Deferring to the power of draft position: Campbell was a late first round pick in a weak quarterback class, and a late first round pick many thought should have been a second round pick or later. His career path for that kind of pick has been ordinary.
The Seahawks could be clearing payroll this offseason. The future of Walter Jones and Matt Hasselbeck is to be decided, but neither is long for Seattle. If the Seahawks go another way, if Tim Ruskell still has the say, then Jason Campbell could be Seattle's quarterback of the future. A future, fans can watch today.
0 recs |
107 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Campbell has shown a lot of character
by just sticking with the team and not demanding a trade. The poor kid has been treated like absolute garbage by the management of the Redskins. I hope he gets to a different team next year and does amazing things.
It's Great to be a Florida Gator!
The only thing I ever liked about Campbell was his size.
Never really was impressed by him as a passer. Sure, Clinton Portis was on a tear for a stretch, but come on, he threw for as many TDs as Shaun Hill in nearly double the games.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
I think that speaks to Zorn's conservative play calling
Campbell attempted the 10th most passes (completing 62% of his passes) and he had a 1.2% Int rate, That tied him with Seneca of all people but was far and away lower than most quarterbacks. The 13 touchdowns just don’t really jive with how the rest of his numbers have been trending.
I’ll admit to having a soft spot with no good reason for Jason Campbell but he seems like he could be an excellent buy low kind of guy.
I also have a huge soft spot for Campbell, and think he'd be a FA steal.
I also think Tarvaris Jackson is going to make Minny sorry for giving up on him so quickly, and wouldn’t mind the ’Hawks trying to pick him up on the cheap.
Of course, I also thought Charlie Frye was a good investment with upside, so I’m probably an idiot.
"I'm tired of chasing after my dreams. I'll just find out where they're going, and catch up later." - Hedberg
Frye showed some potential
but just couldn’t come through.
It's Great to be a Florida Gator!
by Wayward Llama on Sep 2, 2009 5:36 PM PDT up reply actions
Yeah, I noticed Frye a long time before he became a Seahawk
He had a few very nice games for Cleveland in 2005, including some very impressive 4th quarter comebacks. It was good enough for him to be promoted to full time starter in 2006, during which he played below average and led his team to a pretty horrible record. He’s only thrown 33 passes since then. Frye’s career rating, in 590 attempts, is only 70.6.
Still, Frye has a strong arm, good size, at times veteran poise, and plus mobility. He isn’t afraid of taking risks to make plays, and that is a trademark of a winning QB. These things were on full display at times in 2005, it was like a preview of his very good upside.
Unfortunately, despite having the right mindset and the tools to be a good QB, it never came together and he’s had a disappointing career (although not very disappointing relative to his being a 3rd round pick- this is just another reason why expecting anything from later round QB’s is pretty delusional in almost every case).
His career path reminds me a lot of Courtney Taylor, a guy that has good potential and has shown flashes of brilliance, but overall has had a pretty awful NFL career. Taylor only had 5 catches in 2007, but dang if they weren’t some of the more impressive plays I’ve seen a young WR make. His failure to grab a massive opportunity in 2008 was one of the biggest disappointments I’ve experienced for an individual Seahawk.
Tavaris Jackson is a lot like Michael Vick or Vince Young, in that when he’s “on,” he can take over a game and give opposing DC’s fits, but overall, none of those 3 are good quarterbacks that will amount to much if anything over their careers or probably even over 1 season. That Vick or Young managed winning records is really more a testament to their surrounding cast. And with Jackson, he had a pretty impressive team around him too. I think Jackson is done.
"so I’m probably an idiot."
I wouldn’t be nearly that harsh, but I’ll leave it you being oddly misguided.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Sep 2, 2009 9:25 PM PDT up reply actions
"That tied him with Seneca of all people"
I think you may have hit the nail on the head on that one. He’s a lot like Seneca, and like Seneca he’d make a good backup quarterback, but I wouldn’t want to depend on him everyday to win games.
Basically he’s almost how Seneca would be if we used him as a starter. OK passer, pretty good arm, not too great at reading defenses or making good decisions. Campbell has better potential though, I think. Eventually he might take the next step, but I’m not so sure.
I don't know, I watched a couple Skins' games last year
A 1.2 Int% in that offense might be sustainable.
I’m pretty sure Campbell is a signifcantly better passer than Seneca.
Even if it was sustainable,
it’s not like he’s going to be a franchise signal caller if he throws as many TDs as the average QB off the bench with extended playing time due to injury or benching.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Sep 2, 2009 9:27 PM PDT up reply actions
They also similar completion percentages, and the most telling, similar low average yards per pass
at around 6.5. They both have trouble moving the chains by playing it too safe. Certainly Seneca, and from the few Campbell games I’ve seen, I’ve seen the same thing.
I'm not just saying this cos they're both black, k guyz
(I know that’s what you’re thinking)
Similar numbers also came with Kerry Collins (and Kyle Orton), but do you really want your young QB to play like a 36 year old Kerry Collins (or any year Kyle Orton)? Ok, maybe if you’re Tennessee (or Chicago) and you have a hell of a defense and can’t find anyone better, but that didn’t exactly get them that far in the playoffs.
Kerry Collins
is black?
So is neckbeard?
What the hell did I miss?!?!?
Please, for the LOVE OF GOD, stop suggesting next year's 1st round pick (or picks) be used for Taylor Mays and or a QB of the future. Let's just let the season unfold, people, and evaluate much deeper in the process!!!
by whiskey chainsaw on Sep 2, 2009 10:34 PM PDT up reply actions
face paint
hate to be the first to break your lumberjack heart, but the neckbeard ain’t even real either
by B.B.Finnegan on Sep 2, 2009 10:37 PM PDT up reply actions
Seneca's last season was a complete abberation though
Campbell’s career as a passer is much better than Seneca’s.
You can't say it's an abberition yet
Right now you could just as easily say it was the 5 games in 06 that were the aberration.
by B.B.Finnegan on Sep 2, 2009 10:29 PM PDT up reply actions
This has been said several other places and is probably off topic but
Seneca years 3-5:
114 attempts, 198 completions, 57.6 completion%, 1315 yards, 11TD, 9 picks, 4.5 INT%, 4.6 ANY/A
Year 6:
141 attempts, 242 completions, 58.3 completion%, 1532 yards, 11TD, 3 picks, 1.2 INT%, 5.9 ANY/A
Without showing any other improvements Seneca’s INT% dropped by over 3%. My money is on 4.5 being closer to his true INT% than 1.2. Campbell’s INT% is probably around the 2.5% he posted the previous two years and his ANY/A has been consistently at 5.5.
It’s probably also worth noting that Seneca spent his entire career up till this year with Mike Holmgren while Campbell has had a new offensive coordinator every year.
"Basically he’s almost how Seneca would be if we used him as a starter"
Except that he’s not a midget.
He’s plus 6", and 33 lbs on Seneca.
6'5", not very easy to sack either.
But still, I don’t think he’s ever going to become the franchise signal-caller a team needs. He might be a great option for a team like Minny or Tenn though.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Sep 2, 2009 9:28 PM PDT up reply actions
I thought his improved poise
In the pocket last year was due to Zorn’s QB coaching, but it could just be cumulative experience.
He's always had very steady pocket presence
just doesn’t get rattled easy. His footwork, technique is very sound. The tools are there.
I dunno if reading or decision making is the problem, or what. Dunno if there is a problem, or if maybe he’s just a late bloomer. I expected him to break out big time, both of the past two years.
I would almost entirely without hesitation be a go for him, as a free agent. The only thing keeping me from full commitment, though, is a deal of that caliber marries you to a guy. I’d have to be certain. Else it could be 2 years before we finally go another way and figure out who to draft.
Dude has never been given a chance to succeed.
I believe that this will be his first season, out of 5 in the league, where his entire offense, including Offensive Coordinator, will be the same as the year prior.
very interesting (and creative thinking)
I love the idea of getting a guy with talent, untapped potential (read cheap) and relatively low-risk. I hate the idea of using a top draft pick and paying through the nose for an unproven, yet supposedly future franchise QB. I would much rather take the top player in the draft (Eric Berry, who will fall down the draft due to his position and the plethora of QBs in next year’s draft) so Seattle can draft him in the same way they did Curry this year, because there is no way Denver’s first will lie outside the top ten.
Signing Campbell (I have also admired his character and potential) will allow Seattle to use their second first (or first first, if they can get Berry with their second first) on the O-line, or perhaps a franchise RB.
Berry over Mays because Berry is the better football player. Measurables are over-rated, and while Mays will have a killer combine, he won’t match Berry’s play on the field.
Barry is not only better overall
But he’s one of the best ball hawks in the history of College football. This defense has a huge hard on for forcing turnovers- Berry would be a match made in heaven for this team. Rarely would I consent to taking a S in the top 10 picks, but for Berry I absolutely would.
Oh yeah
Safeties have the lowest bust rate of any 1st round pick. Only 8% are considered busts (sorry don’t have link).
Michael Huff and Donte Whitner have been disappointments for their draft slots, I thought.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Sep 2, 2009 9:29 PM PDT up reply actions
This thinking is what netted us Julius Jones.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Sep 2, 2009 9:30 PM PDT up reply actions
Going for the cheap replacement option rather than trying to swing the home-run.
It’s a bad example because Jones isn’t all that bad, but I’d be pissed if we passed on Snead/Bradford/McCoy because Jason Campbell is on the roster.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Sep 2, 2009 9:41 PM PDT up reply actions
+1
Well, I wouldn’t be pissed because I’m not a Seahawks fan, but I think passing up a potential franchise guy for a buy-low option is a bad move.
by Brendan Scolari on Sep 2, 2009 10:19 PM PDT up reply actions
I don't think Alex Smith had a fair chance at things
On top of getting Rocky Bernard’d, he’s played for a bunch of different OC’s. He hasn’t really had a chance to play healthy with a consistent offense for very long.
I’m agnostic about Smith’s abilities/potential/future, but I think there have been a few pretty big obstacles in his path.
Brett Favre is the Kenny Powers of football.
-1
Rob Deer hates a bad K ratio,
and so does Tim Ruskell.
Let’s hit a double here and a home run in the draft with a position player, and call it a day.
Please, for the LOVE OF GOD, stop suggesting next year's 1st round pick (or picks) be used for Taylor Mays and or a QB of the future. Let's just let the season unfold, people, and evaluate much deeper in the process!!!
by whiskey chainsaw on Sep 2, 2009 10:38 PM PDT up reply actions
I'm pretty sure the thinking
Just came from the article FO published today where Doug Farrar evaluated Campbell and mentioned that he could be a Seahawk in the future. I could be wrong though, perhaps it’s just a coincidence that the two articles came out on the same day.
by Brendan Scolari on Sep 2, 2009 10:18 PM PDT up reply actions
It's not the first time John's mentioned it
but it might have been the food for thought that constituted a new post on it, with our outlook being updated post draft and post camp.
by jacobstevens on Sep 2, 2009 10:21 PM PDT up reply actions
I read the article
I didn’t see anything about him being a Seahawk.
Oh I see it in the comments now. That second part is a coincidence. Right down to the two year thing.
Haha
That’s pretty cool then. I wasn’t trying to say you copied him, but I figured that’s where you got the idea from.
by Brendan Scolari on Sep 3, 2009 1:17 AM PDT up reply actions
Farrar used to write here at FieldGulls for a little bit.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Sep 3, 2009 10:31 AM PDT up reply actions
There are two sides to this coin
First, conservative play calling or no, Campbell had his best season as a pro in his first year in a WCO. Its too small a sample size to say anything meaningful, but if Campbell shows himself to be more efficient in WCO again this season, that may make his landing here a lot softer if Ruskell takes that route (I completely agree that Ruskell is nervous as hell about drafting a 1st round QB- they are the riskiest picks in the draft and Ruskell HATES risk).
Campbell is fairly consistent year to year. Yes, he’s been average, but there are some teams out there where simply having “average” QB play would be a big upgrade (I think Minnesota would have to be crazy not to take a look at Campbell next offseason unless Favre is still around). I think Campbell could make a lot of sense for the Vikes, since, in my opinion, they have the capability to win the Superbowl with less than pro-bowl QB play. Their O and D lines and running game are that good.
So would the Seahawks be interested? As Z has shown as Mariners GM, the best way build a team is by finding value wherever that is. Even if its not a huge need or not a player that makes a huge difference, if his compensation is of great value relative to contribution, that is a player that helps you win, and great teams, while built around a small core of superstars, are filled out mostly by good value players. Jason Campbell will almost certainly be a good value player, even if he’s only average.
The other side of the coin is that Jason Campbell probably will never be capable of carrying his team to a Superbowl or giving an All-pro season. For a team like the Vikings, that’s perfectly fine- but a team like Seattle needs a QB that can carry its offense. Even with Knapp’s relatively run happy style, its still a WCO, and that means you still need a QB that can be good in the passing game to open up the run. And its not like Seattle has a pro-bowl O-line or running game. Over the last 10 years, Seattle’s best seasons coincided more with a potent passing offense than running offense (although from 2003-2005 they had both). Simply put, unless Ruskell morphs the Seahawks into the 2002 Bucs (and the current team is still very far from that point), the team will need an above average, or even very good QB to be a real threat for the championship.
In closing, I think that signing Campbell would be a signature move that Seattle is, beyond debate, moving towards a defense-first football team. And that can work wonderfully, but for that to happen Seattle would need to add an all-pro caliber pass rushing DE on its front 4 and an all-pro S to its secondary- to match the diversity and excellence of that 2002 TB defense. If that is the plan, then I’d be totally on board with a Campbell signing. Personally though, I believe there is no quicker or better route to long term NFL success than “hitting” a 1st round QB as other teams have done with Manning, Manning, Roethlisberger, Cutler, Palmer, Ryan, Rivers, etc. However, my hunch is that Ruskell simply does not have the balls for that kind of risk, and will opt fill the QB position with veterans and former backups while trying to build and win with defense. In 2002, the Bucs won the Superbowl with Journeyman Rob Johnson and his 75 QB rating, in his only TB season. Mediocre QB’s rarely win it all, and its a testament to how epic that defense was that he got a ring. I don’t think the Seahawks are even close to being on that level defensively, so I think it would probably be wiser to invest in Bradford/McCoy/Snead etc next draft and try for the home run. That said, I will be surprised if Ruskell actually goes for that, especially if Hasselbeck is as good this year as he figures to be.
by kearly on Sep 2, 2009 6:46 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Great post
A rebuilding season with Campbell does sound logical in a Ruskell sort of way.
In the years after the 05 season (maybe because of how stout our Superbowl’s offense was), Ruskell has definitely favored defensive talents in his drafts and it definitely shows. Much of our talented youth stems from the defensive side with our three linebackers, Mebane, Josh Wilson, and Tapp. So I’d imagine building a new offense that will rely more on the defense in the future. Campbell would be there as a stopgap perhaps used to fuel a turnaround season à la Chad Pennington with the Miami Dolphins.
Can't see them letting him get away so easily.
They gave up a fair bit to get him, and have nothing in return? Who would be the starter? Collins? He will only have a couple years left. Colt Brennas has looked poor in the preseason (13 of 27, 1 TD 3 interceptions), Chase Daniels isn’t a top prospect. So unless they can nab Colt McCoy or someone in the draft I can’t see it happening.
Although if the Skins do franchise him, I wonder if Ruskell would be willing to give up the lower 1st round draft pick for him. Of course, it’s daniel snyder we’re talking about, so he may be too busy looking for some other huge name free agent to sign to remember he has players on his own team he should keep.
The franchise tag would cost $15 million+
Why would a team actively trying to replace a player spend that kind of money to retain him? Sunk cost?
Leverage
Hope for a bidding war so you can get back at least something. Same thing the Pats did with Cassell,. Of course, I don’t count on the ’Skins playing their hand as well as the Pats.
"I'm tired of chasing after my dreams. I'll just find out where they're going, and catch up later." - Hedberg
I don't think paying Campbell nearly twice as much as he's made his entire career hoping for a bidding war is a good play.
Pioli was still with New England when the first report that Cassel would be franchised surfaced. He was with Kansas City when the trade was made. I’m not sure I buy that it was a bidding war.
McDaniels was in DEN. I'm sure NE tried to play both sides off each other to up the price a bit.
There’ are too many variables to predict anything at this point. A lot will depend on just how well Campbell plays this year and what the QB market is like next offseason.
But WAS doesn’t have much to loose by tagging him. They can tag him and try and get a 2nd or 3rd rounder at least. If they can’t, they can pull the tag and don’t have to pay him a cent. They don’t owe him the money until the regular season starts That’s a dicky move, but teams have done it in the past.
The down side is that they have $15M in cap tied up during the time when Snyder likes to splurge on fancy new FA’s. So that makes it unlikely. But it is plausible.
"I'm tired of chasing after my dreams. I'll just find out where they're going, and catch up later." - Hedberg
I believe they can only pull the tag if he doesn't sign it
And can’t imagine Campbell being dumb enough not to sign it immediately for a guaranteed 15 mil. If after that they can’t broker a deal, they’re stuck with him at that price and with a QB who knows they don’t want him there. Could get pretty ugly.
by B.B.Finnegan on Sep 2, 2009 10:23 PM PDT up reply actions
Never!
Campbell is not a West Coast Quarterback. Plain and simple. He was Joe Gibbs guy, more in the mold of Doug Williams and Mark Rypien. Big Arm QB’s with good size who aren’t asked to read a lot of coverages because Gibbs teams were run first play action long throw QB’s. Colt Brenan out preformed Campbell in last years pre-season. He has much better fee and quicker drops. Colt has looked horrible this pre-season but I think it’s the pressure of Daniels behind him making him uncertain in his reads. That being said there asking this Campbell to pick up a system that he is not qualified for. If Jim Zorn can’t teach him the can Gregg Knapp. If Seattle is looking to the future at QB next year then look no further then the Oklahoma Sooners…maybe take a peak at Micahael Vick to.
Was Campbell's system at Auburn in the class of USC's?
I’m just saying that Auburn was a run first system just like that of Gibbs when he drafted him. Not complicated at all. Campbell was only asked to not turnover the ball and to throw over linebackers that bit on play action under Gibbs. I think it’s an effective system but not even close to what he’s being asked to learn now under Zorn.
by Mr. Blache III on Sep 2, 2009 8:08 PM PDT up reply actions
Uh, what?
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Sep 2, 2009 9:42 PM PDT up reply actions
Uh What?
I actually agree with your earlier posts regarding Campbell. Comparison with Jones is right on.
by Mr. Blache III on Sep 3, 2009 12:37 AM PDT up reply actions
I hope you hated the Curry pick
Because it looks like FF has found a new friend.
by aerozeppelin on Sep 3, 2009 12:47 AM PDT up reply actions
Campell played in a WCO his Senior year at Auburn.
His OC, Al Borges, is a Bill Walsh protege who has written a book called “Coaching the West Coast Quarterback”
I thought one of the ’Skins big justifications for hiring Zorn was that it was an attempt to get Campbell back into a system like what he excelled in at Auburn.
Campell’s college offense was actually a lot like Knapp’s. Strive for a 50/50 run/pass ratio, lots of play-action, but definitely WCO derived. Campbell’s not particularly strong-armed. In college he was known more for his accuracy (65% completion), making good reads, and avoiding turnovers
"I'm tired of chasing after my dreams. I'll just find out where they're going, and catch up later." - Hedberg
Question
Do you think Campbell has excelled in the West Coast Offense (WCO) in the NFL? Play action with Ronnie Brown and Cadillac Williams makes play action reads in college much easier right?
by Mr. Blache III on Sep 3, 2009 12:33 AM PDT up reply actions
if he had excelled anywhere he wouldn't be a "buy low" option...
he’s been a servicable starter on a crummy team.
JM is advocating bringing him in with a low risk contract to see if replacing Santana Moss and Malcolm Kelly with TJ Houshmenzadah and Nate Burleson will yield dividends.
His supporting cast isn't exactly bad
You neglected to mention Chris Cooley and Clinton Portis. Those guys are… fairly good.
by Brendan Scolari on Sep 3, 2009 11:54 AM PDT up reply actions
If Julius Jones is average
Then you have no argument, you only get it one way or the other. Not to get all logical on you…
by Brendan Scolari on Sep 3, 2009 5:02 PM PDT up reply actions
Use whatever subjective term you want
But IMO, he had the best season of his career once back in a similar WCO system. Is a he an All Pro? Of course not. But he’s not a disaster either, and there’s still room for improvement.
His stats/struggles are similar to what Hass did his first 2 years once he showed up here. And personally, I think a Hass-like career is still a reasonable ceiling to expect from Campbell. Never one of the top QB’s in the League, but as we’ve seen, when combined with the right system and supporting cast, enough to get you to the Super Bowl.
If you go into next offseason with the option of swinging for a QB in the draft that uses one, possibly both of your 1st rounders if you have to trade up. OTOH, you could sign Campbell + top OT + top RB or S or DE, etc. If Campbell continues to show improvement this season, especially if Zorn opens the playcalling up a bit, then IMO that’s definitily a debate worth having.
"I'm tired of chasing after my dreams. I'll just find out where they're going, and catch up later." - Hedberg
To imply that Hasselbeck was "never one of the top QBs in the league"
is a very arguable point.
Glenn Beck likes argument, but has a deap-seated hatred for logic.
It wasn't meant as a slam
I’m a huge Hass fan-boy, so it was a poor choice of words on my part.
i think Hass has been near the top of the 2nd tier guys – below Manning, Brady etc. Hass has had a couple seasons where he brushed up against the elite tier. I think Campbell still has the tools and upside for a similar career, if he winds up in the right situation.
"I'm tired of chasing after my dreams. I'll just find out where they're going, and catch up later." - Hedberg
Ah! Gotcha
I can agree with that.
Glenn Beck likes argument, but has a deap-seated hatred for logic.
Hass was legitimately a Pro Bowl I think
As in he deserved it. I’d say that’s one of the best QB’s in the league. He just was never a Peyton Manning-Tom Brady level QB.
by Brendan Scolari on Sep 3, 2009 5:03 PM PDT up reply actions
What about the Brian Brohm mancrush?
I don’t think Jason Campbell’s going to happen. We only need one JC on this team.
Coaches like to pick their own guy at QB. Usually this means a draft pick, but sometimes it means a young devalued veteran. Most of the time, a coach picks up a retread because he’s worked with the guy on a previous team. As far as I know, Campbell doesn’t have any connection to Mora or Ruskell.
I don’t see this happening.
Brett Favre is the Kenny Powers of football.
What the hell has happened to Brohm?
I mean, I know preseason isn’t an accurate indicator of a how good a player is, but Brohm has looked awful during his preseason tenure with the Packers. It’s no surprise that he’s 3rd in the depth chart behind fellow draftee Matt Flynn.
That's Matt "National Championship" Flynn to you.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Sep 2, 2009 9:37 PM PDT up reply actions
There is a small connection to Campbell on the coaching staff
Bill Lazor, QB Coach.
"I'm tired of chasing after my dreams. I'll just find out where they're going, and catch up later." - Hedberg
I live outside of washington DC and listen to local sports radio every day about the redskins…
I’ve watched campbell play for 3 years and I don’t think he’s a bad QB.. He just hasn’t had the chance to learn..
3 new coaches in 3 years…
This is his first year being in the same offensive system as the year before…
Most people agree that it takes at least 3 years to pick up on the west coast offense as a QB and he really hasn’t been given the chance to get used to anything.
While I hate everything about the redskins organization I wouldn’t be too upset if the Seahawks picked up Campbell to sit behind #8 and learn…
They have to do something about a future QB… and it seems to me that the sooner it happens the more said QB will be able to learn from Matt!
Seneca Wallace has been learning the WCO for 6 years...
A good QB will make any system look good, a bad QB will make any system look bad. The best you can do with a mediocre QB is have them not lose games. I know it’s not the WCO, but let’s see how Cutler and Orton do in their first years, I bet it’ll look a lot like their old years.
However, 8-8 isn’t bad for the skins. If Haynesworth makes their defense dominate, they should be able to make the playoffs with Campbell. It’s only been three years total for him, there is certainly still time for him to become really good.
by B.B.Finnegan on Sep 2, 2009 10:47 PM PDT up reply actions
But it goes beyond just his pro career… In College he never had the same offensive c.o. any year he was playing… this is his first year in 7 total that he’s had the same offense to work with…
I’m far from a redskins/campbell supporter but I can’t imagine any QB being great in such conditions.
Use the subject line.
You rascal.
It's Great to be a Florida Gator!
by Wayward Llama on Sep 3, 2009 6:28 AM PDT up reply actions
I find the constant use of a subject line here irritating actually…
It’s not as if what I’m typing is on a different subject then anything else here… It’s retarded to use it for something other then what it was intended for…
Since all my posts have been on the subject of the original post (re: Jason Campbell) I feel no need to add a different subject line.
The subject line highlights your thought
It prevents the comment from blending into the previous one.
Brett Favre is the Kenny Powers of football.
No.
Just too limited in upside for what could be had this coming draft. I have not been impressed with him. He does have a fairly good arm, but lacks touch, accuracy and timing. I just don’t see him being the answer. I don’t see him as a future elite QB. That’s what I want after Matt. A QB with the potential to be a game-changing, elite QB; capable of doing big things (Super Bowl). Campbell, though an intriguing idea, isn’t that.
Early prospect watch: RB C.J. Spiller, QB Jevan Snead, OT Ciron Black, DT Gerald McCoy, S Eric Berry, DT Ndamukong Suh, CB Ras-I Dowling 6'2, 200, RB Jonathan Dwyer
I don't know
I don’t think it’s all that likely, nor do I think it would necessarily be the greatest move for you guys. I don’t think Campbell is bad, but he’s not a great option.
I certainly wouldn’t want him as my “QB of the future”, and if Denver is as bad as most people think they will be, the front office would (rightly) take a huge beating for passing up a guy like Bradford or Snead for Campbell. I think you have to take some risk and go for the guy who could be elite rather than setttle for the guy who is bound to be average.
by Brendan Scolari on Sep 2, 2009 10:23 PM PDT reply actions
To clarify a bit
I think signing him to a 1-2 year contract could be a smart move if the price is right. You could still draft a top QB and let them sit for a year while Campbell starts, and then possibly trade Campbell if he plays well. But I wouldn’t want to have to depend on him as the future of my team for the next five+ years.
by Brendan Scolari on Sep 2, 2009 10:25 PM PDT up reply actions
It is hard to imagine the market will command the type of resources it takes to be dependant on him.
Sort of true
But we don’t know how he will perform this year. Look at guys like Schaub, Delhomme, and Cassell. They weren’t elite QB’s and still got huge contracts. And it’s not only the salary, but if you end up passing up a franchise guy because you are already committed to a mediocre option.
by Brendan Scolari on Sep 3, 2009 1:16 AM PDT up reply actions
Where's the "then"
to match your “if”? Was that sentence sposed to end there?
Glenn Beck likes argument, but has a deap-seated hatred for logic.
Yes
As in "Salary is not the only problem. The other problem is if you end up passing up on a franchise QB because of the presence of Campbell.
by Brendan Scolari on Sep 3, 2009 5:04 PM PDT up reply actions
It would be Campbell and Berry/other potential top pick vs Snead/Bradford
Ruskell loves to fill all of his needs in free agency which allows him to draft whoever.
Yes
As I said above, that changes things as you aren’t making a huge commitment to him. But the title of the article suggests that you’d be relying on Campbell as the sole option for the future, and I certainly wouldn’t pass up a top signal caller in the draft for Campbell or want him to be a starter for more than a year or two unless he really plays well this year.
by Brendan Scolari on Sep 2, 2009 10:34 PM PDT up reply actions
If Holmgren were still coach I'd say give it a shot
Not sure with Knapp. Is he good at building QBs?
With Legos, even.
I don’t know if Knapp has a history of ‘developing’ QBs, the ones under his watch were Garcia, Vick, and Russell.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Sep 3, 2009 10:35 AM PDT up reply actions
Really?
Garcia was an upper tier QB. 2/3rds the teams in the league would take the pre-dogfight Vick as their starter today, and Russell is still a work in progress, but is far from someone I would give up on.
Please, for the LOVE OF GOD, stop suggesting next year's 1st round pick (or picks) be used for Taylor Mays and or a QB of the future. Let's just let the season unfold, people, and evaluate much deeper in the process!!!
by whiskey chainsaw on Sep 3, 2009 3:26 PM PDT up reply actions
Well
I think it’s safe to say that neither Vick nor Russell has developed into a true QB. Vick was decent because of his running abilities but Knapp didn’t teach him that. His passing ability has always been poor and that’s what was supposed to develop.
He actually was the QB coach for the Niners during Garcia’s first years with them. I wasn’t aware of that, but I imagine Knapp was at least partly responsible for Garcia’s development. So he’s got that going for him.
by Brendan Scolari on Sep 3, 2009 5:09 PM PDT up reply actions
You could probably add Matt Schaub to the list too,
He spent his first 3 years in the league under Knapp.
Also, I agree that Vick was decent because of his running abilities, but Knapp did design an offense that took advantage of his ability to run. They actually were talking about Vick on NFL Live a month or so back, talking about how the Wildcat offense is not new to the NFL, it just used to be called the Michael Vick offense. They then showed a series of designed run plays for Vick that looked straight out of the Wildcat playbook. I think Knapp got as much out of Vick as anyone could have.
by Mind of no mind on Sep 4, 2009 3:01 AM PDT up reply actions
Fantasy GMing a bit, John?
I like Campbell, and while he’ll never be Peyton I think his upside is better than some of the comments here indicate. He’s improved his completion percentage every year and, as a few people pointed out, this will be the first time he’s had consistency from his coaches and coordinators. Two years ago he was fumble-prone; last year that improved quite a bit but he got sacked a lot more. I’m not sure if that was the O-line’s fault or if he hangs onto the ball too long….I think kearly’s post was spot-on; if we signed him I’d see it as an indication that we’re reorienting as an elite D, and I’d be fine with it.
begs the question
Does our financial situation really require the FO to aquire ‘on the cheap’ ? I also second the notion that great QB’s do more with less, and we shouldn’t expect average QB’s to become great.
The NFL has a hard salary cap
Money that doesn’t get spent on an expensive QB can be spent on other important positions.
Brett Favre is the Kenny Powers of football.
I think he was asking if we had the salary cap room
to sign an expensive player (like a high 1st round QB) or if we were cash strapped and the situation dictated getting a QB on the cheap. And in answer to that, I have no idea.
Yeah, I've got no idea either, but I don't imagine its necessary
While we wouldn’t want to spend $25 million/year plus on the QB position for very long (with both Matt and a top-5 pick on the roster), I think the FO could do it for a little while without too much trouble. NFL contracts and payrolls are pretty flexible.
Brett Favre is the Kenny Powers of football.
probably too soon for a first round QB pick
So I would be on board with Campbell, which might allow us to see high round safety and O-line picks, which cure the worst of our deficiencies..
Which is no guarantee
Most QB’s that are starters end up getting paid quite a bit.
by Brendan Scolari on Sep 3, 2009 5:10 PM PDT up reply actions
Where's the logic?
First: Why is everybody always calling Seneca a second string only quarterback?
Considering the problems we had last year, Seneca did a heck of a job when we needed him. How many teams would love to have a first string quarterback with his stats, especially when under fire. Give the man his due. He might be positioned as a second string quarterback but he can play first. The league has lots of first stringers who haven’t done as well. With more playing time, he’d just get better. He’s a darn good quarterback and very knowledgeable. We’re lucky to have him and he doesn’t deserve the disrespect he’s getting from a lot of ignorant fans.
Second, until proven otherwise, I suspect that the Seahawks feel they have their current and future quarterbacks. Matt is looking very good this season and has put in a huge amount of preseason work to get in shape. Instead of showing appreciation, some so-called fans are ready to write him off before the season starts. It’s mean and totally without merit. Obviously he and his doctors and the team think he’s got more years to play. We could at least have the courtesy to let him show us what he can do before we try to dial up his replacement.
As well, Teal has looked great as a rookie. Of the teams we have played in preseason, he has performed the best. He’s done nothing to cause doubt that he can play in the NFL.
We have great first, second, and third string quarterbacks but we should drop one of them and spend money and time trying to reshape players that didn’t work out with another team? Where’s the logic? My prediction for the next season is that, unless there is an injury, we won’t be hiring or drafting, another quarterback.
The Beast
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
Related FanPosts on Field Gulls
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
