Wilbon: If You Don't Play the Kid, How Do You Know He Can Play?

[shsu1]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/03/AR2006110301608.html?nav=rss_opinion/columns

If You Don't Play the Kid, How Do You Know He Can Play?

By Michael Wilbon (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/staff/email/michael+wilbon/)
Saturday, November 4, 2006; Page E01



It's time to put Jason Campbell in a real, live NFL game. Actually, the time was two weeks ago in Indianapolis. The Colts were beating the Redskins senseless late in the fourth quarter. It was the perfect time to put Campbell in. The Redskins were going into a bye week. The game was lost. They had dropped to 2-5.

There was absolutely nothing to lose that day. The situation was screaming out for Campbell to go into the game . . . unless you're a proponent of Mark Brunell staying in to fatten up his numbers. Talk about a lost opportunity.

Click link for rest of the article

[the burgundy and gold]

very true, i wish he woulda got a few snaps in that game.

[LoudMouth12thMan]

No point in it really. They were playing prevent the entire time. What good would it have done? The real test will be when he's under duress, so to speak.
HTTR

[SkinsTillIDie]

I think giving Campbell two full weeks to prepare for his first game with the first team offense was the smarter move, as opposed to just throwing him to the sharks offhand.

[JaimeDeCurry]

I hate the Post. I can't remember the last time the Post actually had something good to say about the Redskins. I don't even think last year's 5-game run to the playoffs could pull a decent word out of them.

[flexxskins]

It's natural to wonder whether the Redskins, when they were watching the film of Romo shred the Carolina Panthers last week, noticed any similarities between the Cowboys' quarterback situation and their own.


Hmmm and the Cowboys are risking more being at 4-3.

[Spartacus87]

I hate the Post. I can't remember the last time the Post actually had something good to say about the Redskins. I don't even think last year's 5-game run to the playoffs could pull a decent word out of them. Did you even read the article? Can you point out one thing about the article that is unfair towards the Redskins and their handling of Jason Campbell thus far?

So to trade three potential starters for a quarterback, then not use him at all is about as wasteful as it gets in the NFL these days. Too much time and money are invested in first-round quarterbacks to wait two-plus years to get them ready to play, or at least find out if they can. Exactly. It goes beyond the fact that Brunell just is simply not cutting it anymore as a real starter in the NFL; we really need to find out what Campbell can do before the season is over, and that'll require some decent starting/playing time.

[iSTILLhateLavar1]

If we began to loosr badly Sunday or Mark cant make anything happen he will see the feild! If not sunday he will play the following week

[flexxskins]

If we began to loosr badly Sunday or Mark cant make anything happen he will see the feild! If not sunday he will play the following weekAnd you know this becausssssssseee...

[JaimeDeCurry]

If we began to loosr badly Sunday or Mark cant make anything happen he will see the feild! If not sunday he will play the following week


No. Gibbs has said many times that if they were, for some reason, to pull Brunell during a game, it would be Collins that went in. That's why Campbell is always listed as the #3 QB on the depth chart.


Did you even read the article? Can you point out one thing about the article that is unfair towards the Redskins and their handling of Jason Campbell thus far?

What's going on right now with the 'Skins and the QB situation really isn't all that unusual. Brunell isn't a bad QB, he's just a maddeningly inconsistent one, even down to the in-game level. Knowing what I know, I'd have put Campbell in a while ago. But I don't know everything, I just know what I see during the games and what gets reported to me by the news. My post wasn't directed at the content of the article, just the fact that I hate the Post because they never have anything good to say.

[scottlo34]

I hate the Post. I can't remember the last time the Post actually had something good to say about the Redskins. I don't even think last year's 5-game run to the playoffs could pull a decent word out of them.

You don't hate the Post....you just hate the truth. Quit molly coddling this inept coaching staff. They need to get with the 2006 program of the way things are done in the NFL...this ain't 1987 anymore for crying out loud. This staff is making a mockery of the Redskins...and I mean fast.

[skinz1972]

You don't hate the Post....you just hate the truth. Quit molly coddling this inept coaching staff. They need to get with the 2006 program of the way things are done in the NFL...this ain't 1987 anymore for crying out loud. This staff is making a mockery of the Redskins...and I mean fast.can a MOD here pls remove the no new thread lable on my name?i did nothing wrong to deserve it.are ppl that sensitive to racial issues?

[akorn22]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/03/AR2006110301608.html?nav=rss_opinion/columns

If You Don't Play the Kid, How Do You Know He Can Play?

By Michael Wilbon (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/staff/email/michael+wilbon/)
Saturday, November 4, 2006; Page E01



It's time to put Jason Campbell in a real, live NFL game. Actually, the time was two weeks ago in Indianapolis. The Colts were beating the Redskins senseless late in the fourth quarter. It was the perfect time to put Campbell in. The Redskins were going into a bye week. The game was lost. They had dropped to 2-5.

There was absolutely nothing to lose that day. The situation was screaming out for Campbell to go into the game . . . unless you're a proponent of Mark Brunell staying in to fatten up his numbers. Talk about a lost opportunity.

Click link for rest of the article


Nice.. I actually started a thread a few weeks back that said almost the exact same thing
http://www.extremeskins.com/forums/showthread.php?t=176659
BUt I guess it all sounds better coming from a true NFL analyst.

However if you didn;t like the point I made, articles like this show that this is a big issue. ANd gibbs is really screwing things up.

[SkinsFTW]

Actually the time to put Campbell in was in the Titans game in the second half.

[akorn22]

And even better time to put him in was the texans game. They are a bad team who we were routing. The only reason to keep brunell in that game is to pad his stats so Gibbs can talk about how smart he is.

[SkinsFTW]

Yeah, but we looked like a winning team after we played the Texans. We beat the Jags the next week unbelievably and that caused them to lose 3 games straight to weak defensive teams.

[skinzplay]

Wilbon is spot on with this column. I agree with every word. And with each passing week, Gibbs looks ever more stupid for sticking with Brunell and not giving Campbell SOME playing time. This is absurd.

Do not be surprised, friends, if after next season Bill Lazor is offered an offensive coordinator's post somewhere (to run Al Saunders offense), and Campbell decides to leave and be successful elsewhere.

[christopher44]

Gibbs kept Boonell in to pad his stats.Horrible decision.:doh: :doh:

[kingfish50]

You don't hate the Post....you just hate the truth. Quit molly coddling this inept coaching staff. They need to get with the 2006 program of the way things are done in the NFL...this ain't 1987 anymore for crying out loud. This staff is making a mockery of the Redskins...and I mean fast.
You are wrong and yet, right at the same time. Back in Joe Gibbs first tour here, you could keep a QB on the bench and let him learn as he wasn't going anywhere in 4 years after his contract was up. That's why Joe Gibbs was always successful with whatever QB he would start. He had the luxury of time, no salary cap and no FA.
Today's football is different. You better start these QB's no later than their second year, because when his contract expires in his 4th year, his salary will sky rocket, causing teams to either pay the inflated salary and cut other productive players or he takes a hike, meaning that all of the time spent in grooming him and making him into an NFL type QB was a waste and ends up benefiting the team that will pay the higher price for his services.
The only other way that you can take a positive look on the starting QB fiasco is that Joe Gibbs is building for the future. He knows that Campbell isn't ready and he's not going to make a Ramsey out of him. Maybe he figured that with our defense playing at the level they were the last 2 years, that they would keep it close for us during the season and let Brunell start and play mistake free football. All of this would give the offensive players time to adjust to Al Saunders new offense.
Next year would be Campbells debut as the starting QB. This will have given Campbell a full year to learn the system and the players a full season to play it. Campbell and the rest of the offense would be in sync and it could prove to be the better choice as Joe Gibbs always builds teams that will last and stay together for years to come.
Now with all of that said, I imagine Joe didn't plan on our defense having a total collapse and Brunell making more mistakes than a blind china man on a ping pong table. Add all of the injuries to the mix and we look like the philthy eagles from last year.
That's just one way of looking at it and I'm not saying that this is the most likely scenario. Believe me, I'm just as baffled at some of the decisions that Joe has made as anyone else on this board. I do however, have faith in Joe Gibbs that he'll straighten this mess out. I've been a Redskin fan since I can remember and I've seen what Joe can do.
The game is Football and it hasn't really changed, only the players have. Today's players are practically millionaires when they get drafted. There's no incentive to play hard, as there was a few years back when playing and winning meant getting payed more money. Not the guaranteed millions they get today for sitting on a bench and when their little pinky hurts, they'll sit out and not risk injury so they can audition for their next team down the road.
Today's players practically have their own team. A publicist, lawyer, agent, body guards and their own little web sites. It's not about the team anymore, it's about them. That could explain why you see teams play like Super Bowl champs one week and then the Arizona Cardinals the next. How many starters from the Redskins have you seen sitting on the bench with little nagging injuries, that cost us games. Compare that to 10 + years ago when a player wouldn't miss a game unless thier legs were broken.
That is today's football and unless the players have a change in attitude, you'll be seeing the inconsistencies and selfishness that prevails in today's football, tomorrow.

[Spaceman Spiff]

Hey Wilbon...




:obvious: :obvious: :obvious: :obvious: :obvious: :obvious: :obvious: :obvious: :obvious: :obvious: :obvious: :obvious: :obvious: :obvious: :obvious: :obvious:

[Fan035]

A young quarterback will win tomorrow. Unfortunately it won't be ours.

[Underwater Ally]

The most telling line of the article is where he says that for "good teams", the 1st, 3rd and 4th round picks represent three starters, and we don't even know if we have one. That just hurts.

[TK]

can a MOD here pls remove the no new thread lable on my name?
Maybe.

i did nothing wrong to deserve it.
Guess again.

are ppl that sensitive to racial issues?
Racial issues?

[gw21502]

I agree completely with the article. Give the kid a chance!

I think the reason that this QB situation has us all shaking our heads is because we have been going through this for the past 3 years with Brunell and Gibbs. I don't like to second guess Gibbs, and we all do it, but it seemed clear when he traded up for Campbell and benched Ramsey, that Brunell would start until he either couldn't play (which has been most of the time he's been here), or until Campbell's 2nd or 3rd year. We're in the middle of the 2nd year and Campbell hasn't even dressed for a game!

I hope I am wrong, but the only way I see a different QB starting here is either Gibbs moving into the front office after the season, or they cut Brunell. And, as long as Gibbs and Brunell are on the same team, with the way the loyalty lies, I think Gibbs would start Brunell next year too. I hope I am wrong, but I haven't seen one thing that would lead me to believe otherwise.

Brunell isn't the only problem on this team, however, his position is the one position that can ignite a huge spark on this team..........ask T.O. and Co. in Dallas!

[G-Prime]

What is so hard to understand about the simple phrase "Emergency Backup"?

[Goaldeje]

Today's players practically have their own team. A publicist, lawyer, agent, body guards and their own little web sites. It's not about the team anymore, it's about them. That could explain why you see teams play like Super Bowl champs one week and then the Arizona Cardinals the next. How many starters from the Redskins have you seen sitting on the bench with little nagging injuries, that cost us games. Compare that to 10 + years ago when a player wouldn't miss a game unless thier legs were broken.
That is today's football and unless the players have a change in attitude, you'll be seeing the inconsistencies and selfishness that prevails in today's football, tomorrow.


Excellent post, Kingfish. And this last paragraph sums it up nicely. It's a different NFL, the players are different from Gibbs' first tenure. One of my biggest unspoken fears at the start of this season was that we would go on a losing streak, and Gibbs would lose the players.

You figure in his first year here, the team knew he was building towards something, and he was a legend for crying out loud. They knew to respect him. And then last year, we actually won more games than we lost. We were building toward something, something that would be manifested this year, we all thought.

This is all conjecture, of course. But imagine how upset and disillusioned we as fans are right now. We bought into it. We all thought the players did as well. If they did, and still do to some extent, is it impossible to imagine that they might be disillusioned as well? That respect for Gibbs may be fading fast, unfortunately. That's not to say Gibbs can't get it back, but it will take time, and a major win streak.

And back to Wilbon's point - we need a spark. We need a change. It may not salvavge the season, but it may salvage the future. If analysts like Wilbon know it's time to play the kid, why wouldn't the players be thinking the same thing? The players have to be questioning Gibbs' blind loyalty to Brunell, especially considering a playoff spot is all but out of the question for us now. So put the kid in; what's the worst thing that could happen? We lose more games?

[Geoff_K]

Other than maybe Gibbs W/L record I dont see how working Campbell into the lineup could be a bad thing ? As much of a fan I am, I do not see us winning 8 or 9 games to make the playoffs.


Toss the kid in and let him get some REAL practice. There is no way that practice with the first team alone is going to make him ready for the full speed, want to kill you attitude, of the NFL.

I would not be surprised if he decided to hold out next year in an effort to get traded if he is not listed at least as #2. I cant say as I would blame him either.

The only way he is going to get in now is if Brunell trips in the shower before the game and breaks his hip and Collins breaks his throwing hand trying to catch Brunell as he falls.

I can GUARANTEE you that Campbell is faster than Brunell in the 40. THAT mobility just might make a difference in a few plays and that difference could lead to us winning games.

[Underwater Ally]

Wilbon is spot on with this column. I agree with every word. And with each passing week, Gibbs looks ever more stupid for sticking with Brunell and not giving Campbell SOME playing time. This is absurd.


Gibbs also looked pretty stupid turning down Miami's offer of a first round pick for Ramsey.

Gibbs + Brunell = Stupid :doh:

[JCav06]

Good column by Wilbon. Once again, it was spot on.

[Yusuf06]

Underwater Ally let's at least try to be respectful towards a guy that brought 3 Lombardi trophies to DC.

However, with that said I have to agree with Wilbon. We've been saying pretty much the same thing around here since week 1 or 2. However, I think what's really more important here is what's between the lines. Namely that Gibbs came back into the league expecting that he could pretty much do business the same way he did the first time around. Unfortunately, the league is very different and Gibbs doesn't seem to be very adept at changing his M.O. :( More than anything else, this worries me because we have a team that is going to need a moderate infusion of talent at key positions over the next two or three seasons.

The only thing I could quibble with was his contention that Gibbs should have played Campbell at the end of the Dolts game. The only way that's true is if Gibbs had committed to playing Campbell for the rest of the season. With the way the Dolts were playing defense the chances were good that Campbell would have lit it up (as Brunell did somewhat) and then Gibbs would have not been able to go back to Brunell and wouldn't have really known if Campbell could cut it or not. Furthermore, it would have given the Pukes some film on Campbell and two weeks to prepare for him. At the very least, if we decide to start Campbell this week (or bench Brunell after he sucks it up again) the Pukes won't know what they're getting.

However, if we don't play Campbell at all this week, then it's a big mistake no matter how you cut it.

[CPortJGibbs89]

Other than maybe Gibbs W/L record I dont see how working Campbell into the lineup could be a bad thing ? As much of a fan I am, I do not see us winning 8 or 9 games to make the playoffs.


Toss the kid in and let him get some REAL practice. There is no way that practice with the first team alone is going to make him ready for the full speed, want to kill you attitude, of the NFL.

I would not be surprised if he decided to hold out next year in an effort to get traded if he is not listed at least as #2. I cant say as I would blame him either.

The only way he is going to get in now is if Brunell trips in the shower before the game and breaks his hip and Collins breaks his throwing hand trying to catch Brunell as he falls.

I can GUARANTEE you that Campbell is faster than Brunell in the 40. THAT mobility just might make a difference in a few plays and that difference could lead to us winning games. I agree, I also agree with the article. When will his time come we dont know.

[kingfish50]

Excellent post, Kingfish. And this last paragraph sums it up nicely. It's a different NFL, the players are different from Gibbs' first tenure. One of my biggest unspoken fears at the start of this season was that we would go on a losing streak, and Gibbs would lose the players.

You figure in his first year here, the team knew he was building towards something, and he was a legend for crying out loud. They knew to respect him. And then last year, we actually won more games than we lost. We were building toward something, something that would be manifested this year, we all thought.

This is all conjecture, of course. But imagine how upset and disillusioned we as fans are right now. We bought into it. We all thought the players did as well. If they did, and still do to some extent, is it impossible to imagine that they might be disillusioned as well? That respect for Gibbs may be fading fast, unfortunately. That's not to say Gibbs can't get it back, but it will take time, and a major win streak.

And back to Wilbon's point - we need a spark. We need a change. It may not salvavge the season, but it may salvage the future. If analysts like Wilbon know it's time to play the kid, why wouldn't the players be thinking the same thing? The players have to be questioning Gibbs' blind loyalty to Brunell, especially considering a playoff spot is all but out of the question for us now. So put the kid in; what's the worst thing that could happen? We lose more games?
Thanks goldeje
I've been for a QB change since the dallASS game as Brunell lost that one for us all by himself. I get so damned mad that Gibbs just keeps going with Brunell and then defending him by reading off his stats for the game that he again blew. It just baffles the hell out of me.
The example I gave about the QB situation was just one of many reasons why Gibbs may seem to have this undying devotion to Brunell. I'm hoping that is the case because any other reason for keeping him in would just be insane.
I'm hoping for a big win this Sunday but with Brunell in, what are our chances? And if he does pull out a win, he'll revert back to his inconsistent play. I just don't see this team pulling out 8-9 wins. That's what we need to at least make the wild card.

[Thirtyfive2seven]

You all know what's going to happen don't you? Sure you do. You've seen it all before in week 2. Then again in week 5, 6, and 8. Brunell will stink up the joint in the first half making all the 'smart' check down dump off throws. The Redskins will be trailing 21-3 in the 4th quarter with about 5 minutes left and Brunell will have a TOTAL of 156 yards. He will have completed 16 of 21 passes and Portis will have 65 yards rushing. The pukes will play prevent defense and the skins will drive the ball 90 yards for a meaningless touchdown. Bill Parcells will smile knowing that allowing Brunell to pad his stats means he will play another week. Why do you think he played prevent? Brunell's final stats will be something in the neighborhood of 22 for 27 for 230 yards and 1 touchdown. He will finish with 8 touchdown passes and 3 interceptions on the year through week 9. Gibbs will get into the post game press conference and say Brunell gives us the best chance to win and he'll start next week as well against Philly.

[arkowi]

This article by Wilbon pretty much sums up my frustrations and feelings on this year. We are treading water with Brunell, time to see what else we have.

[Yusuf06]

You all know what's going to happen don't you? Sure you do. You've seen it all before in week 2. Then again in week 5, 6, and 8. Brunell will stink up the joint in the first half making all the 'smart' check down dump off throws. The Redskins will be trailing 21-3 in the 4th quarter with about 5 minutes left and Brunell will have a TOTAL of 156 yards. He will have completed 16 of 21 passes and Portis will have 65 yards rushing. The pukes will play prevent defense and the skins will drive the ball 90 yards for a meaningless touchdown. Bill Parcells will smile knowing that allowing Brunell to pad his stats means he will play another week. Why do you think he played prevent? Brunell's final stats will be something in the neighborhood of 22 for 27 for 230 yards and 1 touchdown. He will finish with 8 touchdown passes and 3 interceptions on the year through week 9. Gibbs will get into the post game press conference and say Brunell gives us the best chance to win and he'll start next week as well against Philly.

You forgot the worst part...wash, rinse, repeat.:doh:

[Tastes Like Chicken]

I think that even unproven Jason could've squeaked out a win against Houston.

So if we had Jason starting from Game 1, we might be 1-6 instead of 2-5. So it could be worse. Right? :doh:

[no1fanofno21]

I hate the Post. I can't remember the last time the Post actually had something good to say about the Redskins. I don't even think last year's 5-game run to the playoffs could pull a decent word out of them.

What good can the post say about the skins right now at this time. I enjoy Mike Wilbon and he is exactly correct in this article.

Every other coach besides gibbs would have gone to the back up if not starting by now but at least put him in when the game is out of reach.

If Mark is your guy and your getting a beat down you should take him out so he doesn't get injured.

[peachhaze]

What good can the post say about the skins right now at this time. I enjoy Mike Wilbon and he is exactly correct in this article.

Every other coach besides gibbs would have gone to the back up if not starting by now but at least put him in when the game is out of reach.

If Mark is your guy and your getting a beat down you should take him out so he doesn't get injured.

I totally agree.

Hey, Mods, can you remove my "No New Threads" also?

[0mega]

The most telling line of the article is where he says that for "good teams", the 1st, 3rd and 4th round picks represent three starters, and we don't even know if we have one. That just hurts.
Sad but true :doh:

[0mega]

This article by Wilbon pretty much sums up my frustrations and feelings on this year. We are treading water with Brunell, time to see what else we have.
Treading water AT BEST.

Sinking like a stone would be more accurate.

:logo:

[XxSpearheadxX]

What is so hard to understand about the simple phrase "Emergency Backup"?

Well, I think the part that is hard for you to understand about the phrase, "Emergency Backup", is that once the 4th quarter begins, the depth chart is unlocked and any combination of QBs can be played.

This rule allows for 3rd string "projects" (usually not drafted in the first round after trading away 2 other picks) to come into games such as the Dallas game, and the Indy game to play the final 4th quarter - for obvious developmental reasons.;)

[Rafterman]

I hate the Post. I can't remember the last time the Post actually had something good to say about the Redskins. I don't even think last year's 5-game run to the playoffs could pull a decent word out of them. :rolleyes:

Quit living in denial.

If there was something good to say, they would say it.

[Rafterman]

Treading water AT BEST.

Sinking like a stone would be more accurate.

:logo: :applause: :cheers:


AMEN

Gibbs is blowing this and it's time for him to wake up or leave.

This team needs a strong GM and a coach who understands todays game.
Gibbs isn't catching on to what he needs too do too succeed today.

[wpenn1]

This article by Wilbon pretty much sums up my frustrations and feelings on this year. We are treading water with Brunell, time to see what else we have.

treading water is when you are above water. we are drowning with this clown

[Warhead36]

God bless ya Wilbon. Amen 100%

[JaimeDeCurry]

:rolleyes:

Quit living in denial.

If there was something good to say, they would say it.


Maybe people were confused about my post about...the Post. As I said later, I would have already put Campbell in several times this season. I'm not a Brunell homer or a Campbell worshipper. I just want to see my 'Skins win. I know as well as anyone that right now, there pretty much isn't anything postive going for this team. My statement about the WP was simply that regardless how things are going, they never seem to say anything good about the 'Skins.


:wewantd:

[stwasm]

I hate the Post. I can't remember the last time the Post actually had something good to say about the Redskins. I don't even think last year's 5-game run to the playoffs could pull a decent word out of them.

Actually the Post and the Redskins did have a VERY strong bond until Snyder took over the team and revoked all the season-ticket passes the Post enjoyed for 40-some-odd years. Since that time, the Post has been blasting the organization, which is a shame because, for years, their relationship was a GREAT one that benefitted both parties. No more, thanks to Dan. And that man could use all the positive press he can get.

Anyway, to Wilbon's column, I read it and agreed with it. As much as I'd really like to keep Brunell in there, this is a different NFL than when Gibbs first started coaching and it is time to see what Campbell can do instead of letting him collect dust on the shelf, so to speak.

[TheLongshot]

It is easy to sit on the sidelines and say "put Campbell in", when you don't know what the situation is as far as he goes.

I mean, there seems to be a lot of experts here who "know" when to put a QB in. Hell, it sounds like he's probably more comfortable now that he's got some work with the first team during the bye than he was before then, so maybe we will see that soon.

But, I'll let the guys who have actually seen him play assess his ability to come out there and perform. If they think that Campbell wasn't ready to come out there in Indy, I'll let that be their decision.

(In fact, if he had, there would be no talk but whether Campbell would be starting during the bye. It would have been a media circus.)

Jason

[TheLongshot]

Actually the Post and the Redskins did have a VERY strong bond until Snyder took over the team and revoked all the season-ticket passes the Post enjoyed for 40-some-odd years. Since that time, the Post has been blasting the organization, which is a shame because, for years, their relationship was a GREAT one that benefitted both parties. No more, thanks to Dan. And that man could use all the positive press he can get.

Let's at least get the order right: Snyder takes over the team, the Post blasts Snyder, and then Snyder revokes the season ticket passes.

Jason

[overhead]

No point in it really. They were playing prevent the entire time. What good would it have done? The real test will be when he's under duress, so to speak.
HTTR

So he is learning more on the bench watching? My friend I am wondering how long you will stay on the Brunell wagon, I am expecting you to jump off sometime soon, maybe while it still has a wheel or two left.

When all this started I said I respect Gibbs and think he is smart enough to adjust to the "new" NFL, but honestly I am starting to wonder. Maybe fighting you guts our and being smart just will not get it done anymore. Wilbon is right about this one (I do not say that very often), they need to deal with the brutal facts and take corrective action.

[CapitalDefense]

The 1,000,001th person to agree with me, to bad the super smarts over-rule the sane.

[stwasm]

Let's at least get the order right: Snyder takes over the team, the Post blasts Snyder, and then Snyder revokes the season ticket passes.

Jason

Thank you, Jason. But, no need for the venom.

During Cooke's tenure, the Post wrote its share of, both, complimentary and critical articles about the team and him, and he took it as part of the business. Our beloved owner can dish it out, but can't take it, and only wants people around who will tell him what he wants to hear. It's that type of personality that does this team -- and, ultimately, us the fans -- more harm than good.

[GSF]

The reason why Gibbs hasn't put in Campbell late in games is b/c Gibbs knows that the first time Campbell completes a pass longer than 15 yards the amount of screaming from the fans and media for the switch will increase exponentially. The same goes for Collins for that matter. Whenever Campbell finally gets on the field, it will be for good.

Excellent article. Somebody fax it to Redskins Park.

[turbodiesel#44]

Actually the time to put Campbell in was in the Titans game in the second half.

I agree. If you can see that from Japan, why can't the coaches see it from the sideline.

[RedskinzOwnU]

Good column. Anyone that dislikes it is clearly a blind homer. The Joe Gibbs way of handling personnel is not going to work in today's league.

[turbodiesel#44]

I used to hate Wilbon for all the Skins dissing. Then, a few years ago, I realized he is usually correct. Now I think he is one of the more informed, reasonably intelligent commentators in the business. Even if he is a Chicago homer.

[REDSKINZ-RIDEORDIE]

Dan Snyder needs to pull a Jerry Jones, and start walkin the sidelines. Get M-Fs back on their toes. :dallasuck :dallasuck :dallasuck :dallasuck :dallasuck

[llcamino]

My question for all of the "Post Bashers" is......During Snyder's tenure, what GOOD things did they have to write about?

When you're constantly making public relations and football mistakes, treating people poorly, and losing, how can you expect good press?

[skinzplay]

And Wilbon is correct when he politely mentions "leaving Brunell in to pad his stats". How telling that is, because it certainly gives Gibbs something for which to praise Brunell after the game......."yeah, Mark really fought it out and led us in that 4th quarter drive." Gibbs never seems to mention that the defense is playing prevent, and the game is pretty much already over. Pitiful.

[Earthcat]

Wilbon basically said what I did in my last thread. I was slammed by a few who thought they knew better and that we shouldn't be pointing the fact that all these guys are playing, 'cept our guy. Or we shouldn't even be posting about it at all. Thank you, MW, where you at 81?

[six4g]

No point in it really. They were playing prevent the entire time. What good would it have done? The real test will be when he's under duress, so to speak.
HTTR

Actually the point would have been to get the kid some much needed playing time with live bodies chasing him. Not the yellow jersey practice crap he's seen for the last 2 1/2 years

[Killerbo]

Dude, I don't even argue about this QB stuff anymore. all I know is the Brunell major suppporters are


Desertfox56
Loudmouth12thman
CooleycatchTD
Bubba
Inmone
and a couple more will never change their views . To them every other player on both defense and offense are at fault except Brunell, who will "lead us to glory :rolleyes: , and he is perfect for our team at this time". I really don't care to beat the pulp of the already beaten horse.
Go Redskins and beat the ****ing Cowboys

[arkowi]

Did it ever occur to everyone here that the Post is telling the truth?

I guess it is easier to believe whatever corporate spin the team is spoon feeding you.

[0mega]

Did it ever occur to everyone here that the Post is telling the truth?

I guess it is easier to believe whatever corporate spin the team is spoon feeding you.
Yeah - there is definitely no shortage of lemmings on this board.

:logo:

[shsu1]

Gibbs also looked pretty stupid turning down Miami's offer of a first round pick for Ramsey.

Gibbs + Brunell = Stupid :doh:

When did that happen?

[turbodiesel#44]

When did that happen?

Rumor. We might have had a shot at a second.

[stwasm]

Good column. Anyone that dislikes it is clearly a blind homer. The Joe Gibbs way of handling personnel is not going to work in today's league.

And as much as I love this man, that's a MAJOR problem with this team. Until we get someone who is REALLY in tune with the way today's NFL works and knows how to evaluate talent objectively, this football team will continue to spin its wheels, shelling out all this cash for people who may or may not work out and, most importantly, raise prices because they swear THIS is the year we win the Super Bowl. It's getting old, folks!

[skinz4evr]

No point in it really. They were playing prevent the entire time. What good would it have done? The real test will be when he's under duress, so to speak.
HTTRWhat point? How about getting him some CONFIDENCE? No better time than when the D is backed off to let him have some success instead of putting him in when they are coming after him.

[Yusuf06]

Dude, I don't even argue about this QB stuff anymore. all I know is the Brunell major suppporters are


Desertfox56
Loudmouth12thman
CooleycatchTD
Bubba
Inmone
and a couple more will never change their views . To them every other player on both defense and offense are at fault except Brunell, who will "lead us to glory :rolleyes: , and he is perfect for our team at this time". I really don't care to beat the pulp of the already beaten horse.
Go Redskins and beat the ****ing Cowboys

First of all it's Brunell zombies, not supporters. Secondly, you forgot to include perhaps the biggest Brunell zombie (short of Bubba) Longshot. :)

[thomasroane]

Ima big homer. But Brunell just can't cut it anymore. He's right that Brunell and saunders aren't a good mix. I've been to 3 games this year and I'm telling you. Brunell is consistently missing open receivers down field. If there's one thing you'd expect out of a 36 year old vet it would be good decision making. So, he's either:

a. Not seeing the receivers for the rush and panacking with his Moss-Cooley-checkdown progression
b. Doesn't have the arm to get them the ball

Either should be cause for removal from the lineup. We know Ramsey wouldn't have had that kinda leeway.

[stwasm]

Ima big homer. But Brunell just can't cut it anymore. He's right that Brunell and saunders aren't a good mix. I've been to 3 games this year and I'm telling you. Brunell is consistently missing open receivers down field. If there's one thing you'd expect out of a 36 year old vet it would be good decision making. So, he's either:

a. Not seeing the receivers for the rush and panacking with his Moss-Cooley-checkdown progression
b. Doesn't have the arm to get them the ball

Either should be cause for removal from the lineup. We know Ramsey wouldn't have had that kinda leeway.

I'll never forget the Titans game. In the first half, James Thrash streaked downfield all by himself. Brunell, instead, threw into triple coverage. :doh:

I can't take it anymore!

[llcamino]

I'll never forget the Titans game. In the first half, James Thrash streaked downfield all by himself. Brunell, instead, threw into triple coverage. :doh:

I can't take it anymore!

You are COMPLETELY wrong about the Thrash play.....is was the first play of the 2nd half....that changes EVERYTHING.

Just kidding, I'll never forget that one either, especially when Gibbs was asked if Mark's seeing all of the reads and he said "I hope were getting all of the reads". Then Dungy says that Brunell misses open players deep on big plays, and proceeded to stack the box to successfully stop Portis......and here we are at week 9 with Brunell starting!

[0mega]

You are COMPLETELY wrong about the Thrash play.....is was the first play of the 2nd half....that changes EVERYTHING.

Just kidding, I'll never forget that one either, especially when Gibbs was asked if Mark's seeing all of the reads and he said "I hope were getting all of the reads". Then Dungy says that Brunell misses open players deep on big plays, and proceeded to stack the box to successfully stop Portis......and here we are at week 9 with Brunell starting!

:laugh:

What, you can't see the genius of this concept?

[21Knock_U_Out]

You are COMPLETELY wrong about the Thrash play.....is was the first play of the 2nd half....that changes EVERYTHING.

Just kidding, I'll never forget that one either, especially when Gibbs was asked if Mark's seeing all of the reads and he said "I hope were getting all of the reads". Then Dungy says that Brunell misses open players deep on big plays, and proceeded to stack the box to successfully stop Portis......and here we are at week 9 with Brunell starting!
Aint that some bull crap!If other coaches can see that, why cant ours that say they study the tapes?:applause::doh:

[nneece]

A fine article. Dead on. I don't see how anyone in their right mind would have an issue with what Wilbon is saying here.

[nneece]

It is easy to sit on the sidelines and say "put Campbell in", when you don't know what the situation is as far as he goes.

I mean, there seems to be a lot of experts here who "know" when to put a QB in. Hell, it sounds like he's probably more comfortable now that he's got some work with the first team during the bye than he was before then, so maybe we will see that soon.

But, I'll let the guys who have actually seen him play assess his ability to come out there and perform. If they think that Campbell wasn't ready to come out there in Indy, I'll let that be their decision.

(In fact, if he had, there would be no talk but whether Campbell would be starting during the bye. It would have been a media circus.)

Jason

If Campbell cannot play better then Brunell, today, then it was a huge mistake to draft him in the first round. We've got to find out what he can do. Sure Campbell will make mistakes and INT's, but he will also do something else that Brunell does not do any more, make plays. My grandmother can out play Brunell now :laugh:

[gtm55]

I've been lurking on the site for quite awhile and enjoy the depth of football knowledge and range of opinions expressed here. One thing though has me perplexed regarding the Brunell vs. Campbell debate. If, in fact JC is an upgrade over MB, why haven't I heard of any suggestions that he be promoted to the starting QB coming from the players?

[LiveStrongSkins]

First of all it's Brunell zombies, not supporters. Secondly, you forgot to include perhaps the biggest Brunell zombie (short of Bubba) Longshot. :)

:laugh: You have to be a zombie to think were getting good QB play. Oh wait, he has good stats against the prevent... lets send him to the pro bowl. :rolleyes:

[LiveStrongSkins]

I've been lurking on the site for quite awhile and enjoy the depth of football knowledge and range of opinions expressed here. One thing though has me perplexed regarding the Brunell vs. Campbell debate. If, in fact JC is an upgrade over MB, why haven't I heard of any suggestions that he be promoted to the starting QB coming from the players?

Probably because they dont want to stir controversy seeing how big a deal the QB position is in this area. I'm not a rocket scientist, but I think that may be a safe assumption.

[skinzfannumero1]

I've been lurking on the site for quite awhile and enjoy the depth of football knowledge and range of opinions expressed here. One thing though has me perplexed regarding the Brunell vs. Campbell debate. If, in fact JC is an upgrade over MB, why haven't I heard of any suggestions that he be promoted to the starting QB coming from the players?

I don't think any of the skins players want to stab the QB in the back. They'll leave that kind of stuff to #81 lining up at WR tomorrow.

That being said, it doesn't mean some of them aren't thinking it... I've been thinking it since day one he was here...

[U C S D SkinsFan]

the decisions we make just confuse me. i don't know what gibbs is thinking. i don't know what anyone in the organization is thinking. we've had way too many head scratching moves. i don't care who you are, hall of fame coach or regular fan, if you don't realize that brunell doesn't have it anymore and the team is just flat with him in, you're an idiot. who knows, maybe JC isn't very good, but this team needs a spark of some sort. they need to try something new. we have to try to make the playoffs by winning pretty much the rest of our games. again i don't know what to say, it's been frustrating being a redskins fan the last 15 years.

[Califan007]

Play Campbell...even if you don't think the Skins' 2-5 start is due to Brunell's play, you still start Campbell. Right now, at 2-5, the Skins would have to go 8-1 in order to have even a slight chance at making the playoffs...and they'd have to literally go 11-1 in order to get to the Super Bowl. And that's not gonna happen. Not with Brunell, not with Campbell, not with Collins. It's just not. Yes, a 7-2 run to end the season would be nice, but that's all it would be...because that would result in a 9-7 record, and a 99% certainty of missing the playoffs. The Skins have dug themselves a hole so deep that "making a nice run" to finish the season means squat. How does it benefit the team and franchise to finish out this season with Brunell behind center? It doesn't. Brunell's only benefit to the team was in his apparent ability to get them to the playoffs...if it seems he can't do that afterall, then 9-7 or 8-8 or 7-9...it's pretty much all the same if it results in sitting at home in January.

So start Campbell, give him experience...

[Pimpey42000]

I can smell his time coming soon but when ARE they gonna play the kid?

[bbuzz1962]

Wilbons article is great. He makes a great argument for the new NFL, not the generation that Gibbs first coaching regime. It's time for Campbell now, not in two weeks, now. He has the talent, strength, and quickness to easily become a great NFL quarterback. The days of grooming and wasting valuable playing time is long gone.

As the Cowboys recently found out, a rookie can come in and win. There are now 8 or 9 teams with 2nd or 3rd year quarterbacks starting, and doing very well.

I think it is nothing but Gibbs loyalty to Brunell, and promises he made when he courted him before his first season that fogs his thinking and reasoning. I have a strong feeling that Campbell will start Sunday, and it won't be known until gameday.

[Park City Skins]

Answer. You don't. As with anything else in life, you don't know for sure until the moment arrives that anyone, or yourself, can do something. If you have trained, taught, coached, ect...then you know that many times its a gut feeling. An instinct built on experience. Something inside that after awhile says okay, the time is now. You teach, you watch, you review until your eyes hurt and those around you go "when?". And all you can do is rely upon that which you feel and believe to provide and answer. It doesn't always make sense to those around you sometimes and certainly not to those looking from the outside in, but then it never will. And it won't and shouldn't. They ain't there.

[rmancha]

Did you even read the article? Can you point out one thing about the article that is unfair towards the Redskins and their handling of Jason Campbell thus far?
Exactly. It goes beyond the fact that Brunell just is simply not cutting it anymore as a real starter in the NFL; we really need to find out what Campbell can do before the season is over, and that'll require some decent starting/playing time.Just play the kid and I bet that he will do a whole lot better then Burnell, remember JC is alot younger and can move in the pocket not like Burnell who can't move and takes the sack:logo: :point2sky :logo: :dallasuck :dallasuck :dallasuck :dallasuck :dallasuck :dallasuck :dallasuck :dallasuck :dallasuck :dallasuck

[Mercuryrising]

2 things are for certain:
1 At 36 Brunnell's best days are behind him. He will never be better than he is right now. 2-5 is not so good.

2 Campbell will never be a good or great NFL QB is he does not get to play.

Put him in and lets find out what a genius Gibbs was for falling in love witht he kid and moving up to pick him.....

[mi6]

To put Jason in, he has to be active for the game. He wasn't.


Another genius move by Gibbs ... If Boonell was pulled, Todd Collins would be in, and not Jason.

:point2sky

[aussieskin]

When was the last time a JG QB started a game earlier than other thru injury or emergency, JC will get his time and when he does he will be ready, he will know the receivers and RB's and he will know the game plan and exactly what is required of him, lets not go throwing lambs to the slaughter just yet. JG knows what he is doing, have faith in him.

[bulldog]

Wilbon misses the point. Gibbs cut his teeth as a coach in the 1970's and 1980's when clubs DID bury rookie quarterbacks on the bench for 3-4 years and went almost exclusively with vets. He still has that mind set.

Gibbs and Co. are not going to switch quarterbacks IMO unless Brunell is carted off the field.

You can argue that other teams brought guys along faster but this staff will always be able to come up with some excuse as to why the situation with Campbell here in Washington is different.

As if other young quarterbacks didn't had 100% of their systems down the first time they have to take the field.

At some point when we get beyond the masking complexities (shifts, motion and all the 'trickery' we are about as a team) this game still comes down to blocking and tackling, throwing and running.

And if you don't have the talent out there to throw the football effectively you are going into each game with one hand tied behind your back.

[fitz26]

i have faith in him just not Brunell come on, we need a spark and JC is were i think its ganna come from. let the kid play...

[Pimpey42000]

Answer. You don't. As with anything else in life, you don't know for sure until the moment arrives that anyone, or yourself, can do something. If you have trained, taught, coached, ect...then you know that many times its a gut feeling. An instinct built on experience. Something inside that after awhile says okay, the time is now. You teach, you watch, you review until your eyes hurt and those around you go "when?". And all you can do is rely upon that which you feel and believe to provide and answer. It doesn't always make sense to those around you sometimes and certainly not to those looking from the outside in, but then it never will. And it won't and shouldn't. They ain't there.

Thank you sir, for clarification. :dallasuck :dallasuck :dallasuck :dallasuck

[PeterMP]

I've been lurking on the site for quite awhile and enjoy the depth of football knowledge and range of opinions expressed here. One thing though has me perplexed regarding the Brunell vs. Campbell debate. If, in fact JC is an upgrade over MB, why haven't I heard of any suggestions that he be promoted to the starting QB coming from the players?
It is very rare for a player on any team to call for replacing any starter with another player in public. In most cases that would be considered insubrodination by the coach and would make you enemies in the locker room.

[Goaldeje]

Wilbon misses the point. Gibbs cut his teeth as a coach in the 1970's and 1980's when clubs DID bury rookie quarterbacks on the bench for 3-4 years and went almost exclusively with vets. He still has that mind set.

Gibbs and Co. are not going to switch quarterbacks IMO unless Brunell is carted off the field.

You can argue that other teams brought guys along faster but this staff will always be able to come up with some excuse as to why the situation with Campbell here in Washington is different.

As if other young quarterbacks didn't had 100% of their systems down the first time they have to take the field.

At some point when we get beyond the masking complexities (shifts, motion and all the 'trickery' we are about as a team) this game still comes down to blocking and tackling, throwing and running.

And if you don't have the talent out there to throw the football effectively you are going into each game with one hand tied behind your back.


Bulldog, I respect you POV much more than many here. If Brunell stays healthy, and we continue to lose, do you think Gibbs stays with MB? At some point, if the loses pile up and we are eliminated from playoff contention, don't you think Gibbs goes to Campbell? I know it seems like Brunell seems to do just enough to keep his job, but for how long?

[TheLongshot]

Thank you, Jason. But, no need for the venom.

Venom? What venom? Just stating facts. Snyder bought the team in 1999. He didn't revoke the tickets until 2004-2005. In between there, there has been a lot of negative things said about Snyder, some justified, some not.

I'm not making any value judgements on either side of the argument, just clarifying the timeline.

As for Wilbon's argument, as well as a lot of people on this thread, the argument seems to be that it is what is best for the team, and for him. Problem is, none of these people have seen him play as much as the coaching staff has.

Wilbon should retitle his column, "If the team doesn't play the kind, how do we know that he can play?" In the end, this is all about people wanting to talk about something other than the team going 2-5. It isn't because that this is the right move to me. There is no position that has more pressure to make a change than at QB when things arent going well. This is true for Wilbon as well, since he wants to write about something other than the current situation. Course, he could just write about his Bears, if he really wanted to.

Hey, I'd like to see Campbell at some point too. But, I also would like to see him here for a long time, and I'm not going to rush the process just because I wasn't patient.

Jason

[Goaldeje]

Hey, I'd like to see Campbell at some point too. But, I also would like to see him here for a long time, and I'm not going to rush the process just because I wasn't patient.

Jason


Jason, the point of Wilbon's article is indisputable. The Skins are not going to be able to analyze the play of Campbell in live game situations unless they play him. Bottom line. Seeing what they see in practice is fine; the coaches also see to see him in a real game situation to evaluate him properly.

Now, you can argue that now isn't that time, but not the basic premise of his article.

I would argue that now is a great time. Our defense is healthy, we're coming off a bye, let's go ahead and throw him in there.

I am smart enough to realize that I don't know more than our coaches, however. It's incredibly frustrating to watch our inept offense struggle, wondering if Campbell would make a difference. And it's fun to debate.

But you have to admit that Wilbon's point is very much salient. No one will know what the kid can do if they don't play him...

[georgiaredskin]

Perhaps Wilbon's best work. Never more truthful.

[Peregrine]

In order to maintain that Wilbon is wrong in this article, in putting forth that Campbell should have been put in at the end of the Colts game, you have to establish:

1. The Redskins have even a decent probability of going 8-1 and making the playoffs(probably meaning cant lose another Division game as well).

2. The redskins had even a decent probability of beating the Colts after being down 36-22 with minutes left.

3. Getting a young QB gametime is not important at all to their development(and thus to the teams future).

Personaly, I think you would fall flat on your face attempting to make an argument for 1, 2, or 3, much less ALL 3.

[TheLongshot]

Now, you can argue that now isn't that time, but not the basic premise of his article.

Um, excuse me, but he specified that now is the time. (Actually, a couple weeks ago.) That IS the basic premise of the article.


In order to maintain that Wilbon is wrong in this article, in putting forth that Campbell should have been put in at the end of the Colts game, you have to establish:

I wouldn't dream of arguing against any of those points, but I can bring up a couple of others.

1) How is his knowedge of the offense, and how is the execution of the offense by the other players? If he isn't ready, or if there are problems in the offense other than Brunell, is it a good idea to put him in there? Problem is, we don't have that information.

2) What is the quality of those minutes? Considering that he hasn't practiced with the starters since training camp, what kind of experience would he get being out there in a blowout? Is that putting him into a position to succeed?

What I also don't like about the column is the impression he gives that Campbell won't see time this year, and that Gibbs plans on sitting him on the bench forever. Somehow, I doubt that we'd still be starting Brunell if we were way out of contention.

Jason

[GSF]

As for Wilbon's argument, as well as a lot of people on this thread, the argument seems to be that it is what is best for the team, and for him. Problem is, none of these people have seen him play as much as the coaching staff has.

Wilbon should retitle his column, "If the team doesn't play the kind, how do we know that he can play?"



Gibbs has said that Campbell is ready. That's how we know he is ready.

Gibbs just still believes that Brunell gives him the best chance to win, which in a great many people's mind is an unfortunate mistake. A mistake he has made before. Gibbs is one of the greatest ever, but he's not perfect, just like the rest of the world. If he's ever had a weakness, it's been sticking with older players too long.

Gibbs will put in Campbell after the 7th loss, which will probably come in 2 games, and this whole mess will finally be over with.

[TheLongshot]

Gibbs has said that Campbell is ready. That's how we know he is ready.

He said that this week. It sounds like it wasn't until the practices last week that he found that out, because his comments seem to bear that out.

As to whether or not starting Brunell this weekend is a mistake, well, I guess Sunday will prove that out. We have been wrong about Brunell in the past too.

Jason

[GSF]

What am I missing here Jason? Haven't you been saying that we don't know if JC is ready?

Anyways...You're right, Brunell could surprise us this weekend and pull off a win. He's coming off a bye and hopefully feeling fresh, assuming he's healed up. I think the point that Wilbon and so many fans are trying to make that is even if Brunell does pull off a win this weekend, what are the chances of him winning 8 out of the next 9 as inconsistent, and mostly bad he has been?

[Peregrine]

Longshot, are you saying that you think getting gametime is only valuable for young QBs(who have had time to learn) in certain situations? That Campbell would not learn more than in a normal practice, and that it would actually be harmful to him to be in there? I think youd find exactly 0 NFL head coaches an OCs that would agree with you, but I could be mistaken.

Putting a young QB into a blowout is actually the very best way to boost his confidence. The opposing defense plays a very passive, non-agressive defense, that allows a lot of passes. Campbell would be able to go, without getting much of a pass rush, and throw lots of short and intermediate routes. Likely(as actually happened), the defense would be lax enough to let the team eventually score on a methodical drive, thus giving him a scoring drive under his belt. Talk about a huge confidence booster for a young QB. A long drive, lots of completions, no pass rush, no pressure to succeed(game is out of reach), and a scoring drive. What could be better?

[Yusuf06]

Mark Brunell this year

Pass Thrown 1-10 yds 71 of 96 74.0%
Pass Thrown 11-20 yds 10 of 31 32.3%
Pass Thrown 21-30 yds 8 of 18 44.4%
Pass Thrown 31-40 yds 1 of 6 16.0%
Comp% over 10y=34% YPA over 10y=7.0

WOW Peregrine. Those #s are fugly. But wait, Brunell is ranked in the top 10 of NFL QBs. :rolleyes:

You're telling me that in 7 games he's only attempted 31 passes of 11-20 yards? I mean, we're not talking low percentage stuff here. These are meat and potatoes passes. We're talking the classic 15 yard out pattern. 32% completion rate on that...uhhh, yeah. Must be those WRs we have that drop the ball all the time. Yeah, right. Tell me again why he doesn't suck? :confused:

Amazing. Absolutely amazing that A) He's still out there and B) that anyone on this board (or anywhere for that matter) can argue with a straight face that he's still worth a darn. For the record Bubba and Longshot, please explain to me how our poor defensive showing has affected Brunell's play in this area? And no, please don't bring up the OL. If our OL can't hold off the pass rush long enough to complete a 11-20 yard pass we might as well not even try to pass the ball. We'd also probably have a lot more sacks than we do were that the case.

[Rafterman]

Maybe people were confused about my post about...the Post. As I said later, I would have already put Campbell in several times this season. I'm not a Brunell homer or a Campbell worshipper. I just want to see my 'Skins win. I know as well as anyone that right now, there pretty much isn't anything postive going for this team. My statement about the WP was simply that regardless how things are going, they never seem to say anything good about the 'Skins.


:wewantd:

I didn't realize that Dan the Man pulled the Post's season passes.
Pretty short sighted IMHO. ;)

The team has just been so disappointing...

[Knightwchmn]

That's funny... I don't remember writing this article, but it's word verbatim what I've been preaching for 6 weeks now.

You Go, Wilbon!!

:notworthy

[TheLongshot]

Longshot, are you saying that you think getting gametime is only valuable for young QBs(who have had time to learn) in certain situations? That Campbell would not learn more than in a normal practice, and that it would actually be harmful to him to be in there? I think youd find exactly 0 NFL head coaches an OCs that would agree with you, but I could be mistaken.

If he isn't ready? Perhaps. I mean, how much better could Ramsey could have been had he gotten a proper education? We saw a lot of the bad habits he gained under Spurrier, and he never learned how to throw a fade.

You also need to take into account that Campbell is learning a new offense. Mastering that doesn't happen overnight.

I understand that the situation could be a good one, but if Campbell wasn't considered ready, maybe the situaiton wouldn't have been all that beneficial.

There is another reason that doesn't have much to do with Campbell's development: it would undermine the decision process. We've seen how crazy it has been here when people found out that Campbell was practicing last week. How crazy would it have been if Campbell saw action in the Indy game?

One thing Gibbs is known for is not throwing his guys under the bus. Putting in Campbell effectively would be doing that in everyone's eyes. How much confidence would you have in Gibbs' decisions in light of that?

Course, people here have no problem throwing Brunell under a bus. They'd probably back up as well.

Jason

[Yusuf06]

Course, people here have no problem throwing Brunell under a bus. They'd probably back up as well.

Jason

I think you just read my mind Longshot. Am I really that transparent? :silly:

[SkinsNoles21]

this situation is so retarted...play Campbell ****.

[desioreo87]

I am just waiting for Bubba, DesertFox, Cooleycatch, and a couple of others to weigh in on this article just to see what they would say

[desioreo87]

No point in it really. They were playing prevent the entire time. What good would it have done? The real test will be when he's under duress, so to speak.
HTTR

I mean sure the true test of any quarterback is their performance under pressure but do we really want Campbell's first snap to be under pressure? (I actually don't care when he gets his first snap as long as its sometime soon!) Wouldn't te situation against the Colts have been an ideal situation where he can get comfortable with playing in an actual game against the simplest of all defensive schemes? That would build his confidence going into the bye week?

I get what you mean when you say it proves nothing cause it doesn't but who cares because Campbell would actually be getting some real game experience which is immeasurably valuable towards our success next year.

With taht said, Brunel hopefully plays lights out today against the Cowhumpers. HTTR

[skinzfannumero1]

As for Wilbon's argument, as well as a lot of people on this thread, the argument seems to be that it is what is best for the team, and for him. Problem is, none of these people have seen him play as much as the coaching staff has.


Hey, I'd like to see Campbell at some point too. But, I also would like to see him here for a long time, and I'm not going to rush the process just because I wasn't patient.



He won't be here much longer if he doesn't get a shot to play. How long are rookie contracts? What year is he in his? How many actual games has he attempted a pass in? Oh wait - how many actual games has he been ACTIVE in...




Somehow, I doubt that we'd still be starting Brunell if we were way out of contention.



I must've missed something because I thought we WERE way out of contention... And last time I checked the sideline avenger was still starting... And please, nobody give me the bull about what the team did last year. Last years schedule was a lot different than what's coming up this year. Last year we were 5-6 and had struggling Eagles, fading Giants and Cowboys, along with the Cards and Rams (without their starting QB). We also had two divisional victories at that point. No such luck from the schedule this year. I'd wager the title to my house that this team won't go undefeated for the rest of the season, and make the playoffs... Not against the competition we'v got coming up. And not with the sideline avenger still under center.


He said that this week. It sounds like it wasn't until the practices last week that he found that out, because his comments seem to bear that out.

Jason

The funny thing is that you say nobody here has seen the kid play or practice. The players and coaches are the only ones who have. But I think everyone here who has supported giving Campbell a shot have said he just needs a chance. Not giving him time in practice is not giving him a chance. Not giving him a chance in garbage time of games is not giving him a chance. I'd venture to say the players and coaches haven't seen him either! Now, all of a sudden he gets what, two days of practice, and he is miraculously ready? I don't think so. I think he's doing the things he's been capable of doing, HE JUST GOT THE CHANCE. You can argue he isn't ready to run this offense. I'll counter neither is Brunell RIGHT NOW. Neither was Farve when he first started. Neither was Manning when he first started. No one was a polished NFL starting QB the first time the walked into a game. But NO ONE became a polished NFL starting QB by sitting on the bench forever.

Wilbon is point on. Either it was a tremendous blunder to give up all the draft picks to get him (jury's still out on that) or his possible contributions to the team (and his own development cycle) are being wasted.

Quoting the article -

It's time to put Jason Campbell in a real, live NFL game. Actually, the time was two weeks ago in Indianapolis. The Colts were beating the Redskins senseless late in the fourth quarter. It was the perfect time to put Campbell in. The Redskins were going into a bye week. The game was lost. They had dropped to 2-5.

There was absolutely nothing to lose that day. The situation was screaming out for Campbell to go into the game . . . unless you're a proponent of Mark Brunell staying in to fatten up his numbers. Talk about a lost opportunity.

-

It doesn't even say it's time to START Campbell. Just time to PLAY HIM. To see what you've got.

I don't understand the logic of your argument. Not with the level of play we've seen at the QB position - not only this year, but since day one of the Brunell era...

[steve57]

Well, I agree, with Wilbon. I would like to know what JC has. To be honest, I'm not expecting much, since I have Zero confidence in Joe Gibbs and draft picks. If Campbell doesn't work out, what you have is the spotlight on Gibbs -- and his decisionmaking, the kind that can wreck a team longterm. First Brunell, who was washed up before he even got here. And overpriced for what he was bringing to the table (5 yard go patterns). And trading up for Jason Campbell, which went against draft guru conventional wisdom -- we paid too much for him. If Campbell doesn't work out -- and we should try and get some sort of handle on that now -- then that sucking noise you hear out at Skins' Park is the Gibbs II era going down the tubes. A bunch of expensive parts that do not equal a whole.

[cakmoney61]

Aint that some bull crap!If other coaches can see that, why cant ours that say they study the tapes?:applause::doh:

Folks are going to bust a blood vessel if they don't calm down. For the life of me, I can't understand why Gibbs keeps Brunell as his starter. But we have to expect Brunell to play every snap and Campbell to play none at all or we will lose our collective minds.

Blondie's words are so appropriate right now: "It is what it is." So we might as well deal with it.

[cakmoney61]

As for Wilbon's argument, as well as a lot of people on this thread, the argument seems to be that it is what is best for the team, and for him. Problem is, none of these people have seen him play as much as the coaching staff has.

Hey, I'd like to see Campbell at some point too. But, I also would like to see him here for a long time, and I'm not going to rush the process just because I wasn't patient.

Jason

I have to ask you this question. With all the suspect personnel decisions that have been made by coaches, scouts, whomever, can you honestly say Gibbs is making the right decision by keeping Brunell as his starter and giving Campbell "zero" playing time? What are you basing this trust on? Personally, I have a bad feeling that they may have made another personnel blunder by getting Campbell. I'm starting to think they don't think he can play. If he can't do what Brunell is doing right now, we are in serious trouble.

[P007]

Um, excuse me, but he specified that now is the time. (Actually, a couple weeks ago.) That IS the basic premise of the article.



I wouldn't dream of arguing against any of those points, but I can bring up a couple of others.

1) How is his knowedge of the offense, and how is the execution of the offense by the other players? If he isn't ready, or if there are problems in the offense other than Brunell, is it a good idea to put him in there? Problem is, we don't have that information.

2) What is the quality of those minutes? Considering that he hasn't practiced with the starters since training camp, what kind of experience would he get being out there in a blowout? Is that putting him into a position to succeed?

What I also don't like about the column is the impression he gives that Campbell won't see time this year, and that Gibbs plans on sitting him on the bench forever. Somehow, I doubt that we'd still be starting Brunell if we were way out of contention.

Jason

Gibbs will never take out Brunell, period. The only way Brunell doesn't play is if he is carted off the field on a stretcher. So you think that Brunell is doing a fine job? Hell Saunders had to dumb down the offense, because super smart Brunell can't figure it out, or he doesn't have the physical tools to run it. It's time for a change, and Gibbs should have been getting Campbell ready to play since the preseason, instead of sticking with this bum. Brunell needs to go, everything on offense had been upgraded from recievers to coaches, but the one position that wasn't upgraded was the QB position. And our offense struggles, and why is that? Brunell isn't getting the job done, and all of the Brunell lovers and supporters need to wake up.

[GSF]

If he isn't ready? Perhaps. I mean, how much better could Ramsey could have been had he gotten a proper education? We saw a lot of the bad habits he gained under Spurrier, and he never learned how to throw a fade.
Totally different situation with Ramsey. Spurrier left him sitting back there like a sitting duck. Gibbs knows better.



Course, people here have no problem throwing Brunell under a bus. They'd probably back up as well.

Jason

I would back that bus up, and then drive it forward, and then back it up, and then drive it forward...

[kimrobyn]

You all know what's going to happen don't you? Sure you do. You've seen it all before in week 2. Then again in week 5, 6, and 8. Brunell will stink up the joint in the first half making all the 'smart' check down dump off throws. The Redskins will be trailing 21-3 in the 4th quarter with about 5 minutes left and Brunell will have a TOTAL of 156 yards. He will have completed 16 of 21 passes and Portis will have 65 yards rushing. The pukes will play prevent defense and the skins will drive the ball 90 yards for a meaningless touchdown. Bill Parcells will smile knowing that allowing Brunell to pad his stats means he will play another week. Why do you think he played prevent? Brunell's final stats will be something in the neighborhood of 22 for 27 for 230 yards and 1 touchdown. He will finish with 8 touchdown passes and 3 interceptions on the year through week 9. Gibbs will get into the post game press conference and say Brunell gives us the best chance to win and he'll start next week as well against Philly.
That is soooo F'ing true!!! I'm so tired of this!!! Damn!

[Rafterman]

Ima big homer. But Brunell just can't cut it anymore. He's right that Brunell and saunders aren't a good mix. I've been to 3 games this year and I'm telling you. Brunell is consistently missing open receivers down field. If there's one thing you'd expect out of a 36 year old vet it would be good decision making. So, he's either:

a. Not seeing the receivers for the rush and panacking with his Moss-Cooley-checkdown progression
b. Doesn't have the arm to get them the ball

Either should be cause for removal from the lineup. We know Ramsey wouldn't have had that kinda leeway.
:1stplace: :jump: :allhail:

I've seen the same and I believe it is both A & B. However, I'm sure it is mostly B.

[box8276]

We have to be the only team in the league to not play a backup qb EVER. During the vikings and pats game brad j. got benched early in the 4th. Brooks bollinger came in. So i ask WHY in the hell cant JC see the field? We have had several games this year he could have mopped up just to keep him interested.