Bills should be wary of possible Campbell trade
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 8:45 AM EDT
in Buffalo Bills Opinion
Email
PrintSunday night's trade of QB Donovan McNabb from Philadelphia to Washington ended a weeks-long marathon of trade rumors surrounding the veteran signal caller. When one door closes, another opens, and from the moment that the Redskins made their annual big off-season splash, their incumbent starting quarterback, Jason Campbell, has been on the trade market.
According to an ESPN 980 radio report out of the nation's capital, the Buffalo Bills - who were heavily linked to McNabb prior to the trade - are one of five teams interested in Washington's quarterback leftovers.
Buffalo has been searching for a franchise quarterback since Hall of Famer Jim Kelly's retirement in 1997. Their need has grown so desperate that the team has been linked to just about every available quarterback this off-season, washed up or in their prime. Campbell, 28, is decidedly in his prime, and reports indicate that it might only require a fourth-round pick to acquire a talented player who could compete for a starting job in many, many NFL locales.
The Bills, despite their reported interest, need to be very, very wary of a trade for Campbell.
It's not that I don't see the value of the deal. A fourth-round pick for a player as talented as Campbell seems like an incredibly worthwhile deal. The 6'5", 230-pound Campbell has been through a lot in his five-year NFL career, as the Redskins haven't exactly given him much help offensively - particularly along the offensive line - and only Trent Edwards comes close to having as many different offensive coordinators as Campbell has had. Through it all, he's seen a steady increase in production throughout his four years as a starter, to the point where he threw for 250 or more yards five times last season and finished as the league's 15th-highest rated passer.
From that angle, Campbell in Buffalo would finally provide the QB with some form of schematic stability. Bills head coach Chan Gailey will be acting as his own offensive play-caller, and as he's unlikely to get the boot from GM Buddy Nix after just one year on the job, Campbell would get at least two years - and probably more - of working in the same offense as a Bill. It's hard to forecast, but it's difficult to imagine that fact having anything but a (potentially astronomical) positive impact on his career outlook.
Campbell is also admittedly a solid fit for Buffalo. He's big, mobile, has a good head on his shoulders - i.e. it's not often that he's rattled, and he's mentally tough - and has the requisite arm strength to cut through the icy winds of Orchard Park winters with ease. Campbell's been sacked 81 times over the last two years, thanks in part due to his propensity to hang onto the ball a tad too long (but in much larger part to a terrible offensive line), but has managed to start 32 games despite taking that pounding, so durability is not a concern, either. From a talent standpoint, Campbell makes a lot of sense as well.
Give a talented quarterback schematic stability for the first time in his career. Get a quarterback that's a really solid fit for the Bills' environment for the highly average price of a fourth-round pick. There's a lot to like about that hypothetical.
Here's why Buffalo shouldn't do it: Jason Campbell is 20-32 as an NFL starting quarterback.
I realize there are excuses to be made regarding his record; we've already been over them - the line, the talent around him, the lack of schematic stability. Add in the fact that the Redskins have been trying to upgrade the position for two years, courting everyone from Jay Cutler to Brett Favre to McNabb, and it's not difficult at all to feel sorry for Campbell's situation. He's a pretty good player, and these excuses are valid.
I just don't think Jason Campbell is a player that you can win big with. The .385 winning percentage is concerning despite all of the odds stacked against him. Even in an ideal world in Buffalo, one in which Campbell has job security, scheme stability and all the help in the world, dramatic improvement in the win column might not equal much more than .500. Maybe Campbell is the type of QB that in that ideal circumstance can keep you in playoff contention, and get you there in particularly good seasons. Does anyone really think that Campbell can lead a team deep into a playoff tournament? I know my answer: I don't think he's that type of player.
Buffalo has a unique opportunity in front of them. They've finally gotten themselves a unified front office voice in the form of Nix, Gailey and their various associates, even if it's cost them points in the court of public opinion due to the unpopularity of the choices. That's important, and it's been achieved. What's even more critical is finding a quarterback that you can win with. Given the reports of Buffalo's interest in Campbell, they obviously think they can win with him. I just hope they don't think they can win big, because that's a risky line of thought.
The bottom line for me here is this: I like Jason Campbell. Few quarterbacks have been through as much adversity as he has during his time in D.C., and he's gotten through it with great class and, remarkably, steady improvement on the football field. There is definitely a chance that he can turn himself into an upper-echelon quarterback with a change in environment, and it wouldn't exactly break my heart to see him get that opportunity in Buffalo. He's easy to root for. But Buffalo needs to complete this re-build the right way, and I'm just not sold that building around a quarterback who might not be able to win big - no matter the value of his acquisition - is the best move for the long-term.
357 comments
|
2 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
IMO If we trade for Campbell, it is with the understanding that we will still get a young prospect this year or next to groom as the future face of the franchise. Campbell can keep us competitive during that transition phase.
by XtrmeCarnage82 on Apr 6, 2010 8:58 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs
stop-gap (with benefits)
I love his durability through all the hits he has taken. Still has some potential up side.
Not entirely sold on Campbell
I wouldn’t mind seeing some sort of pick/player package deal with the Skins that included Whitner to the Skins, and us getting Campbell and a late round pick, maybe a conditional from 2011. I agree that Campbell is better than the three we already have, but I also agree that he’s not the 10 year answer at the position for the Bills…that being said, nobody knows if Clausen or Tebow is that answer either. I wouldn’t be upset if Campbell was acquired for a good price, but it would have to be a draft day deal if we missed on a guy Chix was targeting.
Being a Bills fan the last decade is a lot like being a man with E.D....sometimes you get excited too soon just be disappointed in the end, and other times...you just don't get excited at all
but it would have to be a draft day deal if we missed on a guy Chix was targeting.
And therein lies the flaw in most thinking… The Bills ARE NOT waiting for draft day which tells me they have no target on Clausen, nor arguably, Tebow…..
I get that line of thinking too, that if Campbell is picked up, that they were not as interested in the Rookies…but then again, with all the smoke screens and speculation leading up to draft day, nobody really knows what the plan is. I’d be happy in three weeks if we came away one of the three (Campbell, Clausen, or Tebow)
Being a Bills fan the last decade is a lot like being a man with E.D....sometimes you get excited too soon just be disappointed in the end, and other times...you just don't get excited at all
Get Campbell on the cheap and...
still draft Clausen or Tebow. The more I read about Roger Saffold, the more I like him. I say grab Clausen if he’s there and Saffold in the second. If not, grab A. Davis and Tebow (if he’s there) or best NT in the second. Still acquire Campbell and get rid of Edwards altogether. Let Campbell start this year while the line jells and allow Clausen or Tebow watch and learn from his mistaked under Gailey. I have a feeling Tebow and Campbell would have similar styles anyway. If Clausen’s the guy, he could still learn how to deal with adversity in an intelligent and mature manor from JC. He’s a classy guy, whoever we draft could learn worlds more from him than that “it’s not my fault” crybaby Edwards.
Confucius say, "Man who go to bed with itchy butt, wake up with smelly finger."
Ok
I can get on board with that scenario for with either Tebow or Clausen. Worst case scenario, Campbell sucks and we cut dead weight in a year or two and were only out of a mid-late round pick. Best case scenario, we are stuck with a QB controversy and trade Campbell for decent compensation down the road if he performs well. Wow that’s a lot to speculate on…but I still like JC over any of our current three
Being a Bills fan the last decade is a lot like being a man with E.D....sometimes you get excited too soon just be disappointed in the end, and other times...you just don't get excited at all
Or they are trying to secure a better option right now
Instead of hoping they’ll have the chance to draft a QB they like….
~K
"As the governor of Louisiana once said, the only way Chris Kelsay can lose his job is if he got caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy."
I couldn't agree more...
I didn’t quite know how to describe my hesitation about trading for Campbell. Brian, you described it to a tee.
The Missing Link in the Chan Gang
It comes down to whether the 4th pick will provide more value
than campbell
i don’t think it will for the bills over the long run or over the course of this year
remember—-rich gannon was a horribly mediocre qb for most of his career—-brett favre was traded away for a bag of footballs at one point….qbs are funny
campbell definately has the talent—-so why not take a flier on him in the 4th round and let him and trent duke it out?
by tiimbitz4786 on Apr 6, 2010 12:59 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I think it really comes down to how confident they are in Claussen because it’s pretty likely he’ll be there for the taking if we want him. If they trade a 3rd or 4th for Campbell it just signals to me they aren’t high on Claussen and they think Campbell brings more value than any other QB that might be available in the 3rd or 4th. Cambell is young, durable and just entering his prime so has quite a few years left in him.
I’ve read in several places recently that scouts seem to have McCoy and Tebow rated higher than most “draft experts” and I don’t expect either to be around for our pick in the 2nd anymore. So the choices they are looking at is A) Do we take Classen and if the answer to that is no then B) who brings better value for a 3rd or 4th round pick Campbell or Skelton/Pike/Lefevour.
If it was me I’d take Claussen but if they don’t I’d take Cambell over Skelton/Pike/LeFevour any day.
i like campbell
he improved every year completes 60 percent of his passes, threw for 20 TDS is mobile, big arm. all with a bad line. Gaily can get the most out of him i think he can be very good in buffalo if we swing for a clausen in round one and he sucks 5 more years of lousy football with campbell we would get solid QB play. Elways, Kellys and Marinos Dont come around that often. Campbell would be the second best QB in our Division, we may have the best RB in the division. make this deal next years 4th rd pick. Fix the O.L and our D this year and i bet The bills will finish 2nd in the division.
Totally agree
Great article Brian. I live in the D.C. area and everything Trent is accused of (Captain Check Down) Campbell is accused of around here. Not being able to go with the correct read, hesitant in the pocket, head rattled by inconsistent coaching and porous lines, etc. I think Campbell may find some success in the future, but the truth is Edwards, Campbell, and Fitz while possessing different tools are really just the same quality QB when it comes to winning record. Bringing in Campbell would just create a logjam. Would I trade Edwards or Fitz for Campbell. Maybe… but I would only be doing it to try and give each of those players a fresh start.
you nailed it (again)
I’m just not sold that building around a quarterback who might not be able to win big – no matter the value of his acquisition – is the best move for the long-term.
Nor am I. However the scenario (@ QB) plays out, I believe we will learn a lot (more) about the talent we have at GM and coach. Their maneuvers this year will speak volumes. Somehow, I don’t think we will be bored!
"you can't fill every hole, especially if you haven't been very good" - Buddy
Bored
Bills should not go after Campbell.
Forget bored and just realize there are to many holes to fill on this team first.
QB can be addressed once we get some of these changes made in the future.
The team needs list is to large due to lack of talent and poor past management running the team.
Yes I wish Buddy the best, however, the team has to overcome to many holes before we talk about QB needs.
QB, WR, and DE
Those are the positions that take the most time to learn in the NFL. So why, if you’re a rebuilding team, would you not focus on those needs first, so that the guys at those positions are learning while you’re building around them in the coming years?
Official ledge-talker-offer of the Buffalo Bills.
Admittedly..........
I don’t know too much about Campbell (other than what I have read in the past few months) but it seems to me that a 28 yr old veteran QB, with a decent upside, who started 32 games the past two season in spite of being hampered by a poor line & OC issues might be well worth a 4th round pick. I still believe we have to make the OL stronger (1st or 2nd round or Gaither) regardless of who will be behind center this year but for the right price, he may be worth a shot. As stated above, he may just keep us competitive and nothing more or perhaps stability and a new environment might catapult this guy into the higher echelon of NFL QBs. Again, at the right price he may be worth it.
"The ball is like a cold to Clifford Franklin..... Clifford Franklin the only one catchin' it....Clifford Franklin the only one comin' down wit it!"....... Clifford Franklin
Nail on head
…it seems to me that a 28 yr old veteran QB, with a decent upside, who started 32 games the past two season in spite of being hampered by a poor line & OC issues might be well worth a 4th round pick.
That about sums it up. If Buffalo brings Campbell, it doesn’t mean he has to be the guy they build their franchise around for the next ten years. If he turns into that guy, great. If not, then he’s a stop-gate that has much more potential and upside than anything you currently have on your roster while you go out and draft a QB to groom properly.
I argued for Troy Smith by the same logic. Campbell is young enough that he’s not just some washed up vet, but old enough that he has the expereience and ability to start and be competitive right away. I don’t think Campbell will be Pro Bowl QB, but that doesn’t mean he’s not worth the 4th round investment.
John I.
I agree almost entirely. Campbell is likely an upgrade, but not one that gets you where you need to go.
Personally, I wouldn’t consider him until after the draft (and by then he may be gone) in the event the Bills don’t get the QB they want. In that case you use him as a stop gap until you get the QB you want next year (or whenever). And yes, I know this goes against what Gailey said previously about setting things up prior to the draft.
As we get closer and closer to the draft I find myself wanting Clausen to be the pick at #9.
QB Wait
Please already the team has many holes to fill first before you give the keys to the Porsche away.
Stay with T.Edwards and build your many holes first.
There are to many team needs to be worried about aside from QB for now.
Team Needs List:
Offensive Line
Fullback
Slot WR
(New 3/4 Defense)
Two NT’s
Three DE’s
SS
ILB & OLB
The talent level along with a new 3/4 defensive system is to much to overcome by just concentrating on the QB.
If we are smart we can get a new QB in the next two years as we bring in the better talent now at our need positions.
Bringing in a QB and then saying the same old story, oh now we have to build around him just does not work.
It only works when the team has less holes to fill then what we have.
GO BILLS!
I think you’ve posted a teams needs list in every comment you’ve ever made here. Can’t we just talk about Campbell? Because I guarantee that this will devolve into yet another debate about how QB should be higher on your list of priorities.
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 9:51 AM EDT up reply actions
Hello Brian
Well that may be true about the team needs and my many lists.
To sum it up., all I am saying is that the team has major needs at many positions along with a need for better talent.
It is my opinion opposite of yours, that the team needs to fill the many major needs first before you go after the future QB.
Now don’t get crazy and say the opposite, because I know your opinion already.
What I will say if the Bills had mor etalent and some of these needs filled along with not just changing to a new system and coaching staff then I would say go for the QB.
Then I would be saying get aggressive and put together a major package and go after S.Bradford through St. Louis.
He is a stud and will be solid leader towards the success of the Rams.
He does it in a quit way that is great.
You only get opportunities to draft Blue Chip QB's when you team has many many needs!
very rare for good QB prospects to be available outside of the top 10. Therefore, if you build everything else up on your team (before QB) you will never be able to draft the top flight talent with out giving up alot in a draft day trade.
Teams always will pick a franchise QB in the top 10 (if they think he can be a franchise QB), unless you already have the franchise QB.
Turn the page on Trent, he has slowly regressed in the 3 yrs! He has not gotten better at anything other than checking down quicker!
Let the offseason begin
QB?
You are right in your QB theory.
What I said is get the many team needs filled now and then in a year or two go after a QB.
Now there is only one QB in this draft of QB status towards star power.
That is S.Bradford.
Let’s not go there regarding the others.
Example:
The team has many needs if they were filled now and in two years M.Barkley comes out from USC and we are picking in the twenty’s. Then we put together a large package to get him.
If we draft one of the guys this year. The first excuse everybody will have is oh well he is young and he needs help.
Do you want that?
When you say T.Edwards regressed. Remember what you are saying because the whole team regressed along with creating many team needs.
One other thought, Clausen has leadership skills you cannot teach, however, his phiysical talent scares me a little.
Go Bills!
Hey, shouldn’t QB be higher on your list of priorities? :-)
You can't have CHANGE without CHAN.
Tweet
Buffalo Rumblings
by MattRichWarren on Apr 6, 2010 9:54 AM EDT up reply actions
you mean, like #1?
We got the tools, We got the talent
by J2 on Apr 6, 2010 10:05 AM EDT up reply actions
What the?
Why in God’s name do the Bills need three DE’s? You only play two, and they have three now (Edwards, Stroud, Johnson – with Williams getting reps as well).
Why do they need two NT’s? One, I get. But Williams is gonna play there at least part time, whether anyone likes it or not.
Why do they need a SS? They’ve got three – Whitner, Wilson, and Scott. And while they all have varying levels of ability, unless Whitner gets traded pre-draft, none of those guys are going anywhere.
And what are they gonna do with an ILB? They have Poz, Davis, and Mitchell for two spots.
I’m not saying the idea that they should fill other spots first, then move to QB is a horrible one. Giving the lack of QB talent out there right now, it might be a good one. But let’s at least be realistic about their needs.
Just so we’re all on the same page, there is a very large difference between “Team Needs” and “One specific fan’s wants.”
Bill Polian and AJ Smith are gone, so there's not the usual balance between "sane" and "others." Ralph has mentally checked out since 1994. It's a very dangerous time. The coalition for reason is extremely weak.
by thatguy34 on Apr 6, 2010 9:57 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I was wondering about
a fullback. What? We already got one (albeit an average one). And those can be picked up as a UFA.
Sorry Brian, couldn’t resist.
I'd have to admit that I'm shocked by this analysis
You begin by asserting that Campbell has steadily improved despite the situation around him in Washington (coaching transitions, lack of surrounding talent, bad o-line, etc.), but proceed to argue that he can’t win big. I understand that the Bills have issues with the o-line and possibly wide receiver (while I’ll admit that I’m not as concerned with WR depth as many other fans), but the facts show that Campbell is young and has produced more in Washington than our QBs did all of last year (and he managed this with one legit WR). If we trust the talent scouting ability of Buddy Nix (he’s done pretty well with Brees and Rivers), then I think we should trust him in his assessment that Campbell can be productive in Buffalo. If it takes a 4th rounder, I don’t see how why we should be averse to his attempt to improve the position. We have several holes, and I don’t think anyone truly believes that we would leave the draft without another QB on the roster, so why not spend a 4th rounder and use the first and second rounders to draft players with a lower bust ration than QB. Now, I’m not saying that Campbell will be a hall of famer, but people thought Steve Young was a bust in Tampa, but Walsh saw his potential, despite his winning percentage, and we all know how that worked out.
by NittanyKenny on Apr 6, 2010 9:52 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs
the facts show that Campbell is young
He’s not that young. He’s in his prime; so’s Lee Evans. Big difference. Keep in mind he’s only got one year left on his deal, as well.
steadily improved despite the situation around him in Washington
There’s been progress, but it’s been VERY incremental. Keep that in mind as well.
Shocked? Really?
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 10:00 AM EDT up reply actions
Keep in mind he’s only got one year left on his deal, as well.
So does Trent Edwards. And that’s all the more reason why Campbell won’t effect the Bills’ draft plans. You can trade for Campbell and still draft Clausen or Tebow or whoever. Even if all you’re doing with that 4th round pick is buying an insurance policy against Trent Edwards being irrecovably broken and potentially damaging to year one of the rebuild, then I’d pay a 4th round pick for that policy.
I signed up for Second Life about a year ago. Back then my life was so great that I literally wanted a second one. In my Second Life I was also a paper salesman and I was also named Dwight. Absolutely everything was the same. Except I could fly. - Dwight Schrute
It’s clear that our source of disagreement is how this trade would affect Buffalo’s draft plans. :)
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 10:06 AM EDT up reply actions
well I think you’re both right – just in different ways.
i’m going to look past it because Campbell isn’t the future of our team – I think that’s the most important thing we should be focusing on.
Kaisers right on the point that he’d be a better stop-gap for a year or two – but so could Brohm or even Fitz.
I just hope the Bills wait until after the draft to decided if they like Campbell.
It wouldn’t surprise me at all if the Bills have ZERO interest in Campbell as it stands – i’m sure the Bills are linked because we have no franchise QB and have been sniffing around 2nd tier elite QBs
We got the tools, We got the talent
by J2 on Apr 6, 2010 10:11 AM EDT up reply actions
I agree with kaisertown
I don’t think it would have to affect our draft plans at all. If it does, then we shouldn’t make the move.
Every apprentice needs an on-the-job teacher. Who would be a better teacher, Edwards/Fitz or Campbell?
Confucius say, "Man who go to bed with itchy butt, wake up with smelly finger."
If it does, then we shouldn’t make the move.
Well, at least we agree on that. :)
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 10:43 AM EDT up reply actions
A 4th round pick is not a bad trade for Campbell but campbell, fritz and trent are all names for the same thing. As far as Clausen he has great mechanics and is attitude well let’s just say he’s young or maybe just maybe confident. Regardless of the previous 4 Colt mccoy could be what we’re looking for.
I would still have to say shocked. I don’t know how a player can be described as not being a winner in the same post as we describe all of the negatives of his situations.
There’s been progress, but it’s been VERY incremental
He’s had 3 years as a starter, during which his passing yards and touchdown passes increased despite the fact that his offensive coordinators have changed and sacks have increased. I think I would continue to argue that it’s been a steady improvement. I wouldn’t be averse to seeing what he can do with stability (which I think we can provide) and an o-line (which we clearly must address).
Keep in mind he’s only got one year left on his deal, as well.
I hope that the Bills would address his contract like they tried to do with McNabb.
by NittanyKenny on Apr 6, 2010 10:36 AM EDT up reply actions
Well, he’s also gone from 2-5 to 6-7 to 8-8 to 4-12 as a starter. That’s not really progress.
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 10:44 AM EDT up reply actions
If he were the one deciding each of those games solely by his play. :-)
You can't have CHANGE without CHAN.
Tweet
Buffalo Rumblings
by MattRichWarren on Apr 6, 2010 10:44 AM EDT up reply actions
Well, if there’s one position on the football field that holds more responsibility in a win or loss than any other, it’s clearly quarterback.
Let’s take close games – games decided by 7 points or less – for an example. Good quarterbacks find ways to win those close games, but in his career, Campbell is 14-20 in that situation.
Maybe he doesn’t hold as much responsibility in a blowout win or a blowout loss, but it’d be nice if he found ways to eek out more close wins. .412 winning percentage in close games doesn’t cut it for me.
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 10:57 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
i’m rec’in that because you are exactly right. we’ve had plenty of guys that can’t get the job done – why bring another one on the team?
i understand the stop-gap for developing other players – but i just don’t see campbell as that big of an upgrade where it’s going to matter.
We got the tools, We got the talent
by J2 on Apr 6, 2010 11:02 AM EDT up reply actions
So look at 2009's 7 points or less losses
Week 1 – six point loss to the Giants
19-26, 211 yards, 1 TD, 1 INT
Responsible for 227 of their 272 total yards
Week 3 – five point loss to the Lions (ugh BTW)
27-41, 340 yards, 2 TD, 1 INT
Responsible for 361 of team’s 390 offensive yards
Week 5 – three point loss to the Panthers
17-23, only 145 yards, 1 TD
Responsible for 149 of team’s 198 yards
Week 11 – one point loss to the Cowboys
24-37, 256 yards, 1 INT
256 of team’s 324 yards
Week 12 – three point loss to the Eagles
22-37, 231 yards, 2 TD, 2 INT, 1 rushing TD
Responsible for 233 of team’s 303 yards and all three TDs
Week 13 – three point loss to the Saints in OT
30-42, 367 yards, 3 TDs, 1 INT
366 of team’s 463 yards
Brees drives 80 yards in 33 seconds to tie at end of regulation after Redskin’s kicker missed a 23-yard FG with 1:52 to play
Week 17 – three point loss to the Chargers
28-42, 281 yards, 2 TDs
289 of team’s 341 yards
Not in one of those close games did the Redskins running game account for more than one hundred yards. You can heap blame on Campbell but it seems to me he was one of the only guys on offense doing a whole lot in those games. So what he went 2-7 in close games last year? I’d hardly put those losses at his feet.
You can't have CHANGE without CHAN.
Tweet
Buffalo Rumblings
by MattRichWarren on Apr 6, 2010 11:18 AM EDT up reply actions
With the possible exception of the Saints game, yes, I put at least a solid chunk of those losses at the feet of Campbell. The theory is simple: good quarterbacks win close games.
Peyton Manning went 7-0 in 7-point games in 2009. Indy had the league’s 32nd-ranked rushing offense.
Philip Rivers went 6-2 in 7-point games in 2009. SD had the league’s 31st-ranked rushing offense.
Matt Schaub went 5-5 in 7-point games in 2009. Houston had the league’s 30th-ranked rushing offense.
Jay Cutler went 3-5 in 7-point games in 2009. Chicago had the league’s 29th-ranked rushing offense.
Kurt Warner went 3-2 in 7-point games in 2009. Arizona had the league’s 28th-ranked rushing offense.
I realize that Manning is Manning, Rivers is Rivers and Warner is Warner. That’s my point – Campbell is not these players – and all had worse rushing offenses than Washington. He might compare favorably to Schaub and Cutler, if not talent-wise (but I’d say he does) then career-status wise, and those guys were still better than Campbell in those situations last year. Maybe the Zorn situation had that team on the whole down in the dumps, but I wouldn’t bet on him recovering from that pattern.
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 11:33 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
in all fairness Brian
Jay Cutler is the only QB on that list who had a dysfunctional o-line last year and he has the worst record on it and was terrible.
Jason Campbell’s o-line was worse than ours. The Skins better fix that o-line or Donovan McNabb is not going to look any better than Campbell than did.
Then of course, there is the fact that every single QB you listed – again, except for Cutler who again has a losing record in close games as you mentioned and was terrible last year – had much better receivers than Campbell did.
Reggie Wayne, Dallas Clark, Pierre Garcon, Austin Collie, Antonio Gates, Vincent Jackson, Andre Johnson, Owen Daniels, Kevin Walter, Larry Fitzgerald, Anquan Boldin, Steve Breston compared to Devin Hester, Greg Olson, Earl Bennett, Chris Cooley, Santana Moss and Antwan Randel El.
So the guys who had poor receiving corps and poor o-lines played the worst and lost more close games than they won. I dont think you can throw blame at their feet.
"you just have to know there's always going to be adversity. None of these games are going to be easy. Nothing will be given to us" - Paul Posluszny
Excuses, excuses…
Reggie Wayne, Dallas Clark, Pierre Garcon, Austin Collie, Antonio Gates, Vincent Jackson, Andre Johnson, Owen Daniels, Kevin Walter, Larry Fitzgerald, Anquan Boldin, Steve Breston
Sorry, but if Garcon, Collie, Walter, or Breaston are playing for the Redskins, people are still complaining about Campbell. His record probably isn’t any better. QBs make the players around them better, and that counts for the OL, too – Manning doesn’t get sacked not because his OL is good (Polian called it garbage recently), but because Manning himself is good.
So I can, and am, throwing blame at their feet. :)
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 12:11 PM EDT up reply actions
(Polian called it garbage recently),
LOL – I couldn’t beleive he said that either.
We got the tools, We got the talent
by J2 on Apr 6, 2010 12:14 PM EDT up reply actions
rec'd
And BTW, Cooley and Moss are awesome recievers. Moss can be dominant at times. As he ages it becomes less and less. but Cooley is a poor man’s Dallas Clark.
Manning doesn’t get sacked because he holds the ball for all of say… 0.5 seconds. He could play behind any line in the league and it wouldn’t matter. On most Indy passing plays it’s humanly impossible to sack Manning before he throws the ball.
Confucius say, "Man who go to bed with itchy butt, wake up with smelly finger."
Santana Moss
is not dominant. In seasons he almost plays a full 16 he averages 66 catches a year for 995 yards. Under the same criteria Lee Evans averages 58 catches and 922 yards a year. Is Lee Evans dominant?
"you just have to know there's always going to be adversity. None of these games are going to be easy. Nothing will be given to us" - Paul Posluszny
Manning doesn’t get sacked because he holds the ball for all of say… 0.5 seconds. He could play behind any line in the league and it wouldn’t matter. On most Indy passing plays it’s humanly impossible to sack Manning before he throws the ball.
And this is exactly why Manning is not relevant to this discussion. He is the greatest QB of all time. No one else in the league can do that.
"you just have to know there's always going to be adversity. None of these games are going to be easy. Nothing will be given to us" - Paul Posluszny
LOL, you can’t just cherry-pick like that if I can’t! :)
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 12:29 PM EDT up reply actions
hahahaha!!
fine, fair enough, fair enough.
"you just have to know there's always going to be adversity. None of these games are going to be easy. Nothing will be given to us" - Paul Posluszny
I don't think he's the graetest QB of all-time.
He’s a great QB, a once a generation kind of player, but IMO, the greatest of all time, doesn’t throw that pick in that situation in a Super Bowl. Joe Montana is my greatest of all-time, IMO, was clutch in SB’s and won everyone he was in. I also would put Tom Brady ahead of Manning, but that’s just me, they’re both great. Just my opinion.
" A wise man once told me, never argue with a fool, becuase from a far, you can't tell who is who" - Jay-Z
by SouthBuffaloNDgrad on Apr 7, 2010 1:49 AM EDT up reply actions
well now your mixing and matching. Garcon, Collie, Walter, and Breston are clearly the worst players on that list and in real life played along side Reggie Wayne/Dallas Clark , Andre Johnson/Owen Daniels, and Larry Fitzgerald/Anquan Boldin. The point of adding those players was to point out not just how talented the receiving corps those guys worked with were but how deep they were as well.
So if we try that more realistically, if Larry Fitzgerald, Anquan Boldin and Steve Breston are Campbell’s receivers I don’t think people are complaining about his record.
A good example of how much the offense and coach around a QB matter is Jay Cutler himself.
"you just have to know there's always going to be adversity. None of these games are going to be easy. Nothing will be given to us" - Paul Posluszny
Hey, you listed those guys, not me.
A good example of how much the offense and coach around a QB matter is Jay Cutler himself.
Your point is a fair one in this case, because Cutler was actually pretty good in close games in Denver. 11-6 I believe.
Still, even at 3-5, he’s better than Campbell.
The general point of the theory remains the same: good quarterbacks win close games, regardless of what’s around them. Obviously it helps to have talent around you – that’s why teams like Indy pour tons of resources into the offensive skill positions.
But that’s not the point I’m making. The point I’m making is that good quarterbacks win games regardless of what’s around them. Campbell is not one of those players.
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 12:28 PM EDT up reply actions
The point I’m making is that good quarterbacks win games regardless of what’s around them.
Then why did Brett Favre do so much better in Minnesota than in New York?
Your point is a fair one in this case, because Cutler was actually pretty good in close games in Denver. 11-6 I believe.
And where the heck do you find these stats? I need to know, haha!
"you just have to know there's always going to be adversity. None of these games are going to be easy. Nothing will be given to us" - Paul Posluszny
Then why did Brett Favre do so much better in Minnesota than in New York?
Because he was in the same offense he’d been in his entire GB career. Pretty simple.
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 1:25 PM EDT up reply actions
To be fair, Farve started out that year as a Jet playing very well. I think injury had a lot to do with how he finished
"I'm a peripheral visionary." - Steven Wright
Exactly. He wasn’t quite playing as well as he did in Minnesota, but he was having a good season until the last 5 or 6 games. He was really terrible after he hurt his shoulder. I doubt that most QBs would have played through it.
I signed up for Second Life about a year ago. Back then my life was so great that I literally wanted a second one. In my Second Life I was also a paper salesman and I was also named Dwight. Absolutely everything was the same. Except I could fly. - Dwight Schrute
exactly. You said a good quarterback wins no matter whats around them. Favre wasnt in a system he was used to and he didnt win. If 9-7 and out of the playoffs counted, Bledsoe would be a fonder memory than he was.
"you just have to know there's always going to be adversity. None of these games are going to be easy. Nothing will be given to us" - Paul Posluszny
by poz on Apr 6, 2010 2:09 PM EDT up reply actions
See Joe’s comment. Remember that the Jets started 8-3 that year, and had the division lead.
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 2:14 PM EDT up reply actions
Trent Edwards
also started 5-1 and had the division lead at one point in his career.
You talk of familiarity with a system being a major benefit for Favre in Minnesota. Doesn’t Campbell get any slack for never having the same offensive system for more than a season? He still progressed despite it.
I don’t really want Campbell because I think Clausen – Edwards will work just fine as a stop gap, development system, but I do think its unfair to classify Campbell as a guy who will never be able to take a team to the playoffs and do something there.
"you just have to know there's always going to be adversity. None of these games are going to be easy. Nothing will be given to us" - Paul Posluszny
by poz on Apr 6, 2010 2:30 PM EDT up reply actions
You talk of familiarity with a system being a major benefit for Favre in Minnesota. Doesn’t Campbell get any slack for never having the same offensive system for more than a season? He still progressed despite it.
Yeah, I definitely mentioned all of that and more in the article.
I do think its unfair to classify Campbell as a guy who will never be able to take a team to the playoffs and do something there.
I’m sorry. Like I said – I like Campbell. I just don’t think he’ll be much more than what he is – and what he is isn’t awful. I want a QB that can take us deep into the playoffs and be a threat to do that consistently, and I am certain that Campbell can’t be that type of quarterback. He can be a good quarterback. We need to find a great one.
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 2:32 PM EDT up reply actions
I know you mentioned it in the article. Which is odd that you mention it and then say you are certain Campbell isnt that guy.
I want a great QB too, which is why I want to draft our guy. But I disagree with the theory that a great QB wins no matter whats around him. Bad QBs can win with the right system around them and I think it stands to reason that great QBs can lose with the wrong system around them.
"you just have to know there's always going to be adversity. None of these games are going to be easy. Nothing will be given to us" - Paul Posluszny
by poz on Apr 6, 2010 2:36 PM EDT up reply actions
Bad QBs can win with the right system around them and I think it stands to reason that great QBs can lose with the wrong system around them.
Even with the Favre example you cite, they were 9 and freaking 7.
Meanwhile, Marc Bulger gave the Rams a couple of years (bad QB – good team), and they’ve been in complete re-building mode basically since 2005. I just fear that Campbell would become Buffalo’s version of Bulger.
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 2:47 PM EDT up reply actions
why do you feel
that Nix and Gailey would accept Campbell as the answer? It seems that nearly everyone on this board understands that Campbell coming would signal nothing more than an upgraded stop gap as well as an upgraded mentor and example for the young QB we bring in the draft.
Even without Campbell Clausen or Tebow can’t start behind our line and I think both of them are better QBs if they sit for two seasons maybe a little more.
Nix has shown in the past he is more than willing to bring in a future QB when he already has a servicable one on the roster. Nix drafted Eli Manning/Philip Rivers when he already had Drew Brees on the roster. Brees made the Pro Bowl in 2004 and then was given one more season before he was jettisoned to allow Rivers to start.
Nix will have far less loyalty to Campbell than he did to Brees. Why are you so worried that we wont draft our franchise guy with Campbell around?
"you just have to know there's always going to be adversity. None of these games are going to be easy. Nothing will be given to us" - Paul Posluszny
by poz on Apr 6, 2010 3:10 PM EDT up reply actions
why do you feel that Nix and Gailey would accept Campbell as the answer?
I don’t. I believe that if they get Campbell, they’ll be less pressed to go get a QB if they like one. There won’t be the same level of urgency that there is now.
I want to have the same thought process on Nix, but as much as I repeat exactly what you just said to myself, those were A.J. Smith moves. No one really knows how Nix will operate.
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 3:15 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Dyl's point
at the bottom of this thread about Gailey saying he wanted QB settled before the draft is strong reminder that I can’t assume that Nix will be drafting a QB no matter what.
Then again, Gailey doesnt have final say.
"you just have to know there's always going to be adversity. None of these games are going to be easy. Nothing will be given to us" - Paul Posluszny
by poz on Apr 6, 2010 3:52 PM EDT up reply actions
I had to put my 2 cents in,,,,,
I do agree with Brian to some degree, well actually most of it. However, the downfall of stats is not knowing game conditions, the coach’s boneheaded decisions (I’m sure we can relate to those), who had the ball in the final drive, did the defense hold up in the end, etc. There are too many variables. So, yes the QB does have a great amt. of accountability and responsibility but to just look at the stats and lay the blame solely at the QB’s feet is totally unfair.
If you can throw a football
So I can, and am, throwing blame at their feet. :)
as well as you can throw blame, you could be the next Bills QB :-)
"I'm a peripheral visionary." - Steven Wright
yes i'm shocked---
i mean why such opposition to this move
it’s not a big time risk—-if he doesn’t pan out—-we’ll suck and be in a position to draft a qb int he near future and will have only lost a 4th round pick that had a 20 percent chance of being on the roster in 4 years anyways…
there is no downside in my mind—-either you are right and we lose a 4th round pick—-not that bad
or you are terribly wrong and jason campbell finally taps in on his talent—-huge upside
in my mind this is exactly the type of fliers the bills should be taking as they rebuild—-guys with high upside who come a cheap price—-since we aren’t going to be that great next year nayways we can afford to give them a shot and see if we can find some diamonds in the rough that will make rebuilding a heck of a lot easier
by tiimbitz4786 on Apr 6, 2010 1:02 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I completely disagree with you, Brian. Doesn’t happen often. I think the Bills should bring in Campbell for every reason you listed why you like the guy. You know as well as I do that one player doesn’t win a football game. You say it over and over in reference to Clausen but fail to apply the same logic to Campbell.
If you spend the fourth-round pick on Campbell you get to take an OT in the first, hopefully solidifying the line in front of Campbell so he doesn’t have to take so many hits. It’s a domino effect as Gailey said a few weeks ago. If you take care of the QB situation – even if it’s a flier for 2010 only – before the draft you can then just draft BPA among a smaller list of positions – OLB, NT, WR, scat back – all the way through the draft. No need is ZOMG dire anymore.
I think bringing Campbell in makes a ton of sense. If Gailey and Nix don’t like him that’s a different story.
And now I’ve officially thrown my hat solidly into a ring for the first time in a while.
You can't have CHANGE without CHAN.
Tweet
Buffalo Rumblings
by MattRichWarren on Apr 6, 2010 9:54 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs
You know as well as I do that one player doesn’t win a football game. You say it over and over in reference to Clausen but fail to apply the same logic to Campbell.
Have I said that in reference to Clausen? Doesn’t seem like an argument I’d make. I hesitate to even acknowledge his presence in this conversation, because this is a post about Campbell, not about Campbell v. Clausen. I wrote the post based solely on Campbell, and I’ll keep it that way here.
If you take care of the QB situation – even if it’s a flier for 2010 only – before the draft you can then just draft BPA among a smaller list of positions – OLB, NT, WR, scat back – all the way through the draft. No need is ZOMG dire anymore.
My entire point was that trading for Campbell does NOT “take care of the QB situation.” Not in any meaningful long-term way, at least.
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 10:02 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
but by trading for Campbell you are giving whatever QB we do pick up, what i feel to be, the required year or two to pick up the playbook and speed of the game and not throw them in the fire as a rookie. The last thing we want to do is throw damage another QB with the shell shock of starting too soon.
by XtrmeCarnage82 on Apr 6, 2010 10:16 AM EDT up reply actions
Again, let me re-iterate what I’ve stated elsewhere: I am in no way convinced that the Bills will still draft a long-term solution if they trade for Campbell. In fact, I’d bet against it.
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 10:17 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I agree that If by trading for Campbell they postpone the long term solution, they are “throwing the baby out with the bath water”, and I cannot back that plan.
by XtrmeCarnage82 on Apr 6, 2010 10:23 AM EDT up reply actions
I disagree
Maybe not this year, where the QB class is woefully week in my opinion, but next year when the class is much deeper and more talented.
I guess that’s the state of disagreement. I agree with Matt. Campbell may not be a Pro Bowler, but he has enough traits you look for when deciding to bring in a potential starting QB. He’s in his prime, but no one can say for certain if he has hit his ceiling yet. He provides potential as a long-term answer. At best, he blossoms into a Top 10 QB under the tutelage of Gailey. At worst, he’s a stop-gate who is better than any QB on the current roster and can hold down the reins for the next two years or so, while a young QB properly develops on the bench.
My biggest fear is that Buffalo brings in a young QB and throws him into the fire too soon. With the QBs on the current roster, I think that’s almost a guarantee to happen. I think those odds go down if Campbell is brought aboard.
Again, it all seems to boil down and what you think the addition of Campbell means to the Bills long term plans. I see him as a guy that they would hope develops into an above-average NFL starter, but someone the team is not willing to bet the farm on – thus drafting a young QB in 2010 (Teabow maybe?) or 2011 (my preference) to learn on the bench for a year or two. You see the acquisition of Campbell as Buffalo’s major attempt to solve their long-term QB woes. You seem to think (and correct me if I’m wrong), that Buffalo’s chances of drafting a QB (either this year of next year) would be greatly reduced if they bring in Campbell? I disagree with that line of thinking and I think that’s the major point of contention in this article.
John I.
I have a question – is everyones thinking about bringing in Campbell directly related to Edwards?
Because Fitz to me is kind of a lot like Campbell – he’s more durable than Edwards and at least takes chances and neither of them are long term solutions.
We got the tools, We got the talent
by J2 on Apr 6, 2010 10:34 AM EDT up reply actions
But Campbell is head and shoulders better than Fitzpatrick IMO.
You can't have CHANGE without CHAN.
Tweet
Buffalo Rumblings
by MattRichWarren on Apr 6, 2010 10:37 AM EDT up reply actions
no i agree that Campbell is better than Fitz
i just don’t see him as a guy that we should go after because of our QBs – he’s not “the” guy and he’s not that much of an upgrade over our guys.
i’d rather nix and co. just build through the draft and leave players like this off of our roster
We got the tools, We got the talent
by J2 on Apr 6, 2010 10:51 AM EDT up reply actions
head and shoulders
taller too
I don’t mind the idea of Campbell, because he is better than anything we have. He has been healthy despite his beat downs, and has kept a high chin in a similar situation that our Bills have been in, and Trent has regressed, while Campbell has at least been steadily improving his play. He is no Alex smith, David Carr or that #3 the Lions picked a while back from Oregon. He can play, and I like him
It is Brohm’s Bills jersey that is the least stained with doo-doo... GO BILLS
I like Fitz
But I think he’s proven that he’s nothing more than a career back-up. A nice guy to have on your roster, and someone who I would fell comfortable with over a short period to start, but nothing more.
Campbell on the other hand is an NFL starter. Now we can argue the merits of where he ranks as an NFL starrter, but he has the tools, arm and experience to be an NFL starter.
Cambell >>> Fitz
John I.
Here we go comparing Campbell to our current quarterbacks again. Marc Bulger is better than our QBs too, folks.
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 10:45 AM EDT up reply actions
Ewww.
You can't have CHANGE without CHAN.
Tweet
Buffalo Rumblings
by MattRichWarren on Apr 6, 2010 10:46 AM EDT up reply actions
Hit me with a brick but...
I think I get it now. You want this discussion to center on the fact that you believe the trade would only be made if Campbell is going to be our 10 year franchise QB of the future and present.
Agreed!!! 120% Do NOT want that to be an option at all!!!! NO Trade!
I think Chix is better that that, at least I think Nix is. I believe him to be a much better judge of talent.
Still feel that he could be a good developmental teacher for our true QB of the future, who I by the way pray is Jimmy Clausen.
Confucius say, "Man who go to bed with itchy butt, wake up with smelly finger."
You want this discussion to center on the fact that you believe the trade would only be made if Campbell is going to be our 10 year franchise QB of the future and present.
Not quite. :)
I don’t want a Campbell trade to Nix Buffalo (it was gonna happen eventually, sorry) from getting their guy at QB.
If they don’t think there’s a guy worthy of franchise QB status this year, then by all means go out and get Campbell.
If they like a guy but feel like he’s a year or two away, then by all means go out and get Campbell.
I want this discussion to center on the fact that Campbell is not a long-term solution, and pretending he is – whether it’s Nix doing it or the fans doing it – will just lead to more heartache.
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 11:19 AM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
That said,
discussion over. Agreed.
BTW, well written article. I’m quite impressed with the site. I’ve been reading for 3 years now, commenting rarely off and on for about 3-4 months. I don’t like talking unless no one else is saying it.
Confucius say, "Man who go to bed with itchy butt, wake up with smelly finger."
Glad you’re enjoying it.
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 11:34 AM EDT up reply actions
You should definitely respond more often
95% of my comments are useless. I don’t mind! Sometimes new discussions begin from minor comments.
~K
"As the governor of Louisiana once said, the only way Chris Kelsay can lose his job is if he got caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy."
Brian
I want this discussion to center on the fact that Campbell is not a long-term solution, and pretending he is – whether it’s Nix doing it or the fans doing it – will just lead to more heartache.
Is anyone really arguing that Campbell is the long term solution???
Even if Nix trades for him, it doesn’t mean he feels that way either.
~K
"As the governor of Louisiana once said, the only way Chris Kelsay can lose his job is if he got caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy."
No. But no one’s factoring it into their arguments on the topic, either.
Again: what if trading for Campbell means that Nix is more inclined to pass on a QB he really likes? Doesn’t that hurt the team more than help it?
I didn’t oppose the trade in the article, and I never will – unless it impedes finding that long-term solution. That’s where I have a problem.
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 1:26 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
So..In theory..
What I was thinking is if Clausen is gone by the number 9 pick,make the trade on draft day to get Campbell,and the team at least has a stopgap to get us through a year or two until Nix finds a Franchise Guy in future drafts.Would that be in line with what You’re saying in this article??..I can see where someone would think that if we have Campbell before that,that Nix would skip the QB pick at 9 and go for something else..That would really be the only scenario that I would want to trade for Campbell..
Never argue with an Idiot,they'll drag You down to their level and beat You with experience every time..
I’d be OK with that scenario, though I’m not sure how realistic it is.
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 7:00 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm not sold on Campbell
I’m sorry but the coaches that know him best tried to replace him (and finally succeeded) two seasons in a row. That doesn’t sound like our QB of the future, that doesn’t even sound better than what we got now.
I’m an Edwards supporter. I freely admit it. But I’d rather give Brohm a chance to start and see what he can do and it doesn’t end up costing us a pick.
I’ll give you one more reason we won’t get Campbell. He won’t sell season tickets. At least with a drafted QB (whether it be Clausen, Tebow or McCoy) they can be marketed as the savior of the franchise. You can’t say that about Campbell and expect people to believe it.
Brohm wasn’t just replaced by the people that knew him best he was cut. Apply the same logic to him that you did to Campbell.
You can't have CHANGE without CHAN.
Tweet
Buffalo Rumblings
by MattRichWarren on Apr 7, 2010 6:06 AM EDT up reply actions
I’m arguing that Campbell has shown he is an average QB who has been through a bunch of OC changes and on crappy teams. I think with stability at head coach and OC, which is what Gailey would be for two or three years, he could take the next step and be a very good QB in the bear future. I’m not saying he is now. Just that he could be the long term solution.
And as I’ve pointed out… it’s a fourth rounder. Even if he’s not the long term solution the compensation is minimal for an average starting NFL QB.
You can't have CHANGE without CHAN.
Tweet
Buffalo Rumblings
by MattRichWarren on Apr 6, 2010 1:42 PM EDT up reply actions
Brian: I don’t think anyone who wants to see Campbell in Buffalo actually thinks he’s our franchise QB. Isn’t fair to say that Nix and Gailey have absolutely no allegiance to Edwards, Fitz and Brohm? In theory, they could cut Fitz and Brohm, let Edwards duke it out with Campbell and still draft our franchise QB if they find one that they like.
Signing Campbell just means that we aren’t forced to take Clausen. If Nix and Gailey love Clausen, they can still draft him.
Schmucks don't make it to the Pro Bowl... except Jason Peters!
by Run Thurmal Run! on Apr 6, 2010 7:17 PM EDT up reply actions
Haha – yep, I’ve been over this. :)
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 7:34 PM EDT up reply actions
How many fourth round picks are going to be franchise cornerstones in ten years?
You can't have CHANGE without CHAN.
Tweet
Buffalo Rumblings
by MattRichWarren on Apr 6, 2010 11:19 AM EDT up reply actions
I really don't like that argument though
4th round picks are worthless anyway so just throw them away and take a ehh okay guy. Every draft pick is a potential cornerstone, Brady at ultimate best and a Kyle Williams very likely. I don’t like getting rid of any draft picks on a player we’re going to view as a 2 year throwaway.
Be clear I’m not disagreeing with the value, just the thought process. I’m a stickler for semantics.
Confucius say, "Man who go to bed with itchy butt, wake up with smelly finger."
by superchops on Apr 6, 2010 11:23 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
no that’s the point i was trying to make but I coudln’t becuase i’m a moron.
you already k now what you have in campbell – every pick can potentially be a cornerstone.
you’re dead on – rec’d
We got the tools, We got the talent
by J2 on Apr 6, 2010 11:26 AM EDT up reply actions
I’m not using that argument exactly.
I think Jason Campbell, a guy who has proven to have moderate success in the league, is a better bet to be successful in the league than anyone that any team picks in the fourth round.
You can't have CHANGE without CHAN.
Tweet
Buffalo Rumblings
by MattRichWarren on Apr 6, 2010 11:26 AM EDT up reply actions
I don't disagree totally
I don’t want to settle for a QB because he’s better than what we may get with that same pick. We’ve been setting long enough.
If it happens there better be a transparent plan to use him as a bridge over troubled water or I will be highly disappointed.
Confucius say, "Man who go to bed with itchy butt, wake up with smelly finger."
Why would there be a plan that he is a bridge? If he’s the starter he’ll have every opportunity to be the long term answer.
You can't have CHANGE without CHAN.
Tweet
Buffalo Rumblings
by MattRichWarren on Apr 6, 2010 1:43 PM EDT up reply actions
Sure, he’s the better bet, but you’re also paying more for that. The beauty of mid round draft picks is that if you hit on them you’re paying them a minimal amount (under $1MM) for 4-5 years. And then you can go use the money in other areas.
That’s true. I don’t think the salary offsets the odds.
You can't have CHANGE without CHAN.
Tweet
Buffalo Rumblings
by MattRichWarren on Apr 6, 2010 1:44 PM EDT up reply actions
I agree. I’m not a fan of the QBs in this draft class and don’t see the harm in waiting a year to draft a rookie who will still be sitting behind Campbell for a year anyway. Especially if we have the option of playing what amounts to a pretty decent QB in the meantime with Campbell.
"The horse jumped over the f#@king fence."
- KV
That’s all fine and dandy, but know this: if Buddy Nix likes a guy this year, he’s not going to pass on him for next year’s guys. That’s not how it works.
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 10:46 AM EDT up reply actions
if Buddy Nix likes a guy this year, he’s not going to pass on him for next year’s guys
and I think he is going to like one guy and hope he falls to him – so I hope he just stands pat with Campbell.
We got the tools, We got the talent
by J2 on Apr 6, 2010 10:52 AM EDT up reply actions
Right, and I’m NOT advocating passing on a guy Nix likes – I trust his judgement more than my own. All I’m saying is if he feels the same way I do, waiting a year is a lot more palatable with Campbell running our offense.
"The horse jumped over the f#@king fence."
- KV
That’s a valid point. Given their research at the QB position and the red carpet treatment Tebow got, I’m not sure I believe that he’s iffy on this year’s QB class.
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 10:58 AM EDT up reply actions
I don't know
Tebow got the red carpet treatment, but no one else really did. What if Tebow was the only guy they really liked this year? He’s certainly not game-ready right now, nor should he be. He needs, at a minimum, a year on the bench. I’d say at least two.
Would would you like to see start for those two years?
From the options available, my pick: Campbell
John I.
We can get into specifics if you want.
If Buffalo thinks Clausen is a franchise QB, then there’s zero reason to trade for Campbell. Clausen can start immeidately.
If Buffalo thinks Tebow is a franchise QB, then trading for Campbell makes a ton more sense.
Once more: provided that trading for Campbell does NOT deter Nix from getting his guy (again assuming that there IS a guy he likes), I’m OK with the Campbell trade. I said “be wary,” not “avoid altogether,” folks. :)
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 11:04 AM EDT up reply actions
provided that trading for Campbell does NOT deter Nix from getting his guy (again assuming that there IS a guy he likes), I’m OK with the Campbell trade.
I’m on board with that and I bet 99% of others here would agree. Your original article seemed to suggest that the acquisition of Campbell would deter Nix from getting his guy – which I don’t agree with.
But were on the same page. A lot boils down to how Nix and co. view this year’s QB’s.
.
John I.
Your original article seemed to suggest that the acquisition of Campbell would deter Nix from getting his guy – which I don’t agree with.
It definitely suggests that, because I believe it. And I’m OK with people disagreeing with me on that particular point. :)
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 11:11 AM EDT up reply actions
Well, the one thing Nix has proven to be is patient; so you don’t have to worry about him making a decision before he’s fully evaluated the situation.
Agreed. I hope he does it right. I have some faith he will. Call me gun-shy because of the past decade, I just can’t believe it yet.
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 11:20 AM EDT up reply actions
If Buffalo thinks Clausen is a franchise QB, then there’s zero reason to trade for Campbell. Clausen can start immeidately.
Agree, but that doesn’t include the notion that Clausen might not even be available to the Bills….
~K
"As the governor of Louisiana once said, the only way Chris Kelsay can lose his job is if he got caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy."
If he’s not, then you swing the deal on draft day.
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 1:27 PM EDT up reply actions
Well, there’s a chance we’re buggered any direction we choose, right?
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 1:53 PM EDT up reply actions
Well, they are the Bills :-)
If you want to do the deal, why wait until draft day.
"I'm a peripheral visionary." - Steven Wright
well....
Tebow got the red carpet treatment, but no one else really did.
Nobody else did…yet.
I don’t think Bradford will have any chance of being available to the Bills, so it’d make sense that he doesn’t get that treatment.
Colt McCoy is scheduled to be in Buffalo April 11-12. Maybe he’ll get that treatment too.
Clausen’s Pro Day is this week, so I assume he’ll be visiting teams after that. So he might get it, too.
We don’t know how they truly feel about any of these guys, Tebow included.
~K
"As the governor of Louisiana once said, the only way Chris Kelsay can lose his job is if he got caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy."
Yeah Clausen is visiting the Bills after his Pro Day from reports I read.
You can't have CHANGE without CHAN.
Tweet
Buffalo Rumblings
by MattRichWarren on Apr 6, 2010 1:45 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah, Jim Kelly did that probably on his own,
as he’s a fan of Tebow obviously, I don’t think he got a red-carpet treatment, to whoever said that, just a Buffalo legend that happens to like him as player, and whatever else.
" A wise man once told me, never argue with a fool, becuase from a far, you can't tell who is who" - Jay-Z
by SouthBuffaloNDgrad on Apr 7, 2010 2:07 AM EDT up reply actions
This isn't a sound draft strategy
Waiting for Locker, Mallett, or Luck isn’t a draft plan.
Eg: It’s sort of like the Lions passing on Stafford because they think Bradford is better. So they pass on Stafford and take Jason Smith. And the Rams still get the first pick, and the Lions are still without a franchise QB.
And that’s the problem with “nest year’s draft” theories. You can’t predict your results or anyone elses, or how the draft class pans out.
Quit, don't quit? Noodles, don't noodles? You are too concerned about what was and what will be. There is a saying: yesterday is history, tomorrow is a mystery, but today is a gift. That is why it is called the "present." --Oogway
by Der Jaeger on Apr 6, 2010 11:37 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
If next years’ draft class has 3 QB’s you rate higher than every QB in this class I don’t see the problem with this “draft strategy”. If next year we aren’t in a position to get one of these three, we trade up the same as the Jets did.
Obviously it’s a bad idea to have your heart set on one specific player – but isn’t it an equally bad idea to take a QB you don’t think will be very good just because you need a QB?
"The horse jumped over the f#@king fence."
- KV
Disagree
Buffalo should take the BPA, or a franchise QB, if available. Absolutely nothing about the 2011 draft should impact the 2010 draft. That’s a disaster waiting to happen.
The Jets had everything line up for them. It’s not as easy as saying “we trade up.” If it we’re, there would be more trades into the first ten picks.
Quit, don't quit? Noodles, don't noodles? You are too concerned about what was and what will be. There is a saying: yesterday is history, tomorrow is a mystery, but today is a gift. That is why it is called the "present." --Oogway
Whether that’s true or not (I tend to think the real reason there are less “trade ups” is due to the inherent risk, not the difficulty) I don’t see how that answers the question that I see as most important. If you don’t think any of the QBs in this draft class will amount to anything – do you pick one anyway, just to have picked one?
"The horse jumped over the f#@king fence."
- KV
You’re asking a different question now.
If next years’ draft class has 3 QB’s you rate higher than every QB in this class I don’t see the problem with this "draft strategy".
If you don’t think any of the QBs in this draft class will amount to anything – do you pick one anyway, just to have picked one?
Big difference.
The only thing that matters is if you think there’s a franchise guy this year. If you don’t, you wait and try your luck next year.
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 11:52 AM EDT up reply actions
Two different situations
Buffalo won’t pass on Clausen or Tebow based on how they think the 2011 draft will play out.
Buffalo will pass on Clausen or Tebow if they don’t believe that either is a franchise QB.
Quit, don't quit? Noodles, don't noodles? You are too concerned about what was and what will be. There is a saying: yesterday is history, tomorrow is a mystery, but today is a gift. That is why it is called the "present." --Oogway
That’s not how the draft process works, though. Buffalo’s scouting department won’t have anything in Nix’s hands regarding Jake Locker, Ryan Mallett and Andrew Luck until December 2010.
The 2011 Draft has absolutely zero bearing on the 2010 Draft.
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 11:45 AM EDT up reply actions
The 2011 Draft has absolutely zero bearing on the 2010 Draft.
That’s a great point, that I thinnk everyone should recognize. Nobody know what will happen between now and that Draft. Locker could have a bad trip on acid and go crazy; Mallett could wind up on the island from Lost; and Luck could win the lottery – then hang up his helmet forever. The point – that these players can’t be factored into current decisions – is very vaild.
I think that’s a very weak argument – because all of those things could happen to Clausen or Tebow the day after we draft them.
What’s the point? Is there any way to eliminate risk?
"The horse jumped over the f#@king fence."
- KV
The point is that we don’t know where “Our guy” next year will fall, who gets what picks, etc. Far too may unknowns!
That is NOT how you run a franchise. If there is a QB in this draft that falls to you and you think he’s got the goods, you pull the trigger. No questions asked.
Confucius say, "Man who go to bed with itchy butt, wake up with smelly finger."
Again – I’ve never said “if a QB falls to us and we think he’s got the goods we should not draft him” and I don’t get where that idea came from.
If you DON’T think any QBs in this draft have the goods, then waiting to me is no more inherently risky.
"The horse jumped over the f#@king fence."
- KV
So...
If Nix thinks Clausen, Tebow or whoever this year has the stuff, do you have a problem with them taking their guy?
Confucius say, "Man who go to bed with itchy butt, wake up with smelly finger."
I mean, the comment I made that started this was:
Right, and I’m NOT advocating passing on a guy Nix likes – I trust his judgement more than my own. All I’m saying is if he feels the same way I do, waiting a year is a lot more palatable with Campbell running our offense.
So again, I don’t know where this spun off.
"The horse jumped over the f#@king fence."
- KV
Be clear
I’m not asking who is better, Locker or Tebow for example. You cannot wait for better next year. You cannot compare the two at all.
I’m saying that when your number comes up, if the option is there and you feel he can start and do well and win games you take him. No matter what you think about next year’s crop.
Confucius say, "Man who go to bed with itchy butt, wake up with smelly finger."
All I’ve said all along is that IF Nix doesn’t like anyone in this draft class than getting Campbell makes waiting a year much easier to stomach.
"The horse jumped over the f#@king fence."
- KV
Sorry
didn’t read all the way back.
I thought you were arguing judging multiple draft classes at the same time and making selections each year based on next year’s class. I don’t think one can do that with any degree of success.
Confucius say, "Man who go to bed with itchy butt, wake up with smelly finger."
That’s not how the draft process works, though. Buffalo’s scouting department won’t have anything in Nix’s hands regarding Jake Locker, Ryan Mallett and Andrew Luck until December 2010.
The 2011 Draft has absolutely zero bearing on the 2010 Draft.
It’s worth noting that at this time last year Jevan Snead was a golden boy. Just because those guys played well this year doesn’t mean they’ll be considered franchise guys next year. Things happen. Projecting the guys coming out this year is hard enough- don’t even bother trying to guess how the guys who come out next year will be.
...so I guess now I root for chan gailey...
by JPH on Apr 6, 2010 5:20 PM EDT up reply actions
And everytime those names pop up, I also feel obligated to add that two of the three QBs still aren’t seniors. Luck is only going to be a sophomore.
I signed up for Second Life about a year ago. Back then my life was so great that I literally wanted a second one. In my Second Life I was also a paper salesman and I was also named Dwight. Absolutely everything was the same. Except I could fly. - Dwight Schrute
If only there was some way to guarantee the Bills would have a shot at one of those 3 then....
Too bad that can’t happen though….
~K
"As the governor of Louisiana once said, the only way Chris Kelsay can lose his job is if he got caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy."
we could bring Dick back.
...so I guess now I root for chan gailey...
by JPH on Apr 6, 2010 5:20 PM EDT up reply actions
At best, he blossoms into a Top 10 QB under the tutelage of Gailey. At worst, he’s a stop-gate who is better than any QB on the current roster and can hold down the reins
Yeah that’s what I’m saying. I won’t go as far as to say two years since he’s only got a one year tender.
You can't have CHANGE without CHAN.
Tweet
Buffalo Rumblings
by MattRichWarren on Apr 6, 2010 10:37 AM EDT up reply actions
I agree. Campbell is probably the last good QB the Bills will have a shot at before the draft. If they pass on him, then we can probably assume they have their eye on drafting a QB – if they trade for Campbell, then we can assume that the Bills didn’t see any prospects in the draft whose basket is egg-worthy.
If the Bills do trade for Campbell, and pass on a high round QB this year – then I can see them making that trade for Campbell with the stipulation that he sign a one or two year extension for a moderate yearly salary and with good bonus incentives.
You’ve said that one player doesn’t lose a game… Guess I took it to mean one guy can’t win a game by himself and one guy can’t lose it by himself. I find it hard to believe the Redskins record while Campbell started is entirely his fault.
My entire point was that trading for Campbell does NOT "take care of the QB situation." Not in any meaningful long-term way, at least.
It would take care of the QB situation for one year at least. If Gailey likes him it works out for a lot longer term. If Gailey doesn’t, all we lost was a fourth-round pick. I don’t think that’s too high of a price to pay for a guy that has shown what Campbell has shown.
You can't have CHANGE without CHAN.
Tweet
Buffalo Rumblings
by MattRichWarren on Apr 6, 2010 10:35 AM EDT up reply actions
I’m not interested in stop-gaps, to be frank. If we get one, great. I care about getting the future of the position.
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 10:47 AM EDT up reply actions
And I’m saying Campbell has a very real chance to be that future and at worst could be a stopgap.
You can't have CHANGE without CHAN.
Tweet
Buffalo Rumblings
by MattRichWarren on Apr 6, 2010 10:49 AM EDT up reply actions
Oh, there is worse than stopgap. :)
And obviously I disagree on his being the future – hence the article.
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 10:58 AM EDT up reply actions
Let me weigh in here. I agree with Brian on his points...he's making alot of sense
My thoughts:
1.) I do not think Jason Campbell is good enough to be “the future” at QB for Buffalo.
2.) Hence, if by trading for Jason Campbell, Nix and Gailey are even 1% less determined to get Buffalo that Franchise QB, then I don’t want Campbell here.
3.) If you can guarantee me that getting Campbell has absolutely zero effect on getting a Franchise QB, then MAYBE I will think about giving up a 4th rounder for him. But I still don’t see how it benefits the Bills to have a slightly better QB than Edwards on the roster next year to start while our Franchise QB sits. I just don’t think an extra 1-3 wins is worth a 4th rounder. Just be freakin patient, and sit through one really bad year with Edwards/Fitz/Brohm as QB while our Franchise QB sits and learns. We will be better off for it in the longrun.
Overall conclusion: Right now Buffalo is in a great position, in that our current QB’s are so uninspiring and inexpensive such that we now have a free pass to grab any Franchise QB in the draft that we like, even if we have to trade up/down to do it. Given the fact that we can start fresh with our choice of a Franchise QB, why in the world would we want to bring in Jason Campbell? Good lord that is small-minded thinking. Last I checked we were still an NFL team, capable of drafting our own Franchise QBs, and not having to pick through other team’s leftovers!
(Great article Brian, Rec’d!)
by StroudFanClub on Apr 6, 2010 12:43 PM EDT up reply actions
LOVE IT
Last I checked we were still an NFL team, capable of drafting our own Franchise QBs, and not having to pick through other team’s leftovers!
Chanting or Crying, I'll be at the Ralph
did you last check in 1985?
...so I guess now I root for chan gailey...
by JPH on Apr 6, 2010 5:21 PM EDT up reply actions
reply fail again.
meant to reply to my man SFC.
...so I guess now I root for chan gailey...
by JPH on Apr 6, 2010 5:21 PM EDT up reply actions
Sh*t, your right! My encyclopedia is dated 1985. Crap.
The Bills may not still be an NFL team……
haha
By the way, the internet really sucker punched the encyclopedia, huh? Damn thing never saw it coming.
by StroudFanClub on Apr 6, 2010 8:10 PM EDT up reply actions
“Lets print all world knowledge on paper.”
hard to imagine an idea that was better for the internet or worse for print media.
...so I guess now I root for chan gailey...
by JPH on Apr 6, 2010 9:20 PM EDT up reply actions
Given the fact that we can start fresh with our choice of a Franchise QB, why in the world would we want to bring in Jason Campbell?
Because he’s proven in the NFL that he can be an average QB despite crappy circumstances. He’s proven he can be virtually the entire offense for a team if they need that. Clausen, Bradford, McCoy, Tebow, etc. haven’t done any of that at the NFL level. If you’re willing to bank on all of them working out splendidly by all means root for that.
You can't have CHANGE without CHAN.
Tweet
Buffalo Rumblings
by MattRichWarren on Apr 6, 2010 1:49 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
This...
…Many people seem content to ‘go with what we’ve got’ or to draft a kid, plug him and call the problem fixed. No one knows if any player in the draft will work out.
Drafting a QB doesn’t automatically mean the problem is handled. Especially if we have to toss him in behind a shaky line after two games because Edwards can’t recall what day of the week it is.
I’m a fan of Campbell for his durability as much as I am over his ability to do SOMETHING (not always the right thing but…) with the football. It’s something that should be considered here as well as his skill sets.
I just don’t think Jason Campbell is a player that you can win big with
Then what’s the purpose of a 4th round pick? Are you winning big because of anybody you draft in the 4th round?
For me, Jason Campbell could be 0-52 and his statistical production and ability to bounce back up from a hit and not mentally crumble as the season progresses is enough for me to think that Campbell is a much, much better stop gap QB. Honestly, I do not care what the Bills record is. It’s a building season, so let’s find out what we’ve got with some young players and see how much they can improve over the season. Campbell can help you do that. Can Edwards?
I think sticking with Edwards is a recipe for disaster. I can already picture the season now. Edwards has a decent start, Buffalo starts 2-3 or something. Hope grows and then Edwards slowly regresses to the point where he’s completely unwilling to throw down the field, the Bills lose a lot at the end of the season and fans are left arguing about Brian Brohm’s potential because he’s the only thing on the roster that might have an NFL future.
You could tell me right now that Jason Campbell has a 1 in 100 shot of making the playoffs with the Bills and I’ll give up a 4th round pick because I still think he’s enough of a short term upgrade of Edwards.
Brian, what if Buffalo’s plan was to draft Tebow? Would that change your opinion about getting Campbell? Or what if they don’t like any of the QBs in this draft enough to take one? Would you rather do nothing, start whoever from the current roster and wait until next year? I think there is a lot of short term stability to be gained from Campbell and I’d need to be pretty confident that I could get Clausen to think that a 4th round pick isn’t worth the upgrade.
I signed up for Second Life about a year ago. Back then my life was so great that I literally wanted a second one. In my Second Life I was also a paper salesman and I was also named Dwight. Absolutely everything was the same. Except I could fly. - Dwight Schrute
by kaisertown on Apr 6, 2010 9:55 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Exactly. We’re talking about a fourth round pick. I don’t think that’s too much to trade for even a below-average starting QB. I consider Campbell’s career average to this point. I think most fans and teams get too hung up on draft picks. We have a guy we know can contribute in the league and I think that’s worth more than a fourth rounder.
You can't have CHANGE without CHAN.
Tweet
Buffalo Rumblings
by MattRichWarren on Apr 6, 2010 9:57 AM EDT up reply actions
I think sticking with Edwards is a recipe for disaster. I can already picture the season now. Edwards has a decent start, Buffalo starts 2-3 or something. Hope grows and then Edwards slowly regresses to the point where he’s completely unwilling to throw down the field, the Bills lose a lot at the end of the season and fans are left arguing about Brian Brohm’s potential because he’s the only thing on the roster that might have an NFL future.
… can’t the same thing happen with Campbell?
Then what’s the purpose of a 4th round pick? Are you winning big because of anybody you draft in the 4th round?
I mentioned right in the article that it’s good trade value; that’s not the sticking point. Let’s not pretend that trading for Campbell would have a massive effect on Buffalo’s draft plans. Trading for Campbell might create a mentality that they can wait on a QB. I’m not down with that, because I think you know as well as I that the Bills need a winner at QB.
I’m OK with Campbell as a stop-gap so long as it doesn’t deter Buffalo from taking the best QB they can get this year. That is critical. I have the opinion I do because I truly believe that if this deal is made, we’re left waiting another year for the future of the position.
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 10:05 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
You want to stay away from Clausen v. Campell debate, but the fact is they could very well be related. I want Clausen. I think he will be a good NFL QB. If the Bills can draft Clausen at 9 then I don’t want Campbell for the 4th rounder. But, if they don’t get Clausen (either bc he is gone or bc they value someone else more) then I would love to have Campell over Trent. Campell has more mobility than Trent, a stronger arm and durability. What scares me is that they will pass on a QB of the future for someone like Campell.
Oh, they’re absolutely related. My point was my opinion on Clausen holds no bearing on this article; rather, my belief that Nix thinks there’s a franchise QB in this class does.
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 11:02 AM EDT up reply actions
I don't know why you are taking that position
Campbell allows CHIX more flexibility. Could be to let the rookie QB in this year’s draft develop…could be to wait to get a QB in next year’s draft. There is no guarantee that the QB CHIX like will be there when it is the Bills turn to pick, let alone that said QB will be ready to start this year. If you think Campbell is > then what we have, why not make the deal?
"I'm a peripheral visionary." - Steven Wright
I’m taking that position because, as I’ve stated repeatedly, I’m not convinced that acquiring Campbell would leave the option of drafting a QB still open. I fear that bringing him in will mean that Buffalo will focus elsewhere in the draft. If it doesn’t mean that, then by all means bring Campbell in.
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 12:00 PM EDT up reply actions
If bringing in Campbell would cause CHIX to ignore the QB positon long term,
then they are not as smart as I hope they are….. and it wouldn’t really matter what they do.
"I'm a peripheral visionary." - Steven Wright
Concise and accurate up to the ellipsis.
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 1:29 PM EDT up reply actions
If bringing in Campbell would cause CHIX to ignore the QB positon long term, then they are not as smart as I hope they are
That’s exactly my point in my earlier post. How they work through this will/will not give new meaning to Denny Green’s infamous quote, “They are who we thought they were”.
Right now, I think of Nix (and to some degree Gailey) as somewhat shrewd, close-to-the-vest players. This draft and the transactions they enter into will stamp this administration. I hope they are who I thought they were.
As such, I agree with Brian. Approaching Campbell as the long term solution would mean CHIX are NOT who I thought they were.
"you can't fill every hole, especially if you haven't been very good" - Buddy
good post....how do you view "long term"? IMO, that would be greater than 2 years.
"I'm a peripheral visionary." - Steven Wright
The way I see it, if Nix likes Claussen, he should wait until draft day to see if Claussen is available. If he isn’t, and the Bills don’t see Tebow or any of the 2nd tier prospects as franchise QBs, then make a draft-day trade for Campbell. If Campbell moves in the meantime, ehhh. I wouldn’t cry over it.
Campbell is a hell of a value for a 4th rounder… no debate there.
Thou shall not drinketh thy KoolAid...
Agree with your last statement Brian
“I’m OK with Campbell as a stop-gap so long as it doesn’t deter Buffalo from taking the best QB they can get this year. That is critical.”
That would be the only situation in which the Campbell acquisition makes sense. In my head that was the only option under which to bring him in. You are correct in your assessment above, he is NOT a long term winner.
Jason Campbell as a Franchise QB?… I truly hope Chix is better than that.
Confucius say, "Man who go to bed with itchy butt, wake up with smelly finger."
can’t the same thing happen with Campbell?
Anything is possible, but we’ve seen Edwards regress to the point of imploding during the last two seasons. And we’ve seen Edwards completely fail to stay on the field. A couple years ago, Campbell was straight up bad and he could certainly show up in Buffalo and stink it up. But I don’t think him regressing over the course of the season like Edwards seems to is at all likely.
I think we’ve just approached this differently. I’m looking at this as what I would do if I were Buffalo. And I could trade for Campbell and then still go hard after a QB in the draft. I get where you’re coming from in worrying about what Buffalo might do after trading for Campbell.
I signed up for Second Life about a year ago. Back then my life was so great that I literally wanted a second one. In my Second Life I was also a paper salesman and I was also named Dwight. Absolutely everything was the same. Except I could fly. - Dwight Schrute
I’m looking at this as what I would do if I were Buffalo.
Haha, yeah, that’s not how I looked at it at all. If I looked at things that way, I’d be arguing your same points.
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 10:48 AM EDT up reply actions
The Bills need a winner at QB but all the guys in the draft have a 0-0 record in the NFL. :-)
You can't have CHANGE without CHAN.
Tweet
Buffalo Rumblings
by MattRichWarren on Apr 6, 2010 10:38 AM EDT up reply actions
.500 > .385 :)
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 10:49 AM EDT up reply actions
Brian… what’s zero wins divided by zero games? That’s right… it’s an imaginary number. You’re imagining things. :-)
You can't have CHANGE without CHAN.
Tweet
Buffalo Rumblings
by MattRichWarren on Apr 6, 2010 10:50 AM EDT up reply actions
Actually, Mr. Teacher-man, imaginary numbers occur when you attempt to find the square root of a negative number. Dividing anything by zero is undefined.
Bill Polian and AJ Smith are gone, so there's not the usual balance between "sane" and "others." Ralph has mentally checked out since 1994. It's a very dangerous time. The coalition for reason is extremely weak.
haha bingo!
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 10:58 AM EDT up reply actions
But to be fair, Matt’s a music teacher.
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 10:59 AM EDT up reply actions
Right… 0 divided by any number is “undefined”. Sue me.
You can't have CHANGE without CHAN.
Tweet
Buffalo Rumblings
by MattRichWarren on Apr 6, 2010 11:22 AM EDT up reply actions
LOL, I was half-joking anyway. Hence the smiley. :) :) :) :) :)
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 11:35 AM EDT up reply actions
but didn’t scientists divide by zero in a quantum state? I think so but not sure…?
We got the tools, We got the talent
by J2 on Apr 6, 2010 11:04 AM EDT up reply actions
When did quantum become a state? Does that mean we have 51 now :-)
"I'm a peripheral visionary." - Steven Wright
I thought quantum was a loop.
Bill Polian and AJ Smith are gone, so there's not the usual balance between "sane" and "others." Ralph has mentally checked out since 1994. It's a very dangerous time. The coalition for reason is extremely weak.
None of the draft QBs have been beaten, battered, confused, and betrayed by their coaching staffs and front offices for 5 years either.
I’ll take a young clean slate to slighlty experience baggage anyday when I’m building my franchise for the future!
Confucius say, "Man who go to bed with itchy butt, wake up with smelly finger."
When he’s proven he can deal with being beaten and battered but still keeps getting better? It’s not Trent Edwards here who has continued to take steps backwards. He has still done well despite all the crap you mentioned. I don’t know if a guy like Clausen who is used to winning and being liked by his fans would react well to Buffalo fans getting down on him. Ditto Tebow, McCoy or anyone else. Campbell has proven that despite fans, coaches, and his owner not wanting him he can produce and do more than a passable job.
You can't have CHANGE without CHAN.
Tweet
Buffalo Rumblings
by MattRichWarren on Apr 6, 2010 1:52 PM EDT up reply actions
I would pass.
I think that the failed attempt at McNabb shows that the FO is looking for more at QB than what Campbell can bring. Now if Campbell would get cut and we could persue without trading a draft pick then maybe. Nix and Gailey have obviously, set their sites on a different level of QB and Campbell isn’t Much more than what we have. We have yet to consider trading picks for anyone, I don’t know why the FO would begin now, unless it was for a McNabb.
YOU ARE OUT of you kuku fufu mine craker laker Flaber baber FUNKI chunki brain. WE want to winn every year -- abayarde
Campbell isn’t Much more than what we have.
Campbell has better numbers in 2009 than any Bills QB. Completion percentage – 64.5% to Edwards’ 60.1% and Fitz’s 55.9%. Yards was a blowout as were completions and attempts so I don’t care so much about that. Yards per attempt was 7.1 for Campbell and 6.4 for Edwards, 6.3 for Fitz. Fitz was 11.2 yards per completion, Campbell was 11.1 and Trent was down at 10.6. Campbell passed for 80 yards more per game than the Bills two QBs did individually or combined and his QB rating was much higher, too.
You can't have CHANGE without CHAN.
Tweet
Buffalo Rumblings
by MattRichWarren on Apr 6, 2010 10:43 AM EDT up reply actions
Yeah, I agree – Campbell is very clearly better than what we have. The real problem is that that comparison is a part of the decision-making process at all.
Forget about what we have, folks. All that matters is getting the best QB possible – a guy we can win with.
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 10:50 AM EDT up reply actions
Right… I think Campbell is a guy the Bills can win with. I think he’s an average QB right now but in Chan Gailey’s system could be everything the Bills need at the spot and continue to get better. You, obviously, don’t. We can agree to disagree.
You can't have CHANGE without CHAN.
Tweet
Buffalo Rumblings
by MattRichWarren on Apr 6, 2010 10:51 AM EDT up reply actions
We’re gonna have to. :)
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 10:59 AM EDT up reply actions
I disagree with you knocking that a comparison is part of the decision making process. How does Indy know that they shouldn’t be trading for Campbell? They compare him to what they have on the roster…
…Should the Bills make him a long term solution. No, they shouldn’t. But what’s the better option? Edwards behind a make shift line or a line that will suffer through growing pains? A rookie in the same situation? Watching Fitz run around and toss passes at people’s feet?
Or a player that’s proven to be durable and a much better QB than what we presently have on the roster (I’ll exclude Brohm from that as we just don’t know what he is yet). The choice seems pretty clear and if the Bills are trading a fourth round pick or later and addressing a huge area of need, what’s the hold up?
It still allows us to take ‘our guy’ if he exists and avoid starting him out of the gate.
You can’t use Indy. They have the best QB on the planet.
Again, I re-iterate: I’m OK with the Bills trading for Campbell, so long as it doesn’t deter Nix from getting the future of the position. That’s all that matters. Who we currently have on the roster is irrelevant.
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 11:13 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Yes I can use Indy :) If player comparisons aren’t valid, then why should they be excluded? It’s how we know if we’re improving, we look at what we have. Where we need to get better and then compare options to what we have…
And I get what you’re stating. I just disagree with some of the logic or the way you’ve stated it
I didn’t say player comparisons weren’t valid, ever. If you have a mediocre LT and want to upgrade, go ahead.
I don’t think it’s applicable at QB, because if you have an average QB, you’re going to be an average team.
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 11:22 AM EDT up reply actions
I will rec that :-)
I’m OK with the Bills trading for Campbell, so long as it doesn’t deter Nix from getting the future of the position.
Maybe if you had made that the title of the post, it would have made it much easier to agree with you :-)
"I'm a peripheral visionary." - Steven Wright
The choice seems pretty clear and if the Bills are trading a fourth round pick or later and addressing a huge area of need, what’s the hold up?
well the hold up is this team needs talent and the draft is the way this administration is going to be loading this team up with talent.
trading draft picks away for a guy that isn’t your long term solution at QB might not be the best idea.
we draft fairely well in later rounds too so that shouldn’t be thrown to the way side.
Nelson, Fine, Corner were the last 4th rounders we’ve taken so far. if it wasn’t for injuries Fine might have worked out well for us and we are certainly all hoping for a lot out of Nelson plus Corner is serviceable for us.
We got the tools, We got the talent
by J2 on Apr 6, 2010 11:14 AM EDT up reply actions
Corner is serviceable. Campbell is serviceable. I’m not sure how you could realistically make the argument that Corner would be more important to the team than Campbell if we had both.
"The horse jumped over the f#@king fence."
- KV
well i can’t – serviceable was a poor choice of words.
my point is that we draft well and can hit on later picks – we already know what we would have in Campbell and it isn’t that much of an upgrade
We got the tools, We got the talent
by J2 on Apr 6, 2010 11:18 AM EDT up reply actions
The question is...
…Will any of them contribute more than Campbell over the next three years? I’m expecting that if the Bills did pick up Campbell we’d still draft a QB this year or next.
Even as a stop gap and to avoid shell shocking a rookie QB, wouldn’t a fourth be worth it? Many talented QB’s have come out, got tossed into the fire and never recovered. I’d much rather spend a fourth on Campbell and a first/second this year on a rookie we can then let sit and develop vs. watching Edwards go out with another concussion and the rookie getting tossed into the mix.
I’d much rather spend a fourth on Campbell and a first/second this year on a rookie we can then let sit and develop vs.
then that’s where we differ
I’d let fitz/edwards or brohm do that – i just don’t see campbell as that big of an upgrade for us that would make me pull the trigger
We got the tools, We got the talent
by J2 on Apr 6, 2010 11:20 AM EDT up reply actions
Campbell vs. Edwards pre-Cards concussion I agree. Since then I’d point at durability being as much a concern with him as his skill set.
Fitz/Brohm. Eh… I’d be game to see what Brohm’s got but a year of watching Fitz at QB would be extremely difficult to watch and the team would have a ton of media/local pressure to just ‘put the kid in’
all fine and valid
but that’s how I would do it. I just don’t see Campbell as that big of an upgrade – I really don’t. he’s got better stats but his w/l record is terrible and i just don’t see it.
obviously i could be wrong – but i certainly wouldn’t pull the trigger unless there was bigger advantage for us
We got the tools, We got the talent
by J2 on Apr 6, 2010 11:25 AM EDT up reply actions
And I'll say
I wouldn’t consider this trade if the price climbed higher than a fourth, ideally I’d love to see this be nothing higher than a fifth for him.
I think he’s a big upgrade, but beyond that I also think there is merit in the idea that we should field the best team possible if for no other reason than to help us evaluate our current talent. If we don’t have a QB capable of throwing the ball, how will we ever know what we have in Johnson and Hardy. You can extrapolate from there – but I’m not very happy with the idea of sticking it out with Edwards or Fitz for two or three years while we groom the next QB.
"The horse jumped over the f#@king fence."
- KV
If we don’t have a QB capable of throwing the ball, how will we ever know what we have in Johnson and Hardy.
well you won’t know from a stats production – but you (if we were NFL scouts) would have film and you could see his separation and route running, dropped passes etc…
taht’s how you evaluate those guys when you have a crappy QB
We got the tools, We got the talent
by J2 on Apr 6, 2010 11:27 AM EDT up reply actions
Hard to count dropped passes if there aren’t any passes. Hard to judge how much separation is earned and how much is the result of the defense blitzing recklessly because our QB can’t make them pay. etc. etc.
I see your point, I think you see mine as well though.
"The horse jumped over the f#@king fence."
- KV
I see your point, I think you see mine as well though.
yup
We got the tools, We got the talent
by J2 on Apr 6, 2010 11:32 AM EDT up reply actions
I’m not very happy with the idea of sticking it out with Edwards or Fitz for two or three years while we groom the next QB.
I can’t argue with not wanting to do that.
but I also don’t want them half assing this rebuild either – to me he’s a mediocre QB – we have plenty of mediocre QBs and mediocre players.
if the draft pick(s) we give up could potentially be a great player for us then i’d rather take the risk on that guy instead of a guy we know is going to be average
We got the tools, We got the talent
by J2 on Apr 6, 2010 11:31 AM EDT up reply actions
I love how you guys throw stats around.
Can you show me what Campbells stats would be on a different team who he has no familiarity with, compared to what we already have. I do agree QB is an area of need and the FO agrees as well, that’s why the pursuit of McNabb, which is miles higher than a Campbell. These stats you put out don’t mean anything next year on The Bills team and I did say “Much More”. I think they are looking for alot more wheather it is immediately or in the draft is yet to be determined.
YOU ARE OUT of you kuku fufu mine craker laker Flaber baber FUNKI chunki brain. WE want to winn every year -- abayarde
valid point maybee.
I agree with your point to a degree, but are you implying that buffalo’s offense is worse than washingtons? If you stuck P. Manning into our OFF his stats would drop off. That goes both ways our QB would look better in a reversed position. I would argue that our O-line, RB, and WR were better than Washingtons last year and our QB stats are much worse than Campbells. So if anything Campbells stats should improve, and this would lead one to believe that Campbell would be a significant improvement over our current QB’s. You are right that can not be proven.
Brian...
As I see it, there’s so much validity to your article. For me, while I like Campbell in terms of his abilities, I don’t know how he comes to Buffalo and helps them become winners. He couldn’t do it in Washington, and that franchise has been fairly identical to Buffalo’s over the last 10 years. So how does a somewhat-troubled, disenchanted signal caller come to a similar situation and not produce the same results?
The organization needs to invest in a player who can rise above the adversity on the field, when the players around him show no ability to do so without him.
I don’t mind him coming to town (he’s not Marc Bulger, afterall), but I don’t think he changes their fortunes.
Buffalo Rumblings Premiere League 2009 Champion
Song recommendation of the week: Apostle of Hustle - National Anthem of Nowhere
"All I care about is Mega-Desk. That is all I care about. Getting. More. Mega-Desk." - Dwight Schrute
by TheAfghanTwilight on Apr 6, 2010 10:23 AM EDT reply actions
Clausen vs. Tebow
By the logic from this article you are also saying that the Bills should take Tebow over Clausen because when Clausen was at Notre Dame he put up some good stats but in the 3 years he was there Notre Dame went 3-9, 7-6 and 6-6. That is not too good of a college winning percentage. Tebow on the other hand… well we don’t really need to talk about how many games he won plus 2 championships and a heisman trophy, and finalist for it for 3 years straight. So my thinking is, if we are not going to get Campbell, then Clausen should not be the guy because Campbell is a similar winning type player. This article makes me feel like there are only 2 options for QB now and it is either Campbell or Tebow.
I know i’m more infatuated with Tebow’s ability to win games than I am with scouts assessments of Clausen’s attributes. But again, that’s just my opinion.
Buffalo Rumblings Premiere League 2009 Champion
Song recommendation of the week: Apostle of Hustle - National Anthem of Nowhere
"All I care about is Mega-Desk. That is all I care about. Getting. More. Mega-Desk." - Dwight Schrute
by TheAfghanTwilight on Apr 6, 2010 10:49 AM EDT up reply actions
im more infatuated with his combination of wins and raw ability than i am with Clausen's abilities.
i don’t like when people act like Tebow’s a talentless system QB. He ain’t Ken Dorsey or Eric Crouch, folks.
...so I guess now I root for chan gailey...
by JPH on Apr 6, 2010 5:26 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah, I’m definitely not saying that. If I was, I’d have said explicitly that. The NFL is a different animal entirely.
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 10:51 AM EDT up reply actions
and I'm just not sold that building around a quarterback who might not be able to win big - no matter the value of his acquisition - is the best move for the long-term.
I agree with you, but i’m not sure any of the QB’s in this years draft, bradford included, are that guy either.
Campbell-Two Thumbs UP!!!
First the agrument of were he can take us is mute. We can still draft a QB of the future in 2 or 3 round, we need a OT with the 9th pick no matter what. We also have Brohm to play with. What this trade does is give us a better option than Fitzpatrick, who is easily likeable but doesn’t have an arm. Campell can start for 2-3 years till Brohm or a new QB wins the job. We then can finally say goodbye to Trent. he has no chance of winning the starting job in Buffalo with his injury history.
NO PROBLEM, WHATEVER, Work Is For People Who Don't Know How To Fish!
High round QB in 2010 draft vs. Vet
What it boils down to for me, and I’m guessing the fault line is similar for most, is how you view this year’s QB crop in the NFL draft. Brian, you say that the Bills can’t wait another year to properly address their QB situation. In the ideal world, I agree with you. But unfortunately, nothing about this team is ideal.
I don’t like ANY of the QB’s in this year’s draft enough to spend a first round pick on (with the exception of Bradford). I also don’t think the Bills should draft a QB this year simply because they desperately need one.
Personally, I don’t want the Bills to draft Clausen at #9, so I’m okay with bringing in a vet like Campbell and then taking a QB in the later rounds or waiting until 2011 to take an early round QB (where I like the prospects much better). I think for those who want the Bills to draft Clasen in the first round, they perhaps see Buffalo trading for Campbell as an obstacle to that goal. I understand that, it’s all just personal prefernce.
Personally, my prefernce looks like this:
Campbell + 2011 draftee > Cambell + Teabow >>> Clausen
John I.
UMMMMMM......
Hey Brian, so basically you’re hesitant to sign off completely on the idea of Campbell because you’re worried that Chix could possibly decide against drafting a “franchise” qb in this years draft if they trade for Campbell? Why is it so important for them to draft a qb from this draft? What if Chix determined that they like the qb’s who will be available in the draft next year as opposed to this year and felt that the team would be better served by going after a couple of players in the first two rounds at premium positions that are much better than the talent next year?
Let me re-phrase it this way: I don’t want a Campbell trade to deter Nix from drafting a QB this year that he thinks can be the future of the franchise. Does that make more sense?
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 10:52 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Wow
the next time you’ll have to rephrase it in another language. You’ve said it in English about as many ways as possible.
"you can't fill every hole, especially if you haven't been very good" - Buddy
:)
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 7:01 PM EDT up reply actions
I think if you compare to the two teams, the bills and redskins are pretty similar in terms of offense. The bills skill players might even be a little better, In my opinion. Evans is as good, maybe even better than Moss. Jackson and Lynch, in my opinion are better than the gaggle of old dog RB’s they have now. And i think Nelson is a good QB away from being a stud recieving TE. Point being i think bringing in Campbell is a good idea and alot better than what we would go with in 2010 without trading for him.
I like this.
I thought the Bills shouldve gone after Campbell since the trade season started. With Campbell they can cut Trent, Brohm, and the other guy, keep Fitzy,and stilldraft a QB in the draft. Thats a pretty solid Qb corp. I dont think Campbell is as bad as everyone says, hes definately got talent, hes just gotta get with the right team. I think the Bills definately should do this.
Here is a very unpopular suggestion
Forget about Campbell, Lausen and Tebow. Stick with Edwards. With the new coaching staff I think Edwards will respond in a positive way and come back to the form he was at the year before. We should shoot for an OT NT OLB in the draft
Can acquiring Campbell wait until draft day?
What are the odds that Campbell is still on the Skins come draft day? I think a lot of people would be hesitant to use a 4th to get Campbell if we can get Clausen. What we have to hope for is that Campbell is not traded until the Bills know what they did in the first round. If the Skins put pressure to get a deal done today, I think the Bills have to jump on it. But, ultimately the Bills might be able to make the Skins delay if they say the price of Campbell goes up if they can’t get Clausen.
Can acquiring Campbell wait until draft day?
or after? we can make a trade or even trade next years draft pick if we want to.
I certainly don’t see him as such an upgrade that we need to sign him prior to the draft
We got the tools, We got the talent
by J2 on Apr 6, 2010 11:16 AM EDT up reply actions
Bills have options, even though they aren't all working out well...
Agreed with Berg79…
I’d wait until draft day to see what falls to them at #9… They have a few OT’s ranked higher than Clausen, but if their gone and Clausen is there… then you probably have to take him there… OR move down and pick up a few other draft picks to then trade for Campbell.
Bills can’t afford to be giving away draft picks higher than a 4th rounder, unless they pick up a few extra ones, via a trade.
A few months ago we were talking about them getting Pennington in FA… Then we learn they went after McNabb hard. Sounds to me that they know a few things have to occur before OTA’s in the spring.
My guess is that the will research Campbell and see if others are going after him hard. If so, they will get in the game and bid as well. If not, do something on day 2 of the draft.
A bit late, but I do disagree
We’ve tweeted about this Brian, but I really am convinced that Campbell is a good, solid QB in a bad situation. I frankly don’t think that Clausen (the best option for Buffalo this year in the draft) has much more upside than Campbell does, and it wasn’t as if any of the guys in College (other than, shudder, Tebow) was winning anything-so I don’t know that there is a particularly better option in the draft.
I do think there is the feeling of getting the used/recyled bad Redskins player that sits in everyone’s mouth-but again, I think he’s a player of quality and you can win “big” with him. Of course, in Buffalo winning, even little, is a step in the right direction.
If the cost is pick 42 and you can get Campbell essentially “with that pick” you can still upgrade either line with 9. To me it seems the least risky option to take-You can get a solid QB prospect in the second round-he’s probably better than any second rounder (particularly QB) that Buffalo was going to take.
But that all is about the value of Campbell-and as we see him differently, we have different opinions. I also, won’t be heart broken if they don’t trade for him. Jus think it is a good option.
It’s not even pick 42 (or 41). It’s the fourth round pick.
You can't have CHANGE without CHAN.
Tweet
Buffalo Rumblings
by MattRichWarren on Apr 6, 2010 1:53 PM EDT up reply actions
Wait...wht?
Really? They had tendered him at a first rounder…I know having a QB to replace him reduces the value, but seriously? We are going to quibble about a 4th round QB prospec that has already demonstrated SOME skill in the NFL?
ANd he’s RFA! If he sucks-just let him go and get a guy next year. Hmm. He’s a starter i this league, and he’s an upgrade at the position. I really can’t see how he’s not worth a 4th round pick. Unless you are dead certain that Bradford/Clausen/Tebow/whoever is the next franchise QB, I think you are honorbound to try and get this guy at that price.
They did tender him at a first round level but now with McNabb in the fold they have little leverage to get a first-round pick for Campbell. Peter King suggested a fifth while Matt Bowen said fourth.
You can't have CHANGE without CHAN.
Tweet
Buffalo Rumblings
by MattRichWarren on Apr 6, 2010 4:07 PM EDT up reply actions
Campbell being cut...
What are the chances of the Skins just out right cutting Campbell before camp starts? Wouldn’t Shanahan want to come into camp with no chance of dividing a locker room with players that side with Campbell or align with McNabb. Plus, how will the trading for McNabb affect Campbell mentally after being benched (don’t forget last year he had to go thru the Farve rumors).
If he is cut it won’t help the Bills sign him but he may look at the Bills QB situation and figure he has a great chance to start.
"Rock and roll is the greatest music that’s ever been. Or ever will be."
Jerry Lee Lewis
My only curiosity is who do they have aside from Campell and McNabb? If / when McNabb goes down, who steps in? I’m not sure they want to just let someone competent walk away that easily.
Buffalo Rumblings Premiere League 2009 Champion
Song recommendation of the week: Apostle of Hustle - National Anthem of Nowhere
"All I care about is Mega-Desk. That is all I care about. Getting. More. Mega-Desk." - Dwight Schrute
by TheAfghanTwilight on Apr 6, 2010 11:58 AM EDT up reply actions
Fairly certain they won’t be overly comfortable with Colt Brennan as their primary backup. Nor Rex Grossman.
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 12:02 PM EDT up reply actions
Ouch.
Buffalo Rumblings Premiere League 2009 Champion
Song recommendation of the week: Apostle of Hustle - National Anthem of Nowhere
"All I care about is Mega-Desk. That is all I care about. Getting. More. Mega-Desk." - Dwight Schrute
by TheAfghanTwilight on Apr 6, 2010 12:05 PM EDT up reply actions
Shanahan
Might not want the distraction and it is obvious the Skins are trying to get something for Campbell, with McNabb on board his trade value is low and teams might be willing to wait.
Grossman started in a SB and could be a capable back-up with the right coaching.
"Rock and roll is the greatest music that’s ever been. Or ever will be."
Jerry Lee Lewis
Grossman may have started that SB, but Devin Hester and that defense sure made it an easier journey for him.
Buffalo Rumblings Premiere League 2009 Champion
Song recommendation of the week: Apostle of Hustle - National Anthem of Nowhere
"All I care about is Mega-Desk. That is all I care about. Getting. More. Mega-Desk." - Dwight Schrute
by TheAfghanTwilight on Apr 6, 2010 12:33 PM EDT up reply actions
You are so correct...
"Rock and roll is the greatest music that’s ever been. Or ever will be."
Jerry Lee Lewis
maybe they keep campbell and train him some more under McNabb? Would he stick around for that?
Chanting or Crying, I'll be at the Ralph
Not sure if this has been addressed but....
Are we really thinking about using 2 picks on QBs that may equal nothing? Trading a 4th for Campbell and taking Clausen at 9 or Tebow at 41? That is 2 picks…..
I can get on board with any one of these guys but please not 2 of them. I dont know about the validity of this rumor but i would be satisfied with any of these scenarios i have seen here:
Clausen, Gaither
Campbell 1st rd LT
1st rd LT, Tebow
Not in favor of 2 QBs using two draft picks. (Once again these may not be available but please not 2 Qbs in one draft essentially.)
My Reasoning: Campbell is not that much better than Trent(other than Mentally)
My Reasoning: Campbell is not that much better than Trent(other than Mentally)
The Empire State building is shorter than my house (if you only include the residential floors)
You can't have CHANGE without CHAN.
Tweet
Buffalo Rumblings
by MattRichWarren on Apr 6, 2010 2:00 PM EDT up reply actions
I like Campbell, and I really like him for a 4th rounder if that’s the asking price. I do think this will change up their drafting plan. However if they like Clausen is available at 9 and they’ve traded for Campbell, then they are still probably gonna pick him. If they are iffy on Clausen then this would just give them flexibility in what they choose. Let’s face it, the Bills have a ton of holes, and the more players they have that are better then last years team will only allow them to win more games. Can anyone here say they think Edwards/Brohm/Fitz is better then Campbell? I was once hoping about Brohm, but I haven’t heard anything about him, everything you hear is about Fitz/Edwards, which leads me to believe that Chix has little to no faith in Brohm for at least this year, if ever…
I was born in Buffalo, and NO, it's not a suburb of New York City
Yuck. He’s nowhere near the type of player that a 3-4 defense can build around, and he’s lazy and injured. I love that it was Washington who took the bait on him.
Sure, he may have helped Orakpo, but boy that’s an expensive assist.
Buffalo Rumblings Premiere League 2009 Champion
Song recommendation of the week: Apostle of Hustle - National Anthem of Nowhere
"All I care about is Mega-Desk. That is all I care about. Getting. More. Mega-Desk." - Dwight Schrute
by TheAfghanTwilight on Apr 6, 2010 12:34 PM EDT up reply actions
I've always felt you build beginning with the lines and move back from there...
Getting a “top flight” rookie who has proven nothing on the next level is a bigger crapshoot than getting a top lineman (Mike Williams excluded). Yes Clausen was educated by Weiss (who I think is overrated since he hasn’t done much since Willingham’s recruits left) but he also taught Quinn and Cassels if Im correct, so maybe Brady’s success has more to do with his own ability. Campbell hasn’t been successful as a Redskin but he has proven he can do something with nothing, which may be the case here for awhile so why beat down a rookie? Give up a fourth with a conditional next year for Campbell, move Trent to #2, pick up a LT with #9, a NT in the second round and proceed from there.
Agreed.
One QB, and then bulk up the lines….
by MikeEverett08 on Apr 6, 2010 12:33 PM EDT up reply actions
But you love Clausen, Brian?
I mean, I respect your basic thesis, but it seems to contradict your argument in support of Clausen, who finished up with an incredibly disappointing junior season in Notre Dame. I know Clausen had a horrible defense, but if you can accept excuses from you, why not the other?
Just seems inconsistent.
Like I said above – the NFL is an entirely different ballgame.
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 12:35 PM EDT up reply actions
Well....are intangibles that different?
I don’t know. I guess my problem with Clausen is that he strikes me as another Jason Campbell.
But then Jason Campbell had an undefeated season at Auburn, right?
My big problem with getting Campbell...
…and I think this isn’t inconsistent with your point, Brian, is that he locks us into another couple 8 win seasons, taking us out of the Mallet-Locker sweepstakes.
That would be unfortunate.
im surprised brian and i agree on this
from my impressions yesterday, i was thinking that most BR’s wanted to draft campbell, and i was in the minority. good to know that im not alone.
Buffalo, that's where it's at baby. - Adam 'Pacman' Jones
wanted to draft campbell
who wants Bruce Campbell?? hahahaah
"you just have to know there's always going to be adversity. None of these games are going to be easy. Nothing will be given to us" - Paul Posluszny
eh
its still early here….yea thats the excuse ill go with….
Buffalo, that's where it's at baby. - Adam 'Pacman' Jones
by silverstreak3k on Apr 6, 2010 12:56 PM EDT up reply actions
hahahahaha
"you just have to know there's always going to be adversity. None of these games are going to be easy. Nothing will be given to us" - Paul Posluszny
by poz on Apr 6, 2010 1:06 PM EDT up reply actions
So basically, Brian
You are calling him Donovan McNabb, 2.0, which is ironic for the Redskins.
I tend to agree, Campbell is definitely not that transcendent player we’re looking for. And, everyone seems to be saying “awww pooor Jason Campbell..” but there’s probably a reason they were on a hunt to replace him ever since he became the starter in Washington.
"I don't agree with a damn thing you say, but I would die for your right to say it."
"If I had to do it all over again, I'd do it all over again."
If we get this guy..
I promise I won´t watch a single game next season, and really consider moving out of the coutry. This guy sucks, has anybody watched the Redskins the last 3 years, they are a joke, how about the 2 games played last year against the Giants and the Cowboys on national TV????
We´re not gonna win with this guy I promise you, I´ll rather start Trent, Fitz, Brohm or Rob crystal Johnson.
???
What’s Flutie up to these days?
"Rock and roll is the greatest music that’s ever been. Or ever will be."
Jerry Lee Lewis
College football announcing on ABC, right?
You can't have CHANGE without CHAN.
Tweet
Buffalo Rumblings
by MattRichWarren on Apr 6, 2010 2:02 PM EDT up reply actions
Flutie
I think he was reassigned or let go, not sure but didn’t Jesse palmer take is place or a clone of Jesse Palmer.
"Rock and roll is the greatest music that’s ever been. Or ever will be."
Jerry Lee Lewis
" In 2009, he joined Versus as a broadcaster for the United Football League."
Wikipedia – so you know it’s the best possible information.
You can't have CHANGE without CHAN.
Tweet
Buffalo Rumblings
by MattRichWarren on Apr 6, 2010 4:08 PM EDT up reply actions
ABC College Football to Versus USFL
…not exactly a lateral career move. That’s what I like to call a RIchard Seymour.
...so I guess now I root for chan gailey...
by JPH on Apr 6, 2010 5:28 PM EDT up reply actions
Haha, I love Michael Scott.
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 7:02 PM EDT up reply actions
This Netflix disc for my Wii is gold. Every episode of the office at my fingertips.
You can't have CHANGE without CHAN.
Tweet
Buffalo Rumblings
by MattRichWarren on Apr 7, 2010 6:08 AM EDT up reply actions
and playing in his band probably
It is Brohm’s Bills jersey that is the least stained with doo-doo... GO BILLS
about 5'0"
"you can't fill every hole, especially if you haven't been very good" - Buddy
I'm down with Campbell
Cut Trent, let Fitzy backup Campbell, and grab a youn developmental guy in the later rounds of the draft like Kafka, and let him and Bohm battle it out for third string QB. That way you have a decent starter, solid backup and young developmental guy.
YOU ARE OUT of you kuku fufu mine craker laker Flaber baber FUNKI chunki brain-abayarde
im on board with you but I would alter it slightly
Cut Trent, let Fitzy backup Campbell, and grab a rookie in the first two rounds and let him develop with Brohm like Aaron Rodgers did in Green Bay. After 2 to 4 years, whoever is more ready between Clausen/Tebow and Brohm becomes the starter. In the interim we have a good QB in his prime and a good backup.
"you just have to know there's always going to be adversity. None of these games are going to be easy. Nothing will be given to us" - Paul Posluszny
by poz on Apr 6, 2010 1:17 PM EDT up reply actions
You know everyone likes to point out that Campbell has played under umpteen different coordinators in college and the pros......
I’d just like to point something out……
If Campbell was better……..dont you think he would have saved a few of those coordinators from getting fired?
Maybe its not on these coordinators……maybe its on Campbell?
Food for thought.
The only cure for a bad today is tomorrow.
by norcaliangelsfan on Apr 6, 2010 1:35 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Just to expand on this thought....
you dont see the OC’s of Manning, Brees, Brady’s of the worlds getting replaced all the time….unless of course you’re talking about guys going from OC’s to HC’s somewhere else.
Interesting……
The only cure for a bad today is tomorrow.
by norcaliangelsfan on Apr 6, 2010 1:38 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
There is no single factor that contributes to coaching turnover more in the NFL than poor quarterback play. Period.
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 1:40 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
There is no single factor that contributes to coaching turnover more in the NFL than poor quarterback play. Period.
What about Dan Snyder being the owner? LOL
You can't have CHANGE without CHAN.
Tweet
Buffalo Rumblings
by MattRichWarren on Apr 6, 2010 2:03 PM EDT up reply actions
Indeed
Manning’s had the same OC his ENTIRE career.
by FergusonQB12 on Apr 6, 2010 4:01 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
oh thats right, it was campbell’s play that got all of his coordinators fired. or might it have something to do with daniel snyder and his open checkbook and paper thin patience with uber high expectations for his team. Seriously, snyder has burned through so many bridges with people that he couldnt get anyone to coach the team after gibbs hung it up for the 2nd time (a time in which he should never have come back and coached btw). He played owner/gm and picked his staff before the head coach and then went and promoted zorn from qb offensive coordinator/qb coach (in which zorn had never been higher than a qb coach in his career) to head coach. The skins were such a mess. Yet despite all the jerking around campbell received and the carelessness of player selection and talent filling by snyder, campbell somehow managed to show some incremental progress. Now imagine if that was Trent instead of campbell, would we all be siting here as rumblers having this discussion?
Now imagine if that was Trent instead of campbell, would we all be siting here as rumblers having this discussion?
No, because Trent is from California :)
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 1:55 PM EDT up reply actions
http://www.thebrushback.com/campbell_full.htm
Jason Campbell excited to have Donovan McNabb backing him up
Classic satire.
You can't have CHANGE without CHAN.
Tweet
Buffalo Rumblings
If you hit reply at the bottom of the comment we’ll know you meant that in reply to his comment above and not the entire post. :-)
You can't have CHANGE without CHAN.
Tweet
Buffalo Rumblings
by MattRichWarren on Apr 6, 2010 2:05 PM EDT up reply actions
i love campbell
and would gladly take him over any of our current QB’s. Under Gailey he would be a very efficient, and effective short-field thrower and he possesses the arm strength to cut through the Buffalo winds. His stats from last year are much improved under Zorn, and he has the competency and ability to read a defense that I think would yield success at the NFL level. I would think giving up a 4th for Campbell, releasing Trent Edwards, and drafting Clausen or Tebow would be a great way to go. Campbell offers so much more in terms of winning now and is in his prime. I said way back last october that Campbell would be a guy I target and I stick by that. I understand the skepticism, but you’ll find that about Edwards, Clausen or Tebow or anyone else. Campbell in a controlled and stable environment could be a very effective NFL QB. I’d love to see Gailey pair up with him for a year or 2 and see what he can get out of him
MARVelous - "I went from America's team to North America's Team" Terrell Owens
I don't know
He’s certainly never played at a Pro Bowl caliber but he has the tools to play at that level. I think that if he can get the Bills to the playoffs even once that he’s worth a 4th-rounder
If the Bills get Campbell they will not take a QB in the draft
Gailey pretty much stated that. Gailey specifically said he wants the position to be settled before the draft.
What can be inferred from that statement?
“…so that we will not have to spend the draft monkeying with it”
and to a lesser extent
“we do have enough needs for 14 draft picks to be made”
Mmmph rrgh prrmf! - someone with his mouth gagged
Go Jazz! Go Hogs! GO BILLS!
by Dyl on Apr 6, 2010 3:40 PM EDT reply actions 2 recs
Recappotamus.
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 3:44 PM EDT up reply actions
Gailey said he wanted the starting QB situation settled before the draft. How does that have any bearing on drafting a QB? If he’s talking generally, then it would mean he wasn’t drafting a QB regardless. Not like you can draft a QB “before the draft”.
"the true is we havent had SQUAT, SQUISHY,SAQUASUM SAQGUANDO, DIDLY DORI BING TURY CRAP" - abayarde
by dzil on Apr 6, 2010 6:45 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Gailey
I would only say that Chan ran an offense led by Kordell Stewart to an AFC Championship, which the Steelers hosted. Just an anecdote but surely Campbell is a better QB now than Stewart ever was.
by FergusonQB12 on Apr 6, 2010 3:59 PM EDT via mobile reply actions
Oops
Championship game that is.
by FergusonQB12 on Apr 6, 2010 4:00 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Campbell
I can not think of anything worse than trading for Campbell, who I like a lot, and 2 weeks later picking his successor before he even meets the coaching staff. That is EXACTLY the type of crap the Skins did to him the last couple years. How committed can you expect someone to be when they KNOW beyond a doubt that they are a stopgap at best. He would have one foot out the door before he hit minicamp. Hopefully the coaches understand psychology more than some here.
well bflobob
maybe you can understand that the psychology of Jason Campbell isn’t all that important to some of us. This is the NFL, you are fighting for your job every year and you can be replaced at any time.
Instead of having one foot out the door a professional football player would give greater effort to keep their starting job. You act like a starting job is something that every QB gets. Jason Campbell should know his next stop is probably his last to prove he can be the man. Starting QB gigs are hard to come by, he won’t be focusing on leaving town, he’ll be focusing on keeping the rookie on the bench as long as possible.
For the record, Drew Brees went to his first Pro Bowl the year the Chargers drafted Philip Rivers. How’s that for psychology?
"you just have to know there's always going to be adversity. None of these games are going to be easy. Nothing will be given to us" - Paul Posluszny
by poz on Apr 6, 2010 5:23 PM EDT up reply actions
Well, thats the tell isn't it Poz? If the QB gets better when the team looks to remove you and doesn't collapse, you got a good one
If he goes in the tank, you know to toss him out and try again
Nix and Chan, the new Cheech and Chong of the Bills, hopefully they will be as successful in business as they were, and not so much the drug fueled comedy act....
Stats are not everything
Over the past three seasons Cambells performance may have improved statistically. What about Washington’s 3 previous overall records? They have been on the decline each of the past three years. Isn’t winning a lot more important than stats ?
2007 9-7
2008 8-8
2009 4-12
All the passing yards and TD’s mean nothing without adding up to a Win
Isn’t winning a lot more important than stats ?
Yep. It absolutely is. But he doesn’t have the same degree of control over whether the team wins that he does over his own stats. It’s not as fair a measure of him as quarterback, in my opinion.
...so I guess now I root for chan gailey...
by JPH on Apr 6, 2010 5:34 PM EDT up reply actions
again
Clinton Portis got older and older and more and more injured and was never replaced or complimented
The offensive line got older and older and more and more injured until they were completely useless and were never replaced
The wide receiver corp got older and older and stayed smaller and smaller and they tried to replace them with Devin Thomas and Malcolm Kelly but so far that hasn’t worked out.
The coaches got worse and worse and were never adequately upgraded until just now.
How again is this Jason Campbell’s fault?
"you just have to know there's always going to be adversity. None of these games are going to be easy. Nothing will be given to us" - Paul Posluszny
by poz on Apr 6, 2010 5:35 PM EDT up reply actions
Hey Brian
I just read through the 290+ comments on this thread, and I was wondering if I could get you to reply to this comment to explain that you don’t have a problem with them trading for Campbell as long as it doesn’t affect their draft plans? I just feel like you haven’t had to do that enough.
...so I guess now I root for chan gailey...
:)
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Apr 6, 2010 7:04 PM EDT up reply actions
Campbell
I understand your point I just don’t agree with it. QBs are always a few bad games away from the bench but that doesn’t mean it is wise to to send a message that “your replacement is here no matter how you play”. If they pick Clausen at 9 after trading for Campbell it is a foregone conclusion that all that money ain’t gonna be riding the pine very long. So my point is why even bother with Campbell if Clausen is worth a first rounder. If I were Campbell i wouldn’t even take the gig unless i was assured they weren’t going to pick a QB in the first couple rounds.
a few things
i think history has shown that great results come from patience and by keeping a high end QB prospect on the bench for a good amount of time. Campbell could get anywhere from 1 – 5 seasons as the starter – all of it depending on how well he performs. Philip Rivers was on the bench for two years, Aaron Rodgers was on the bench for I believe 4 or 5 years.
And to the final point you made, Campbell doesn’t have a choice of what gig he takes. Sure he can decide not to resign with us, but I can’t imagine him getting much better offers than ours. Maybe Oakland, but Russell is still young and right behind him there, the Rams will have Bradford, the Browns won’t look for a 29 year old QB when they already have their vet with a large contract in Delhomme. He doesn’t exactly have many choices.
"you just have to know there's always going to be adversity. None of these games are going to be easy. Nothing will be given to us" - Paul Posluszny
by poz on Apr 6, 2010 5:42 PM EDT up reply actions
Good article Brian
I agree that if it means they don’t go draft a quarterback (or if they draft a third rate one like Jevan Snead) because they traded for Jason Campbell, I don’t think they can do it. But I think you undervalue what having a competent quarterback will do for the rest of the team.
Things we might learn if we have a decent quarterback, which we won’t learn with another year of Edwards/Fitz.
*Is Lee Evans actually a #1 WR?
*Is Steve Johnson the chosen one?
*James Hardy. What’s that all about?
*Is Nelson a role player or a star
*is trent holding the ball or can the receiver not get open?
Additionally, guys like Johnson/Hardy and Nelson can’t develop playing in something that doesn’t look anything like a real offense (we’ll call that JaurOffense.) Neither can Wood or Levitre. If we don’t have a real offense, we also can’t get a good read on our defense, because it’s tough to judge a D that’s always on the field for 40 minutes.
I don’t know, I see Campbell as a way for us to evaluate what we have everywhere else on the field, and to allow those guys to mature. To me, that’s worth a 4th round pick.
...so I guess now I root for chan gailey...
well said JPH
in addition, Campbell gives us the benefit of evaluating exactly what we have and what we have to work to give our new rookie signal caller a chance to win big when he is ready to start.
"you just have to know there's always going to be adversity. None of these games are going to be easy. Nothing will be given to us" - Paul Posluszny
by poz on Apr 6, 2010 7:14 PM EDT up reply actions
Catch 22
For me its a catch 22.
My first choice would be to draft Clausen at this point in time. One guy I trust is Mike Mayock and he was commenting that Cleveland or Seattle would jump on the opportunity to grab him.
My second choice is Campbell, I believe he is better than what we have, and really has all the physical tools we need…..strong arm, tough, mobile (yes he tends to take a few more sacks then normal but his OL has been horrible). But he’s not a “Franchise QB”! He’s not going to win games by himself or put up top 10 QB stats. It’s like settling for the uglier girl when your on a double blind date. It sucks but at least your getting dates.
Problem:
If we trade for Campbell now, then our luck Clausen would be available at 9.
If we don’t trade for Campbell, chances our that Mayock is right and he’s gone.
I don’t want to be stuck with Trent or Fitz starting. I’d take Troy Smith over them, at least I would have hope, although it would be “false hope”
by ManitobaBillsFan on Apr 6, 2010 6:11 PM EDT reply actions
He’s not going to win games by himself or put up top 10 QB stats.
Well he did put up top 15 QB stats playing behind the worst offensive line in football, the worst coach in football, and a very sub par receiving corp. Who knows what he can put up with a decent squad.
If we trade for Campbell now, then our luck Clausen would be available at 9.
If we don’t trade for Campbell, chances our that Mayock is right and he’s gone.
You are so right about this its depressing.
"you just have to know there's always going to be adversity. None of these games are going to be easy. Nothing will be given to us" - Paul Posluszny
by poz on Apr 6, 2010 7:16 PM EDT up reply actions
Do you think they trade him now or wait till the draft?
by ManitobaBillsFan on Apr 6, 2010 7:28 PM EDT up reply actions
well
If the reports are true then Carolina, Buffalo, Oakland and Jacksonville are interested. I’m not sure why Jacksonville would throw Campbell into a competition with a guy like Garrard so I think that many not be true. I have to believe Jacksonville would rather have a guy like Garrard battle it out with a rookie. Oakland can wait till the draft just like us if they are interested. Carolina has no hope of getting an elite QB in the first round, so they could force us to try and deal for him now as they have no reason to wait until the draft.
Then there is the problem of wanting to know whats on your roster before you go into the draft.
I would have to guess they would prefer to get him now than the draft if they are in fact as interested as they say.
"you just have to know there's always going to be adversity. None of these games are going to be easy. Nothing will be given to us" - Paul Posluszny
by poz on Apr 6, 2010 7:33 PM EDT up reply actions
I think your right but keep in mind that those reports came from a radio station owned by Dan Snyder. Garrard and Campbell to me are equals, so I agree with you that the Jags are out. Its almost crazy how these owners, GMs, and coaches do this in the media now. Oakland is so unpredictable and stupid that so I could see them trading a 2nd rounder for him.
Holmgrem’s comments about Clausen is a good example, it really makes the draft interesting.
by ManitobaBillsFan on Apr 6, 2010 7:55 PM EDT up reply actions
I will keep that in mind
I didn’t really read too much into the link on that fanpost, I was unaware that radio station was owned by Dan Snyder. That changes everything. That report basically means nothing to me now, haha.
"you just have to know there's always going to be adversity. None of these games are going to be easy. Nothing will be given to us" - Paul Posluszny
by poz on Apr 7, 2010 2:39 AM EDT up reply actions
I agree with Brian
I think even a 4th round pick is very valuable for a team who is trying to rebuild. I want to here more about this Jared Gaither. Rumor has it that he might be available for a 2nd rounder. I think a player like Gaither does alot more for the team than Campbell does. That said Campbell a bright young guy who has had unfortunate situations, but I don’t see how moving him to another place where he’s going to have similar issues will be a boon to him.
This space held in honor of Robert Royal known to his friends as "Sweet Cream Style Corn" March 11 2006- February 26, 2009
Well you could easily set up a package where we trade our 2nd for Gaither
Toss Whitner to Washington for Campbell and say a conditional 5th next draft, and maybe even chuck Roscoe in there to unload some more dross from past failures.
That way we unload to players we have not much use for, get a pick, a stop gap QB, a good OT, and still have all our other picks.
Nix and Chan, the new Cheech and Chong of the Bills, hopefully they will be as successful in business as they were, and not so much the drug fueled comedy act....
According to the Baltimore Sun, the Ravens were trying to get Gaither into camp by saying they were shopping him.
You can't have CHANGE without CHAN.
Tweet
Buffalo Rumblings
by MattRichWarren on Apr 7, 2010 6:11 AM EDT up reply actions
A Counter-Argument to Brian's piece...
Just think of all the ancillary products we could market with Darryl Jenks (the inventor’s son of Soul Glo from “Coming to America”) as our starting QB…
Darryl Jenks (aka Eriq La Salle)
Jason Campbell (aka Soul Glo)
Just think of it, we could sell the Buffalo Bills Soul Glo Hard Hit (prefitted with a faux Soul Glo-activated jheri curl)…
Act like a sober human being, not a drunk Internet username. -- Brian Galliford
"Let your Soul Glo!"
All right, I’m sold. That is a better reason than any to go get this guy. Just don’t let him sit on your couch
It is Brohm’s Bills jersey that is the least stained with doo-doo... GO BILLS
If your argument is that Buffalo shouldn’t add Campbell as a solution to their search for a franchise QB, I agree. He’s had ample playing time in his career and he has proven to be a middling QB and nothing more (and please, please, please retire the QBs W/L records stats…thbis isn’t tennis; my soul dies a little bit everytime I hear som eone use them in an evaluation). But I view the addition of Campbell as a QB that could run Gailey’s offense professionally while a draft pick is groomed to be a star. I honestly believe that Edwards and Fitzpatrick are so talentless that their running the offense for even a year could stunt the growth of the other 10 players on the field has Gailey tries to build a winner. The QB position is more important than any otehr position on the field and Campbell is at least, a true professional. I can’t say the same for Ryan Fitzpatrick who I view as a very poor #2 in this league or Trent Edwards, who honestly believe does not have enough talent or football smarts to be even a bad backup somewhere. It’s important for Wood and Levitre and Hardy and Nelson and whoever else is drafted to be part of the solution that they have a legitimate QB running the show in 2010 because starting a rookie is so unlikely.
Just say no...to Trent Edwards at QB.
I honestly believe that Edwards and Fitzpatrick are so talentless that their running the offense for even a year could stunt the growth of the other 10 players on the field
This is exactly right, in my opinion.
"you just have to know there's always going to be adversity. None of these games are going to be easy. Nothing will be given to us" - Paul Posluszny
by poz on Apr 7, 2010 2:40 AM EDT up reply actions
Campbell for a 4th makes sense
I think Campbell has been jerked around almost as much as Trent and has done well in spite of it.
Is he the long term answer? Not sure he is but I am also not convinced that he isn’t. I look at guys like Steve Young that took essentially 8 years before blossoming, he was god awful is first few years in the league and he’s now a HOF QB, so I’m not certain that any definite opinion can be made on Campbell just yet.
I read a few times in these comments that good QBs find a way to win the close games but what happens when both QBs are good? Only one can win. Does that mean automatically that one of them is bad?? With the god awful lines he’s had to work behind and the revolving door at OC and changing systems a few times, I am not certain that any definitive conclusion can be made. I also firmly believe that he is not suited for the WCO, which doesn’t help.
I think I trust Nix. If he brings him in and feels that he Campbell can be the guy then I trust his judgment. If he brings Campbell in and drafts a QB in the 1st I’ll be OK with that as well. If he doesn’t bring in Campbell, I’ll be a bit disapointed but I’ll get over it. I really want to believe that Nix knows what he is doing and I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. Brian, you are the first to say that what we’ve lacked was a strong GM. Don’t you think we should trust the guy, at least until the point where he gives us a reason not to?
Rome wasn't built in a day but there was a plan.
off topic
But if we don’t get a Cody in the 2nd…is Arthur Jones from cuse a reach in the 3rd?
A great question……… for a different post. :-)
You can't have CHANGE without CHAN.
Tweet
Buffalo Rumblings
by MattRichWarren on Apr 7, 2010 6:12 AM EDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Buffalo Rumblings
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
SBNation.com Recent Stories
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Roger Goodell wants Wi-Fi in every stadium
- Plaxico Burress wants to workout for the Dolphins; Dolphins don’t want Plaxico Burress
- NFLPA files collusion claim against NFL, claiming salary cap arrangement in uncapped year
- Donald Driver compared winning ‘Dancing With The Stars’ to winning Super Bowl
- Report: Most NFL players would have no problem with an openly gay teammate
