Posted: 05/17/2013 12:52 PM
Posted: 05/17/2013 3:34 PM
Posted: 05/17/2013 6:44 PM
IERaiderFan wrote: No he is a career back up journeyman at best.
Posted: 05/17/2013 10:49 PM
http://mywordonthat.blogspot.com/"The Heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left."
Posted: 05/17/2013 11:00 PM
Posted: 05/18/2013 6:33 AM
golaclips wrote: I disagree with those who answered so far, surround him with talented players and he can be an average starting QB. But that's the best case scenario, he's not a franchise QB, not even a playoff QB on most teams, and will never put up big stats. And worst case, if he's banged up and playing with scrubs, he'll frustrate you and you'll be dreaming of Weeden or Hoyer. Still, he's better than anything Cleveland has as far as I can tell. And based only on their time as Raiders, I give him a slight edge over Carson Palmer and Kerry Collins, and a fairly large edge over Aaron Brooks, Kerry Collins, Daunte Culpepper, and Purple Drank QB.
Posted: 05/18/2013 5:17 PM
Posted: 05/18/2013 8:08 PM
golaclips wrote: I was torn but ultimately I think Campbell was slightly better for us. I know that Palmer had two bad situations, the first year he came midseason and was forced to play without any chance to learn the plays or adjust to the new team. The second year, the front office gutted the roster. Still, I feel that despite the stats that looked better, Carson tended to singlehandedly blow games as often as he threw us back into them. Did he realize that the team was full of holes and figure that if he didn't do it nobody else would? I don't know, all I can go by is what I saw on the field. He took risks and a lot of them backfired. He had the ability to bring us back from a potential blowout, but did he ever actually do it? He made things interesting in a few games but I can't remember actually winning any comeback games with CP under center.Campbell had a better supporting cast here, no doubt. He didn't have to constantly throw because the D gave up 30 or more in half our games. He never put up 300 yards and 4 TDs, but was more of a game manager who didn't blow games for us but also didn't give you a chance when you were down 3 scores. I was looking up Brad Johnson in his 30s as a comparison (simply because I don't remember his 20s) and Trent Dilfer, thinking he was a similar guy who could win in the right system but wouldn't put up monster stats. Brad had a way better team when he beat us to get a ring and played in way more games, but other than that their career stats are really similar and their career QB ratings an exact match at 82.5. We tend to have a good opinion of Dilfer as a game manager thanks to winning a ring in Baltimore, but Johnson and Campbell's stats are way better than Dilfer's.Overall I think Palmer is overrated and Campbell underrated. People are still influenced by Palmer's Pro Bowl seasons, but 2007 was a long time ago, not a single player who caught a pass on that Bengals team is in the league anymore. He's nowhere near that level, at best an average starting QB, and with the bad exits from Cincy and Oakland you now have to wonder about his intangibles like leadership as well. Campbell on the other hand is called a "career back up journeyman at best," and yet he was the only starter since Gannon's Super Bowl year to win more than he lost here. Campbell was 7-5 in his first year, 4-2 in his second year. Gradkowski was the closest, with 3 wins and 5 losses. If you win more than 13 other QBs, including two #1 overall picks, a #5, and a #11, that's worth more to me than a 4000 yard 4 win season.
Posted: 05/19/2013 3:13 AM
IERaiderFan wrote: you have to look at the complete picture. I have to words to say Greg Knapp end of story..
Last edited 05/19/2013 3:33 AM by golaclips
Posted: 05/19/2013 5:57 AM
golaclips wrote: IERaiderFan wrote: you have to look at the complete picture. I have to words to say Greg Knapp end of story.. You do realize what you said right? "Look at the complete picture, but really two words are all that really matter." You're entitled to your opinion but show me the whole picture if you say there's a huge difference. I went beyond W-L record, and I acknowledged the difficult situation CP was put in. But the stats don't say Palmer was better for us, just that he threw a lot more. The wins and losses don't. I didn't mention salary but for a team having to cut starters just to get under the cap that matters too, another pro for Campbell. The only thing I can tell that unequivocally supports Palmer is the front office's decision to keep Palmer over Campbell at the end of that first season, but they aren't always right and on top of that they let a lot of guys go so it doesn't mean a lot. Does keeping Marquette King over Shane Lechler mean we think he's way better?Comparing Raiders stats, Campbell on top, Palmer on bottom. What indicates CP was "way above Campbell?"Year Team G Played G Started Record Completions Attempts Completion% Yards TD TD% Int Int% Long Yds/Att Adj Yds/Att Yds/Cmp Yds/Game QB Rating 2010-2011 RAI 19 18 11-7-0 294 494 59.5% 3557 19 3.8 12 2.4 73 7.2 6.9 12.1 187.2 84.4 2011-2012 RAI 25 24 8-16-0 544 893 60.9% 6771 35 3.9 30 3.4 78 7.6 6.9 12.4 270.8 83.5
Posted: 05/19/2013 10:34 AM
Posted: 05/19/2013 10:37 AM
Posted: 05/19/2013 10:55 AM
MSN PrivacyLegalAdvertise on MSNAbout our adsRSS
© 2014 Microsoft|