Jason Campbell - Stopgap or Glory Bound?
I was just reading Lindy's 2011 NFL annual, with particular attention paid to the pages on the Raiders.
Under the Quarterbacks section, it says, "Jackson has made it clear that his quarterback is Jason Campbell..." Lindy's also states that Campbell "appears to be the one to end the counter-productive carousel at quarterback."
I remember buying a t-shirt at the Coliseum about six years ago or so. It said: RETURN TO GLORY. Of course, we're still waiting for the return, and the Raider Nation is getting increasingly anxious and ornery as each non-winning season comes and goes.
So here we are, after climbing to 8-8 last year, poised to rise above .500 for the first time in ages and finally and hopefully pave that Return to Glory.
Now, we all know that the NFL is a quarterback league. Look at the playoff teams, particularly those who have gone deep in the playoffs, in recent years, and you will see that they are heavily weighted with elite quarterbacks. You can win without one, but the odds are not as favorable.
Which brings us to Jason Campbell. He was pretty solid overall last year, particularly by recent Raiders standards. He'll likely never be a truly elite QB, but the question is: Can he be good enough? Can he continue to improve and demonstrate enough performance, leadership and command to stick around for years and lead us back to excellence?
In other words, is he glory bound, or just another QB stopgap in Raiderland? Personally, I'm torn, and I think the chips could fall either way. What's your take?
Under the Quarterbacks section, it says, "Jackson has made it clear that his quarterback is Jason Campbell..." Lindy's also states that Campbell "appears to be the one to end the counter-productive carousel at quarterback."
I remember buying a t-shirt at the Coliseum about six years ago or so. It said: RETURN TO GLORY. Of course, we're still waiting for the return, and the Raider Nation is getting increasingly anxious and ornery as each non-winning season comes and goes.
So here we are, after climbing to 8-8 last year, poised to rise above .500 for the first time in ages and finally and hopefully pave that Return to Glory.
Now, we all know that the NFL is a quarterback league. Look at the playoff teams, particularly those who have gone deep in the playoffs, in recent years, and you will see that they are heavily weighted with elite quarterbacks. You can win without one, but the odds are not as favorable.
Which brings us to Jason Campbell. He was pretty solid overall last year, particularly by recent Raiders standards. He'll likely never be a truly elite QB, but the question is: Can he be good enough? Can he continue to improve and demonstrate enough performance, leadership and command to stick around for years and lead us back to excellence?
In other words, is he glory bound, or just another QB stopgap in Raiderland? Personally, I'm torn, and I think the chips could fall either way. What's your take?
posted by Raider Take at 11:45 AM
26 Comments:
I'm on the fence with Campbell as well. However, a trio of good - sometimes great - RBs will help.
TE will need depth (assuming they sign Miller) and WR will need to continue to improve.
My primary concern is the patchwork OL. I know some folks are already sold that the line will be fine with all its new parts. However, these guys are mostly unproven players and rookies placed where so many veteran OL players have failed before them.
Worse, I believe the current labor dispute hurts the Raiders as much as any team in the league.
To wit, we have new coaching and a new and inexperienced OL. Many other positions offer inexperience as well... MLB, S, CB, WR, etc.
I believe the longer the labor dispute continues, the further it sets the Raiders back. And I don't buy the notion every team is in the same boat. There are teams that won't skip a beat. Don't believe me? Wait and see. That too will fall heavily on the QB. As RT said, it's a QB driven league.
"RT"...
I don't agree and have been very vocal about that for a long time sense the beginning of last season...
This:
"He was pretty solid overall last year"
NO!!..He wasn't...He disappeared threw entire games and many many half's...His failures were overshadowed by a very strong running game but the moment that failed he had NO ability to lift the team with his arm...He was continually late and thus off target with his throws showing hesitation on every front even running...He fears to throw the long ball and it showed...If not for a few very talented reception by Little Jacoby Ford he would not have been in the games at all...
So can we win with him...Possible but not very probable without a great deal of improvement on his part....And who do we have in reserve...Kile Freakin Boller!!!...Now if there ever was "Doom-n-Gloom" it is on this front...
But alas don't expect to go into the season in this predicament...And understand the context of this:
"Jackson has made it clear that his quarterback is Jason Campbell...
Well who else is on the roster???...So when another name is added expect there to be a competition for the pole position regardless of how much "JC" is familiar with the play book...
Vince Young is my projected target and Pryor taken from the Supplemental Draft with our 3rd rd pick to play the "Slash" position while he prepares himself at "QB"...
Now how far can we go with "VY" on the roster...All the way and then some and my projections are 11-n-5 AFCW Champs....
With only "JC"....Hopefully 10-n-6 because that's a minimum to take the West but I have my doubts...
PantyRaider....Al Wont Stand Pact!!!/_
Also "JC" was only signed to a 2 yr deal and nothing has been done to extend it...
Campbell played essentially EXACTLY to his historical standards. He had an 84 passer rating. And he did it on a new team with a thin WR corps behind a shaky offensive line.
If playing like Jason Campbell has always played isn't solid, then why did the Raiders pin their QB hopes on a sub-solid player and go so far as to compare him to Plunkett? Am I missing something?
The thing that gives me hope about Campbell is that he performed capably in his first year and bounced back after being benched, and didn't have a ton to work with on the WR front.
He didn't regress from his historical standard, and under better circumstances with more help, he might show improvement.
Of course, if the Raiders have better ideas at QB, then I'm all ears. And no, I don't think VY would be a better idea.
I'm not saying Campbell is great. But he's better than Brooks and Walter and Tui and Russell and Boller and Gradkowski and...Jeez, it's been bad, hasn't it.
If you look at Campbell's body of work in 2010 including the game logs and look at the season as it progressed, I think he did a good overall job in his 1st year.
Yes, for many games he was a "game manager" due to a robust rushing attack. However, he also made many big plays with both his arm and own legs.
My view on Campbell is that he will be as good as the support team built around him. He isn't nor will he ever be an elite QB but solid, consistent play with good poise and leadership will put me in his corner.
84.5 passer rating
194/329 passing at 59%
2387 yards
13 TDs to 8 INTs
Context:
There was noticeable overall improvement and consistency from Campbell from week 5 on. Week 1 he laid an egg. Week 2 he was pulled for Ski at half. Weeks 3 and 4 he didn't play. Week 5 he took over for an injured Ski and led the Raiders to a come-back V over SD.
Games Campbell Played Entirely (losses; 0-4)
week 1 vs Tenn 13-38
week 6 vs. SF 9-17
week 14 vs Jax 31-38
week 16 vs Indy 26-31
Games Campbell Played Entirely (wins; 6-0)
week 7 vs Den 55-19
week 8 vs Sea 33-3
week 9 vs KC 23-20
week 13 vs SD 28-13
week 15 vs Den 39-23
week 17 vs KC 31-10
Partial Games (2-1)
week 2 vs StL 16-14
week 5 vs SD 35-27
week 11 vs Pitt 3-35
DNP (0-3)
week 3 vs AZ 23-24
week 4 vs Hou 24-31
week 12 vs Mia 17-33
Further Context to put the wins and losses in perspective:
In 6 of our 8 losses, our D gave up 31 or more points;
Tenn 13-38
Hou 24-31
Pitt 3-35
Mia 17-33
Jax 31-38
Indy 26-31
"RT"...
If playing like Jason Campbell has always played isn't solid, then why did the Raiders pin their QB hopes on a sub-solid player and go so far as to compare him to Plunkett?
Well how many options did they have...Who were the possible solutions at "QB" last season...And would you expect the "PR" to be that we signed a player with questionable abilities and are hopeful he will play better in Oakland than he has in "DC"...
As for the Plunkett comparisons I suppose that was more wishful thinking than anything else...He had some comparisons to who Plunkett was and the hope was he would rediscover his talents as a Raider the same way that Plunket did...Didn't happen last season and I have very serious doubts it will this season either...I can't state for a certainty that "JC" can't and won't improve...I just have my serious doubts based upon what was seen last season and in his prior history in the NFL...
This season there are more potential options on the table...My "VY"...Cincy's Palmer...Pryor as a future prospect that we start developing now...
So I for one expect a move at "QB" in "FA" when ever that finally begins...
"CJ"....
I think if you look at most of those wins it was also the games that our rushing exploded...Scarcely on the strength of "JC"s arm...
Also those game where we gave up 30+ pts....Look at the rushing totals against us and the very limited output by us...
This will put things in much better perspective...
PantyRaider...Hand Picked Stats Are Misleading...Look At Everything Involved!!!/_
This comment has been removed by the author.
Raiders Passer Rating Differentials since 2000
2010 Raiders average QB rating was 77.5 and our opponents average QB rating against us was 85.6. Therefore we take 77.5 and subtract 85.6 which equals -8.1. Therefore, the PRD was -8.1.
Season OAK Opp PRD Record
2010 ~ 77.5 - 85.6 = -8.1 (8-8)
2009 ~ 62.0 - 89.5 = -27.5 (5-11)
2008 ~ 71.6 - 79.3 = -7.7 (5-11)
2007 ~ 70.9 - 78.9 = -8 (4-12)
2006 ~ 56.2 - 74.1 = -17.9 (2-14)
2005 ~ 76.0 - 90.7 = -24.7 (4-12)
2004 ~ 76.1 - 99.4 = -23.3 (5-11)
2003 ~ 65.0 - 87.3 = -22.3 (4-12)
2002 ~ 97.2 - 77.3 = +19.9 (11-5) *Super Bowl
2001 ~ 95.5 - 70.5 = +25 (10-6) *Playoffs
2000 ~ 92.0 - 80.4 = +11.6 (12-4) *Playoffs
Interesting Stats I should think...Now how far do we go with "JC"-n-Boller???...
PantyRaider...Changes Are In The Wind!!!!/_
At the press conference announcing the hiring of Hue Jackson as head coach, Mr. Davis said. "And then Jason came a long way in the year 2010 and you have to go back to the quote I gave and a lot of you took me up on it, the quote I said, he reminds me of Jim Plunkett at this particular phase in his career. I said it then and I believed now. I remind you that these things don’t come quickly to anyone. We all espouse the greatness of Brett Favre. One Super Bowl that he won with the Green Bay Packers. So what I was saying to you was that my gestalt saw in Jason Campbell someone down the road who can really throw the football, can run, there are some things we have to do with him, but I think the guy that’s going to be handling him in the future knows what to do and how to do it."
Based on those words, I do not expect the Raiders to go out and pay for another starter-level QB free agent. They have not drafted for a future QB since Russell.
I think it's Campbell or bust right now.
Historical Accounting Of "JC" Sense The Bye Week By The Halves...
Sense you need the stats before you see the reality of his performance...
Pitts: Week #11
1st half:
2-7@31 12:40 "JC" 4 yds Murphy
1-10@50 12.07 "JC" 17yds JLH
1-10@50 11:23 "JC" Inc Penalty No Play..
2-11@29 10:38 "JC" Inc
3-11@29 "JC" 6yds JLH
2-9@12 8:03 "JC" Inc
3-9@12 7:59 "JC" 16yds Ford
2-15@38 6:57 "JC" Inc
3-15@38 6:55 "JC" Inc
1-10@25 13:24 "JC" Sacked -8yds
3-16@19 12:07 "JC" Inc
2-9@12 7:56 "JC" Inc
3-9@12 7:48 "JC" Inc
2-7@13 3:17 "JC" Sacked -7yds
3-14@6 3:10 "JC" Inc Penalty
1-10@33 3:03 "JC" 12yds Murphy Fumbled
1-10@23 1:20 "JC" Sacked -0yds Fumbled
3-13@20 0:25 "JC" 6yds Miller
2nd Half: Raiders 3-21 "JC" 6/18 45yds -15yds 3 Sks = 30 net yds...
1-10@26 14:51 "JC" 9yds JLH
1-10@37 14:08 "JC" Inc
3-7@40 13:19 "JC" Sacked -12yds
1-10@28 11:13 "JC" INT
2-7@8 8:24 "JC" Inc
3-7@8 8:22 "JC" INT Penalty "TD" Nullified
1-10@23 8:15 "JC" Sacked -0yds Penalty
1-15@18 8:15 "JC" Sacked -3yds Penalty
1-10@23 7:50 "JC" Rush 7yds Penalty
2-20@13 6:34 "JC" Inc
3-20@13 6:28 "JC" Inc
1-10@20 4:42 Grad come in to end this pain...
In 3/4's "JC" 7/19 70yds INT 6 Sks -30yds
In 1/4 Grad 13/24 98yds INT 2 Sks
Game.............Raiders 3-35
This is total "BS" right after the damn Bye for crying out loud and he wasn't prepared to play any better than this in freakin week #11!!!....
Week #13... Win...Chargers
"JC" 10/16 117yds "TD"
Rush 7/37yds "TD"
Team 251yds rushing @ 4.8yd ave
Week #14...Loss....Jaguars
"JC" 21/30 324yds 2 "TD"s
"D" gave up 234yds rushing 151 Passing
Week #15...Win...Denver
"JC" 15/26 238yds "TD" 2 INTs
Team rushed for 264yds...
"D" allowed only 129yds Passing -n- 106yds Rushing...
Week #16....Loss...Indy
"JC" 29/42 231yds "TD"
Raiders opened with Return for "TD"...
3-n-out 3 times...
Managed a "FG"s on the 4th/5th/6th possessions...59yds/38yds/54yds
3-n-Out on the 7th possession...
"FG" on the 8th Possession...
3-n-Out on the 9th-n-10th Possessions...
"FG" on the 11th Possession...51yds..
3-n-Out on the 12th Possession...
"FG" on the 13th Possession...45yds...
3-n-Out on the 14th Possession...
Finally "TD" on the 15th Possession...
Consistency anyone???...
Week #17...Win..."KC"...
"JC" 15/25 155yds "TD"
Raiders rushed for 209yds...
"D" was stiff...
1st Possession Fumble
3-n-Out on 2nd...
6-n-Out on 3rd...Boller
2nd Quarter "TD" on 4th...
Slow start as usual with "JC"...
OK...So what do see here:
#1...Why the hell did it take him so freaking long to show something???....
#2...Consistency and slow starts are a definite issue...Hesitation in game time has already been touched upon...But also he did appear improved at the end...The Jags loss was hardly his fault...He contributed to the Indy loss by being so inconsistent -n- producing so many 3-n-Outs...He didn't hurt us but helped us in the season ending "V"s...So I guess there is hope but Damn!!!....NOT with only Boller backing him up...
PantyRaider...Help Better Be On The Way!!!/_
"RT"...
I doubt that will be the case...Al is no fool and if he has an opportunity to grab a "QB" that he likes he will do so...No telling when he gets another shot at one...
At the time of the press conference who was possible on the list of available "QB"s...Palmer has now surfaced as a possibility...It was speculated that "VY" may be...Pryor was not on anyone's radar yet...Denver is shopping theirs now...So what would you expect him to talk about...
He made it a point to say "Told you so" just a little to those "Mediot"s...I can deal with that but he never said:
"We will NOT pursue and other "QB" in "FA" or the "SD"....
At least I never heard anything like that...We will proceed with "JC" as the #1 option...
PantyRaider...Things Change When Availability Changes!!!/_
I really don't want VY. Palmer is washed up and has regressed considerably the past 2 years.
Pryor is nothing more than a long term project and the Raiders simply don't develop QBs.
Furthermore, when the dust settles on the new CBA, it is highly unlikely the Raiders will be active in the FA market besides attempting to sign some of their own FAs like Miller, Bush, and possibly Asomugha.
Clearly it is Campbell's team in 2011 with the complete endorsement of his head coach and owner.
Campbell's performance in 2011 will dictate what we do in the future.
I agree; it's Campbell or bust.
If the Raiders use a 3rd round pick in the supplemental draft to take a project QB, they would be out their 2nd, 3rd and 4th round picks next year (2012). As it stands, they have no 2nd or 4th.
Really, how many years should we expect this rebuilding process to continue?
IMO, if Campbell fails, Hue Jackson should be right behind him out the door. Remember, Jackson is taking over a team whose HC was fired for only reaching .500. The bar should be equally high for Jackson.
Anything less than making the playoffs will be another failure by the Raiders.
"CJ"...
You may be right regarding all the appearances at the present but that may change as soon as activity is allowed...I'm speculating upon what Al Davis is likely in the mood to peruse and I project "QB" will top his list...
The "OL" has been addresses and now it's up to the coaches to make it work...
"DB"s have also been addressed...
"WR"s have been added as well and our new and exciting "RB"...One "WR" translates to a "WR"/"TE" Tweener with very good hands and very physical play...
Our other perceived needs:
"OLB" or perhaps just better coaching of this unit...
"DB"s are also in need of better coaching...
Other than this just depth....
Bush is NOT a "FA" this season...He spent his 1st season on the NFI list so it did not accumulate as a credited season towards his 4th yr...
Zack was working on a new contract when the CBA meltdown occurred but now also may not be a "UFA"....The Owners are pushing for "Right of 1st Refusal" for 6 yr players and we don't know where the "FA" break free point will be established...
Nam is another story and he will cost $$$$...How much and how are still unknowns....We made preparations in this draft in the event we lose him but no one is going to do what he did..That's clear...
Add to this the Raiders list of "UDFA" who have been on hold and that the NFL has speculated expanding the rosters so this could be a very large class....
Add in the possibility of an un capped season due to the shortage of time to prepare for this season and the projected "Dog Fight" for "FA"s...
Than add in the possibility of the Supplemental Draft catching Al's eye and filling our future "QB" needs as well as present needs at "WR"....The "Slash"...
Now consider that "JC" was only signed to a 2 year deal which expires this season and no known attempts have been made to extend it...
So far too many variables here to just say the roster remains the same but what the final result is ain't exactly clear either...
PantyRaider....Chance For Movement Far Outweigh Chances Of Standing Pact!!!/_
This comment has been removed by the author.
Possible Available Options @ "QB":
Threw trades/release or "FA"/Draft..
Kile Boller.....Rate 30
"JC"............84.5
Davis Carr......23.6
Charlie Frye....???
"Sky"...........66.3
Matt Hasselbeck.73.2
Kevin Kolb......76.1
Matt Leinart....???
Donovan McNabb..77.1
J T O'Sulivan...???
Kile Orton......87.5
Carson Palmer...82,4
Alix Smith......82.1
Vince Young.....98.6
Terrelle Pryor..????
Now I possibly missed a few of non-noteworthy value...But speculate for just a moment honestly...Looking at this list and the #'s who stands out as the best solution to our Run 1st "O" considering price and ability...
PantyRaider...The Last 2 Clearly!!!/_
What's Hanging Things Up???...
The biggest issue remaining on the ledger is the rookie salary system, according to sources on both sides of the table.
The NFL’s disagreement with the players comes, primarily, with the top eight picks in the draft, where the dollars are biggest. Conversely, the players’ issue stretches across the entire first round, with a desire to get younger players to free agency quicker, if their pay is going to be slashed significantly.
As part of its proposal, the league is asking for a system setting the limit for length on first-round deals to five years. Under the old collective bargaining agreement, the NFL allowed six-year deals to the first 16 picks.
Meanwhile, the level to which players have been willing to cut rookie money is tied directly to the years on such deals. More significant economic changes are agreeable to the players if all rookie deals are limited to four years, which was the case for players selected in Rounds 2-7 under the expired CBA.
There’s also basic agreement on new stipulations that would keep draft picks from renegotiating until after Year 3, and undrafted free agents (on three-year deals) from renegotiating until after Year 2.
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d820b3c8e/article/rookie-salary-system-a-major-discussion-point-as-talks-roll-on?module=HP_headlines
I like what I’m seeing here…Many things that help strengthen the NFL,,,I hope they also get the “Right of 1st Refusal” for 6 yr vets…No hold outs before yr 3 is huge and something I posted was a problem…Slashing of the rookie salary and so forth will help the Cap $$$$ significantly…So maybe it’s all worth the wait if it gets done now…
PantyRaider....Time To Look Forwards To Bright New Future!!!/_
As far as free agency goes, I don't see the Raiders actively involved.
I read some article on ESPN last week that projected us to be approx. $10M over the estimated cap figure.
With the contracts signed by Routt, Seymour, Henderson, and Wimbley before the lockout, we will be hard pressed to re-sign some of our own free agents let alone getting any external free agents. The same article mentioned the possibility of some Raiders being cut (ie. Carlisle, Barnes, Henderson and others) and others have their contracts restructured to make room for the rookie contracts and own free agents like Miller and Bush.
"CJ"...
That article failed to mention the "Dead Money" as likely not counting against the Cap....If so we are $15 Mil under a $120 Mil Cap figure...Better if the Cap is as high as $125 Mil as also projected...
Than there is further speculations that due to the very short prep time for this season it will be an uncapped year allowing teams the opportunity to get their Cap figures in line by next season...
----------------------------------
Clayton pins the likely cap number between $117-125 million
Depending on how much dead money is created by the voiding of Nnamdi Asomugha's contract, the Raiders are more than $10 million over the cap.
----------------------------------
The NFL reassured Owners prior to the "CBA" collapse that considerations would be made this season so no need to worry about the Cap...That was prior to Al Davis making the contracts that he made with our players...It was said he wanted to reward his guys for playing well...Now hopefully the NFL didn't put the Raiders in an awkward position by speaking too soon but I suspect the "NFLPA" would also like an uncapped season too...It's more $$$$ possibilities for them...
We don't have a #1 to sign so that in itself saved us allot of $$$$...It went to a proven Vet like Seymour instead and the others already signed...
But the real point of contention is Al Davis himself...Has he ever been quiet when it comes to improving his team....NO!!!...Will he be now....NO!!!...And that's something I can put faith in threw time...As to how he does it I don't know but I damn sure know he will...
Nam's dead $$$$ is $17 Mil I think and there may be more yet unknown...
We need a "QB" and I expect to sign one....I also expect to sign Bush -n- Miller...I also expect a very long list of "UDFA"s that have been on hold...Than I also expect Prior from the "Sup-Draft"...Now that's allot to expect if we don't have the $$$$ to proceed...
Al Will Find A Way....
Other situations also exist...Some teams are as much as $60+ Mil under the cap and now need to spend 90% of the Cap in $$$$....Who are they going to give all that $$$$ to...How is this going to upset the "FA" market...
PantyRaider...Too Much Fog To See Clearly Now!!!/_
PR,
What I'm suggesting is that the Raiders will need to carefully manage the roster by making some difficult decisions (who to re-sign, who to re-structure, who to cut) before the organization is in a place where it can even remotely consider going after external free agents.
Bottom Line:
Don't expect any tier 1 type free agents to walk through the doors in 2011. As always, choices have been made. Some of these decisions, especially the BIG $$ doled out to Routt, Seymour, Henderson, and Wimbley, are in fact going to handcuff our activeness in the free agent market.
For example, how likely is it we re-sign Asomugha? How likely is it that we sign a proven veteran OLineman? If we had more wiggle room and weren't financially pressed, do you really think Davis would allow Asomugha leave?
"CJ"...
I agree Al saw the writing on the wall regarding resigning Nam...He made a very difficult choice indeed and I will hate to lose him...
The only one I question here is Routt...Not because he's not finally a quality player but because who was going to pay him the $$$$...He wasn't much when he left playing in the Zone...He fits what we do here but who else would view him as $$$$ valuable...I think his $$$ was an insurance gift...Prolley not guaranteed though...
Seymour and Wimbley were need positions and quality players for our system...Not sure yet what type of $$$$ go to Wimbley until a final deal is made...If it's back-loaded or in Signing Bonus than it won't count as high this season as a one year "FT" would...
I don't recall Henderson's $$$$...He played well when healthy but that wasn't all season and he's long in the tooth as far as his health...Same age as Hainsworth I believe but less healthy...
We drafted replacements for Nam but they won't be ready to do what he does in one season if ever...
I don't think we go "OL" in "FA" unless it's a cheap sub for one season instead of the old tired bodies we already have...We already have the young bodies to play on this roster...
"VY" is a "Tier #1" player but with baggage that makes him a bargain...Talent with ????s that will scare off most teams....Burris is in the same boat...Pryor will also be cheap as a result of the same issues...
I have not projected the Raiders going after the big priced "QB"s -n- "WR"s...No one that will have high costs in trades or $$$$....
PantyRaider...Quality Talent At Bargain Basement $$$$s!!!!/_
Clarification:
I don't expect "VY" to get any better than "JC" $$$$s and that's low for a starting "QB"....
This comment has been removed by the author.
Back to the old questions...I found this very interesting regarding Nam's perceived value:
----------------------------------
Part of that can be attributed to the increase in zone-based coverage like the Tampa 2 and various zone-blitz schemes. Asomugha would help teams wanting to get after the quarterback with pressure and leaving their cornerbacks in isolated matchups, but it isn't a requirement to have great one-on-one corners to thrive within the increasingly popular zone systems in the league.
Asomugha has 11 career picks, with just two coming during the past three seasons, to go with two forced fumbles. Considering he has faced just 98 pass attempts since 2008, respect for his game limits the number of chances to create turnovers.
Still, the lack of turnovers goes beyond Asomugha's fear factor. The fact that he has primarily played right corner also has limited the amount of pass attempts he has faced. The right side is considered the weaker of the two cornerback spots because most quarterbacks are right-handed and the majority of throws head in that direction -- and challenging the left corner.
That's an even greater possibility when you consider how he uses his 6-foot-2, 210-pound frame to maul receivers in bump-and-run coverage.
----------------------------------
Points that are made here:
#1...The difference in the physical requirements/talents of a Press "M-M" "CB" compared to a Zone Cushion "CB"...
#2...The lack of "M-M" or Press Coverage in today's NFL but perhaps the desire for it by some "DC"s....
#3...That "TB"s Cover-2 Zone has become the preferred coverage as well as Pitt's Multiple Blitz Scheme...
#4...The simple fact that diminished attempts translates to diminished opportunities...98 attempts over the span of 3 seasons is most certainly diminished...
#5...I severely question his perception of which "CB"s face the most pressure...
NYJ..."RCB"
NYG..."RCB"
GBP..."RCB"
Pit...Equal "LCB" most tackles
NE...."LCB"
Chi..."RCB"
Car..."RCB"
Bal..."RCB"
TB...."RCB"
Phi...???...Not enough starts to tell
Ind..."LCB" slight lead
Well I'm not going to look at every team...Takes too damn long...Of these 11 (1/3 of NFL) the "LCB" led twice and tied once with one unknown...So as I said I severely question this report as true..."QB"s-n-"DC"s wanted to attack our right side but shied away from doing so simply because of Nam's presence...
Question: When Nam was out 2 games last season did our replacement "RCB" get picked on???...Indeed!!!...
PantyRaider...Some Self Proclaimed NFL Analyst Just Make It Up As They Go Along!!!/_
By Bucky Brooks NFL.com
Analyst
My view on Asomugha is that he an elite CB. However, my view on the CB position is that it is an important position yet not a top priority as far as value/$$ spent/impact.
IF Asomugha is re-signed at his perceived rate of close to $18M per year, we would be looking at spending $28M alone on our 2 starting CBs.
It begs the question:
Is a team better off playing more zone and spending considerably less on the CB in order to spend more on other positions (ie. OLine, DLine)?
In the grand scheme of things, our team's success with Asomugha in his entire tenure and playing strictly M2M has been a failure by every conceivable measuring stick.
When you are building an elaborate NFL puzzle (53 man roster), there are certain choices that have to be made to build the best possible team.
An important factor is how your team spends or allocates their cap dollars. If you have a $125M budget to build a 53 man team, the money needs to be carefully spent to get your "most bang for your buck"... bang meaning wins.
"CJ"...
I have to agree with the choices made but at the same time I hate to lose such a quality player...He has been everything Al projected him to be and a true Raider...
But his replacement will cost less than $1 Mil as a mid 3rd rd pick...With that $$$$ that was saved we have signed Seymour -n- prolley Zack/Bush...Routt's $$$ is not guaranteed and may not extend very far...I don't know...
I would rather be able to bring in a quality "QB" with that $$$$...
But as for the coverages we are what we are and it has served us very well...It's the Rush "D" that has gone south sense "03" and destroyed our "D" not our pass coverages...As I have posted a strong "O" will relieve some of that pressure and force teams against our strength...Our pass coverages....
"GB" used "M-M" allot this past season and were quite good...The Raiders were #1/#2 using it...Now it appears a few teams are reevaluating their positions on "M-M" and wanting a quality player who can play in it like Nam...There may be a slight shift underway if teams continue to pursue "M-M" as a viable weapon as they should but "CB"s who have the talent and physical skill sets will become a premiums...
Nam will not be replaced in 1-2 seasons so I will get ready for some growing pains...
PantyRaider...So Much Depends Upon The "O" -n- "LB"s Too!!!!/_
Post a Comment
<< Home