Could we have a possible Jason Campbell to Carolina in our future?
by Revshawn on Apr 5, 2010 5:30 PM EDT
Email
Print
You have to admit, he has the jersey number for it! With the Donovan McNabb trade to the Redskins, the chances of Jason Campbell becoming a Panther went from slim to "Oh my gawd this is a big deal!" There are a lot of things to address in a situation like this, on whether a trade for Jason Campbell would be a good move or a bad one. But with our depth chart being ultra-thin at QB, this might be a perfect time to grab a nice young player to stick on our roster in case Matt Moore's has an epic fail!
Many things to debate on a trade like this, but first let's get his stats out there.
In his last two years he has completed 642 out of 1013 passes for 6863 yards, 33 touchdowns, and 21 interceptions.
That's not bad at all. He's shown constant improvement as well, completing career highs in receiving yards, passing attempts, completions, touchdowns, and passer ratings every year he has been in the league, all of this behind a questionable offensive line that doesn't have a blind-side tackle.
I know we all love Matt Moore, heck, I firmly believe that he's the next Tony Romo. But what if he bombs? We've got no one behind him right now that can be a proven starter in this league. It would take a lot of things to get Jason Campbell to work in Carolina though. Here are some of the ones off the top of my head.
The Redskins will have to accept a low round pick or a pick from next year.
The Panther's draft have already been pretty much cleaned out. We're without a 1st rounder or a 5th in one of the best drafts we've seen in a while. If the Redskins want a 3rd or higher for him, they're probably not going to get it from us. If they'll accept lower than that, we could probably send them a pick for next year, and additional picks based on how Campbell performs and if he starts on our team or not, which becomes a non-issue if we go with Matt Moore.
Jason Campbell will have to accept a backup role
Matt Moore has already been named the starter for next year, so there won't be any competition going into training camp, at least officially. The Preseason will tell all of course, but for training camp at least Jason Campbell will have to accept that he's a backup. Plain and simple, though a lot of QB's will not go to a team where they're not guaranteed at least a fight for the main job.
A favorable contract extension
Jerry Richardson is probably one of the head negotiators between the players union and the owners right now in the new CBA agreement. He's not a Daniel Snyder or the Dark Lord of Oakland, he's going to want to get value for his money. If we trade for him and Matt Moore bombs, he's going to probably demand starting money and this becomes a non-issue. But if Matt Moore shows he can be our starter, for Jason Campbell to work here long-term we're going to have to strike a compromise between starting money and backup money, somewhere between the 3-5 million dollars a year range. He's not going to find elite money here.
Finally, we could try to wait till next year and hope that Jason Campbell doesn't get traded. Good luck with that by the way. I doubt a team like the Eagles are going to wait a year to release a player of his caliber to FA and not get anything back back in return. He's going to get traded.
The question is, do we want him?
70 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Marc Bulger Available
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=ArOch6225ztLJbT7Djsbip9DubYF?slug=ap-rams-bulgerreleased
The only thing about Campbell is that I don’t want the Panthers to use a draft pick to get him (Depending on his value of course, but it seems either 4th or 5th right now)
Eh~ Mark Bulger sucks though! He's probably damaged goods at this point.
I don’t mind the Panthers giving up a draft pick as long as it’s for next year. Jason Campbell is by far a much better player that we could ever hope of getting in the 4th or 5th round anyway, and behind a top-5 line and a good running game behind him, his ceiling is pretty high. I’d definitely make a push for him.
"Once again the trousers of evil are yanked down by the mocking hands of justice!"-Revshawn
I like both, BUT Bulger is the better option in my opinion
Although many deride Marc Bulger, he would be a great addition to the team. He has had some bad years, but lets not forget the Rams have had almost zero offensive talent minus Steven Jackson and horrendous blockers. So his past couple dismal years could be explained by that. And back when he took over the job and had some receiving options, he was a great QB. Put a great O line, awesome running game, and Smitty in front of him, and possibly another good WR, and I think he could be decent. Would be a great mentor for Matty at the least, and would cost very little.
Jason Campbell is a good, and often overlooked QB, and I would like him on the Panthers squad if the right price was available. Personally, I don’t think the Redskins will be shopping him as Shanahan has confidence in him and wants to stick with him. We’ve traded enough of our picks this year, and I would only want to trade next year’s pick for him, and only a late 3rd rounder or upwards. But the Skins most likely won’t want to do that, if they want to trade him, they’ll want good value for him and a pick this year, so I’d say Campbell to Cats is unlikely.
Between the two, I’d rather have Bulger. He won’t cost any picks, he’s available, has years of experience, and has proven to be a great QB. Campbell is good, but you just never know what you are going to get out of him, and he costs too much for the Panthers. Also, I think Bulger as an addition would be great mentor for Matty and at the same time, all Panther fans wouldn’t holler for Bulger to be put in if Moore does bad, and I am not so sure of the opposite. So, considering everything, I’d like us to take Bulger…
They're shopping Jason Campbell now.
Thought I’d point that out. ^^
"Once again the trousers of evil are yanked down by the mocking hands of justice!"-Revshawn
Wrong
Redskins aren’t shopping him, his agent is. All speculation about Redskins shopping him are just speculation.
Instead, Washington Coach Mike Shanahan apparently will permit Campbell’s agent, Joel Segal, to seek trade opportunities that might benefit Campbell and the team.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/redskinsinsider/jason-campbell/redskins-could-bring-back-jaso.html
+1
The fact is that they released Jake tells us they don’t want someone to truly compete with Matt for the starting job. They just want someone to push him and help him improve as a starting NFL QB. As we have been speculating since Jake’s release they will want a experienced proven guy that will come in knowing he’s #2 and will be a capable back up if needed. That is exactly what Bulger is to me, and really the way management is being with the team checkbook he’s the one that’s within budget.
+2
Bulger is a fit for the way the front office is handling things this season. He will cost us nothing in draft picks since he is now an UFA. He can probably be had for pretty cheap. He is a veteran QB who has proven in the past that he can play good football, and who has the potential for some good years should he be needed.
We should keep in mind that Bulger has been playing at the helm of a horrible offensive line for quite some time now. If we put him behind our pizza crushers up front, he will have the time to show why he is a two-time pro bowler. He would make the PERFECT backup to Matt Moore, without providing a QB controversy.
Do it Marty. Pull the trigger on Bulger.
I'd trade this year's 4th for him...
We’re not going to draft anyone better in the 4th round than Jason Campbell.
He would be a good backup and could compete for the starting job, and give Moore some pressure to play his A-game. And, if Moore does end up sucking out loud, at least we will have a viable option to go to, instead of Cantwell or the corpse of [insert veteran here].
I would rather give Washington a 4th rounder and get Campbell than draft a project QB with no NFL experience. We already have one of those (Cantwell).
And I think we should introduce Bulger to our good friend Weinke – he is too washed up to be an option, IMO.
As long as the Panthers don't trade for Michael Vick or draft Tim Tebow, my sanity (what's left of it, at least) will remain intact for 2010.
+1
He would certainly be better than anyone we could get at that point. A proven NFL starter who has performed admirably regardless of being thrust into a different offense every season? I’ll take it. Especially for a 4th round pick.
Re: different offense every season
That’s the thing a lot of people forget when criticizing Campbell. The dude has had a new offensive coordinator and/or QB coach 3 out of the 5 years since he’s been drafted (4 if you want to count the bingo-caller they brought in midway through last season). It’s a wonder that he’s even capable of playing the position at all since he’s been pulled in every possible direction without the chance to settle in and fully learn a system.
The big thing that would make him better in Carolina is the stability. As long as he’s cool with being a backup to Moore unless the wheels fall off the wagon, then I don’t see why a 4th rounder is too much to pay for him.
As long as the Panthers don't trade for Michael Vick or draft Tim Tebow, my sanity (what's left of it, at least) will remain intact for 2010.
Maybe if he had been able to execute in one of them
they wouldn’t have had to change so many times.
Seriously, this guy has more apologists than David Carr did. Do you really think Peyton Manning would have suffered so much in a similar circumstance? I don’t—quality QBs can execute, period. Campbell isn’t in that club.
I disagree...
I think the changing of coaches has more to do with the owner than it does with the quarterback – it is Dan Snyder we’re talking about.
Is Jason Campbell on the same level as Manning, et al? No, but I wouldn’t go as far to put him in the same boat as David Carr.
I really believe if you put Campbell in a stable situation he would be a great QB.
But, I don’t think it’s going to matter as far as we’re concerned, because he’s not going to just say “yeah, I’ll be Moore’s backup”, and we will probably get someone who is cool with knowing he has no chance to compete for the starting job. Bulger will probably be the one we wind up with, if we don’t resign McCown.
As long as the Panthers don't trade for Michael Vick or draft Tim Tebow, my sanity (what's left of it, at least) will remain intact for 2010.
Not everybody is Peyton though.
A QB can be good and not be Peyton.
Jason Campbell
2008 = 62.3% 3245 yds 13 TD 6 INT 84.3 passer rtg
2009 = 64.5% 3618 yds 20 TD 15 INT 86.4 passer rtg
The last 2 years Campbell has had some reasonable numbers without stability in the offense (weak/injured OL, coaching, skill players). With our OL, RB’s, Smitty, TE’s and potential other WR through draft/FA he there would be much less pressure on Campbell. He has averaged 31.5 pass att/start while Jake averaged 29.7 pass att/start, not a huge difference. Campbell has shown a confidence in his TE’s so there could be more opportunities for the trio.
In case you cannot tell, I am in favor of bringing him in. I would also welcome off-season/training camp competition with Moore. This should get the most out of each player, making the team better. I say this b/c Moore is not established yet. Moore has shown potential, but not YET as a starter going into the year. We would also have potential to trade either of them the next year once we determine who is the long term solution.
Will Parker
by WillParker81 on Apr 6, 2010 10:36 AM EDT up reply actions
No trade for Campbell
Campbell would be a UFA after this year unless he signed an extension. So he wouldn’t have any trade value at the end of the year.
Hmmmm,
You don’t franchise a backup player, who you recently showed that you don’t really want.
Proctology is a medical profession that specializes in diseases of the colon, rectum, and anus. Law professors call them asses.
Drew Brees, Tom Brady, Philip Rivers then...
You get the point. And yes, a QB can be good and not be a star:
Case in point:
2006 = 68.3% 2767 yards 82.1 passer rating (David Carr). Oh wait… we thought it was his line but it turned otu that he just wasn’t very good.
How about this guy:
1999-2003 = 62% and average rating of 87.1
2004-2005 = 58% 70.9 rating
2006-2009 = 64% 93.5 rating
That’s Frank Garcia in a WCO in SF, then two play-action attacks in Detroit and Cleveland, and then back in a WCO in Philly and Tampa.
You can make excuses for him all day, but I don’t see the star potential you do.
Um, who's Frank Garcia?
Is he Jeff’s cousin? (lol, j/k)
As long as the Panthers don't trade for Michael Vick or draft Tim Tebow, my sanity (what's left of it, at least) will remain intact for 2010.
I actually like Frank better than Jeff...
It sounds better, lol.
As long as the Panthers don't trade for Michael Vick or draft Tim Tebow, my sanity (what's left of it, at least) will remain intact for 2010.
Great Singer
Jeff Sinatra
Proctology is a medical profession that specializes in diseases of the colon, rectum, and anus. Law professors call them asses.
I only remember Garcia in name so I am not completely sure I get the comparison.
I read a point previously that they both came from a west coast offense and F.G. had trouble translating into a different offense. Campbell however had enough success with a play action offense in college to earn a 1st round grade. He handed off to 2 devastating RB’s in Cadillac and Ronnie Brown and had great success (undefeated and shafted in the final rankings).
David Carr I do know and he had a much different situation. He was THE franchise as the 1st pick by the club. They are just now getting a legit OL, Campbell had a good OL his 1st two years (7 and 21 sacks respectively) and a poor OL the last two (38 and 43) due to injuries/age. Plus we all knew Carr was damaged goods and needed to sit for a year or two, but as we all know that plan got shot down when Jake’s elbow exploded. Conversely, Campbell had his best two season’s statistically with poor OL play (as mentioned in the sacks) and a poor running game (94 yds/gm or 27th in the league).
Lastly, I’m not expecting you to change your mind. The fact is neither of us know for sure what type of success or lack there of he would have. Agree to disagree I guess.
Will Parker
by WillParker81 on Apr 6, 2010 10:29 PM EDT up reply actions
I think the skins would prefer a pick this year.
The trade for mcnabb, a 33 year old qb, shows the esire for success in the short term. So i picked this year’s 4th
jason campbell looks like a scared kitten when playing qb
All jumpy and freaked out when under pressure. A lot how jake looked last year. If the panther gave up a draft pick for this kid I would be pissed. His stats look okay but nothing to get excited about. I would feel much more comfortable with mccown. He atleast looks poised. Best of luck to campbell and the raiders or the bills. I don’t ever want to see that guy in a carolina uniform!
Richardson you better not screw this up for me!
by STEVEN 785 on Apr 5, 2010 7:29 PM EDT via mobile reply actions
True, but...
This was the ‘Skins offensive line we’re talking about. Who wouldn’t be scared behind that? I like the guy, I think he would do well here.
scared kitten?
I would question that statement… you might look a little scared too knowing you’re going to get crushed by a 300lb+ DT on every dropback.
He did not have that look to him last season. He seemed confident and showed even more progression than he had in the past. I think he was the lone bright spot on the offensive train-wreck we call the Redskins.
i watched him play last year
Once in person and once on tv. I’ve seen him play in previous seasons. He seriously looks jittery. He is freaking out rushing and dumping the ball off too quickly. Some players have “it” and some don’t. He’s not one of them. He’s not ever going to be a peyton manning or a drew brees or a tom brady…u get the idea. So what’s the point? Why are we so willing to have a mediocre player at qb? I would much rather give cantwell a chance.
Richardson you better not screw this up for me!
by STEVEN 785 on Apr 6, 2010 4:41 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Where's the "I wouldn't give a nickel for him" option?
I would rather have Josh McCown than either Bulger or Campbell.
Face it, he’s not going to start. Neither would Bulger. The best either of them could do is help Moore learn to deal with being an NFL starting quarterback. He already has the skills to beat them both, the only thing he could gain is maybe some leadership pointers. And after learning from Jake for two years, I don’t think that Campbell is necessarily the guy to give him anything new.
Unless he can play receiver, that is… :)
I respectfully disagree.
While I wouldn’t like Bulger to come anywhere near our starting lineup, Jason Campbell is different. I’m still quite conservative in my thoughts for Matt Moore, and I remember how our last great QB fell so fast, so quickly. The appeal to Jason Campbell for me is a chance to have an instant starter in the case that Matt Moore either fails or goes down from injury. Remember, he’s still not proven over the course of 16 games. He could very well choke and in our current state our whole season would instantly be blown.
Right now, our entire season rests on Matt Moore. Our defense is going to be dominant, probably even more dominant than last year if a certain linebacker from Penn State turns out to be a superstar. But it’s been proven that our offense can’t be successful without a decent QB. We won’t fully commit to the running game if our passing game sucks, and with our QB throwing picks left and right we can’t reach the playoffs.
If Matt Moore fails, the Panthers fail. But if we have a good fallback option in Jason Campbell, well….there’s hope. He’s been proven to be successful with the Skins without a good running game or a O-line, and he has far better stats than Josh McCown, who hasn’t seen the field at all ^.-
"Once again the trousers of evil are yanked down by the mocking hands of justice!"-Revshawn
There's no guarantee there at all
Anyone remember how awful Frank Garcia looked in a play-action offense? The skins run the same WCO that he thrived in, and if you asked Campbell to play for Davidson he would look like a fish out of water.
Give me a QB who can run our offense over one who looks like he might be able to run a different one if only he has a line, receivers, coach, etc… any day of the week.
Based on what?
He hasn’t shown strong decision making ability in either system. His numbers actually improved when they went to the WCO. He used to float his long balls, and telegraph them to the cornerbacks. Back then the excuse-makers pointed to his age, now they point to his system.
Matt Moore has shown more talent with less opportunity. We don’t need Campbell.
He should have won a national Championship running a play action offense with Auburn.
They went undefeated, and in the SEC of all conferences, yet was not in the title game.
Will Parker
by WillParker81 on Apr 6, 2010 10:40 AM EDT up reply actions
DISAGREE
He looked like a fish out of water in D.C., they have never run an offense suited to his ability, or have had much of a line, or running game as of late. He has a very strong and accurate arm, more suited to an offense like ours. How many new coaches and offensive co-ordinators has he had to learn in his stint with the skins? He proves to be very smart, and has picked up everything they have thrown at him pretty well, IMO. Still, the questions would be, would he be happy in back-up role, and his quiet demeanor have always led to leadership questions. If he won’t be happy as back-up, I don’t know that you do this to Matt- raise him up, and then drop him before you get into camp…
How many excuses?
The last guy we got that came with a ton of excuses was David Carr.
D.O. N.O.T. W.A.N.T!
Excuses? For what?
Jason Campbell
2008 = 62.3% 3245 yds 13 TD 6 INT 84.3 passer rtg
2009 = 64.5% 3618 yds 20 TD 15 INT 86.4 passer rtg
These numbers would be quite welcomed in Carolina. Plus he had a leser OL/RB/coaching. he could even do better with us. Could he do worse? Of course, but I see it as much less likely than him having success with us.
Will Parker
by WillParker81 on Apr 6, 2010 10:44 AM EDT up reply actions
In my opinion
I would rather have either Bulger or Campbell over McCown any day. It’s not about paying Bulger or Campbell just to have them sit out every game, but it having a back up plan if Moore doesn’t work out.
Moore is definitely the starter of course, but who do we turn to if Moore doesn’t play up to our expectation? The only missing piece on our offense last year was a quarterback. Sure, you could argue that we were missing a home run WR that could play alongside Smitty, but we all saw how Moore utilized our passing game with Smitty, Moose and Jarrett. I am not comfortable having McCown back up Moore if Moore either gets injured or plays poorly.
+1
I wouldn’t either. Primarily because he’s going to be available anyway. I don’t see Washington keeping McNabb, Campbell, Brennan, Bartel, Grossman. To me the odd man out is Campbell they are paying him too much and they have 2 young guys behind him that they are still hoping develop into something. Grossman is a serviceable backup to McNabb with the development guys behind him. They will not fill an extra roster spot and spend the extra money to keep Campbell on board. He may get traded so that they get something out of him, but if teams are smart they will wait for him to get released and not have to give up draft picks. I would rather see Bulger come in or another UFA to back up Moore and wait to see if Campbell is released than give up a draft pick.
Trading for him just doesn't make sense
Is he more talented than a QB we could find in the 4th or 5th round? Absolutely
Do we need a talented QB right now? Not really.
Fact is, Campbell is too talented to ride the pine and would only be on a 1 year deal. If you extend him then you’re on the hook for a player you may never need (if Moore plays up to his billing), and if you don’t you’ve just wasted a mid round pick for a 1 year rental of a back-up.
If you use that draft pick to take a QB they’re not going to be as talented, but they’ll be on a cheap rookie contact… and after all, isn’t that all we need from a backup?
If the Skins release him outright he should be target 1-A, all he wants is a team who respects him (which Synder and the Skins haven’t done) but to spend a draft pick is a really hard sell for me. I know it doesn’t pertain, but I personally can’t help but feel jilted that Anquan Boldin was had for a 3rd and 5th yet we would spend a 4th or 5th on a guy who could never see the field.
Cat Scratch Reader's resident optimist.
I also blog the Panthers at www.realbitsofpanthers.com
Exactly, Campbell is more talented than most, if not all, QB's in the draft. Plus he has 52 NFL starts under his belt.
Why would it be assumed he would ride the pine? Moore has potential to be a good NFL QB for sure, but he is not Peyton, Brady, Brees, Rivers, Rogers, McNabb, etc. This is why is was tendered as a RFA instead of a long term deal. Basically the jury is still out on Moore. Competition should make him better, thus making the Panthers better.
Also, we would have a much more stable situation at the MOST IMPORTANT POSITION ON THE TEAM.
“Do we need a talented QB right now? Not really.”
QB is not a position to be skimpy on. Until Moore PROVES he is the QB of the future, he should not be treated as such.
Will Parker
by WillParker81 on Apr 6, 2010 10:52 AM EDT up reply actions
It's assumed Campbell would be the back-up, because it has to be assumed he would be the back-up.
I like Jason Cambell, but if Matt Moore continues the level of play he displayed at the end of 2009 he’ll be far better than Campbell. Like you said, Jason Campbell has 52 starts we know what kind of QB he is- talented, strong arm, not the best leader but has alot of heart and a high tolerance for BS.
With Matt Moore you have a guy who’s ceiling is a lot higher and he has alot more upside. 2010 is the ‘put up or shut up’ season to see whether we’ll sign him long term or let him leave. Does it mean there’s less stability in playing Moore than signing and starting Campbell? Absolutely. But there comes a time where you need to take a leap of faith and see what happens.
The safe move for New England in 2001 would have been to return Tom Brady to the bench and give the job back to Drew Bledsoe, but we all know in hindsight that in that instance the ‘safe move’ wouldn’t equate to being the right one. New England didn’t even let Bledsoe compete with Brady.
Back in 2001 Tom Brady was just a 24 year old kid with 14 starts to his name and a 86.4 rating.
In 2010 Matt Moore is just a 25 year old kid with 8 starts to his name and a 84.5 rating.
I think it’s very premature to say that Moore is not a Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, Drew Brees etc. player. You’re comparing a guy with 8 starts to multi year veterans. Compare Moore’s first 8 starts with the first 8 starts of the players you mentioned and he looks like the second coming of Johnny Unitas.
The only thing that’s certain is that we’ll know for sure this year, and you’re right he will need to prove he’s the QB of the future- why muddy the waters opening it up to Jason Campbell too? We already know Jason Campbell will never be as good as the players you mentioned, there’s still that hope with Moore.
Cat Scratch Reader's resident optimist.
I also blog the Panthers at www.realbitsofpanthers.com
Come on everyone, lets be real honest with ourselves, Matt Moore is not gauranteed to be a star.
I am not saying Campbell will be a star, but Jake was not either. There are several QB’s I wish we had, but fact is that ALL NFL teams are looking for an elite QB, so with that said at some point teams have to do the best with what they have got. I think Campbell can push Moore if Moore is the type of player we think, but if he is not we have a solid option going forward in Campbell.
It is real easy to make comparisons to Tom Brady, Tony Romo and Matt Moore as well as Jason Campbell and David Carr. Just like it is easy for me to make favorable comparisons for my argument. However, I try to think of probabilities. The probability is that Moore will be a middle of the road guy or career backup.
Do not read into my words too much. I too hope for Moore as the starter for the next 10+ years. I firmly believe that competition will bring out the best of a real franchise QB b/c all QB’s face tough adversity. If this “muddy’s the waters” then what type of player is he really? This is just a question and I do not know the answer, but I think we all should think about that.
Will Parker
by WillParker81 on Apr 6, 2010 11:03 PM EDT up reply actions
When I say 'muddy the waters' I'm referring to the Panthers' vision for 2010, not Matt Moore himself
The organization drew their line in the sand when they cut Jake Delhomme- if we’re to believe Marty Hurney he said that money had absolutely nothing to do with the decision and it was purely a football move. Personally, I don’t buy it, but I’m willing to entertain that thought.
We consistently see in the NFL that the teams who flounder about through the off season and draft very rarely perform well in the regular season. Campbell may have 52 career starts, but he has zero starts as a Carolina Panther- as a quarterback for this organization with this playbook, excecuting John Fox’s game plan Matt Moore has more experience.
I understand the ease of comparing Moore to Tom Brady, given their similar roads to the NFL people are going to make that comparison. There are so many other factors that go into Matt Moore as a player; the fact Bill Parcells’ chose him, his performance stepping in when needed, and that there were many in Cowboys’ circles that considered Moore heir apparant to Tony Romo should he fail- Dallas gambled and lost, and that’s why we have Matt Moore.
I feel that QB competition is a good thing when your starter hasn’t proved to be effective when running the team. That’s why I thought it was a good idea for Moore to compete with Delhomme; however, there comes a time when you need to roll the dice- like Green Bay did with Aaron Rodgers and see what happens. Rodgers first season the Packers drafted two QBs, but Rodgers wasn’t pushed in his first full season as a starter, nor was Tom Brady. Developmentally there’s something to be said about giving a player a vote of confidence, rather than a competition. What accelerates this is that we don’t have Moore on the hook for multiple years- this is our one shot.
Matt Moore has confidence in his abilities, Steve Smith has confidence in Moore, the Panthers have confidence in Moore’s abilities- I think it’s time the fan base as a whole try and check their concerns at the door and see if he can steer the ship without a second captain looking over his shoulder.
Cat Scratch Reader's resident optimist.
I also blog the Panthers at www.realbitsofpanthers.com
by James Dator on Apr 7, 2010 7:28 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
+1
I like the 1 year deal. It gives Moore the incentive to go out and earn a multi-year “franchise qb” contract. He realizes this is his shot to prove that 1) he should have been drafted, 2) Dallas should have never released him, and 3) he should have taken over for Delhomme before an injury took him out for the season.
I’m looking forward to what the kid will do.
As long as the Panthers don't trade for Michael Vick or draft Tim Tebow, my sanity (what's left of it, at least) will remain intact for 2010.
What would serve as sufficient "proof" to you?
“Until Moore PROVES he is the QB of the future, he should not be treated as such.”
As I’ve shown on numerous threads here, Moore’s record through his first 8 starts are BETTER than any active NFL QB had, except Big Ben. How many more starts do you want to see?
Apparently, he’s convinced the Panthers’ coaching staff, as they released Jake and tendered Moore to a 1st and 3rd pick category.
Re: sufficient proof
I think everyone’s concern is that Moore has yet to start a full season, from training camp to preseason to regular season, as the starter. Yes, his 8 starts have been great, and like you’ve pointed out he was better than any active QB save Big Ben – but I think most people want to hold a cautionary view on whether or not he is going to be this good long term.
I think after this season if he is still puts out the same (or close to the same) numbers then we will definitely have our answer. I want to see how he handles “down by 6 with 2:13 to go and no time-outs” against the Falcons in Atlanta with the playoffs on the line before I say he’s definitely the franchise QB. Do I think he has the potential? Absolutely, and I like Moore – I’m glad we decided to give him the shot he has earned. But I think most people are just holding off on anointing him the savior of our team to avoid the potential let down if it doesn’t work out.
And I don’t think he’s fully convinced the coaching staff, otherwise they would have offered him a contract extension instead of a 1 year deal. I think they realize he has the potential to be our QB for the next 5-10 years, and they feel that he’s at least earned the shot to become the franchise QB, but I’m not sure they believe in him fully just yet. (I know a counter argument would be made by saying the potential lockout is the cause, but I’m not completely sold on that being the sole reason.)
As long as the Panthers don't trade for Michael Vick or draft Tim Tebow, my sanity (what's left of it, at least) will remain intact for 2010.
Yes but they did not sign him long term.
Will Parker
by WillParker81 on Apr 6, 2010 11:05 PM EDT up reply actions
No to Campbell
I’ve heard all kinds of excuses made for Campbell as to why he has a losing won/loss record and played poorly. Lest we forget he was drafted and mentored under a HOF coach.
Moore on the other hand has had to prove himself every step of the way. Does anybody remember how bad the Panthers played in ‘07 & ’09 at 5-8 and 4-7, with the team facing playoff teams in 7 of those 8 games and winning 6.
This the same team that was under .500 without Moore in each season and under Moore’s leadership went 6-2 in those same seasons.
What more! do you want him to do?
We are interested in Campbell as a backup
not as a starter over Moore. If Moore falters, then Jason would be a very nice fall back
I'm not down with giving up a pick for him
If we can get a decent back-up QB, like McCown without giving up a pick that is what we need to do. Bringing in a guy like Campbell would only create controversy. I’m more inclined to believe Shanahan is willing to give him up for a reason.
I blog the Carolina Panthers at www.catscratchreader.com
Seems like a moot point...
There are teams in much worse shape at QB. Those teams would most likely offer potential starters more than we would for a simple backup. Also, how many QBs are willing to check their egos enough to be the Panther’s guy? We’re not exactly a run and gun offense that would be a QB’s dream…
That said, I do like Campbell’s game when you look at our offensive scheme. If we could get him at the right price, I’d love to see what he can do under our system.
+1
I’m thinking he might end up in Oakland- seems like the kind of place they’d appreciate him.
He’s a similar QB to Jamarcus Russell… except Campbell is accurate and doesn’t get mistaken for Grimace in a McDonald’s playplace.
Cat Scratch Reader's resident optimist.
I also blog the Panthers at www.realbitsofpanthers.com
Grimace - LMAO!
As long as the Panthers don't trade for Michael Vick or draft Tim Tebow, my sanity (what's left of it, at least) will remain intact for 2010.
I'm thinking the JaMarcus Russell experiment ends this season
I blog the Carolina Panthers at www.catscratchreader.com
Off topic
Could CBS have possible sucked any worse than they did for this NCAA tourny? I don’t know if any of you watched the games, but CBS plowed in more commercials than I thought possible. They had 10X more commercial time than they had covering the winning team! It’s thee worst sports coverage that I have ever seen.
I would give a conditional fifth next year for Campbell.
We have the leverage over Washington given that we can always just go to McCown. Either that, or some team outbids us. But still, McCown is a quality backup, he doesn’t have long term starting potential like Campbell, but our long term potential is Moore. Besides, if Moore sucks next year, we’ll use our first on a guy like Locker, Mallet, Luck, Foles, Devlin, or maybe even Stanzi.
Jake Delhomme, QB Carolina Panthers, 2003-2009.
120 TDs+16000+ passing yards=Good
89 INT's+27 lost fumbles=Bad
Most comeback wins since 2003=Priceless
But what do we do in the 2-3 years it takes a rookie to learn the system?
I’m not trying to be argumentative, and those QB’s you listed should be good NFL QB’s, but I don’t know if any of them are “come in and start their rookie year” QB’s. If Moore sucks, wouldn’t it be better to already have a backup plan in place, instead of relying on a drafted rookie?
As long as the Panthers don't trade for Michael Vick or draft Tim Tebow, my sanity (what's left of it, at least) will remain intact for 2010.
McCown.
Plus a guy like Locker could be good immediately, he reminds me of Freeman.
Jake Delhomme, QB Carolina Panthers, 2003-2009.
120 TDs+16000+ passing yards=Good
89 INT's+27 lost fumbles=Bad
Most comeback wins since 2003=Priceless
by Flowing Willow on Apr 7, 2010 4:50 AM EDT up reply actions
Agreed but ~
McCown is still out their and is a true backup/spot starter but Panthers did say that want someone to push or compete with Moore in camp and McCown doesn’t fit that mold. I would prefer Campbell to Bulger since he still has some upside. Campbell would be way better off playing here than in Washington. I voted a “Sixth Round” pick to trade for Campbell b/c their isn’t much of a market for him and we have a limited number of picks even with the comp. picks we just receieved.
Go Panthers.
by Holty_Panthers_Fan on Apr 7, 2010 9:27 AM EDT up reply actions
If given the choice of rookie or McCown I would pick rookie...
McCown is a career backup – I wouldn’t want him being the starter for a 2-3 year time frame.
As long as the Panthers don't trade for Michael Vick or draft Tim Tebow, my sanity (what's left of it, at least) will remain intact for 2010.
He wouldn't be, likely.
He would be good for two or three games if Moore went down though.
Jake Delhomme, QB Carolina Panthers, 2003-2009.
120 TDs+16000+ passing yards=Good
89 INT's+27 lost fumbles=Bad
Most comeback wins since 2003=Priceless
by Flowing Willow on Apr 8, 2010 3:34 AM EDT up reply actions
I know, but a few comments up I asked what to do for 2-3 years while a rookie learns and you said McCown
That’s what I was replying to. Of course he would be great for 2-3 weeks if Moore went down, I just wouldn’t want him for 3 years while [insert draft pick here] learns the playbook, etc.
As long as the Panthers don't trade for Michael Vick or draft Tim Tebow, my sanity (what's left of it, at least) will remain intact for 2010.
Most high rookie draft picks start immediately, or in the first year.
Second rounders only take a year or so. We wouldn’t need someone to hold the reins for three years unless we took Tebow or a third-seventh rounder.
Jake Delhomme, QB Carolina Panthers, 2003-2009.
120 TDs+16000+ passing yards=Good
89 INT's+27 lost fumbles=Bad
Most comeback wins since 2003=Priceless
by Flowing Willow on Apr 9, 2010 4:04 AM EDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Cat Scratch Reader
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- 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
- Donald Driver wins ‘Dancing With the Stars’
- Student has diploma withheld after Tebowing at graduation
- NFL to mandate knee and thigh pads for players
