Jason Campbell is a BELOW AVERAGE Quarterback

[Blackjack]

Jason Campbell was ranked in the middle of the pack in most categories this season, and this has caused a lot of his "supporters" to say he is an average quarterback but he is not a bad one. The problem is, you have to rank him against his peers. This season, Jason Campbell tallied starts 47-52. Let's see how other quarterbacks did during similar periods of time in comparison.

NAME		STARTS	YARDS	COMP%	YPA	TD	INT	QBR
Philip Rivers	33-48	4009	65.3	8.4	34	11	105.5
Roethlisberger	41-55	3154	65.3	7.8	32	11	104.1
Tony Romo	40-55	4483	63.1	8.2	26	9	97.6
Peyton Manning	33-48	4413	62.5	7.7	33	15	94.7
Carson Palmer	30-45	4035	62.3	7.8	28	13	93.9
Marc Bulger	45-60	4301	62.9	7.3	24	8	92.9
Brett Favre	30-46	3882	62.4	6.7	33	14	90.7
Drew Brees	43-58	3576	64.6	7.2	24	15	89.2
Jake Delhomme	34-49	3421	60.2	7.9	24	16	88.1
Kyle Orton	34-48	3802	62.1	7.0	21	12	86.8
Jason Campbell	37-52	3618	64.5	7.1	20	15	86.4
Donovan McNabb	39-48	2289	58.4	6.3	17	6	86.0
Tom Brady	31-46	3620	60.2	6.9	23	12	85.9
Matt Hasselbeck	39-52	3382	58.9	7.1	22	15	83.1
David Garrard	31-46	3620	62.6	6.8	15	13	81.7
Jay Cutler	38-53	3666	60.5	6.6	27	26	76.8
Eli Manning	40-56	3336	56.1	6.3	23	20	73.9
Kurt Warner	44-49	1431	65.5	6.5	3	11	67.4

I believe Donovan McNabb, Tom Brady, Jay Cutler, Matt Hasselbeck, and Kurt Warner put up enough numbers in earlier seasons to have earned some benefit of the doubt up until this point in time that they should be clearly ranked above Jason Campbell.

That leaves just Eli Manning and David Garrard. Now one can argue either way for and against Eli Manning in comparison to Campbell up until this point (more TDs, more team success, horrible completion percentage, etc.) while David Garrard... The Jaguars are a prime example of a team that wasted their running game and defense sticking with an underperforming quarterback. They rewarded Garrard with a lucrative contract after a season he put up 18 TD and 3 INT. It might actually be a blessing in disguise that our team fell apart midway through 2008 or we might have done the same thing with Campbell.

 

[Miles Monroe]

I must be missing something here. You say he's been ranked in mid pack, but I only see 18 QB's listed. This stat has everybody out of the top ten lookin like losers, but if he's # 11 out of 32, it has him lookin a sight better overall.

I also don't understand why the QB's you named should be "clearly ranked above Jason Campbell." All of those QB's, possibly excepting Hasselbeck, generally had better protection then Campbell, yet he has ranked higher looking at the stats you posted.

Maybe, these QB's you speak of had something that Jason didn't have... A team around them. The stats you posted tell me that the teams had more success, not because of the QB, but because of their surrounding cast of players, despite the QB.

I'm not sold on Jason, but I'm not unsold either.

 

[Boone]

I agree Pete - Campbell is an above average QB, and those stats do nothing but solidify that position. I don't think Campbell has a bright future, because I think he has certain limitations that experience won't change. But to be fair, he hasn't had the protection, the run threat, nor the consistent coaching that many of those he's being compared to have.

I do think though, despite his limitations and flaws, he's clearly 'better than average'. I also think it's tough not to concede he's improved over time. That's certainly demonstrable statistically, even if one feels on the sum he hasn't gotten better.

Campbell isn't the solution at QB for the Redskins. But he's not the problem either. That's how I view it.

 

[Blackjack]

I must be missing something here. You say he's been ranked in mid pack, but I only see 18 QB's listed. This stat has everybody out of the top ten lookin like losers, but if he's # 11 out of 32, it has him lookin a sight better overall.

I also don't understand why the QB's you named should be "clearly ranked above Jason Campbell." All of those QB's, possibly excepting Hasselbeck, generally had better protection then Campbell, yet he has ranked higher looking at the stats you posted.

Maybe, these QB's you speak of had something that Jason didn't have... A team around them. The stats you posted tell me that the teams had more success, not because of the QB, but because of their surrounding cast of players, despite the QB.

I'm not sold on Jason, but I'm not unsold either.

To address your first point, I only took a sample of quarterbacks who have started at least the same general amount of games as Jason Campbell. No sense in comparing quarterbacks with less than 40 starts under their belts to Campbell.

Second, McNabb/Cutler/Hasselbeck/Warner/Brady had accomplished productive seasons previous to the starting ranges I have identified (I'm not taking into account anything they did after starts 50-60). That's why they get the benefit of the doubt. Has Jason Campbell previously had a breakout season that therefore gives him the benefit of the doubt that 2009 was an anomaly? No, he did not.

And are you saying Jason Campbell never had a supporting cast on offense before 2009? Not in 2006 when the offensive line paved the way for Ladell Betts to a 1000 yard season? Not in 2007 when Todd Collins took the same team on a 4-game winning streak to the playoffs? Not in 2008 when once again, Clinton Portis was on pace for an MVP caliber season while Jason Campbell was on pace for.... A Garrard-esque 16 TD and 0 INT?

This is the biggest fundamental lie that I see... That Jason Campbell never had a proper surrounding cast. The only season you can say that is 2009. Every other season, he was given every opportunity to clear any doubt about what kind of quarterback he is.

 

[Blackjack]

I agree Pete - Campbell is an above average QB, and those stats do nothing but solidify that position. I don't think Campbell has a bright future, because I think he has certain limitations that experience won't change. But to be fair, he hasn't had the protection, the run threat, nor the consistent coaching that many of those he's being compared to have.

I think the list shows that Campbell is ranked second to last or third to last depending on who you talk to, if you are reasonable enough to see that the quarterbacks I identified have had statistically superior seasons in previous starts. As for the rest, if you're talking about 2009, you're correct. I disagree about every other season, though.

Protection? He had 2006, 2007, and the first half of 2008 to demonstrate what he could do. The best he could muster was an 8 TD and 0 INT first half in 2008. Similar to how David Garrard once had a season with 18 TD and 3 INT.

Run threat? Clinton Portis and Ladell Betts have all been huge running threats for Jason Campbell. Again, the best Campbell could supply was an 8 TD and 0 INT first half in 2008.

Consistent coaching? He had Al Saunders' system in 2006 and 2007.

 

[Miles Monroe]

Betts success was due to his running style, which suited the line more then Portis's style. The line could run down hill all day long, and Betts lives between the tackles, hitting the hole quickly.

06 Jason started in game 10, so putting the entire seasons results on him is a bit off.

In each season, 07, 08, and even 09, the O line was shuffled a bit, getting progressively worse each year. 07 brought the Wade / Heyer days at RT, and Fabini starting in place of Thomas. Had Jason not been injured, nobody can say how far we could have gone. Collins got hammered in Seattle due to Heyer being matched against a seasoned all pro, and Collins not being all that mobile. With a more mobile QB as Jason is compared to Collins, he might have avoided some of the rush. He might not have...

Lets also take into account that Moss, El, Sellers, and Rabach all missed games, and played injured, some for a good part of the season. Cooley was about the only healthy person to throw to, and he was often kept in to help block due to the disaster at RT. So, in Jason's second incomplete season, he had a semi adequate line in front of him, but the supporting cast, short of Portis, players being dinged up gave us a season where we fell short in the playoff's. You give all the credit to Collins, and none to Jason, even with it out of his control being injured.

So, is that really a strong supporting cast for 07 ? Even just looking at the names, there's a few that are more than suspect. You can look at stats all day long... there not the game, and don't take into account things like Moss not being able to out run my 76 year old mother that year, and we haven't even addressed the D, and how it ties into the grand scheme of things.

If ya can't stomach Campbell, I'm cool with that, but your bias doesn't tell the complete story. It takes 53 men to win a football game, and 53 to lose one...

Team

 

[Neophyte]

Second, McNabb/Cutler/Hasselbeck/Warner/Brady had accomplished productive seasons previous to the starting ranges I have identified (I'm not taking into account anything they did after starts 50-60). That's why they get the benefit of the doubt. Has Jason Campbell previously had a breakout season that therefore gives him the benefit of the doubt that 2009 was an anomaly? No, he did not.

These gentlemen all had something Campbell has not had. Consistency around them, specifically in terms of coaching.

McNabb has never known another HC than Andy Reid. Cutler went 4 years in Denver under Shanahan (never really improving in that time, I might add) and when he changed teams/coaches/systems this year he bombed. Hasselbeck had Holmgren, in both GB and Seattle. Warner played his best ball in StL under one Offensive Coordinator, Mike Martz. And while Brady has had different coordinators, the HC coach has been the same and if reports are correct the system has changed very little.

Contrast that with Campbell. Drafted by Gibbs who ran the offense at the time. Then two years under Saunders with a similar but infinitely bulkier system. Followed by a complete change to the WCO under Zorn who likely won't ever be a coordinator again much less a HC.

Like Boone, I don't think Campbell is either the solution or the problem. I will say that if you are going to compare him to someone, you need to find someone who is comparable in more ways than just the number of starts.

 

[Skinsfan76]

I think Campbell has put up average numbers as a QB since entering the league. However, I cannot think of 15 QBs that would have put up better numbers given his surrounding cast.

Lets take the scenario that The Skins got Sanchez this past off season like Snyder wanted. Lets also say that Campbell got traded to the Jets. Great offensive line, excellent running game and a... um.. slightly better receiving core than in Washington and Campbell would have had easily a top 10 QB season, maybe getting close to top 5. Is he an elite QB? Is he Peyton Manning? No. Is he Tom Brady? No. Is he Drew Brees? Once again no. However, is he better Kyle Orton, Jake Delhomme or Mark Bulger? Absolutely. Another thing to think about compare his numbers in the 2009 season to Carson Palmer. He had a better season that Palmer. Palmer has an excellent running game and great offensive line and a better receiving core than Campbell.

Mike Shanahan doesn't need advice from fans but I'll give it anyway. Keep Campbell and build around him!

 

[The Burgundy Ghost]

I still want us to focus on O-line in the draft with the first two picks.......

No stats will change my mind on that at this point, Campbell has limitations.
Sometimes he has flashes of greatness, other times he throws a pass and you scream at the game or at home: "JASON WHAT THE **** WERE YOU THINKING!?" or "WHAT THE **** IS THAT?"

But Campbell is tough and if we get a running game (again it's the bloody O-line!!!!! We need 3-4 new starters, sorry but right now if it comes to Bradford /Clausen or a new LT for the Redskins we need a new LT) I think he can do enough to help us win (or not cause us to lose).

 

[Bulldog]

A below average quarterback doesn't throw for a positive TD/INT ratio on a 4-12 team that gives up 46 sacks

Whether Campbell is merely a solid but unspectacular player or one that can do more I will trust that judgment to Shanahan who has worked with Montana, Young, Elway during his career.

To be fair to Campbell when your offensive tackles are Levi Jones and Stephon Heyer, you do deserve some benefit of the doubt going into the offseason

 

[Blackjack]

Lets also take into account that Moss, El, Sellers, and Rabach all missed games, and played injured, some for a good part of the season. Cooley was about the only healthy person to throw to, and he was often kept in to help block due to the disaster at RT. So, in Jason's second incomplete season, he had a semi adequate line in front of him, but the supporting cast, short of Portis, players being dinged up gave us a season where we fell short in the playoff's. You give all the credit to Collins, and none to Jason, even with it out of his control being injured.

So, is that really a strong supporting cast for 07 ? Even just looking at the names, there's a few that are more than suspect. You can look at stats all day long... there not the game, and don't take into account things like Moss not being able to out run my 76 year old mother that year, and we haven't even addressed the D, and how it ties into the grand scheme of things.

Okay... I give credit Todd Collins for going 4-0 in 2007. What should I give credit to Jason Campbell for in 2007?

 

[Blackjack]

These gentlemen all had something Campbell has not had. Consistency around them, specifically in terms of coaching.

McNabb has never known another HC than Andy Reid. Cutler went 4 years in Denver under Shanahan (never really improving in that time, I might add) and when he changed teams/coaches/systems this year he bombed. Hasselbeck had Holmgren, in both GB and Seattle. Warner played his best ball in StL under one Offensive Coordinator, Mike Martz. And while Brady has had different coordinators, the HC coach has been the same and if reports are correct the system has changed very little.

Contrast that with Campbell. Drafted by Gibbs who ran the offense at the time. Then two years under Saunders with a similar but infinitely bulkier system. Followed by a complete change to the WCO under Zorn who likely won't ever be a coordinator again much less a HC.

Like Boone, I don't think Campbell is either the solution or the problem. I will say that if you are going to compare him to someone, you need to find someone who is comparable in more ways than just the number of starts.

Do you really want to go this route? Maybe we can say Jason Campbell in 2008 was stunted by the coaching change. But what about his second year under Saunders' system?

Jason Campbell in his second year in Saunders' system threw for 12 TD, 11 INT, and had a 77.6 QB Rating. These numbers were put up in starts 8 through 20.

Jay Cutler in his second year in starts 6-21 threw for 20 TD and 14 INT, and had a 88.1 QB Rating.

Donovan McNabb in his second year in starts 7-22 threw for 21 TD and 13 INT and a 77.8 QB Rating.

Kurt Warner in his second year in starts 1-16 threw for 41 TD and 13 INT.

Tom Brady in his second year in starts 1-14 threw for 18 TD and 12 INT and had a 86.5 QB Rating.

Matt Hasselbeck in his second year in Seattle threw for 15 TD and 10 INT in starts 13 through 22.

In every conceivable situation we have Jason Campbell lagging behind most of his peers. Let's put it this way. You're at an elementary school that has Grades 1 - 6. You are in the sixth grade and read at a third grade level. Are you an average student?

If you compare yourself to every single student in the school, you might be. But you're supposed to compare yourself to your peers.

 

[Henry]

Putting Campbell in the middle of an arbitrary list and then concocting a way to eliminate eveyone on that list except Garrard isn't that convincing. That's a lot of bending over backwards to make a point.

Campbell was in the middle of the pack of QBs this year. And according to your own list, he is in the middle of the pack of players with similar amounts of starts.

That pretty much puts him in the middle of the pack.

And he did it playing with a very awful team. If he were putting up numbers that QBs on bad teams usually do ... like say Brady Quinn, or Matt Cassel, or Matthew Stafford or Josh Freeman ... you'd have a point. Four years in you shouldn't be looking like a rookie. But Campbell didn't. He looked ok.

Here are some other numbers for you. Campbell's QB rating each year:
2006: 76.5
2007: 77.6
2008: 84.3
2009: 86.4

In 2008 and 2009 he played full seasons. In 2009 he threw for more TDs and more yards for a higher completion percentage and more yards-per-attempt despite being sacked more and having his rushing offense drop from 8th in the league to 27th.

Your premise seems to be that he's not getting any better from year-to-year. I'm not sure that's the case.

All that said, I don't think any of this proves he's a good QB. And I am not advocating re-signing him as if he were one. But I don't see a lot of evidence suggesting he's a bad QB either.

 

[Blackjack]

Your premise seems to be that he's not getting any better from year-to-year. I'm not sure that's the case.

All that said, I don't think any of this proves he's a good QB. And I am not advocating re-signing him as if he were one. But I don't see a lot of evidence suggesting he's a bad QB either.

I think you missed my point. The point of my thread was that you're not supposed to be comparing him to Matthew Stafford or Matt Cassel or Josh Freeman or Brady Quinn. The point was to compare him to other quarterbacks at similar stages in their career. My premise is that he lags behind his peers and is therefore below average.

It isn't really bending backwards either... I think it's simple common sense.

Student 1 (Jason Campbell) gets a C+ on an exam. His previous scores were D, and C.

Student 2 (Tom Brady) gets a C+ on an exam. His previous scores were a B and an A.

Are you telling me you're not convinced Student 2 deserves the benefit of the doubt that he is a better student than the first?

Jason Campbell is a bad quarterback, and to tout improving on himself as an achievement is hardly compelling. Remember, you're not competing against yourself, you're competing against 32 other teams. You're competing to be the best at your position. You're not competing to set your own personal records which fall way short of everyone else's.

The worst part is that somehow, Jason Campbell is picking up all these excuses that other people are setting up for him. After the 2008 season, Jason Campbell went on record as to say that he felt he had a good season. What?

Here's what Aaron Rodgers said after his 2008 season where he posted 28 TD, 13 INT, and a 63.6% completion percentage:

http://www.nfl.com/videos/green-bay-packers/09000d5d811dedcd/Aaron-Rodgers-interview

It's just completely night and day.

 

[Elephant]

It isn't really bending backwards either... I think it's simple common sense.

Student 1 (Jason Campbell) gets a C+ on an exam. His previous scores were D, and C.

Student 2 (Tom Brady) gets a C+ on an exam. His previous scores were a B and an A.

Are you telling me you're not convinced Student 2 deserves the benefit of the doubt that he is a better student than the first?

Again you are trying to simplify by using Student A and Student B.

What if Student A has had absolutely no help at home with his homework from his single mother who works 70 hours a week to put food on the table the entire time of the testing yet has gotten progressively better?

Student B has had help on his homework from his stay at home mom and has gotten progressively worse?

What would that say?

I think you made a valiant effort to prove your point but you fail to see what the rest of us see. You can massage numbers to fit any argument. And this is coming from one of the biggest opponents of Jason Campbell all year!

 

[Blackjack]

Again you are trying to simplify by using Student A and Student B.

What if Student A has had absolutely no help at home with his homework from his single mother who works 70 hours a week to put food on the table the entire time of the testing yet has gotten progressively better?

Student B has had help on his homework from his stay at home mom and has gotten progressively worse?

What would that say?

I think you made a valiant effort to prove your point but you fail to see what the rest of us see. You can massage numbers to fit any argument. And this is coming from one of the biggest opponents of Jason Campbell all year!

Again, you are factually incorrect. The only year Jason Campbell had no help was THIS YEAR.

 

[Elephant]

Again, you are factually incorrect. The only year Jason Campbell had no help was THIS YEAR.

That is not true! Last year (2008) the line fell apart after 8 games. The year before the line fell apart (2007) he did not have any legitimate receivers, Moss spent many games on the sidelines and Randle El and Cooley were his only viable options not to mention the line started to decline due to injury and age. His first season as a starter after taking over for Brunnel (2006) the defense was in such shambles they were constantly playing catch up, something Campbell has proven he is not very good at. So your assertion that all the pieces were there for him before this season is fallacious! We are not talking about just the O-Line here.

 

[Henry]

I think you missed my point. The point of my thread was that you're not supposed to be comparing him to Matthew Stafford or Matt Cassel or Josh Freeman or Brady Quinn. The point was to compare him to other quarterbacks at similar stages in their career.

Why do that and not compare him to players that have equally crappy teams around them? Oh right. They didn't have those crappy teams around them during starts 8 through 24 or in starts 25 through 45 they played well despite having a bad line and a new coach... or something.

Yeah ... that's bending over backwards.

My premise is that he lags behind his peers and is therefore below average.

An average QB is going to lag behind good QBs. Of your list up there, the only QBs ahead of Campbell that aren't multiple pro-bowlers are Delhomme and Orton. And Campbell's play has been very comparable the play of those two. If you are suggesting that Campbell will not go to three or four pro-bowls in his career ... ok. There's a case to be made there. That makes him a not great QB. Not a BELOW AVERAGE IN CAPITAL LETTERS one.

The reason your list is so small is because bad QBs wash out as a starter after a season or two. Campbell, however, has not. If you want to argue that Campbell is near the bottom of not bad QBs, your list would be a good place to start.

Student 1 (Jason Campbell) gets a C+ on an exam. His previous scores were D, and C.

That makes him an average student.

Student 2 (Tom Brady) gets a C+ on an exam. His previous scores were a B and an A.

That makes him a good student and future first-ballot hall of famer. I don't think ANYONE is suggesting that's Campbell.

Are you telling me you're not convinced Student 2 deserves the benefit of the doubt that he is a better student than the first?

I'm telling you that Student 2 is much much better than Student 1, who is average to this point. That doesn't mean Student 1 hasn't shown improvement every year for the past four years.

Jason Campbell is a bad quarterback, and to tout improving on himself as an achievement is hardly compelling. Remember, you're not competing against yourself, you're competing against 32 other teams. You're competing to be the best at your position. You're not competing to set your own personal records which fall way short of everyone else's.

And yet, you've got this convoluted formula in which you only look at a very small sampling of players during a very small section of their careers, and then eliminate half of them so that you can plunk Campbell at the bottom of it. It doesn't work that way either.

The worst part is that somehow, Jason Campbell is picking up all these excuses that other people are setting up for him. After the 2008 season, Jason Campbell went on record as to say that he felt he had a good season. What?

Here's what Aaron Rodgers said after his 2008 season where he posted 28 TD, 13 INT, and a 63.6% completion percentage:

http://www.nfl.com/videos/green-bay-packers/09000d5d811dedcd/Aaron-Rodgers-interview

It's just completely night and day.

Eh. The Redskins over the past few years have become an embarrassment. I'm not going to the mat for any of them. And that includes Jason Campbell. If the new front office wants to let him go so be it. I won't shed one tear. So no, I'm not making any excuses for the guy. I have no reason to.

But I know a faulty argument when I see one. Cherry-picking stats to the degree you have in this thread is a rarity. I just can't let that go.

 

[Blackjack]

That is not true! Last year (2008) the line fell apart after 8 games. The year before the line fell apart (2007) he did not have any legitimate receivers, Moss spent many games on the sidelines and Randle El and Cooley were his only viable options not to mention the line started to decline due to injury and age. His first season as a starter after taking over for Brunnel (2006) the defense was in such shambles they were constantly playing catch up, something Campbell has proven he is not very good at. So your assertion that all the pieces were there for him before this season is fallacious! We are not talking about just the O-Line here.

In the first half of 2008, Jason Campbell put up 8 TD and 0 INT. Like I said, Garrard-esque.

In 2007, Collins made the exact same team work.

In 2006.... Campbell's not good at playing catchup.... Ummm... That's a valid excuse?

 

[Neophyte]

Do you really want to go this route? Maybe we can say Jason Campbell in 2008 was stunted by the coaching change. But what about his second year under Saunders' system?

Jason Campbell in his second year in Saunders' system threw for 12 TD, 11 INT, and had a 77.6 QB Rating. These numbers were put up in starts 8 through 20.

If I didn't want to go there, I wouldn't have. If I did not consider it a valid line of reasoning, I would have left it unsaid.

The second year in a system that Collins told Brunell took 2 years to really pick up? That system?

Jay Cutler in his second year in starts 6-21 threw for 20 TD and 14 INT, and had a 88.1 QB Rating.

And that was Cutler's high point too. He really has never been as good again and he shown almost no improvement in his craft at the NFL level, unlike Campbell who has improved every year despite all the disruption on this team and on the offensive side in particular.

Donovan McNabb in his second year in starts 7-22 threw for 21 TD and 13 INT and a 77.8 QB Rating.

Campbell's rating is very similar to McNabb's for this time frame. Sure he had fewer TD's but he was on a team that did it's best to establish the run first and then thrown. His arm was not only often not the first option in the Red Zone, it wasn't even the last option. Contrast that with Reid's offense that has never been anything close to run first. It might be fair to say that giving the chance to throw into the End Zone more, Campbell would have posted better numbers than McNabb.

Kurt Warner in his second year in starts 1-16 threw for 41 TD and 13 INT.

Likely future HoFer. In his league, Campbell ain't.

Tom Brady in his second year in starts 1-14 threw for 18 TD and 12 INT and had a 86.5 QB Rating.

See above.

Matt Hasselbeck in his second year in Seattle threw for 15 TD and 10 INT in starts 13 through 22.

Second year starting but 4th year, both in the league and working under Mike Holmgren's WCO offense system.

In every conceivable situation we have Jason Campbell lagging behind most of his peers. Let's put it this way. You're at an elementary school that has Grades 1 - 6. You are in the sixth grade and read at a third grade level. Are you an average student?

If you compare yourself to every single student in the school, you might be. But you're supposed to compare yourself to your peers.

Peers? You have 18 QBs on this list, at least five of whom are likely HoF inductees and a couple others who will get more than just passing consideration for it. Looks like a little cherry picking going on to me even though I am sure you just took the end of year list. There are more than 18 QBs in the league with 47-52 starts, even they were not starting this year (Michael Vick comes to mind) or finished the year on IR (Chad Pennington), or were demoted in season (Kerry Collins).

And sure, I am picking at knits a bit but then so are you when you ignore Campbell's lack of a stable environment, both in terms of system and the idea of "team". I mean, this guy suffered through one of the worst off seasons of any starting QB in recent memory in the NFL and still came back to improve in every category QBs are meaningfully measured. You could make the argument that he did more with less this year and had he had the better parts of the starting offense all year (I am thinking Samuels, Thomas and Betts here...not sure how I feel about Portis at the moment) he would have better numbers yet.

So what am I saying...? The guy is not a HoFer and it's a safe bet he won't ever be. However, he doesn't suck either. He is a guy who will do well with a solid team around him but can't make up for the missing pieces on his own.