Comparing Cutler to Campbell...........

Video of John Mullin commenting on Campbell vs Cutler.

http://www.csnchicago.com/common/dyn...y_style=manual


http://www.csnphilly.com/common/medialib/162/629558.png
To view this site, you need to have Flash Player 9.0.115 or later installed. Click here to get the latest Flash player.



'Snowflake' quarterbacks: Cutler vs. Campbell

November 14, 2012, 9:19 pm SHARE THIS POST





http://www.csnchicago.com/common/glo...rlay-small.png
http://www.csnchicago.com/sportsnetC...2304711533.jpg
CTL: The difference between Cutler and CampbellInsider John "Moon" Mullin joined CTL Wednesday to discuss the difference in styles between Jay Cutler and Jason Campbell - 11/14



http://www.csnchicago.com/common/glo...rlay-small.png
http://www.csnchicago.com/sportsnetC...2304719089.jpg
CSN Bay Area's Matt Maiocco on CTLCSN Bay Area 49ers Insider Matt Maiocco joined CTL Wednesday to discuss the status of the Niners, namely quarterback Alex Smith's health - 11/14

http://www.csnchicago.com/common/med...158/610698.png	JOHN "MOON" MULLIN http://www.csnchicago.com/common/med...158/610664.png Archive

Quarterbacks are like snowflakes (you have to see where this is going, right?): No two are exactly alike or deliver the football to their receivers or make in-game calls exactly the same.


With Jason Campbell taking over this week from Jay Cutler, Bears receivers will face some subtle adjustments. And at the NFL level, “subtle” is potentially significant.


“Jay has one of the strongest arms in the league so it’s going to get on you quicker,” said wide receiver Dane Sanzenbacher, who played with Cutler all last season and now this, and worked with Campbell through training camp and weekly on the ‘look’ team running upcoming opponents’ offenses.



“Jason has a more deliberate delivery so you know it’s coming, very smooth.”



Style points


Coincidentally, both quarterbacks worked under the direction of quarterbacks coach Jeremy Bates, Cutler in Denver and now Chicago, Campbell as a Bear.


But while Cutler prospered under Mike Shanahan and a version of the West Coast offense, typically built around timing throws, Cutler is less the practitioner of that approach than Campbell.


“Jason has a ‘firmer’ ball, doesn’t zip it to you quite as much,” said wide receiver Devin Hester. “Jason is a more ‘timing’ type of quarterback. Jay is has the arm strength to wait til you get open to throw it to you. Jason’s been in a timing offense more before.



“Both are the same when it comes to catching the ball. Jay puts the ball there when it’s time for it to be there. Jason might get the ball to you a little earlier [in a route].”



Receivers said Campbell does not telegraph throws, just sometimes makes earlier ones.



“He may anticipate more, which isn’t good or bad, just different,” Sanzenbacher said. “Jay’s got a stronger arm and just likes to see it first: ‘It’s open, I’ll get it there.’”



Accuracy matters


Cutler has a career completion percentage of 61.1. Campbell is nearly identical at 60.8. Cutler has had more success down the field with 7.2 yards per attempt vs. Campbell’s 6.75.


But Campbell’s 45-yard completion to Brandon Marshall in last Sunday’s third quarter made a special impression, even on those used to seeing his passing.


“He made great throws last week,” Sanzenbacher said. “That throw to Brandon was impressive in itself. And that’s coming in cold off the sidelines. Impressive.”


Hut, hut, HUT


More than the receivers will be dealing with the new quarterback.


Campbell has a slightly different cadence at the line of scrimmage. How much difference that makes remains to be seen.


The Bears had one false start last Sunday in 34 trips to the line behind Campbell.


“Whatever the case may be, we’ve been around him all offseason and training camp,” said center Roberto Garza. “We’ve heard his cadence. It comes down to just hearing the plays and going out there and executing. We don’t have to do anything different. We just have to do it better.”

Reading that makes me think of Jay Cutler in the same manner as Rex Grossman's "Unleash the Dragon"

I think there's a pretty good chance that Campbell will be playing on Monday night so this article and the video commentary by John Mullin talks about the differences in style between the two.

We signed Campbell for just such a situation as this and I think that it goes without saying that there's an expectation that he can come in and win a ball game in substitution for Cutler. Sunday night was a tough game to come into and get the rhythm he needed to push the ball down the field.

I think he was being overly cautious dumping the ball off but on the other hand Houston wasn't about to give up much of anything deep and there was at least that one throw to Davis that was dropped. Regardless he's gonna need to do more and do it better on Monday night if we expect to win.

There are some negative comments in the video about Campbell not having been as prepared to come in last Sunday as he should have been. I can't say that I totally disagree with that. What do you guys think about that and what needs to be done in practices this week in order to see Campbell operating more effectively. We need points and a dink and dunk passing game won't get that done.

49ers game isn't worth playing Cutler

Why compromise the back end of the schedule by scrambling your starter's eggs even more?

http://www.trbimg.com/img-50a5c1f4/t...121116-001/600 Bears backup quarterback Jason Campbell might be in line for some playing time. (Chris Sweda/Tribune photo / November 15, 2012)

Dan McNeil 12:22 a.m. CST, November 16, 2012


I've heard it suggested that Jason Campbell is the best backup quarterback in this year's NFL — and that maybe the former Raider and Redskin is better than any No. 2 the Bears have ever had.


That's tantamount to the proclamation that Jay Cutler is the best starter in Bears history. One need not squint to see how low the bar previously was set.
But if Lovie Smith thinks Campbell's helmsmanship is as effective as advertised, his decision for Monday night's game in San Francisco should be easy. Campbell starts and Cutler wears civilian clothes. Even if he isn't as wobbly as he was after the Texans' Tim Dobbins laid him out on Soldier Field's soggy, clumpy turf last Sunday night.



The 49ers game is one the Bears weren't supposed to win with Cutler. Why compromise the back end of the schedule by scrambling your starter's eggs even more? Four of the Bears' last six games are against NFC North teams. Those are more meaningful. (I don't agree with his first contention at all. No one believes we can't win the SF game even with Campbell playing QB. But I will have to concede that the NFCN games have more impact on the standings)


Coaches, of course, seldom approach their weekly assignments that way.
Every game is winnable. Every game MUST be won. Even if it means treating human beings like they're equipment.


Thing is, a Bears win at Candlestick Park doesn't get them any closer to New Orleans come February. Recent history illuminates how insignificant home field "advantage" is.

The Giants' road to the Super Bowl last winter was paved by beating the Packers at Lambeau Field and the 49ers in San Francisco.


In January of 2010, Green Bay won three postseason games on the road.
In Philadelphia, Atlanta and, uh-hum, Chicago.


Home field advantage is almost as mythical as "Bear weather." I cringed when Smith alluded to it Wednesday in his news conference — just three days after inclement weather meant nothing for the rough and tumble Midwesterners against a dome team.


Bears coaches and players have intimated they won't scale back on the passing game if Campbell plays. I don't believe them, but I don't find any fault with Campbell liberally sticking the football into the bellies of Matt Forte and Michael Bush, either.


The Bears running game has underwhelmed and it won't improve because of what transpires on the practice fields. The collective bargaining agreement precludes teams from smacking around their own, which is the most proven method to becoming a more physical team.

The Bears haven't been physical enough offensively. Here in Week 11, I'm not sure if Mike Tice's unit has been enough of anything. Save maddening. Here's hoping Smith backs off the pressure this week. A win would be nice, but a loss doesn't threaten the season.


Forget the lights and the national television audience. It's a perfect time to brush up on the offensive fundamentals and get their $3.5 million backup some of the work they haven't requested from him since training camp.


I'm not as head over feet as some others are with Campbell. But I'll wager a week's pay he bests a 16.7 first-half rating and doesn't throw the ball to the 49ers five times.


Special contributor Dan McNeil hosts "The McNeil and Spiegel Show" weekdays from 9 a.m.-1 p.m. on WSCR-AM 670.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by soulman

I think he was being overly cautious dumping the ball off but on the other hand Houston wasn't about to give up much of anything deep and there was at least that one throw to Davis that was dropped. Regardless he's gonna need to do more and do it better on Monday night if we expect to win.

There are some negative comments in the video about Campbell not having been as prepared to come in last Sunday as he should have been. I can't say that I totally disagree with that. What do you guys think about that and what needs to be done in practices this week in order to see Campbell operating more effectively. We need points and a dink and dunk passing game won't get that done.

---

It is a hard situation, but I must agree he had some times where he took the check down and hoped that they could break a tackle.

There was a lot of slipping going on out there and the medium to deep routes are hard to throw if you are not sure that the reciever is going to be in the right spot because of field conditions.

All that being said, he is going to need to take some deep shots and complete some in order to allow the running game to have some room.

When all you do is dink and dunk then they can bring the Safety down in the box and he can defend the run and still be in the area to defend the pass, so it is vital that we take some shots down field early.

The articles I have read have said that Cambell played well. Most everyone on this forum seems to feel the same way.

I am genuinely at a loss (much like I usually am in the stock market). I just saw Cambell in such a different light. I'm not saying I'm right and the rest of the world is wrong, but I really saw it so much different that I don't get it.

What I saw was a QB that went out and started handing off in a running game and did well. He missed a few (no issues with that - they don't give him any reps), hit a REALLY nice deep ball, and then after that IMO, stunk it up.

The reason I say that is that it was like he all of a sudden could not see open players. He had open player SEVERAL times. It was not just once or twice. You are behind in the game, you are going to lose for sure if you don't score. And this is when you take no chances? He was playing like he was protecting a lead. All he did was protect a loss.

He checked down to players that were behind the line of scrimmage several times for a loss when he had open players downfield. It is being said that the Texans took away the long ball and that is why he didn't throw it. Well, they did - for the most part. But I can remember at least twice that guys were totally open and he checked down for a loss. He is a veteran. That should not happen. So ok, anyone can miss an open player sometimes. But several times? A veteran of 70+ games? And for losses? When you HAVE to take a shot to have a chance to win? Sorry, I don't get how he played a good game.

I felt his decisions were poor, and his ability to see open players was poor. He can make throws. We all know that and saw that, but it's immaterial. You can have Joe Montana back there and if he decides he he is going to check down multiple times for losses, his abilities become immaterial. So I know he can do it, but that doesn't matter to me as much as what he chooses to do. And even more important, if this is the way he is going to continue to play. If so, I don't car how many games he has won, how similar his stats are to Cutler, or anything else about him. If he continues to make those kind of decisions and plays, we won't win with him. It will have to be the defense.

I'm not going to judge Campbell much on the Sunday night game. If you look at his whole body of work, he's a fairly decent starting QB, and certainly an above average 2nd string QB. I don't expect him to be great, but I think he'll be OK. To be honest, I'm more worried about Tice calling a decent game, and about our WR's dropping balls they should be catching, TE's who can't block my grandma (and can't catch either).

One point. Campbell has played behind some of the crappiest oline players (with the Skins) and so our oline woes won't be anything new to him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JustAnotherBearsFan99

I'm not going to judge Campbell much on the Sunday night game. If you look at his whole body of work, he's a fairly decent starting QB, and certainly an above average 2nd string QB. I don't expect him to be great, but I think he'll be OK. To be honest, I'm more worried about Tice calling a decent game, and about our WR's dropping balls they should be catching, TE's who can't block my grandma (and can't catch either).

One point. Campbell has played behind some of the crappiest oline players (with the Skins) and so our oline woes won't be anything new to him.

---

All true -- and I agree with what you say. However I am more concerned with his current style of play (how he is playing now) more than how he used to play. How he used to play is not going to affect us. How he plays now will.

I could have dealt with him missing players because he gets no reps. I am having a real problem with him not seeing open players and the check down decisions he was making. Hopefully that was a one game deal - otherwise Monday could be rough. The 49ers are not the Texans, but they are close.

I think part of the explanation can be found in the way the players themselves describe the differences between them.

Cutler seems to wait for a player to break open and then delivers the ball. That may be one reason we see him holding onto the ball as long as he does. But with his arm he can still make those throws and get completions because the ball gets to the receiver as quickly as it does. He throws what guys would call a "heavy ball".

Campbell is a "timing" kind of guy who wants to throw on or just before the receiver breaks. I think that takes a little more time to work out between him and his receivers. Guys will turn and the ball will be there or well on the way and the have to adjust to it quickly. Campbell has a good arm but not the kind of gun Cutler has and he throws a "softer" ball.

All in all it will take a little adjustment on the part of the receivers and on Campbells part just getting comfortable with one another. I think this would be a game where it would be smart to activate Sanz since he and Campbell have been working more together and may have their timing down better than he will with others.

This of course just makes good sense which is probably why they won't do it. :badmood:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by soulman

Campbell is a "timing" kind of guy who wants to throw on or just before the receiver breaks. I think that takes a little more time to work out between him and his receivers. Guys will turn and the ball will be there or well on the way and the have to adjust to it quickly. Campbell has a good arm but not the kind of gun Cutler has and he throws a "softer" ball.

All in all it will take a little adjustment on the part of the receivers and on Campbells part just getting comfortable with one another. I think this would be a game where it would be smart to activate Sanz since he and Campbell have been working more together and may have their timing down better than he will with others.

This of course just makes good sense which is probably why they won't do it. :badmood:

---

Soul -- Yes I agree with you also -- but then how do you explain the last minutes of the game when he was checking down for losses rather taking a chance downfield. The game was lost. What was going to happen with an interception? The game would have been lost anyway. That is the time for some risk. And he had guys open.

Although I agree with what you say, it doesn't explain his decision to stay conservative to preserve the loss or not seeing open WRs. Those continue to be my issues. i was very excited to have him as a backup. But he did not show me any veteran game savvy or ability to see the field. Don't care if he can make throws - if he chooses to bypass open guys for a loss, it doesn't matter what his abilities are.

Hopefully, it was maybe some nerves, but no matter what excuses I conjure up for him. I don't believe them myself. He is a veteran of quite a few games. Game savvy and seeing the field should not go away. Timing and accuracy - sure no problem. If he had tried to throw to one of the open guys (any of the times), and either misses or got intercepted, I could have forgiven that easier due to rust and not getting reps (will teams never learn to give the BU QB reps?).

We'll see what happens Monday. I know what the guy can do -- I'm just not convinced he will.