Campbell or Brunell in 2006?

The one good thing about starting JC if that becomes the team decision is that our core group of players are still young enough to mature and develop along with him. Cooley, Portis, Moss are still young enough to reap the benefits of Jason's maturity.

The one good thing about starting JC if that becomes the team decision is that our core group of players are still young enough to mature and develop along with him. Cooley, Portis, Moss are still young enough to reap the benefits of Jason's maturity.

Hmm...we might need to be careful with Campbell's initials so as not to confuse...

Kevin: [On who inspired him to be a wood worker] I'd have to say Jesus. He was a carpenter and I figured if you're going to follow in somebody's footsteps, why not the steps of our lord and savior?
Jack Byrnes: [Before Greg has a chance to respond] Greg's Jewish.
Kevin: Really? Well so was J.C... (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0212338/quotes)

I think we should start Brunell and then bring in Campbell slowly. By all means start him in the preseason to see what he has. If he is overwhelmingly impressive, then start him opening day. Otherwise, go with Brunell one more year.

mark brunell was not the reason we made the playoffs this season. anyone else notice that his TD's a lot of the time were receivers making the plays after they caught the ball. he didnt play better this year than he did last year, other players made plays last year they werent makign the year before, and santana came in and was an animal. please. give me jason campbell please.

Campbell will not start or play next season unless we are out of the playoff hunt. Ramsey has a better chance of playing for us next season than Campbell. With Saunders coming in it might be good news for Ramsey by opening up some QB compitition. Brunell is the starter but I think that the coaches will look at alot of game film to determine wether Brunell can carry this team for another year. I would love to see us keep Ramsey for another year and see how he plays in preseason. I am not a hugh Ramsey fan but I do feel he has learned more this season on the sidelines than he had in all his past seasons. We have alot of great coaches and I have faith they will make the best decisions for our team.

mark brunell was not the reason we made the playoffs this season. anyone else notice that his TD's a lot of the time were receivers making the plays after they caught the ball. he didnt play better this year than he did last year, other players made plays last year they werent makign the year before, and santana came in and was an animal. please. give me jason campbell please.

The fact that there were only 10 INTs was a bigger reason for victory than the 23 TDs were.

TURNOVERS ARE KEY IN THE NFL.

So many people love to ignore that fact. When evaluating a QB from now on, everyone remember the first stats to look at are INTs and FUMBLES.

The fact that there were only 10 INTs was a bigger reason for victory than the 23 TDs were.

TURNOVERS ARE KEY IN THE NFL.

So many people love to ignore that fact. When evaluating a QB from now on, everyone remember the first stats to look at are INTs and FUMBLES.

you right and how many fumbles did he have?
more than last year, get your facts straight buddy.

The fact that there were only 10 INTs was a bigger reason for victory than the 23 TDs were.

TURNOVERS ARE KEY IN THE NFL.

So many people love to ignore that fact. When evaluating a QB from now on, everyone remember the first stats to look at are INTs and FUMBLES.To back that up look at our turnover ratio in the last 7 games we played. I think its somen where around plus 15 for us.

you right and how many fumbles did he have?
more than last year, get your facts straight buddy.

No genius, they were the exact same as last year. In 2004 he played half the season and fumbled 5 times, losing 3 of them. In 2005 he played the entire season and fumbled 10 times, losing 6 of them. Those ratios are exactly the same.

Also, in 2004 Brunell took 15 sacks in the half season he played. In the other half of that season, Ramsey took 23 sacks. And Ramsey even had the benefit of playing behind an offensive line that was starting to gel at the end of the season.

The fumble rates of Brunell and Ramsey are not much different from each other. But the INT and sack rates are in Brunell's favor big-time. Sacks kill drives, when you lose 7 yards on a play, your chances of making a first down are very slim. You end up punting. INTs don't even give you a chance to gain any field position by punting.

Brunell is our best option going into next year. It's possible Campbell could be really good at taking care of the football, and I'll give him a chance to prove that to me. But usually young guys get intercepted. I say let him be the backup as long as Brunell is still good at managing an offense.