Brunell is Bad

Well on the flipside it doesn't warrant saying "Brunell is bad".

The numbers just don't support your claim. 3050 yards, 23 TDs, 10 INTs. 10 regular season wins and a playoff win. 11th ranked offense.

Nobody is praising Brunell like he's the 2nd coming of Marino, but you're the one that started up a thread that just bashes him for no good reason and from the sounds of it your not willing to give him any credit at all.

Everyone was quick to pile on the blame in 2004 but now those same people aren't willing to give him his proper credit for 2005. You can't have it both ways, he was responsible for the poor offense in '04 and he was just as responsible for the offensive turnaround in '05.

If you have an axe to grind against Brunell just admit it and let's move on. Admit your biased and I can at least accept that.

Believe it or not, I am not biased. I like Brunell' character and personality and he comes across as a good guy. I thought Brunell was the best QB on our roster last season(means nothing). And I don't think '04 was his fault at all. I blame the OL and new team scheme. Giving him credit for last's turn around is irresponsible. We have all seen Gibb's ability to plug components into his system and find success(Rypien and Williams). My point is brunell is a component in an already successful scheme that needed one year to re-tool. The offense is working well together and that is the result of gibb's teaching not brunell's leadership. I think my perspective is much like gibb's right. he brought brunell in to run the offense. he brought in a rookie to be taught. he got what he needed out of brunell but wishes it had been a little more.

Gibb's knows Brunell sucks, that is why he drafted Campbell and that's why campbell will be our opening day starter.

Believe it or not, I am not biased. I like Brunell' character and personality and he comes across as a good guy. I thought Brunell was the best QB on our roster last season(means nothing). And I don't think '04 was his fault at all. I blame the OL and new team scheme. Giving him credit for last's turn around is irresponsible. We have all seen Gibb's ability to plug components into his system and find success(Rypien and Williams). My point is brunell is a component in an already successful scheme that needed one year to re-tool. The offense is working well together and that is the result of gibb's teaching not brunell's leadership. I think my perspective is much like gibb's right. he brought brunell in to run the offense. he brought in a rookie to be taught. he got what he needed out of brunell but wishes it had been a little more.

Gibb's knows Brunell sucks, that is why he drafted Campbell and that's why campbell will be our opening day starter.

So I guess all the good years he put in Jacksonville was a product of the system too. Are you kidding? He was injured in 2004, and played through the pain all year. That shows the confindence he has in an injured Brunell and a 100% healthy Ramsey. To say his productivity is due to the system is off, way off. Brunell has been through out his career, a good QB. QB rating of 80 a far better completion percentage than anyone playing and TD to INT ratio. Give it a rest.

The only thing I am doing is trying to get people to realize that Brunell's success last year does not warrant the praise you throw upon him. The one phrase that seems to keep popping up is, "he got it done." I am not arguing against a 10-6 record. I am arguing that Brunell played a miniscule role in getting it done.

I'm sorry, but brunell iss clearly above average. if we had harrington or orton, we would have tanked horribly, so he played his part and (until the last weeks) did well.

career stats:
total reg season: 74 wins - 64 losses
total post season: 5-5

84.1 rating, 3 pro bowls (1 MVP) 189 TDs, 129 Turnovers (Fumbles lost + Ints)

average QBs TD-TO ratio is below 1, his is almost 1.5... he's not peyton, but he's clearly not bad. in 2005 he had 23 TDs, 16 TOs an a 11-7 record. i'm sure peyton or brady would have had better numbers, but we don't have (nor will we have) either, so that arguement is stupid. finding above average QBs is hard, and by definition, at least 15 teams would like to have had the production of ours last season. He won't be above average much longer, but bashing him for 2005 isn't really logical.

he brought in campbell because brunell is 35 and his legs aren't going to get faster and his arm isn't going to get stronger... and on rypien and williams, maybe those guys weren't that bad either, since they did win super bowls and the did alright on the TD-TO ratio.

Dude, bottom line - you're full of it. I think you've shaken this rug enough.
I think you're insightful enough to know that this is truly a bogus argument.


Originally Posted by Sean Taylor is God
Believe it or not, I am not biased. I like Brunell' character and personality and he comes across as a good guy. I thought Brunell was the best QB on our roster last season(means nothing). And I don't think '04 was his fault at all. I blame the OL and new team scheme. Giving him credit for last's turn around is irresponsible. We have all seen Gibb's ability to plug components into his system and find success(Rypien and Williams). My point is brunell is a component in an already successful scheme that needed one year to re-tool. The offense is working well together and that is the result of gibb's teaching not brunell's leadership. I think my perspective is much like gibb's right. he brought brunell in to run the offense. he brought in a rookie to be taught. he got what he needed out of brunell but wishes it had been a little more.

Gibb's knows Brunell sucks, that is why he drafted Campbell and that's why campbell will be our opening day starter.

The only thing I am doing is trying to get people to realize that Brunell's success last year does not warrant the praise you throw upon him. The one phrase that seems to keep popping up is, "he got it done." I am not arguing against a 10-6 record. I am arguing that Brunell played a miniscule role in getting it done.

Isn't the whole goal of being a professional athlete to "get it done"?

Portis "got it done" rushing for over 1500 yards.
Both Moss and Portis "got it done by receiving and rushing for Redskins team highs.
Mark Brunell "got it done" by throwing a personal best in touchdown passes last year.

If you're a PRO you're supposed to get it done, if you're crap, you get benched. Can you SERIOUSLY argue that he didn't deserve a Pro-Bowl this year?

I can't believe this discussion is still going on. Nobody on here is saying Mark Brunell is the premiere QB in the NFL, but this is a guy who 3/4 through the season was at the top of the list of candidates for Comeback Player of the Year before getting injured. Now I'm sorry, but you don't get that sort of recognition simply because your a "component of a system", and to say that player is "bad" is just ignorant.

Would I like to see a little better production from our QB position? Of course. Does a part of me hope the QB position is an open competition so JC can light it up & be our starter? Absolutely. Is Mark Brunell a "Bad" QB? No way in hell.

Believe it or not, I am not biased. I like Brunell' character and personality and he comes across as a good guy. I thought Brunell was the best QB on our roster last season(means nothing). And I don't think '04 was his fault at all. I blame the OL and new team scheme. Giving him credit for last's turn around is irresponsible. We have all seen Gibb's ability to plug components into his system and find success(Rypien and Williams). My point is brunell is a component in an already successful scheme that needed one year to re-tool. The offense is working well together and that is the result of gibb's teaching not brunell's leadership. I think my perspective is much like gibb's right. he brought brunell in to run the offense. he brought in a rookie to be taught. he got what he needed out of brunell but wishes it had been a little more.

Gibb's knows Brunell sucks, that is why he drafted Campbell and that's why campbell will be our opening day starter.

I don't believe anybody is giving him sole credit for our turnaround this past season, but it is truly irresponsible to give him absolutely no credit whatsoever. If Gibbs truly thought Brunell "sucks" he would not have been starting Brunell this past year. He drafted Campbell because Gibbs knows Brunell isn't going to be playing for another 10 years. Gibbs didn't draft Campbell because Brunell sucks. That to me sounds quite ignorant. Sorry, but it does.

Gibbs brought Brunell in to run the offense and to teach the younger qbs how to manage the offense and how to be good leaders. Gibbs also brought Brunell in, because he felt Mark gave us a chance to be successful, and so far, Gibbs has been absolutely right. Mark will, again, be our starter on opening day this season. He may or may not finish as our starting quarterback, but there is no reason to make a change now.

Ugggg, I've entered a time warp to last September. Maybe we should debate in 9 separate threads whether it was wise to let go of Stephen Davis. This topic is as tired as the elastic on J.Lo.'s panties.

Yeah and 50/50 is going to be our premier receiver this year!

Gibb's knows Brunell sucks, that is why he drafted Campbell and that's why campbell will be our opening day starter.

I think we drafted Campbell because Gibbs thinks Ramsey sucks, not Brunell.

Can't believe I got sucked into this thread.