How Will Campbell Be Handled?

I don't mean to be a pessimist, but I have my doubts about this. I AM relieved that Gibbs asked Brunell to add a flexibility program to his workout regimen.

Gibbs is bringing Campbell along slowly, and having a capable veteran in front of him affords him that luxury. I don't think it speaks to Campbell's inability at all.

As I've said many times already, this team is loading up for a championship run. We have a veteran QB who just led us to the playoffs, obviously it makes perfect sense to stick with the veteran, take a shot at winning it all, and in the meantime you give your young QB another year to soak things up on the sideline and be better prepared to take over in 2007.

Two years on the bench is not the end of the world for a QB. More teams would probably do it too if it wasn't for the tremendous investment that is made in first round QBs. In today's win now or else NFL, teams are almost forced to play young QBs before they are truly ready. We should feel lucky that we can allow Campbell to sit and learn.

All that being said, this entire debate can boil down to this for me. Gibbs knows QBs. He knows how to handle them, he's won with multiple guys, and if we can't trust him, who can we?

Precisely. I doubt Gibbs is somewhere in a cold, dank basement corner self-hugging himself in a fetal position wondering what should he do regarding the QB situation. He knows people and he knows who the best available man for the job is.

Very true. I'm fine as long as Brunell plays like he did at the beginning of the season. And with all the weapons he'll have now, I have no reason to believe he won't. My ONLY thing is that if he gets hurt and knows it's affecting his game, I just wish he would bring that up with Gibbs.

I know Portis can carry the team on his back, but I don't think my heart can take any more of those type of close games.

I know Portis can carry the team on his back, but I don't think my heart can take any more of those type of close games.

I should've bought stock in Tums for the amount I chew on watching 'Skins games dating back to 1992. Winning by 8 points or more is/was considered a blowout for me.

Haha! I know the feeling. I think I got an ulcer from the first Dallas game alone.

TheMalcolmConnection

My ONLY thing is that if he gets hurt and knows it's affecting his game, I just wish he would bring that up with Gibbs.

Mark Brunell said that the hamstring injury in 2004 wasn't that much of a factor in his lackluster performance that year. My sense is that his strong supporters make the injury theory more of a factor than it really is when assessing Mark's performance. I regard it as a minor factor.

The major factor is his age and the accumulated wear and tear on his body.

In his prime, Brunell's game might be compared to Michael Vick's, a threat to run or pass especially when rolling left. He's not that much of a threat anymore even when he's 100%.

Mark Brunell said that the hamstring injury in 2004 wasn't that much of a factor in his lackluster performance that year. My sense is that his strong supporters make the injury theory more of a factor than it really is when assessing Mark's performance. I regard it as a minor factor.

The major factor is his age and the accumulated wear and tear on his body.

In his prime, Brunell's game might be compared to Michael Vick's, a threat to run or pass especially when rolling left. He's not that much of a threat anymore even when he's 100%.

Brunell talked down his hamstring injury in 2004, but I don't think anyone can deny something was drastically hurting his play that year. The Mark Brunell from 2004 was not the Brunell of 2005, or compared to any other year in his career.

After the second Giants game in 2005 he was once again very clearly hampered by his injury. His play dropped off drastically and we saw shades of the 2004 Brunell.

This quote from Gibbs is an indicator that Brunell's leg injuries are a concern:

"Mark's in good shape for his age, [but] his legs are a concern. [We want to] add some things to the offseason program for him from a flexibility standpoint."

Brunell isn't the same QB when his legs are bothering him. He's never had a rocket arm, so much like a finese pitcher in baseball, take away his legs and you have a QB that loses his accuracy and velocity.

The major factor is his age and the accumulated wear and tear on his body.

Then how do you account for the drastic difference in his performance early in the season compared to late in the season? If it was just age related, I'd expect his performance to be pretty consistent throughout the season. But it wasn't, he was much better early on than he was in the last few games and in the playoffs.

Exactly. After the Giants game, his play very obviously dropped off. It wasn't like his body said, "OK, it's this far in the season, time for me to give out."