It's not Brunell's fault!

Hess,
sorry, but that was the line for LAST week, you know when we lost to the 0-5 Titans?

i guarantee the Redskins weren't feeling overconfident in this game, this was the 5-0 Colts. even at half with the lead (thank god for Randle El).

The O-line can't be expected to give Brunell the kind of time he needs on every single play, because with Brunell's passing style it would take 10 passes to get 30yds unless the receivers break one.

Right up unti 1/2 time. They go in feeling great and they come out stinking it up. ... It's ego. I'm convinced. But that's jut my opinon.

The problem is that most of Brunel's completions are checkdowns and on TV it's impossible to know on how many of them did he have options down field that he is not taking advantage of.

Even if it's not Brunel's fault it's still time to see what Campbel can do.

I agree with the whole behind issue, but there was a protection problem from the start. They may not have sacked Brunell too often, but they sure as hell hurried him and with Brunell "a hurry" is just as good as a sack because he is scared to death to step up in the pocket and take a hit and too slow to run away from anyone. Our line, behind or not, is very average. They all bitched about smashmouth football all week and on Portis' first 7 carries he had 1 yard. And when we dropped back to pass Brunell had about 2.5 seconds to get rid of it. Our line is not good........period, no excuses for them. 3 points against the Giants, couldn't run on the Titans in the second half....avg. of 1.2 yards per carry in that game, and really couldn't run today until late when they scored a garbage TD and that came when the Colts were laying back and giving the underneath stuff up. With tackles like Samuels and Jansen they should be counted on for WAY more than just serviceable.

That's a great point right there. This offensive line is serviceable when things are going well. But when it's a dogfight, and the quarterback has to start winging it, forget it -- these guys fold.

And God help us if there's a fast defensive end lining up against Samuels. You said earlier skinnyfan, Chris Samuels could have been called for holding on just about every play.

Brunell is the obvious target, but the offensive line, especially with games like this, and the ones against the Giants and Cowboys, are a very close second in the categories that deserve serious blame.

The problem is that most of Brunel's completions are checkdowns and on TV it's impossible to know on how many of them did he have options down field that he is not taking advantage of.

Even if it's not Brunel's fault it's still time to see what Campbel can do.

I saw a few shots of both Cooley and Lloyd running wide open, watch Brunell throw to a back in the flats, and throw their hands up in the air in frustration. I also saw one such shot of Moss. I'd kill to get my hands on gamefilm and see which receivers were open and why Brunell couldn't get the ball downfield.

Well the good news is that we are guaranteed not to lose next week.
Don't bet on it they will find a way to lose...but Gibbs will praise the effort.

hey, lets start another HATS OFF TO BRUNELL thread: another game without an INT. way to go.

I watched the post game interviews... I don't think its a positive ego thing.

We are not playing with the attitude we need to knock someone in the mouth and take a game away. I wasn't sure about this game, even though I was scared of the Titans.

We're not going to Campbell, which I think is a mistake. I would have to give him this year.

We're going to have a losing season this year, and IF campbell even starts next year we're going to have a year for him to get acclimated to the offense and playing with starters, which gives us another excuse...

Suggestions:

!) Fire Al Saunders. Keep a few of his plays, but send him on his way, or keep him as an advisor, but put the plays back in Gibbs hands.

2) Cut Archuleta. Troy Vincent will be our starter. He's old, but he's only had a week and knows our system better than Archuleta.

3) Bench Brunell and tie Todd Collins to the back of a moving Metro Train

4) Slap GW in the face and tell him if he doesn't start bringing pressure he's done, because anyone can play a cover 2 poorly on defense. Most AVERAGE defensive coaches demonstrate that regularly. Especially when you're playing a guy that has made a sure fire hall of fame career by picking apart zone covering D's that are scared to take guys out of coverage to rush him...

The problem is that most of Brunel's completions are checkdowns and on TV it's impossible to know on how many of them did he have options down field that he is not taking advantage of.

Celts, I wondered the same thing last week. I don't go to the games, so you can't really tell if the wideouts are getting open or not on TV.

But someone on the radio had an interesting viewpoint on whether the WRs are getting open -- in the NFL, getting open usually means only half a step from the defender. In this league, you must have a quarterback who can zip the ball in tight places -- sometimes on their back foot under heavy pressure.

Brunell seems to be good for two types of passes: Short, controlled throws within 5 yards of the line of scrimmage, or desperation heaves to Moss, many times relying only on luck or Moss' ability to adjust to the ball.

But we must be wrong, because Gibbs obviously sees it differently.

Celts, I wondered the same thing last week. I don't go to the games, so you can't really tell if the wideouts are getting open or not on TV.

But someone on the radio had an interesting viewpoint on whether the WRs are getting open -- in the NFL, getting open usually means only half a step from the defender. In this league, you must have a quarterback who can zip the ball in tight places -- sometimes on their back foot under heavy pressure.

Brunell seems to be good for two types of passes: Short, controlled throws within 5 yards of the line of scrimmage, or desperation heaves to Moss, many times relying only on luck or Moss' ability to adjust to the ball.

But we must be wrong, because Gibbs obviously sees it differently.

I believe people were open,but it's hard to say for sure without the coaches tape. When they review these game tapes they know precisely how many opportunities Brunel missed yet he keeps starting games. So maybe it's not as many as we think it is. As much as we know Gibbs loves Brunel, I don't believe for a second he loves him more than winning.

My take on Brunel is that he's just not a difference maker anymore...he is capable of winning when the entire team plays well around him but incapable of winning when any phase of the team breaks down. He will never pull a game out of the fire for you when things aren't going well.

Celts, I wondered the same thing last week. I don't go to the games, so you can't really tell if the wideouts are getting open or not on TV.

But someone on the radio had an interesting viewpoint on whether the WRs are getting open -- in the NFL, getting open usually means only half a step from the defender. In this league, you must have a quarterback who can zip the ball in tight places -- sometimes on their back foot under heavy pressure.

Brunell seems to be good for two types of passes: Short, controlled throws within 5 yards of the line of scrimmage, or desperation heaves to Moss, many times relying only on luck or Moss' ability to adjust to the ball.

But we must be wrong, because Gibbs obviously sees it differently.

Gibbs does see it differently. But I think Saunders sees it like most of us--he doesn't want Brunell in there either. His offense does not have as it's primary read--the 5 yard checkdown. It is just that--a checkdown--that Brunell chooses time and time again. I can't imagine that the primary read is always covered...