QB or defense: what's the bigger problem?

Well as has been said by many repeatedly here, the blame has to go all around.

Exactly.

I think most of us would agree there is plenty of blame to go around.

Yet the overwhelming amount of time and energy around here is spent talking about one position.

I think for most of us, the jury is still out on whether it's Saunders ASKING Brunell to throw short, or if it's just Brunell not hitting the open guy. I would lean more towards him not hitting the open guy, because I just don't see Saunders calling so many dump off passes.

The defense can and will get fixed once the entire defense returns healthy. I've said it once, and I'll say it again, Brunell is the weak link in an otherwise strong chain.

Out of curiosity, which part of his deal hasn't he been holding up? He hasn't been inaccurate, and he moves the ball. So do you want him to start changing Saunders' plays in the huddle or something? Is that why he sucks, he accepts coaching?

First of all, I didn't say he sucks, just that he's not getting it done. And moving the ball and accuracy are fine, but when he has less touchdowns than starts, throws a four yard pass on 3rd and 8 constantly, and skips the ball to open receivers, he's not holding up his end of the deal.

Oh, I almost forgot... 2-5.

Yes. And I do have to say this for anyone who is a Brunell apologist. His stats look fine, but I would have to say that when a majority including: fans, sport writers, players and more say that he's not getting the job done, you'd tend to think that was true.

Out of curiosity, which part of his deal hasn't he been holding up? He hasn't been inaccurate, and he moves the ball. So do you want him to start changing Saunders' plays in the huddle or something? Is that why he sucks, he accepts coaching?

GTripp,
how bout throwing to his number 2 and number 3 receiver? YES, he's accurate because he's "moving the ball" 5yds away to the runningback.

do you really think all of Al Saunder's plays are "throw to the runningback 5yds SHORT of the 1st down"? NO. that's all Brunell. his check down in light of not being able to evade blitzes and find and throw to the open guy PAST the 1st down marker. heaven forbid they'd be near the endzone.

sure some of those screens are set up, but those dump offs he keeps making are his emergency valve when HE thinks he can't make the play. THATS the part of the deal he's not holding up, MAKING THE PLAY.

First of all, I didn't say he sucks, just that he's not getting it done. And moving the ball and accuracy are fine, but when he has less touchdowns than starts, throws a four yard pass on 3rd and 8 constantly, and skips the ball to open receivers, he's not holding up his end of the deal.

Oh, I almost forgot... 2-5.Ok, my fault for misquoting you then. But still...

The four yard passes on 3rd and 8 are what I was referring to by changing the plays in the huddle. Obviously, he checks down because the main reciever is covered. So if there was a better play call, the intended reciever would be open, because a pre snap read determines where the ball is going to go against 3rd down pressure. So what normally happens is that teams blitz us on 3rd down, Brunell has time to look at one reciever which is taken away for a multitude of reasons, and he checks it down. Running routes like all curl or all slant versus the blitz would allow Brunell to pick a guy before the snap and deliver the ball...but we never use these plays on third down. I think Saunders is getting too creative on a down where a conversion is critical.

I should be fair. On the flip side of the coin, the offense is more efficient than last year because on first and second down, we are more creative in the passing game and when not facing a blitz, work the intermediate passing game quite well. That's a big perk with an Al Saunders offense. But vs a blitz, a check down is the only way to beat it if the intended reciever is covered. My theroy is consistent with those observations of Brunell looking at one guy and then checking down.

As for the fewer TD's than games played:
1. That's not even true. Brunell has 7 starts and 7 TD passes.
2. Clinton Portis is second in the league with 6 TD runs. You can't score more than one TD a drive, so who the hell in their right mind would penalize the QB for a TD scored in the rushing game. Such I believe is the fundamental flaw of QB rating as a stat (which Brunell still ranks high in this season).

I don't remember him skipping a ball in since the Dallas game, which is pretty impressive for any QB. Then again, I was following the Tennessee game on radio, so I have no visuals from that game whatsoever.

Yes. And I do have to say this for anyone who is a Brunell apologist. His stats look fine, but I would have to say that when a majority including: fans, sport writers, players and more say that he's not getting the job done, you'd tend to think that was true.

what stats, his completion ratio??

the stats bubbling up by the Brunell apologists are *very* selective. it's not hard to complete passes when they're deep behind the line of schrimmage, and last time i checked "Touchdowns" was also a stat. why aren't those ever mentioned by the apologists? how bout first downs?

another stat not mentioned by them is YAC, they'll state Brunell's yards sure, but completely discount how much of those were by the receiver.

there's a reason why Moss got into the pro-bowl last year, and his QB didn't.

Yeah....let's not use facts in support of a logical argument here.

</sarc>

Brunell has been bad. No two ways about it.

do you really think all of Al Saunder's plays are "throw to the runningback 5yds SHORT of the 1st down"? NO. that's all Brunell. his check down in light of not being able to evade blitzes and find and throw to the open guy PAST the 1st down marker. heaven forbid they'd be near the endzone.No, I do however think that is the SECOND option on many of them. If you watch how often Trent Green used to check down, it makes a lot of sense.

Fine, he's too old to evade the blitz (even though he still can at times). Campbell doesn't yet have that level of pocket presence, and he's not exactly known for his mobility.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TenandSix:Unacceptable http://www.thewarpath.net/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.thewarpath.net/redskins-locker-room/15165-qb-defense-whats-bigger-problem-post233291.html#post233291)
ANYONE WHO SAYS DEFENSE IS WRONG.
DEAD WRONG!

Have you been paying any attention to the missed tackles? The blown coverages? The injuries?



Have you been paying attention to football teams with good QB´s?

Essentially because of Joe Gibbs and Trent Dilfer, some people actually try to win without a franchise QB. Let´s look back at the last 20 years or so, shall we? Who wins superbowls?

Ben Rothlisberger
Brady times three
Brad Johnson
Trent Dilfer
Kurt Warner
John Elway times two
Brett Favre
Troy Aikman times three
Steve Young
Mark Rypien
Jeff Hostetler
Joe Montana times two
Doug Williams
Phil Simms

Now, my point is, that out of the last twenty SB winners, 15 were won with franchise QB´s. That´s 75%. It´s no coincidence that the teams with franchise QB´s are consistantly in it, year after year. The Redskins QB´s, Rypien and Williams, had solid if not spectacular careers, but had incredible SB performances. Dilfer is another QB on the list who had done very little else in his career. Hostetler and Johnson had solid careers but weren´t franchise QB´s. Warner is the lowest rated in my opinion out of the Franchise group. But he went again two years later and lost in an upset to a young guy named Brady. He bloomed late, and luckily for the Rams they cut him as soon as his skills had diminished. To me, what most of you are trying to say is that you´d rather take the Gibbsian approach to winning. Build the team around the QB first thinking that we can win it with a servicable QB who gets hot as the team around him peaks. Obviously, as Gibbs is our coach again, it makes sense to me and has the ring of foolishness to suggest otherwise. However, just imagine if we had a franchise QB? Would you trade that player for all the players and the members of the coaching staff of the #1 defense in the league? Do you trade Peyton Manning or Tom Brady for the Bears D? Absolutely not.

Let me repeat that: ABSOLUTELY NOT!

So, my point is that it all starts with a QB. Perhaps in other places the need is not quite as dire as it is here for us here in Skinsland. We haven´t had a franchise QB for decades and it is time to make that priority number one.


im just going to throw htis out there but YES! defenses win superbowls want an example the ravens? and now im willing to place money the bears take it this year.