Campbell, now!

As long as a winning record is still possible you stick with Brunell. Brunell is not the problem...he fumbles to much but yesterdays prblem was protection. That may have been the worst game of Jon Jansen's life. He was a turnstyle out there...

If the "Brunell experiment" fails this year, it will show that Gibbs did in fact make a terrible error in judgment by signing him and making him the starter this year.

The decision to start Brunell looked brilliant for a couple games, and it still could turn out that way. However, if we finish 8-8 or 7-9, I think Coach Gibbs will deserve some flack for benching Ramsey and anointing Brunell the starter, especially because it will mean being back at square one when it comes to the QB position.

I don't see Brunell as the problem right now at all. He's had 2 bad games this year. If it weren't for him we'd be a lot worse off than 5-5.

I wouldn't say he's an experiment either, he firmly entrenched himself as the starter this year and I fully expect him to be back as the starter again next year.

I'm not saying they should bench brunell, but he did play bad last game. No way was this game the defenses fault. They scored more points than the offense and only let up 16 to a great offense. Our offense played bad this game, and some of that blame has to go to brunell. The quarterback gets the ball every play, so some of it has to be his fault.

The defense play a good game until the end. as usual. The fault has to start with the coaching staff on this game. The defensive calls at the end of the game has cost us two games. Blitzing like crazy against TB at the end cost us and Blitzing at the end yesterday cost us. If you are not pressuring the QB during the game, why try at the end of the game when the Raiders needed to get down field. which they did. And for the second week in a row, GW has the middle LB covering a WR. I dont care who the middle LB is, that is a HUGE mismatch every time. The offense yesterday went away from the run WAY too early. Portis touched the ball 8 freakin times in the second half. He was averaging 5 yards a carry and we stopped running the ball in the 2nd half. Why did we not run when we are up 3 points. we threw the ball 5 out of 6 plays, both times we were 3 and out. I fault the coaching staff. Brunell was is a bad position in the second half. We had only one receiver(Moss) and Jacobs couldn't get open with my mother covering him. Which is more of a reason to run. Brunell was trying to make plays(that Gibbs and Co. were calling) down the field. They were just not there. He either threw the ball where only his receiver was going to come down with it, or the ball went out of bounds. How many times did he go back to pass and get flushed out and have to throw the ball away, too many. when a defense knows you are going to pass, the d-line does nothing but attack the QB, we did nothing to offset that, no screens , draws, pitches or anything.

Brunell is the MAN. No matter how poorly he may play in the next few games, he must NOT be replaced. He will come through for the SKINS and as a result the SKINS will be in the playoffs. If you want to blame others on the team, OK. But Brunell is the man to get the job done. If he can't do it nobody can.

Brunell is the MAN. No matter how poorly he may play in the next few games, he must NOT be replaced. He will come through for the SKINS and as a result the SKINS will be in the playoffs. If you want to blame others on the team, OK. But Brunell is the man to get the job done. If he can't do it nobody can.
If Brunell does not lead us to the playoffs this year, would you be up for starting Campbell or someone else next year?

If the "Brunell experiment" fails this year, it will show that Gibbs did in fact make a terrible error in judgment by signing him and making him the starter this year.

The decision to start Brunell looked brilliant for a couple games, and it still could turn out that way. However, if we finish 8-8 or 7-9, I think Coach Gibbs will deserve some flack for benching Ramsey and anointing Brunell the starter, especially because it will mean being back at square one when it comes to the QB position.

I think you're a little to late on the argument of Joe Gibbs' signing of Brunell. Mark has more than proven himself a leader and a very good quarterback for us. Even alot of the doubters of Mark Brunell changed their tune. Mark has played great for us since the Dallas game. One or two weak games from him is by no means grounds to bench the guy.

I don't think Gibbs will deserve flack at all if we finish higher than what we did a year ago. The offense has improved dramatically from a year ago, but the defense hasn't. That isn't a direct reflection on Joe Gibbs and Mark Brunell. If anything, other than the team giving the ball up way too much, Gibbs has done his job in getting this offense competitive and able to score more than a TD a game (minus game one and yesterday's game.)

You just have to be patient. This team has been a loser since he left the first time. A tweak here and there can do wonders for this team. We're extremely close in being a "Joe Gibbs" team that finds a way to win Sunday in and Sunday out. We all want to win now. Haven't we learned our lesson with how that normally goes?

brunell should finish out the year. as far as next year it's anyones guess. maybe there will be an open competition. i would lean towards brunell starting next yr too though.

I think you're a little to late on the argument of Joe Gibbs' signing of Brunell. Mark has more than proven himself a leader and a very good quarterback for us. Even alot of the doubters of Mark Brunell changed their tune. Mark has played great for us since the Dallas game. One or two weak games from him is by no means grounds to bench the guy.

I don't think Gibbs will deserve flack at all if we finish higher than what we did a year ago. The offense has improved dramatically from a year ago, but the defense hasn't. That isn't a direct reflection on Joe Gibbs and Mark Brunell. If anything, other than the team giving the ball up way too much, Gibbs has done his job in getting this offense competitive and able to score more than a TD a game (minus game one and yesterday's game.)

You just have to be patient. This team has been a loser since he left the first time. A tweak here and there can do wonders for this team. We're extremely close in being a "Joe Gibbs" team that finds a way to win Sunday in and Sunday out. We all want to win now. Haven't we learned our lesson with how that normally goes?
Believe me, I was there arguing against Gibbs' decision last year to sign Brunell and then this year to start him at Dallas. And right after the Dallas game (in which Brunell was lousy except in the fourth quarter), I changed my tune and supported Brunell and Gibbs' decision.

All I am saying now is that it might be time to reassess the decision. Brunell has played poorly in three of the past five games, and had led us to a 2-5 mark in the past seven games. He has six fumbles in the past six games. (Gibbs used to jump all over Ramsey for fumbling.)

I know it's not all on Brunell, and I hope he has a great game in the do-or-die bout with the Bolts. But, right now our record speaks for itself. We're a .500 team with an all right QB.

If Brunell does not lead us to the playoffs this year, would you be up for starting Campbell or someone else next year?

YES! If Brunell does not lead us to the promise land this year, then go all the way with Campbell next year. However, we must stick with Brunell for the remainder of this year, regardless of wins or losses. That way, when Campbell does get the job he will be able to play with the same confidence as Brunell, knowing that Gibbs will not be second guessing his every move.

Mark Brunell has made the entire league recognize his ability to find the open receiver no matter how difficult the pass. He has been in the top Ten QBs rating all year and has earned the respect of his team mates something Ramsey nor Campbell can do in their stages of development. It is a shame that a fan of the Redskins could be so shallow to call for the replacement of the Brunell when he is the main reason we even have five wins. First the argument was the offense doesn't score enough TD's. Then that became history. Now Brunell is the reason for the loss yesterday and should be replaced. Now who in their right mind......Boy I can't even finish this thread because it's too ridiculous.