Should Brunell be replaced? (merged)

one big difference that we had in the 80's that we don't have now, is a strong armed QB who could get the ball deep, Brunell can't throw the deep ball and stretch the defense any more.

...

what was your thought on Brunells performance over the coarse of the next 7 quarters before he threw those 2 miracle passes, which only worked because of dallas's total disregard for Brunells ability to throw deep, that ain't happening again.

Wait, let me get this straight - Brunell can't throw deep any more...even though he did earlier this season...which made the defense respect his ability to throw deep...and they still respect that, so they're covering downfield now...even though Brunell can't throw deep?

Why don't you get that one straightened out and get back to us.

Wait, let me get this straight - Brunell can't throw deep any more...even though he did earlier this season...which made the defense respect his ability to throw deep...and they still respect that, so they're covering downfield now...even though Brunell can't throw deep?

Why don't you get that one straightened out and get back to us.

Yeah I don't get it either. Brunell was throwing the ball deep just fine earlier in the year. I think the way defenses are playing us now has more to do with our troubles going down the field, add in the losses of Patten & Thrash and it's much more logical to conclude that than to say Brunell has suddenly lost his arm strength. :rolleyes:

How do you figure we are in control of our own destiny? FACT?

We win out, we have a great shot at the playoffs.


Brunell was hurt last season? Explain to me why he insist's he wasen't, and why he had his best game of the year statistically the week after he supposedly had this big time injury, Brunells explanation was he didn't believe he really had a hole lot of help around him.

Care to give me the link or soundbyte to Mark Brunell stating specifically that he didn't have any help around him? You keep siting that one game, ignoring the fact that playing hurt makes the injury worse.



As you said winning is the measuring stick in this league, that's winning in the regular season, not pre-season, and Brunell is failing.

We have a winning record, therefore, Mark Brunell is not failing. You're just failing to convince me you even like the Redskins.


Now the contradictions start, on one hand you say that the reason Brunell can't duplicate what he's previously done on offense is because Patten is out, then on the other hand you say we have no one except Moss who was in the posse's league, how many balls did Patten catch, and how much could an inferior talent in Patten to the Posse really effect an offense? And correct me if I am wrong but Brunell was losing games before Patten was injured.


I'll be glad to correct you, because you usually are wrong. First of all, I'll admit you're really good at taking what I say completely out of context to justify your illness toward the Redskins. Secondly, You're the one suggesting Patten is inferior. Never did I say he and Thrash were inferior. I am saying Moss is the only deep threat - that doesn't mean the other receivers are inferior, it just means that I believe they are good possession receivers who can make the clutch catches and occasionally get behind the defenders. In fact, I might have even said that before. However, they are not considered deep threats. And because both are quality receivers and both being out, then we are left with ONE receiver, Moss, to throw to.

Mark Brunell wasn't losing games before Patten was injured - the Redskins were losing game, but they were also winning games. This is a team sport. If you have issues with this team, go back to pulling for the Jets.


The big reason why we won back in the 80's was because our O-line used to dominate everyone we faced, we would run at will on teams, that doesn't exist anymore, and Gibbs hasen't shown an ability to adjust the offense to compensate for the lack of a dominating offensive line.

You can't be anymore wrong than this. Gibbs hasn't shown the ability to adjust the offense? What team are you watching? You have absolutely no faith in this team whatsoever, and probably never will.


And just for the record Moss is more explosive than any reciever Gibbs ever had in DC, and Patten was the same type player as Sanders, except Patten is probably a little faster, Cooley is better than any H-back we had, and a better all around reciever than Didier, one big difference that we had in the 80's that we don't have now, is a strong armed QB who could get the ball deep, Brunell can't throw the deep ball and stretch the defense any more.

So what exactly is your point? Brunell can't throw the deep ball, but yet you talk about the "miracle passes" at the end of the Dallas game. That is where the real contradictions come into play. Please, give it up. Just say you hate Mark Brunell, Joe Gibbs, and the Redskins and get it over with. You have no enjoyment in watching this team whatsoever. Why do you even pull for this team?


As for the ball control aspect in the 80's, only our running game was ball control, our passing game under Gibbs was alway's a downfield passing attack, and that's part of the problem, with Portis he's more of a homerun hitter than a ball control back.

BECAUSE WE HAD THE POSSE WHICH MADE IT SPECIAL FOR US! GO BACK AND READ MY POST. Yet, Portis is adjusting fairly well and we're also getting great use out of Betts and Cartwright. I see no logic in your point whatsoever.

[/QUOTE=Offiss]
Patrick's play spilled over to the regular season, you were able to make that evaluation after 1 quarter? Not bad![/QUOTE]

Do you not know how to read? Did I NOT say after watching Patrick Ramsey play in preseason, I found no signs of improvement and that it spilled over into our first regular season game? I betcha you didn't even watch the preseason at all, did you?


what was your thought on Brunells performance over the coarse of the next 7 quarters before he threw those 2 miracle passes, which only worked because of dallas's total disregard for Brunells ability to throw deep, that ain't happening again.

Here is your contradiction. You state in part of your post that Brunell doesn't have the ability to throw deep, but then you turn around and say that Dallas totally disregarded Mark Brunell's abilit to throw deep. Face it, you're pwned! You have no excuse to hide being a closest Jets fan anymore. Just come out and be loud and proud.



But if your putting a lot of stock into what you saw in the pre-season OK, although most scouts and coaches don't put any stock into the pre-season, and yes that has alway's inc. Gibbs, why becuase of mismatches and vanilla offenses, while most legitamate starters are playing not to get hurt. How indicative was Brunells play in the pre-season, hold up to how he is playing now? I don't think he was succeeding in the pre-season with Patten as one of his WR's either. I do believe Patten played most of the pre-season with Ramsey.

And I would suggest this is a reason why you don't coach football in the NFL, because if coaches didn't put alot of stock into training camp and preseason, then we wouldn't have training camp and preseason. What is your freakin point with Patten? You state that Patten is just as good as what Ricky Sanders was, and then you suggest that Patten only played in preseason with Patrick Ramsey. So by this logic, then Patrick Ramsey should have looked like Joe Montana. Give it up man.

Guys guys...relax...

There is no reason to start insulting people or whatever... Everyone should be able to talk about there opinions calmly without letting things get personal...

I dont know why anyone would question whether someone is really a skins fan or not... I feel like offiss is obviously stating his frustration with Brunell...not because he hates him or hates this team...but because he feels that the team would be in a better position right now if Patrick Ramsey were starting. That is in no way an attack on the redskins...or making him less of a fan. That is simply stating an opinion about how he feels we could make the most out of our personnel.

Oh...and one question for skinsguy
With regard to this statement:
"Secondly, You're the one suggesting Patten is inferior. Never did I say he and Thrash were inferior. I am saying Moss is the only deep threat - that doesn't mean the other receivers are inferior, it just means that I believe they are good possession receivers who can make the clutch catches and occasionally get behind the defenders."

I may be mistaken but i thought one of the main reasons Patten was brought here was precisely because he was supposed to be a deep threat. I remember reading that at the time we signed him.

Its been a while since we signed him though...and i wasnt able to find any articles supporting it in a quick search...so i guess people let me know if im mistaken. I just thought one of the things that was touted about our "revamped receving corps" in the offseason was its speed and so i thought patten was considered a deep threat before coming here and that that was one of the main reasons we signed him.

Guys guys...relax...

There is no reason to start insulting people or whatever... Everyone should be able to talk about there opinions calmly without letting things get personal...

I dont know why anyone would question whether someone is really a skins fan or not... I feel like offiss is obviously stating his frustration with Brunell...not because he hates him or hates this team...but because he feels that the team would be in a better position right now if Patrick Ramsey were starting. That is in no way an attack on the redskins...or making him less of a fan. That is simply stating an opinion about how he feels we could make the most out of our personnel.

All I'm asking for is a good solid reason and evidence to assume that Patrick Ramsey would be better for us at this point than Mark Brunell. As far as I have seen, there is no evidence but only maybes and what ifs, which mean nothing. I certainly hope you take up for the rest of us when Offiss accuses us for not knowing anything about football and only being "cheerleaders."


Oh...and one question for skinsguy
With regard to this statement:
"Secondly, You're the one suggesting Patten is inferior. Never did I say he and Thrash were inferior. I am saying Moss is the only deep threat - that doesn't mean the other receivers are inferior, it just means that I believe they are good possession receivers who can make the clutch catches and occasionally get behind the defenders."

I may be mistaken but i thought one of the main reasons Patten was brought here was precisely because he was supposed to be a deep threat. I remember reading that at the time we signed him.

Its been a while since we signed him though...and i wasnt able to find any articles supporting it in a quick search...so i guess people let me know if im mistaken. I just thought one of the things that was touted about our "revamped receving corps" in the offseason was its speed and so i thought patten was considered a deep threat before coming here and that that was one of the main reasons we signed him.


Patten was brought in because he runs precise routes and that he can occasionally get behind the defenders. He is not a deep threat like Santana Moss, but because he is very good with running his routes, he can occasionally become a deep threat. However, comparing the two, it is obvious that Santana Moss is our only true deep threat. He is our home run receiver, the other guys are more possession type of guys.

Are you guys nuts?
How the hell do you want to plop Ramsey into a game this important?
Of course I assume that you do not want the rookie from Auburn in there.

how come no one remembers the 3-0 start at the beginning of the season? You guys are talking about the 2006 draft without Brunells play so far this year instead of having a chance - slim - at a playoff bye.

:duel: im down with the flu....let offiss and skins guy go at it...gives me somethin to read while i eat my soup. Keep it up guys, love the spirit!!

EF DALLAS

Are you guys nuts?
How the hell do you want to plop Ramsey into a game this important?
Of course I assume that you do not want the rookie from Auburn in there.

how come no one remembers the 3-0 start at the beginning of the season? You guys are talking about the 2006 draft without Brunells play so far this year instead of having a chance - slim - at a playoff bye.

They're not nuts, just been dippin' in to the sauce a bit too much.

:party-smi

Wait, let me get this straight - Brunell can't throw deep any more...even though he did earlier this season...which made the defense respect his ability to throw deep...and they still respect that, so they're covering downfield now...even though Brunell can't throw deep?

Why don't you get that one straightened out and get back to us.


I guess I will have to spell it out for you here we go, dallas's total disregard for Brunells arm strength set up that play, they like other teams weren't committing to the deep ball, Brunell if he throws deep puts way to much air under the ball and makes it easy to catch up, the reason he completed those balls wasen't because he out threw the defense, it was the defenses total disregard for anything deep and he was able to catch them way off guard, a normal coverage there and we are done in that dallas game. If you don't beleive that's the case show 1 game in which Brunell completed a deep ball like the last one to Moss?

So in part he doesn't throw downfield because it takes the ball to long to get there, which allows safties and DB's to recover and make a play on the ball.

2 pass plays doesn't constitute a deep passing GAME early in the season, take away those 2 passes and name all the deep passing plays we have completed this season?

And we have to keep in mind that the first TD pass in that game was about 40 yd, which leaves us with 1 real leagitamate deep ball, I would hope an NFL QB was capable of throwing the ball 40 yds.

Actually we have a HUGE amount of plays over 20 yards. If you can find the stat, I saw it during the Rams game. I believe we're one of the top 10 teams with long gaining plays.