Will Saunders Affect Our QB Situation?

[offiss]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

It's interesting that you would add Joe Namath to that mix. I've heard from several people that Namath was WAY overrated -- famous and memorable only because of his "guarantee" that his Jets would beat the heavily favored Colts in the Super Bowl. The coaches were reportedly so nervous about Namath that they refused to allow him to throw the ball at all in the fourth quarter of that game while the Jets held the lead.





Exactly. Remember when he tried to throw a pass across the field against Tampa Bay in the Wild Card? The result was disasterous. Without a doubt, even when Brunell and the offense was peaking, it was either Moss or Cooley that enabled the Skins to move the ball through the air, or it just wasn't going to happen. Now, the question remains, was that due to ineptitude from the #2, and #3 wide receivers, one of the flaws of Brunell, or both?

Basically the chicken or the egg debate we've been having here for the past week.

I still believe once we get a bonfied QB running the offense everyone will see how inafective Brunell really is.

Brunell IMO held back this team.

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by offiss

Basically the chicken or the egg debate we've been having here for the past week.

I still believe once we get a bonfied QB running the offense everyone will see how inafective Brunell really is.

Brunell IMO held back this team.

Statistically Brunell had a good year. So when you say he held the team back, are you refering to his inability to get the ball downfield??

[offiss]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

Statistically Brunell had a good year. So when you say he held the team back, are you refering to his inability to get the ball downfield??

His inability to win, anyone and everyone knows we went to the playoffs because of one reason and one reason only, and that's our defense.

We don't beat Philli to get in if it's not for our defense, and we sure don't beat Tampa for the same reasons, bottom line the defense carried Brunells inability to move the offense. The slightest bit of help from Brunell and were playing Carolina for the championship this sunday!

[skinsguy]

Originally Posted by offiss

His inability to win, anyone and everyone knows we went to the playoffs because of one reason and one reason only, and that's our defense.

Our defense had a large part in our success this year, but an offense that was ranked #11 after being ranked #30 the previous year - WITH record breakers - makes your statement incorrect.

Originally Posted by offiss

We don't beat Philli to get in if it's not for our defense, and we sure don't beat Tampa for the same reasons, bottom line the defense carried Brunells inability to move the offense. The slightest bit of help from Brunell and were playing Carolina for the championship this sunday!

If you're going to put blame on Brunell's inability to move the ball in the playoffs, you might as well put the blame on Portis's inability to establish an effective running game, and Moss's inability to get open on every single play, and Cooley's inability to get open for the big plays in the playoffs. When your offense lives and dies by the running game and you only have one true deep threat receiver, no quarterback is going to be able to move the ball successfully.

[offiss]

Originally Posted by skinsguy

Our defense had a large part in our success this year, but an offense that was ranked #11 after being ranked #30 the previous year - WITH record breakers - makes your statement incorrect.



If you're going to put blame on Brunell's inability to move the ball in the playoffs, you might as well put the blame on Portis's inability to establish an effective running game, and Moss's inability to get open on every single play, and Cooley's inability to get open for the big plays in the playoffs. When your offense lives and dies by the running game and you only have one true deep threat receiver, no quarterback is going to be able to move the ball successfully.

You should define records, those were team records, not NFL. If you only throw to 2 guy's that will happen.

Of coarse we improved on offense, but I think it was down right impossible to go backwards.

Our offensive performance in the last 3 games is what makes my statement correct, obviously you get caught up with a stat sheet and can't really see what's actually happening on the field, those stats are misleading and irrelevant, if they had bearing we wouldn't have pounded out the worst offensive performance in a playoff win in the history of the NFL, yes I said NFL record, not team.

Laying the blame on Portis in the Seattle game is ridiculous, did you watch that game, Seattle was sending 7 guys at him where ever he went with no caution to misdirection, why you ask? Could it be they didn't have any real worries about Brunell beating them downfield?

You are not going to run the ball I don't care who you are if you become 1 dimensional, you have to be able to beat a team in the air if they over committ to the run, Brunell never did that.

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by offiss

You should define records, those were team records, not NFL. If you only throw to 2 guy's that will happen.

Of coarse we improved on offense, but I think it was down right impossible to go backwards.

Our offensive performance in the last 3 games is what makes my statement correct, obviously you get caught up with a stat sheet and can't really see what's actually happening on the field, those stats are misleading and irrelevant, if they had bearing we wouldn't have pounded out the worst offensive performance in a playoff win in the history of the NFL, yes I said NFL record, not team.

Laying the blame on Portis in the Seattle game is ridiculous, did you watch that game, Seattle was sending 7 guys at him where ever he went with no caution to misdirection, why you ask? Could it be they didn't have any real worries about Brunell beating them downfield?

You are not going to run the ball I don't care who you are if you become 1 dimensional, you have to be able to beat a team in the air if they over committ to the run, Brunell never did that.

Offiss,

While you say it was impossible for the offense to go backward, you still fail to acknowledge the fact that they went from the bottom to number #11.

How do you account for this, and what parties would you say contributed?

[skinsguy]

Originally Posted by offiss

You should define records, those were team records, not NFL. If you only throw to 2 guy's that will happen.

Of coarse we improved on offense, but I think it was down right impossible to go backwards.

Of course it's possible to go backwards, there is at least 32 teams in the NFL if I remember correctly. We were ranked #30, which means we could have been ranked worse.

Originally Posted by offiss

Our offensive performance in the last 3 games is what makes my statement correct,

Right! You'd rather dwell on three games out of the 18 we played this year and ignore the rest.

Originally Posted by offiss

Laying the blame on Portis in the Seattle game is ridiculous, did you watch that game, Seattle was sending 7 guys at him where ever he went with no caution to misdirection, why you ask? Could it be they didn't have any real worries about Brunell beating them downfield?

How so? Portis didn't perform well. Why not blame him? You're quick to pick Brunell apart when he doesn't play well, regardless of the reason. By your logic, it's just as correct to blame Portis. How is it that Brunell can't get the ball down the field? Go back and watch the highlight films of this season. Brunell doesn't have a problem with getting the ball downfield.

Originally Posted by offiss

You are not going to run the ball I don't care who you are if you become 1 dimensional, you have to be able to beat a team in the air if they over committ to the run, Brunell never did that.

It's not Brunell's fault that Portis couldn't establish the run. Our offensive philosophy is a run first to set up the pass philosophy. Logically, you must establish the running game to open up the passing game. We couldn't establish the running game, therefore, our passing game suffered as well. When you're put in a position where the majority of the plays have to be pass plays, then the defense can double your ONE receiver down the field. It's not that hard to figure out.

[offiss]

Originally Posted by skinsguy

Of course it's possible to go backwards, there is at least 32 teams in the NFL if I remember correctly. We were ranked #30, which means we could have been ranked worse.



Right! You'd rather dwell on three games out of the 18 we played this year and ignore the rest.




How so? Portis didn't perform well. Why not blame him? You're quick to pick Brunell apart when he doesn't play well, regardless of the reason. By your logic, it's just as correct to blame Portis. How is it that Brunell can't get the ball down the field? Go back and watch the highlight films of this season. Brunell doesn't have a problem with getting the ball downfield.



It's not Brunell's fault that Portis couldn't establish the run. Our offensive philosophy is a run first to set up the pass philosophy. Logically, you must establish the running game to open up the passing game. We couldn't establish the running game, therefore, our passing game suffered as well. When you're put in a position where the majority of the plays have to be pass plays, then the defense can double your ONE receiver down the field. It's not that hard to figure out.

It is his fault if the defense is stacking the box with no fear of the passing game.

Logically you have to establish 1 or the other, you have to run in order to pass, if a team over committs and stops the run, then you must burn them with the pass to force them out of the box, Brunell couldn't do that.

Portis himself said after the game that he couldn't run because Seattle was stacking the box, you can't ask 5 O-linemen to block 7 and 8 players in the box, it's up to the QB to make them pay for that and Bruenll didn't.

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by offiss

His inability to win, anyone and everyone knows we went to the playoffs because of one reason and one reason only, and that's our defense.

We don't beat Philli to get in if it's not for our defense, and we sure don't beat Tampa for the same reasons, bottom line the defense carried Brunells inability to move the offense. The slightest bit of help from Brunell and were playing Carolina for the championship this sunday!

No arguing that the defense carried us most of the season, but it certainly wasn't the only reason we were in the playoffs. Sure he had a bad games v. Eagles and Tampa. But I'm sure you would even agree field position was horrible in each of those games, as well as Seattle.

I don't think it's fair to say someone who was one of the better passers in the NFC this year held back his team.

[offiss]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

No arguing that the defense carried us most of the season, but it certainly wasn't the only reason we were in the playoffs. Sure he had a bad games v. Eagles and Tampa. But I'm sure you would even agree field position was horrible in each of those games, as well as Seattle.

I don't think it's fair to say someone who was one of the better passers in the NFC this year held back his team.

Yes and no, we started out with bad field position, but that turned around, our defense and special team handed him 3 turnovers, we were handed 3 TO's and still lost, that doesn't say much for brunell.

He was vastly outplayed by a kid in Simms, and big time Mike McMahon.

As a QB it's up to him to dig us out of bad field position, he wasen't able to do that.

[skinsguy]

Originally Posted by offiss

Yes and no, we started out with bad field position, but that turned around, our defense and special team handed him 3 turnovers, we were handed 3 TO's and still lost, that doesn't say much for brunell.

He was vastly outplayed by a kid in Simms, and big time Mike McMahon.

As a QB it's up to him to dig us out of bad field position, he wasen't able to do that.

And you put no blame on Portis? No blame on the OL? That doesn't make any sense! Portis can have a bad game or two and you offer no criticism?

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by offiss

Yes and no, we started out with bad field position, but that turned around, our defense and special team handed him 3 turnovers, we were handed 3 TO's and still lost, that doesn't say much for brunell.

He was vastly outplayed by a kid in Simms, and big time Mike McMahon.

As a QB it's up to him to dig us out of bad field position, he wasen't able to do that.

No, they didn't give Brunell three turnovers, they gave are offense three turnovers.

And I'd bet money you wouldn't take Simms or McMahon over Brunell.

[offiss]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

No, they didn't give Brunell three turnovers, they gave are offense three turnovers.

And I'd bet money you wouldn't take Simms or McMahon over Brunell.

Your kidding with that statement right? Who runs the offense? So I guess when Brunell throws an INT it's not really him it's the offense, interseting way of looking at things you have there. I guess if you don't understand that the QB is going to get the credit and the blame for the up's and downs of an offense this is kind of a dead end discussion.


I will bet as much money as you can muster that I would take Simms over Brunell.