Will Saunders Affect Our QB Situation?

12thMan · 01-20-2006, 12:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

I can't wait to see Ramsey tear it up elsewhere.

We really haven't come to regret any of the players we've let leave so far under Gibbs, outside of maybe Pierce but Marshall has proved to be a more than capable replacement.

I think it's reasonable to say Marshall will be even better next year. Moreover, he's not nearly as expensive as Pierce, which will probably go a long way in us signing some key people this year.

Beemnseven · 01-20-2006, 01:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 70Chip

Green has the intangible ability to understand how a play is developing and make the right decision. Montana and Aikman were two of the best you will ever have seen at this. Also I would add Joe Namath and Tom Brady.

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.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 70Chip

Mark Brunell seems to be able to see about half of the field - usually the left side ... What he can't do well is look off an intermediate receiver on his left and find an intermediate receiver on his right, or vice versa.

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?

offiss · 01-20-2006, 01:27 PM

Quote:

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 · 01-20-2006, 01:30 PM

Quote:

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 · 01-20-2006, 01:56 PM

Quote:

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!

Longtimefan · 01-20-2006, 02:03 PM

It's time we made a total commitment to the QB situation that's going to benefit the team long term, and not continue to rely on short term fixes. The debate between Brunell and Ramsey has been an ongoing one since the arival of Gibbs, and based on what we know of the present situation, how can one conclude there's any prospect of Ramsey being the QB here at any point in time. He has consistently maintained he wants' to play. With Jason Campbell in line as the projected future starter and Ramsey in the final year of his contract, it's difficult to see where he fits in. It would seem unlikely he would sit for another year, become an unrestricted free agent at the end of next season free to sign with any team and the Redskins not be compensated in any way. It's not likely he's going to be the starting QB here, so it would be incumbent upon the team to seek value in a trade (if possible) rather than see him walk away to the highest bidder.
It's going to be interesting to see how the addition of Al Saunders will impact who will likely be the QB. As much as I have defended Brunell in the past and not completely dismissed him as being ineffective, watching him closely this year still (in my mind) raises some questions about his ability (or lack thereof) to make all the neccessary throws for an offense to consistently sustain drives over a sixteen game season. Without a doubt we will have growing pains starting the young QB and will probably take a slight step back. The question remains then, do we start another season with Brunell as the starter, or be willing to sacrafice maybe a chance at the play-offs in 06 for the sake of development? "TOUGH DECISION"

skinsguy · 01-20-2006, 02:09 PM

Quote:

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.

Quote:

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.

12thMan · 01-20-2006, 02:20 PM

Quote:

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 · 01-20-2006, 02:42 PM

Quote:

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 · 01-20-2006, 02:46 PM

Quote:

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 · 01-20-2006, 02:48 PM

Quote:

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.

MTK · 01-20-2006, 02:50 PM

The offense played a large role in our 11 wins this year.

Last year I would agree the defense carried the team, but this year the offense improved to #11, averaged 22 points per game, produced a 1500 yard RB, a 1400 yard WR, a TE with over 70 catches, and a QB with over 3000 yards and 23 TDs.

The offense has alot of room for improvement obviously, but to totally discount the marked improvement they showed this year is just ridiculous.

offiss · 01-20-2006, 02:53 PM

Quote:

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.

MTK · 01-20-2006, 02:57 PM

offiss, you're baseing your opinion of the offense on 3 games??

C'mon man, the season is 16 games long. Look at the entire body of work and then judge. Portis was 4th in the NFL in rushing, Moss was 2nd in receiving yards...

No one is debating the fact the offense struggled down the stretch, but look at the injuries we had. Thomas, Brunell, Portis, they all started to pile up right at the end.

12thMan · 01-20-2006, 03:00 PM

Quote:

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?

01-20-2006, 02:03 PM	#51
Longtimefan Playmaker Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Germantown, Md. Posts: 4,832	Re: Will Saunders Affect Our QB Situation? It's time we made a total commitment to the QB situation that's going to benefit the team long term, and not continue to rely on short term fixes. The debate between Brunell and Ramsey has been an ongoing one since the arival of Gibbs, and based on what we know of the present situation, how can one conclude there's any prospect of Ramsey being the QB here at any point in time. He has consistently maintained he wants' to play. With Jason Campbell in line as the projected future starter and Ramsey in the final year of his contract, it's difficult to see where he fits in. It would seem unlikely he would sit for another year, become an unrestricted free agent at the end of next season free to sign with any team and the Redskins not be compensated in any way. It's not likely he's going to be the starting QB here, so it would be incumbent upon the team to seek value in a trade (if possible) rather than see him walk away to the highest bidder. It's going to be interesting to see how the addition of Al Saunders will impact who will likely be the QB. As much as I have defended Brunell in the past and not completely dismissed him as being ineffective, watching him closely this year still (in my mind) raises some questions about his ability (or lack thereof) to make all the neccessary throws for an offense to consistently sustain drives over a sixteen game season. Without a doubt we will have growing pains starting the young QB and will probably take a slight step back. The question remains then, do we start another season with Brunell as the starter, or be willing to sacrafice maybe a chance at the play-offs in 06 for the sake of development? "TOUGH DECISION"

01-20-2006, 02:50 PM	#57
MTK \m/ Join Date: Feb 2004 Age: 53 Posts: 99,913	Re: Will Saunders Affect Our QB Situation? The offense played a large role in our 11 wins this year. Last year I would agree the defense carried the team, but this year the offense improved to #11, averaged 22 points per game, produced a 1500 yard RB, a 1400 yard WR, a TE with over 70 catches, and a QB with over 3000 yards and 23 TDs. The offense has alot of room for improvement obviously, but to totally discount the marked improvement they showed this year is just ridiculous.

01-20-2006, 02:57 PM	#59
MTK \m/ Join Date: Feb 2004 Age: 53 Posts: 99,913	Re: Will Saunders Affect Our QB Situation? offiss, you're baseing your opinion of the offense on 3 games?? C'mon man, the season is 16 games long. Look at the entire body of work and then judge. Portis was 4th in the NFL in rushing, Moss was 2nd in receiving yards... No one is debating the fact the offense struggled down the stretch, but look at the injuries we had. Thomas, Brunell, Portis, they all started to pile up right at the end.

Will Saunders Affect Our QB Situation?

Locker Room Main Forum