Re: How Long For Brunell?
 

we will see i hope your right but i wouldnt bet on it. Listen were all skins fans but maybe i have stop drinking the Danny Coolaid, i have seen the real world

Re: How Long For Brunell?
 

Brunell helped us get back to the playoffs last year. I think I'll take my chances with him for now until I see that our team is sitting home watching the playoffs.

Re: How Long For Brunell?
 

[quote=AlvinWalton'sNeckBrace;214081]0 interceptions 0 sacks...he didn't lose the game, poor play calling and defensive play did[/quote]

No, he alone didn't lose the game, but he rarely wins games either. Face it, his glory days are long gone. He's a QB who seems capable of only throwing dink passes, he hears footsteps that aren't there, and he immediately gets rid of the ball if his primary receiver is covered. All this adds up to an offense that will struggle to score TDs as long as he is behind center.

He's the main reason why we've had to rely so heavily on the Defense to have any decent chance at winning games. He's the main reason why this offense rarely scores more than 15 to 17 points each game.

We have a slew of talented receivers, but all that talent don't mean a thing if you have a QB who can't seem to complete a pass beyond 10 yards. Yeah, once in a while he does manage to complete one downfield, but that's the definite exception, not the rule. So, what you saw from him Monday night is what you're going to get and it ain't pretty.

Everyone's angry at Hall for missing the 48 yard field goal. But, if it weren't for Hall's other 3 field goals, the game wouldn't have even been close!!!!!

A starting offense that's only managed to score 1 lousy TD in 4 preseason and 1 regular season games? Unbelievable.

Re: How Long For Brunell?
 

[QUOTE=skinsguy;215017]#1: That is what QB is supposed to do, anticipate pressure -- it's called awareness.

Secondly, Ramsey was the king of happy dancing feet, so don't even go there.[/QUOTE]


I will go there any time I feel like it!

Obviously your hung up on who knows what and can't seperate the two. But I will do it for you, Ramsey regardless of happy feet would hang in the pocket and take the hit to complete the pass, unlike Brunell, who if you could comprehend anything would understand that anticipating a sack when no one is there is not what a QB is supposed to do, unfortuantly that's what Brunell does, that is why he throws it to the first reciever he see's whether or not he's far enough downfield for a first, or he throws it away. That fear also doesn't allow him to continue to check down on his progressions to possibly throw to a third or 4th reciever because he's to worried about being hit, you cannot play QB in the NFL if your worried about being hit, that fear wont allow you to be successeful. That is why the Jags were going to release him and we haven't seen anything different, he was throwing off his back leg all night against the Viks.

Re: How Long For Brunell?
 

[QUOTE=CHIEF CHUCKING MY SPEAR;215029]His ass should have should have been gone in 2004, last year was a fluke. We went to the playoffs in spite of him last not because of him. Damn you see his old ass legs go out of under him trying to run out of bounds monday. Gibbs for some unknown reason is willing to sink his reputation with this has been. I hope i'm wrong but i dont thinks so. He didnt do anything to lose but he sure as hell didnt do anything to help win the game just one scramble, that why i thought we had in there for was for his great mobility. Damn that arm look weak its really sad,but hey at least he can throw a screen pass or out of bounds.[/QUOTE]


Nice job with that CHIEF! I am adding you to my click!:biggthump

Re: How Long For Brunell?
 

[quote=LadyT;215070]No, he alone didn't lose the game, but he rarely wins games either. Face it, his glory days are long gone. He's a QB who seems capable of only throwing dink passes, he hears footsteps that aren't there, and he immediately gets rid of the ball if his primary receiver is covered. All this adds up to an offense that will struggle to score TDs as long as he is behind center.

He's the main reason why we've had to rely so heavily on the Defense to have any decent chance at winning games. He's the main reason why this offense rarely scores more than 15 to 17 points each game.

We have a slew of talented receivers, but all that talent don't mean a thing if you have a QB who can't seem to complete a pass beyond 10 yards. Yeah, once in a while he does manage to complete one downfield, but that's the definite exception, not the rule. So, what you saw from him Monday night is what you're going to get and it ain't pretty.

Everyone's angry at Hall for missing the 48 yard field goal. But, if it weren't for Hall's other 3 field goals, the game wouldn't have even been close!!!!!

A starting offense that's only managed to score 1 lousy TD in 4 preseason and 1 regular season games? Unbelievable.[/quote]

As far as I am concerned, Mark Brunell won the most important and the most memorable game of all, last year in Dallas to break the painful losing streak we had with the Cowgirls! Not only that, he lead the way in their second meeting at FedEx Field, a critical game which was important to both teams. Needless to say, you know the outcome. Give him some more respect! I think Joe Gibbs and Al Saunders know a little more than you do when it comes to deciding on who should be the starter!

Re: How Long For Brunell?
 

So for the people who believe Brunell's way past his prime (which in my opinion isn't too far from the truth), who would you all be interested in seeing at QB that you believe could finally carry the team to a Super Bowl or at least deep into the playoffs?

And for the folks who think Brunell is capable of helping to carry the team, whats stopping us from actually gelling together?

Re: How Long For Brunell?
 

[quote=DynamiteRave;215107]So for the people who believe Brunell's way past his prime (which in my opinion isn't too far from the truth), who would you all be interested in seeing at QB that you believe could finally carry the team to a Super Bowl or at least deep into the playoffs?

And for the folks who think Brunell is capable of helping to carry the team, whats stopping us from actually gelling together?[/quote] I believe Mark Brunell can and will do it under this new offensive philosophy. Besides Joe Theismann, what other star Quarterbacks did we ever have? None, but we still managed to win two more Superbowls with two other semi-satisfactory quarterbacks (Mark Rypien and Doug Williams). It's not always about the quarterback people, you can't lay the entire burden on Mark, it was the team who dropped the bomb, the defense allowing 3rd down conversions over and over again, the dropped td catch by Santana Moss in the end zone after a perfect pass from Mark, the missed field goal by John Hall, the two 15 yard penalties by Sean Taylor, etc, etc.....

Re: How Long For Brunell?
 

[quote=JWsleep;214790]Look, we did not run the ball well at all, and that really makes it harder to throw..[/quote]

And we never will be able to run the ball throwing swing passes... and 5 yard passes ...thats was all game!!! ask yourself this??? how would u defend the redskins...i would shorten everything and bring a safety..... hell ya know they wont challenge us deep... i saw several interviews on tv where it was said the redskins need to open it up and take shots down field... Well until we do Portis will continue to get beat up.... If brunell doesnt have the 1st receiver open he throws it away immediately.... its pathetic... if he is afraid of contact...he should be a punter....

Re: How Long For Brunell?
 

[quote=CHIEF CHUCKING MY SPEAR;215029]His ass should have should have been gone in 2004, last year was a fluke. We went to the playoffs in spite of him last not because of him. Damn you see his old ass legs go out of under him trying to run out of bounds monday. Gibbs for some unknown reason is willing to sink his reputation with this has been. I hope i'm wrong but i dont thinks so. He didnt do anything to lose but he sure as hell didnt do anything to help win the game just one scramble, that why i thought we had in there for was for his great mobility. Damn that arm look weak its really sad,but hey at least he can throw a screen pass or out of bounds.[/quote]
Perfect

Re: How Long For Brunell?
 

If you look at his career numbers year by year, it's quite obvious that 2004 sticks out as the real "fluke".

Regardless, as always Brunell takes the brunt of the blame for any loss. I really didn't see him as the main problem on Monday night.

As an offensive unit they were out of sync and didn't play well enough to win. That's not all on his shoulders.

Everyone needs to improve right now, MB included.

But if you think plugging in Campbell is going to radically change things in a positive manner you're sadly mistaken.

Re: How Long For Brunell?
 

Last year at this time I had a gut feeling that we would be better off with #8 at qb instead of #11 against Dallas. It turned out that Gibbs made the right decision after all and we all know how that ended up.

This year I [U]almost[/U] have the same feeling about starting #17 this week, but then common sense gets the better of me. I think #8 starts this week and next but look for #17 by week 4 against Jacksonville.

Re: How Long For Brunell?
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72;215139]If you look at his career numbers year by year, it's quite obvious that 2004 sticks out as the real "fluke".

Regardless, as always Brunell takes the brunt of the blame for any loss. I really didn't see him as the main problem on Monday night.

As an offensive unit they were out of sync and didn't play well enough to win. That's not all on his shoulders.

Everyone needs to improve right now, MB included.

But if you think plugging in Campbell is going to radically change things in a positive manner you're sadly mistaken.[/QUOTE]

Matty, I hear what you're saying. And no matter what anybody thinks of Brunell, there can be no doubt that if there was a better option, Gibbs would play him. That should answer any question regarding our situation with quarterbacks. Brunell gives us the best chance to win. Personally, I have so far steered clear of making a big stink about QB play.

That said, I think it's legitimate to question how better this offense could operate if there was a quarterback who might have attempted a throw to a tightly covered receiver if he had more confidence in his abilities, instead of throwing the ball out of bounds when he thinks there's nothing there.

You'll never hear Brunell make such an admission. But the question MUST be asked. Defenders of Brunell will point to his astute decision making, i.e. throwing the ball away instead of throwing a pick. Don't the critics also have a point by saying that a younger, more talented, and a more confident quarterback might be able to make this offense better by making the throws that Brunell is afraid to make?

Still, Gibbs, right or wrong, apparently doesn't believe there is such a quarterback on this team. Shouldn't that also be a sign of concern?

Re: How Long For Brunell?
 

With a young QB like Campbell I really wonder if people would be prepared to take the bad along with the good. Would he force some throws that Brunell wouldn't attempt? He probably would, but how much of that would be due to inexperience rather than a more aggressive mentality?

I would say at this point his inexperience would hurt us more than help. Perhaps if he didn't have to digest his 6th new offense in 6 years it would be a different story right now. It's been well documented that Brunell hasn't had very much fun learning the new system and he's a veteran. Just imagine what Campbell has gone through. Not only has he had to learn another new system, an insanely in-depth one at that, but he's had to continue working on his mechanics and footwork.

I know there are some that are already blowing off Campbell as a bust since he's not playing in his second year and I think that's utterly ridiculous and very ignorant considering the circumstances.

Next year will be the time to expect big things from him. Right now he's just got too much going on to be able to step in and do a better job than Brunell.

People need to chill the heck out and realize we have 15 games to go. Some of these reactions lately have been comical to put it nice.

Re: How Long For Brunell?
 

During 2004, I was a front runner in wanting to see #8 on the bench. I still believe he was injured during most of that season. 2005 was different. Ramsey lost the job and MB kept it which I didn't expect. I've also been pretty open about my feeling that our stretch run last year was in spite of our passing game, not because of it.

In other words, I don't have a #8 jersey in my closet.

But I've gotta tell you, I am nothing short of stunned by this thread. Exactly what game where you people watching? Of all the broken pieces and parts, why are you discussing QB play at all?

For example:

Betts: 8/22 yards, 1 Fumble (how come no one is calling for his head?)
3rd Down Defense: 9/17
3rd Down Offense: 4/13
Secondary play: Enough said.

Compare that with what MB did:

17/28/163 with 0 fumbles, sacks or INTs.

Sure, not Peyton like numbers, but he sure wasn't the reason why we lost.

Re: How Long For Brunell?
 

where was duckett??????

Re: How Long For Brunell?
 

How long for MB?

ALL THE WAY

Re: How Long For Brunell?
 

[QUOTE=offiss;215071]I will go there any time I feel like it!

Obviously your hung up on who knows what and can't seperate the two. But I will do it for you, Ramsey regardless of happy feet would hang in the pocket and take the hit to complete the pass.[/QUOTE]

It's good to know you're finally admitting that you agree with me. But, why take the hit if you can make the play without doing so? Just to say you took the hit? That's ignorant. You'd rather the QB force the ball into double coverage than to do the smart thing and throw the ball away? Why? That's playing dumb. Sure, out of 50 INTs, you might complete the pass, but how does that improve anything? It doesn't. By the way, how well did Ramsey do this past week?

Re: How Long For Brunell?
 

Well i agree with you skins guy....but there were a couple plays where he looked at his 1 receiver and then just threw the ball away when he still had a little time....

Re: How Long For Brunell?
 

It's still hard to knock Brunell and his arm though...considering the Super Bowl winning QBs who were/are not known for arm strength: Brad Johnson, Trent Dilfer.... I think the whole point in thinking this thread is silly to begin with is that there were so many things wrong with our team's play this past Monday, that people would rather dedicate one thread to trashin' Brunell - who wasn't really a big part of why we lost that game. Heck....our offense, with the exception of the red zone, was a bright spot in the game.

Re: How Long For Brunell?
 

My only probelm with Mark is that he feels the pressure more now than he probably use to and is quicker to throw it away that we would all like to see. However, As you guys have posted above he did throw for over 60% Monday night and did not get sacked or throw a pick. Which kept us in the game. The Skins lost the time of posession battle, which was a big deal in a tight game and I was unimpressed by our Defenses ability to get off the field on 3rd down. Mark is not the reason the Skins lost. Not getting more pressure on Brad was a big problem and the Skins rushing game was bad. If both of those a re better Sunday night, the Skins can and should beat Dallas.

Re: How Long For Brunell?
 

seriously tho...where was duckett?? i thought we got him for redzone...why didnt he pound it in there

Re: How Long For Brunell?
 

[quote=cowboykiller89;215082]As far as I am concerned, Mark Brunell won the most important and the most memorable game of all, last year in Dallas to break the painful losing streak we had with the Cowgirls! Not only that, he lead the way in their second meeting at FedEx Field, a critical game which was important to both teams. Needless to say, you know the outcome. Give him some more respect! I think Joe Gibbs and Al Saunders know a little more than you do when it comes to deciding on who should be the starter![/quote]

All I know is what I see and what I see is that the weakest link on the offense is QB and has been for some time. It's a sad state of affairs when all you can credit the QB with is two games in a 16-game season. I'll repeat - he's rarely if ever the reason we win games and, for a QB, that's pathetic. I don't want a QB who mostly "doesn't lose games for us". QBs should be game breakers and control the flow of the game for their team. Brunell might do that 2 or 3 games a year, at best.

Problem is - there's no one else on the bench who's ready to take us all the way right now. Campbell may become that QB, but he's untested. I've seen all I want to see of what Brunell has to offer and it is game after game where we score 9, 10, 12, maybe 16 or 17 points. Again, pathetic, given the talent that surrounds him.

Re: How Long For Brunell?
 

Funny how eating crow for some people never gets old.

I guess it must be tasty.

Re: How Long For Brunell?
 

[quote=RiggoRules;215180]Betts: 8/22 yards, 1 Fumble (how come no one is calling for his head?)
3rd Down Defense: 9/17
3rd Down Offense: 4/13
Secondary play: Enough said.

Compare that with what MB did:

17/28/163 with 0 fumbles, sacks or INTs.

Sure, not Peyton like numbers, but he sure wasn't the reason why we lost.[/quote]

First of all, the more knowledgeable among us already know that Betts isn't starter material. I've personally stated that he's not the "bruising power runner" that a lot of people seem to think he is, so his perfomance is about what I expected.

As far as pointing out Brunells' numbers; all but maybe one of the third down plays were passes, so the 4/13 on third down was mostly him throwing it away.

And as far as Campbell playing, I don't think that's a good idea just yet. While I think the offense will far more dynamic with him running the show, there will still be a learning curve, and if he doesn't perform well by his second start, everyone will be screaming that he was a wasted pick. The only way Campbell will see the field is if Brunell gets injured, or if he's still playing in week nine, like he played Monday, and there's no chance for a playoff run. At that point, I could see Gibbs making the switch.

Re: How Long For Brunell?
 

[QUOTE=RiggoRules;215180]But I've gotta tell you, I am nothing short of stunned by this thread. Exactly what game where you people watching? Of all the broken pieces and parts, why are you discussing QB play at all?

For example:

Betts: 8/22 yards, 1 Fumble (how come no one is calling for his head?)
3rd Down Defense: 9/17
3rd Down Offense: 4/13
Secondary play: Enough said.

Compare that with what MB did:

17/28/163 with 0 fumbles, sacks or INTs.

Sure, not Peyton like numbers, but he sure wasn't the reason why we lost.[/QUOTE]

When did Betts fumble? Either way, it was not a fumble lost. Brunell and Portis did fumble an exchange, but they recovered it. Unless I've missed something, we had no turnovers against the Vikings.

Now, as to Brunell, regardless of his final stats, the type of play we saw isn't going to win games. The point is that by and large, you need dynamic quarterback play if you expect to go anywhere in the NFL today. Brunell wasn't dynamic in '05 -- far from it. Our defense and the running game was what got us to the divisional playoff round.

No, Brunell wasn't the sole reason we lost. But you cannot dismiss the fact that a better quarterback might have able to complete some throws into tight coverage and keep some drives going. Isn't Brunell a part of the 3rd down stats and red zone offense?

[QUOTE]It's still hard to knock Brunell and his arm though...considering the Super Bowl winning QBs who were/are not known for arm strength: Brad Johnson, Trent Dilfer...[/QUOTE]

Not a good comparison. I would submit that Dilfer and Johnson were playing at a higher level than Brunell is now. Not only that, the strength of the Ravens and Buccaneers in their Super Bowl seasons was the defense. Dilfer was better than people give credit for, ditto for Johnson. Right now, Brunell is playing like a very average quarterback.

Here's the thing, you can throw the ball away, and you can be good at avoiding interceptions, [U]and still be ineffective as a quarterback[/U].

[QUOTE] As you guys have posted above he did throw for over 60% Monday night and did not get sacked or throw a pick. Which kept us in the game.[/QUOTE]

What kept the game close were Viking mistakes, nothing else. Throwing for 60% means nothing when there's only 16 points and failed red zone trips to show for it.

Let me say again, I am in no way calling for Brunell's head, nor am I calling for Campbell to start. Brunell is the best quarterback we have right now.

And that's the problem.

Re: How Long For Brunell?
 

I cannot believe I am here defending #8.

[quote=LadyT;215317]All I know is what I see and what I see is that the weakest link on the offense is QB and has been for some time. It's a sad state of affairs when all you can credit the QB with is two games in a 16-game season. I'll repeat - he's rarely if ever the reason we win games and, for a QB, that's pathetic. I don't want a QB who mostly "doesn't lose games for us". QBs should be game breakers and control the flow of the game for their team. Brunell might do that 2 or 3 games a year, at best.

[/quote]

May I suggest:

[url=http://www.lasikinstitute.org/]Eye Surgery Education Council[/url]

Perhaps you would be happier with this team and their four Super Bowl trophies:

[url=http://www.colts.com/]The Official Website of the Indianapolis Colts[/url]

The Steelers, Patriots, Bucs and Ravens all have recent SB rings without "game breakers" at QB.

Perhaps you have forgotten what it has been like to have our QB losing game after game with stupid mistakes. I'm thrilled to see #8 throw that ball out of bounds instead of:

-Sack
-Penalty
-INT
-Fumble

The passing game struggles last year cannot be hung on MB. He had one quality WR. Of course the passing game is going to struggle. Against MN, Betts kept putting us in 2nd and 3rd and long. The most important (and most overlooked) QB stat is TD/INT ratio. Last year, MB was 2/1. That is outstanding. It was a big reason why we were able to get into the playoffs even though we were not getting any major juice from the passing game.

I feel like the Kevin Bacon character in Animal House yelling "Don't Panic!" in the middle of the riot.

If we had Bledsoe, Collins, Plummer, Kitna, Frye, Losman, Brooks, Carr, Huard or Favre (yes, I said it -- he is one of the worst in the league right now) at QB, then I could understand the reaction. In fact, I would be in a state of panic as well. But we don't.

I'd also like to point out that there are 10 NFL teams with really bad QBs starting for them this week. By comparison (and I can't believe I'm saying this), every Redskin fan should get down on their knees and thank god for #8.

Re: How Long For Brunell?
 

give it another game or two. if we beat dallas we're fine. i of course have my doubts but it's too early to tell. if we get a bit better in the RZ we should be okay. i felt we could move the ball when we needed to (losing in the beginning and the 4th qtr drive).

i'd feel WAY differently if we lost by 10+.

brad johnson is def. better than MB but what can you do?

Re: How Long For Brunell?
 

[QUOTE=VTSkins897;215347]give it another game or two. if we beat dallas we're fine. i of course have my doubts but it's too early to tell. if we get a bit better in the RZ we should be okay. i felt we could move the ball when we needed to (losing in the beginning and the 4th qtr drive).

i'd feel WAY differently if we lost by 10+.

brad johnson is def. better than MB but what can you do?[/QUOTE]

Had it not been for Troy Willamson dropping passes, we would have lost by way more than 10 points.

Re: How Long For Brunell?
 

[QUOTE=Beemnseven;215352]Had it not been for Troy Willamson dropping passes, we would have lost by way more than 10 points.[/QUOTE]

i cancel that out partly with santana moss' drop. yeah he got hit but moss holds on to that shite.

Re: How Long For Brunell?
 

[quote=RiggoRules;215340]If we had Bledsoe, Collins, Plummer, Kitna, Frye, Losman, Brooks, Carr, Huard or Favre (yes, I said it -- he is one of the worst in the league right now) at QB, then I could understand the reaction. In fact, I would be in a state of panic as well. But we don't.

I'd also like to point out that there are 10 NFL teams with really bad QBs starting for them this week. By comparison (and I can't believe I'm saying this), [B]every Redskin fan should get down on their knees and thank god for #8.[/B][/quote]

First of all, Losman and Frye have next to no game experience. Favre, Brooks, Carr, Kitna and Collins are all on really BAD teams, and Huard is only playing because Trent Green is out. Bledsoe and Plummer are the only fair comparisons, and the funny thing is, there was a segment on ESPN today, about whether or not Plummer and Bledsoe should be benched. If Brunell continues to put up the kind of numbers he did on Monday, he'll be on that list in a few weeks.

And I sure as hell will not get on my knees for a middle tier, happy feet, scared quarterback, that makes a couple of great plays every three seasons.

Re: How Long For Brunell?
 

[quote=RiggoRules;215340]I cannot believe I am here defending #8.



May I suggest:

[URL="http://www.lasikinstitute.org/"]Eye Surgery Education Council[/URL]

Perhaps you would be happier with this team and their four Super Bowl trophies:

[URL="http://www.colts.com/"]The Official Website of the Indianapolis Colts[/URL]

The Steelers, Patriots, Bucs and Ravens all have recent SB rings without "game breakers" at QB.

Perhaps you have forgotten what it has been like to have our QB losing game after game with stupid mistakes. I'm thrilled to see #8 throw that ball out of bounds instead of:

-Sack
-Penalty
-INT
-Fumble

The passing game struggles last year cannot be hung on MB. He had one quality WR. Of course the passing game is going to struggle. Against MN, Betts kept putting us in 2nd and 3rd and long. The most important (and most overlooked) QB stat is TD/INT ratio. Last year, MB was 2/1. That is outstanding. It was a big reason why we were able to get into the playoffs even though we were not getting any major juice from the passing game.

I feel like the Kevin Bacon character in Animal House yelling "Don't Panic!" in the middle of the riot.

If we had Bledsoe, Collins, Plummer, Kitna, Frye, Losman, Brooks, Carr, Huard or Favre (yes, I said it -- he is one of the worst in the league right now) at QB, then I could understand the reaction. In fact, I would be in a state of panic as well. But we don't.

I'd also like to point out that there are 10 NFL teams with really bad QBs starting for them this week. By comparison (and I can't believe I'm saying this), every Redskin fan should get down on their knees and thank god for #8.[/quote]

We'll just have to agree to disagree about Brunell's capabilities, I guess. I'm not in panic mode, but I am very frustrated by Brunell's play and have been for some time.

But enough about my opinion. You'd be very interested to hear what Sonny J. has to say about Brunell, I would assume, as would all Redskins fans. After all, if he doesn't know the QB position, then who does? A relative of mine (who knows Sonny well) actually discussed Brunell's merits with ole Sonny recently. In deference to Sonny, I won't repeat what he said. Suffice it to say his indictment of Brunell was far worse than mine.

Re: How Long For Brunell?
 

[quote=Mattyk72;214420]Favre is on a bad team, period.

Put him on a good team and he would look much better.[/quote]



Good team or not, have you seen Favre lately and all of last season? THE QB throws the INT, not the reciever.... He's done, he should have retired last year.

Re: How Long For Brunell?
 

My point is that only a few Qb,s are capable of winning games without a great running game . We need to run in order to set up play action . And I would point to our struggles in third and 4 Plus yds is not very good . I agree that he needs more time , and that will come with a strong running game . Very few teams can win a Championship throwing first . You may be correct saying that Brunell can pass for 4,000 yds , but we will not win if we throw it that much , He will get hit too many times and none of our Wr's are going to hold up if they are getiing hit that often , we do not have 210 lb Wr's. I don't want 3 yds and a cloud of dust , I just believe we HAVE to run in order to win , and I think we can .

Re: How Long For Brunell?
 

[quote=CHIEF CHUCKING MY SPEAR;215043]we will see i hope your right but i wouldnt bet on it. Listen were all skins fans but maybe i have stop drinking the Danny Coolaid, i have seen the real world[/quote] What up boy ! We need to stick with that running game , Don't ya think ! I say ,, RUN ,,, RUN ,,, RUN some more , when they bring there safeties up ,,, go deep !!!

Re: How Long For Brunell?
 

Hopefully we will run more , dictate to the defence , when they walk their safeties up , make them pay for it going over the top ! Im sure our defence would also like us to run and control the clock .

Re: How Long For Brunell?
 

[quote=LadyT;215317]All I know is what I see and what I see is that the weakest link on the offense is QB and has been for some time. It's a sad state of affairs when all you can credit the QB with is two games in a 16-game season. I'll repeat - he's rarely if ever the reason we win games and, for a QB, that's pathetic. I don't want a QB who mostly "doesn't lose games for us". QBs should be game breakers and control the flow of the game for their team. Brunell might do that 2 or 3 games a year, at best.

Problem is - there's no one else on the bench who's ready to take us all the way right now. Campbell may become that QB, but he's untested. I've seen all I want to see of what Brunell has to offer and it is game after game where we score 9, 10, 12, maybe 16 or 17 points. Again, pathetic, given the talent that surrounds him.[/quote]

Oh okay, I forgot, it was not Mark Brunell who lead the team to a 10-6 [B]WINNING [/B]season, and not to mention the playoffs, including a win over the Bucs last year right? And all of this after such a long playoff drought which included a losing streak against the Cowboys! So are you also telling me that Mark Brunell was to blame for last week's loss? Did he not get the ball to Moss in the end zone? Was it not a perfect pass? It's not Mark's fault that Moss dropped it; that would have been the game and this discussion would not exist if Moss had held on to it!! It's not always about the quarterback, what the heck has Indianapolis done? Do they not have one of the best quarterbacks in the league with a ton of talent surrounding him as well? What have they accomplished? [B]ZERO!!! [/B]Same goes for McNabb and the Eagles, Michael Vick and the Falcons!! You just need to learn to be patient, it's not going to happen overnight! Things will definitley get better as they get the new offensive strategy down. Look at it this way, we've already scored almost twice as many more points this season than at this same point last year; and mind you it came in a losing effort!

Re: How Long For Brunell?
 

We have bigger problems than Brunell.