Should Brunell be replaced? (merged)

[offiss]

Originally Posted by skinsguy

That's one huge run on sentence! Okay, let's break this down. First of all, as much as this offense needed some tweaking from the previous year, I find it hard to put the blame on Brunell's play on the system. If the system was too simplistic like you say, then Brunell would have had an easy time adjusting to it. Let's face it, Brunell stunk it up last year. Part of the reason was that he was injured. I think the other part of it had to do with him being away from playing for at least year in Jacksonville. When you're an older athelete it is much harder to comeback from an injury.

Patrick Ramsey played better than Mark Brunell did LAST year, but that isn't really saying much. I felt Patrick came in and showed signs of promise, but he also showed signs of being a long ways from being a true starter. This year, I was hyped about how much Patrick would've improved. Yes, I base this on preseason, but why should I not? Patrick Ramsey showed no signs of improvement during preseason, and it spilled into our first regular season game.

Maybe you're argument is based on principle. You feel it's only fair to give Ramsey 8 or 9 games like Brunell was given last year. Well yes, that would be considered fair to a certain extent. But, these NFL teams do not put their success in how fair things are. They put their success in winning. However, judging by how Patrick Ramsey played in preseason, we would more than likely be 4-8 right now, if not worse. I witnessed nothing about Ramsey's play that would've suggested anything much better than that.

As far as Brunell's play lately, he hasn't played as well as he has for the most part of this season. He has also had two of his starting receivers out. With both Thrash and Patten in there with Moss, Brunell is a better quarterback. When he basically has one proven threat to throw too, how can Mark Brunell duplicate his best performances of this season? It doesn't happen.

Finally, this system is not inept. It is a ball controlled system that thrives off of maximum protection and a strong running game. That is how it has always been. It has always been a run first pass second offense - even during the days of the posse. They made this offense special, because they were probably the best three wide receivers in the league back then. That is probably the biggest reason why we could score points easily. But we don't have Art Monk, Gary Clark, and Ricky Sanders now. We have only one receiver in Santana Moss, who I feel could be as good as any of the members of the posse.

Fact is, we are in a position to control our own destiny. We have a winning record and a chance to make the playoffs. That is a whole heck of alot more than what we can say about this team for the most part this past decade. There is alot to look forward to even if we don't make the playoffs this year. This franchise is establishing itself as a good franchise, but that does not happen overnight, nor does it happen on maybes or would've could've should've.

How do you figure we are in control of our own destiny? FACT? If watching the playoffs on TV is our destiny then I would agree, take a good look we need help to get into 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Patrick's play spilled over to the regular season, you were able to make that evaluation after 1 quarter? Not bad! 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. 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.