bubba9497 Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 I just read this Brunell has not played a full season since 2000. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/06/AR2006080600825_2.html Correct me if I am wrong, but didn't Brunell play or was on the roster for every game in '04... i.e. no injury Didn't he play in every game last season including two playoff games. In fact only missing the first quarter of the Bears game because Ramsey started, and a Quarter and a half against the Giants at home after a knee shot, but still played the following week against Philly??? :whoknows: or does those 2 1/2 quarters not fulfill the requirements for an entire season? :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hkHog Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 Hahaha, yeah, he played every game last year! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrimReaper21 Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 No I would say a full season is starting 16 games, which he didnt, he started 15, if you wanna be technical. Getting injured in a big giants game with playoff implications also constitutes not playing a full season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scruffylookin Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 Being on the roster doesn't equal "playing an entire season", hence the word PLAY. So no, 2004 doesn't count. But I do agree that 2005 should count. He played in every game. He played most of the Bears game and most of the Giants game and while he did get knocked out of the Giants game, he did come back to play the next week. The Post is wrong, unless they mean "start" every game instead of just playing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrockster21 Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 No I would say a full season is starting 16 games, which he didnt, he started 15, if you wanna be technical. Getting injured in a big giants game with playoff implications also constitutes not playing a full season. It says played, not started. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HapHaszard Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 Just out of curiosity when was the Post ever right on their facts? 1991? 1989? Its been so long ago I forget, LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grhqofb5 Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 these guys are such ****s... next thing they'll write is that Cal Ripken didn't play during the 1995 season because his wife was sleeping with Kevin Costner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 We all know he meant started. When I read that last night, it was the 1st thing I thought of. That's just nitpicking over wording. And to be honest, I think he really didn't play much after that hit in the Giants game. Well, I think he got pulled in the 1st one, and hurt in the 2nd one. No? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimster Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 No I would say a full season is starting 16 games, which he didnt, he started 15, if you wanna be technical. Getting injured in a big giants game with playoff implications also constitutes not playing a full season. Starting a game counts as playing that game - see Brett Favre Bubba mentioned '04 - Ramsey started the last few games in '04,, but Brunell was on the active roster for every game since he's been here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.