Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

So Brunnell leads us to an 8/8 record and we miss the playoffs.....


318 SKIN

Recommended Posts

Do we really care about seeing a 35 year old QB guide us to an 8/8 record missing the playoffs. If we are going to be average lets be average with a young developing QB. At least we will find out what we have for the future. If it's PR or Campbell, lets find out - MB scares no one, D cordinaters will continue to take Moss out and force us to challenge the middle of the field something MB can't do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do we really care about seeing a 35 year old QB guide us to an 8/8 record missing the playoffs. If we are going to be average lets be average with a young developing QB. At least we will find out what we have for the future. If it's PR or Campbell, lets find out - MB scares no one, D cordinaters will continue to take Moss out and force us to challenge the middle of the field something MB can't do.

We will be below average with either PR or Campbell, I understand your point but we WOULD NOT be moving the ball on offense if either of them start.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We will be below average with either PR or Campbell, I understand your point but we WOULD NOT be moving the ball on offense if either of them start.
So what? If you don't make the playoffs and have no 1st round pick none of it matter anyway. We would be better off having given one of our young players a ton of valuable experience then we are trying to win now and failing to do so.

The Bengals had a decent vet QB coming off a good year and they benched him in favor of Palmer....he wasn't very good his first year and the team suffered a bit. But it paid off didn't it. They accepted reality and took a win later approach and concerned themselves with building the team and growing and now they are looking very good indeed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing that PR can do and maybe Campbell as well is press the middle of the field. Defenses will take Moss out and w/o being able to take advantage of the middle. D's will continue to play over the top in the 2ndary and stacking up the line of scrimmedge encouraging us to throw down the middle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what if we go 9-7 or 10-6?
Brunell still doesn't get any younger so I'd still bench him or release him at the end of the year. This team needs a patient long term approach. Mark is not the answer but we have a guy that very well could be. Experience is how these QBs seem to get better and the longer we put it off the worse it will be later.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what? If you don't make the playoffs and have no 1st round pick none of it matter anyway. We would be better off having given one of our young players a ton of valuable experience then we are trying to win now and failing to do so.

The Bengals had a decent vet QB coming off a good year and they benched him in favor of Palmer....he wasn't very good his first year and the team suffered a bit. But it paid off didn't it. They accepted reality and took a win later approach and concerned themselves with building the team and growing and now they are looking very good indeed.

And Palmer's first year starting was his second year in the league. That is the difference there. Starting right out of the gate does more harm than good...on average.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would only start Campbell if/when we are mathematically eliminated from the playoffs

OK - well let's start PR - If Cooley doesn't get called for pass interference aganist the Bears and the TD stands would PR still be starting? I don't know, but he did drive us down the field against the Bears twice, something Brunnell was not able to do. All i'm saying is, i'm not sure PR would be much worse than MB and maybe even better for this offense. Yeah he will throw picks but he will also put pressure on the secondaries with his ability to cover the entire field with his throws.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Based on what I've seen of Brunell this season, I wouldn't mind having him start for us next year, even if we don't make the playoffs. My read of his post-game comments yesterday is that he took some veiled shots at the offensive playcalling for not really putting the team in a position to win. No need to remove Brunell. Just get Don Breaux out of the booth as a playcaller, and get somebody in there with some competence. As far as Campbell is concerned, I'd start him in 2007. Hopefully by then the line will be somewhat consistent and the offensive staff will have figured out, at long last, how to best utilize Clinton Portis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And Palmer's first year starting was his second year in the league. That is the difference there. Starting right out of the gate does more harm than good...on average.
I wouldn't have started Campbell this year. I was thinking Ramsey this year. To tell you the truth I think Brunell would have been fine this year if the play calling was more ballsy, but max protect and 2 wide out sets won't score a lot of point forever....if you are going to play losing football you may as well get your younger guys some experience.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The way you guys have managed to pin our failures on the shoulders of Mark Brunell is absolutely unfathomable. Brunell has played incredibly well, especially considering our lacking pass protection and our acking number a two receiver. The Redskins are 5-6 for a number of reasons, but Mark Brunell's play is most certainly not one of them. Had Robert Royal not slipped over the goalline in Denver, had Rock Cartwright not decided to cough up the ball in Kansas City, had the officals made the obviously correct calls against Tampa Bay and Oakland, and had Joe Gibbs not tensed up so often late in games (most recently on Sunday), we'd likely be 7-4 or better. It's completely unfair to place the responsibility of this team's downfall on Mark Brunell.

Knowing Gibbs, Brunell will most likely finish the year our starting quarterback no matter our record, and go into next year as our anticipated starter. And at the level Brunell has played this season, that's exactly the way it should be. Brunell's passer rating is 12th in the league, which lands him higher than McNabb, Manning, and Favre. I've heard the arguement that a team can't succeed without a franchise quarterback. Meanwhile, Kyle Orton, Brad Johnson, and Chris Simms all quarterback teams with better records than the Redskins. Brunell is more than capable of leading any team to the playoffs, and were it not for a poor offensive line, an inconsistent defense, and painfully conservative play-calling, we'd be right there in playoff contention.

This is not to say that Jason Campbell isn't a franchise quarterback , but for every Ben Rothleisberger and Eli Manning, there are three more Joey Harringtons and Kyle Bollers. Jason Campbell may the franchise quarterback, but history states it's equally as likely that he will prove to be a total bust of a draft pick. If we insert Campbell into the starting lineup at any point in the season (barring a huge dropoff in Brunell's play, in which case we should insert Campbell as the starter), we destroy any momentum we might have gained going into next year with Brunell. Many of you probably disagree that Brunell has another good year left in him, but I see nothing in his play that shows that will be the case. Brunell is an above average quarterback, capable of leading a playoff-caliber team to the playoffs. Campbell's time will come, and that time will most likely be in 2007; because at the moment, Brunell is playing just fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The way you guys have managed to pin our failures on the shoulders of Mark Brunell is absolutely unfathomable. Brunell has played incredibly well, especially considering our lacking pass protection and our acking number a two receiver. The Redskins are 5-6 for a number of reasons, but Mark Brunell's play is most certainly not one of them. Had Robert Royal not slipped over the goalline in Denver, had Rock Cartwright not decided to cough up the ball in Kansas City, had the officals made the obviously correct calls against Tampa Bay and Oakland, and had Joe Gibbs not tensed up so often late in games (most recently on Sunday), we'd likely be 7-4 or better. It's completely unfair to place the responsibility of this team's downfall on Mark Brunell.

Knowing Gibbs, Brunell will most likely finish the year our starting quarterback no matter our record, and go into next year as our anticipated starter. And at the level Brunell has played this season, that's exactly the way it should be. Brunell's passer rating is 12th in the league, which lands him higher than McNabb, Manning, and Favre. I've heard the arguement that a team can't succeed without a franchise quarterback. Meanwhile, Kyle Orton, Brad Johnson, and Chris Simms all quarterback teams with better records than the Redskins. Brunell is more than capable of leading any team to the playoffs, and were it not for a poor offensive line, an inconsistent defense, and painfully conservative play-calling, we'd be right there in playoff contention.

This is not to say that Jason Campbell isn't a franchise quarterback , but for every Ben Rothleisberger and Eli Manning, there are three more Joey Harringtons and Kyle Bollers. Jason Campbell may the franchise quarterback, but history states it's equally as likely that he will prove to be a total bust of a draft pick. If we insert Campbell into the starting lineup at any point in the season (barring a huge dropoff in Brunell's play, in which case we should insert Campbell as the starter), we destroy any momentum we might have gained going into next year with Brunell. Many of you probably disagree that Brunell has another good year left in him, but I see nothing in his play that shows that will be the case. Brunell is an above average quarterback, capable of leading a playoff-caliber team to the playoffs. Campbell's time will come, and that time will most likely be in 2007; because at the moment, Brunell is playing just fine.

- ok, here is my point, we are average and i'm not sure I want to build on the momentum that we have develop over the past few years. You can always look at the mistakes of others and say if this if that. Staying with that theme - if MB was able to make the throw to Thash last week at the goal line we score and win, if MB could make the tough throws down the middle of the field consistantly D's would not be able to always bring a safety over the top to double Moss and they would not be able stack the line to stop Clinton.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let me go on record and say this. I really like MB, he has had a great career and has done an ok job for the Skins, as much as could have been expected. However, at this point in his career I think he is a better change of pace or backup than a starter. I think with his limited arm strength he is very easy to game plan against. I think he limits you to what you can do in the passing game & after 8 games I think the D cordinaters started to recognize he didn't scare you with his ability to cover the entire field.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't have started Campbell this year. I was thinking Ramsey this year. To tell you the truth I think Brunell would have been fine this year if the play calling was more ballsy, but max protect and 2 wide out sets won't score a lot of point forever....if you are going to play losing football you may as well get your younger guys some experience.

And if Campbell isn't ready?

That's what seems to be ignored by the "play Campbell now" crowd. If he's not ready then you probably do more harm then good. Only about 1 QB every 2-3 years is capable of coming in and being productive right away. I can think of Manning in 1998 (he also threw like 30 picks that season) Big Ben last season and Orton this season. That's it lately. Those are your success stories. The horror stories are too numerous to count.

Do the math. It's been positive returns for teams that have the #1 defense in the league and only allow the rookie to throw about 20 passes per game or players named Peyton Manning. We don't have the #1 defense right now. And we don't have the Steelers 2004 running game. And Jason Campbell is not related to Manning. So I think the odds are highly against him being able to produce this season.

Now if you look at the QBs who sat the bench virtually their entire first season and LEARNED without being baptized by fire. And then took the reigns in their second or third season: I give you Carson Palmer, Tom Brady, Steve McNair, Drew Brees, Daunte Culpepper, Chad Pennington, Marc Bulger, and Brett Favre.

Feel better?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm thinking with our schedule we should be able to do that assuming we take care of the Rams and Cardinals......

Yeah, but how can we assume that any more? Forget our 3-0 start and look at us... we can't assume anything. I won't be surprised with 5-11 and I won't be surprised with 10-6. But I'm not assuming anything with this team. I still say 3-2 is a lot to ask.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And if Campbell isn't ready?

That's what seems to be ignored by the "play Campbell now" crowd. If he's not ready then you probably do more harm then good. Only about 1 QB every 2-3 years is capable of coming in and being productive right away. I can think of Manning in 1998 (he also threw like 30 picks that season) Big Ben last season and Orton this season. That's it lately. Those are your success stories. The horror stories are too numerous to count.

Do the math. It's been positive returns for teams that have the #1 defense in the league and only allow the rookie to throw about 20 passes per game or players named Peyton Manning. We don't have the #1 defense right now. And we don't have the Steelers 2004 running game. And Jason Campbell is not related to Manning. So I think the odds are highly against him being able to produce this season.

Now if you look at the QBs who sat the bench virtually their entire first season and LEARNED without being baptized by fire. And then took the reigns in their second or third season: I give you Carson Palmer, Tom Brady, Steve McNair, Drew Brees, Daunte Culpepper, Chad Pennington, Marc Bulger, and Brett Favre.

Feel better?

if he is not ready he will never be a good QB here. Orton is ready, rothensbuger was , BRUNELL WAS BENCHED FOR A ROOKIE 2 YRS AGO ANDLOOK HOW THAT TEAM TURNED OUT, better then us

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if he is not ready he will never be a good QB here. Orton is ready, rothensbuger was , BRUNELL WAS BENCHED FOR A ROOKIE 2 YRS AGO ANDLOOK HOW THAT TEAM TURNED OUT, better then us

Wow. Way to completely miss the entire point of the entire post. I give you 8 of today's best QBs who were not ready their rookie seasons and you give me "if he's not ready he never will be" 11 games into his career where he hasn't taken a snap.

I think you embody all that is wrong with today's fan. :thumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...