MRMADD Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 Mark Brunell has thrown for under 200 yards in each of the last 3 games. Is that arm getting a little ragged this late in the season? He's had games early this season where he's thrown 30, 40, even 50 passes, but in recent weeks the long balls just aren't falling. Part of that is because defenses are keying on Moss, and there just isn't any other deep threat on the team. But is it partly a realization by the coaching staff that his 35-year-old arm might not have 16 games in it anymore? He started the season with 290, 226, 332, 331, and 252 yard passing games... but hasn't had a 250 yard passing game since then -- back in October. We all know the Skins will turn to the run to try to make the playoffs, but they can't be one-dimensional. Without at least the threat of an occasional long pass to keep defenses honest, even the Cards can stop them. What have you guys seen? Does he look like he could still complete those bombs he threw in the Dallas game, or is he showing his age? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DButz65 Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 He hasnt passed for alot of yards because teams are taking away our first threat (Moss) now and our second threat, not because hes running our of gas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TankRizzo Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 I hope he's got another 3 weeks worth of gas or I'm screwed in my fantasy league Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 I think he's running out of receivers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BleedinBurgundyandGold Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 Yea, teams are keying on Moss- couple that with the fact that our #2 AND #3 recievers have been hurt each of the last 3 weeks. In addition, we've been ahead in each of our last 3 games, the entire game, heading into the fourth quarter (so you dont have to throw as much as we did in Denver or KC for instance). Brunell is fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FUJISKINS Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 THAT'S BECAUSE WERE RUNNING THE BALL MORE :dallasuck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonez3 Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 I think he's running out of receivers. :laugh: Exactly, we can't overlook the fact that we lost our #2 and 3 WR this year! They might not have been setting the world on fire, but that relationship was worked on since July. Not many other teams would be able to really thrive under these very cu=ircumstances. More reason the Skins are underrated overall. Plus, I think he had a comp. % of 66% last week with about 10 tds a comp. I'll take that any day of the year-thank you very much (no picks either) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skins11 Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 Maybe he's wearing down a little, but more devastasting is the loss of receivers. Our #2 and #3 out, extremely inexperienced guys are forced to play. We saw that he's able to still throw a deep ball, it's just that they haven't been caught due to good coverage. However, a couple times Brunell flat out did not see a wide open Jacobs who could have taken it all the way if Brunell threw it and Jacobs actually caught it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 Don't forget our #4 has missed playing time too lately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
l!ghtbringr Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 our running game is getting more push (we were actually able to run the clock out yesterday without a punt) plus i don't think Brunell / Jacobs are on the same page yesterday. Brunell missed an open Jacobs on two long passes (one for a td) and Jacobs made a bad read on another one. as soon as those two click we'll have a receiver to put on the other side of Moss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MRMADD Posted December 7, 2005 Author Share Posted December 7, 2005 I don't think we should read too much into the Rams game. They -- what's the word? -- suck. But just running the ball ain't gonna win the next four games. You think the Giants are gonna give up 200 yards rushing? They're averaging about 90 yards a game. You better have some complementary air power. True, Brunell has so few targets left that he still throws balls to Robert Royal. But they've gotta do something. The Rams game plan won't work many more times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCalSkins Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 Maybe he has too much gas and it's affecting his passing. The digestive system breaks down in your older years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saeth29 Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 More reason the Skins are underrated overall. Plus, I think he had a comp. % of 66% last week with about 10 tds a comp. I'll take that any day of the year-thank you very much (no picks either) I wish he had 10 tds a comp!! :logo: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seabee1973 Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 Maybe he has too much gas and it's affecting his passing. The digestive system breaks down in your older years. LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnFoRcEr_uPu Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 I understand people wanting to bring up a point that is "relevant", but could we PLEASE lay off the damn doubting for a week or two? Watch, on Sunday Moss will drop a pass and everyone will wonder if he's done for the season. Give me a break man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olive19 Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 Yes I think he is out of gas but until we lose again he has to start. Then PLAY THE KID! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 I think Mark hit the wall after the San Fran game but no one noticed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Underwater Ally Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 1) Defenses are double covering Moss 2) We lost Patton and Thrash 3) We are running the ball more It doesn't matter how bad the deep ball looks or how much his yards passing plummet, some people are in denial and will cling to these arguments to the bitter end. Don't get me wrong, they all have some validity, but the bottome line is as soon as we face a team who can shut down our running game, we're sunk, and there is nothing Brunell can do to improve our chances. Ramsey or Campbell give us the better chance to win at this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superbowl Skins Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 It's definately not Brunell. He's got more than enough left in the tank. The problem has been losing receivers to injury. I didn't realize how much Patten brought to the team until he was put on IR. He wasn't putting up good stats by any means, but with his speed and talent, defences have to respect him which took some of the pressure of Moss. Once you get into your 4th and 5th receivers, the defences can double cover Moss, because the other wideouts are not providing that threat that Patten was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#1SkinsFan Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 He hasnt passed for alot of yards because teams are taking away our first threat (Moss) now and our second threat, not because hes running our of gas good point, and that pretty much sums up why he hasnt been able to pass for as many yards as he did earlier in the season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raperry2 Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 is this a joke? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldfan Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 1) Ramsey or Campbell give us the better chance to win at this point. Because...? [Not disagreeing...I'd like to hear your reasons] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santanamoss89 Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 He;s running out of recievers and we are running more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlinginSammy HOF '63 Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 THAT'S BECAUSE WERE RUNNING THE BALL MORE :dallasuck Yup. This and lack of receivers are part of it. He threw alot of deep balls against Oakland and couldn't connect with Jacobs. We hardly threw a pass against Stl(21) and the very few he threw in the 4th against SD were dropped. Can't blame the QB's tired arm when guys can't catch a basic 5 yarder wide open. God, I'm getting tired of people pissin' and moanin' everytime he doesn't throw for 200 yards. It's kind of hard to do when you only throw 21 times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RIDETHEWALRUS Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 Yea, teams are keying on Moss- couple that with the fact that our #2 AND #3 recievers have been hurt each of the last 3 weeks. We have not lost our #2 reciever, we lost our #2 WR. Our #2 reciever has been Cris Cooley all season long. David Patten never did the job of lightening up pressure on Moss. That being said, teams do key on Moss more because they realize he is the only wideout that is a threat. But Brunell has not been good at finding the open WR, he relies to heavily on checkdowns to TEs and H-backs. I think he has lost his legs and that is why he has let numerous balls sail in recent weeks. he is still far better than he was last year, but he is running on fumes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.