Rodriggo Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 Nobody on the team is going to acknowledge it but anyone who is a fan will agree that since the Giants game Brunell has reminded us all of his brutal performance last year. There is no way we can start Ramsey and not expect to give up at least two interceptions at this point but unfortunately we are again stuck with a valiant but injured veteran who is only good for less than 100 yds. passing per game. He threw an absolute duck to Moss on the screen fake which would have gone for a ****load of yards if not a td. He sold out a gimpy Portis on a dumbass dumpoff for a loss. He underthrew Moss on a curl route that would have kept a drive alive in the second half and he threw across the field late to our worst reciever, blanketed in coverage which resulted in a pick and gave them the chance to tie the game. We need to establish the run because Brunell is hobbled and playing like **** at the worst possible time. I would consider starting Brunell against Seattle and maybe working Ramsey in at some point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 6. Do not attempt to circumvent the profanity filters. Let the filters do their job. Veiled profanity is unacceptable. We allow the use of either all asterisks/symbols or not at all. For example "****" and "*&*%$" are acceptable, while "*****, “s**t” or “sh*t" are not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedskinsRGr8 Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 Nobody on the team is going to acknowledge it but anyone who is a fan will agree that since the Giants game Brunell has reminded us all of his brutal performance last year. There is no way we can start Ramsey and not expect to give up at least two interceptions at this point but unfortunately we are again stuck with a valiant but injured veteran who is only good for less than 100 yds. passing per game. He threw an absolute duck to Moss on the screen fake which would have gone for a sh*tload of yards if not a td. He sold out a gimpy Portis on a dumb*ss dumpoff for a loss. He underthrew Moss on a curl route that would have kept a drive alive in the second half and he threw across the field late to our worst reciever, blanketed in coverage which resulted in a pick and gave them the chance to tie the game. We need to establish the run because Brunell is hobbled and playing like sh*t at the worst possible time. I would consider starting Brunell against Seattle and maybe working Ramsey in at some point. I agree with you 100%. I don't think Brunell can get it done against Seattle. Let's hope the defense and running game step it up even more! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dadyjr Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 It's an interesting point. @ Seattle will there be a chance that Brunell gets pulled if our struggles continue?? Personally I think we'll keep him in for better or worse unless the game gets out of hand much like the nightcap tonight. I think this post is very valid and that scares me but we could come out next week and drive. We did only have 15 pass attempts as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MidwayMonster31 Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 Portis has to be healthy in order to have a chance. I do not think that Ramsey can beat Seattle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rodriggo Posted January 8, 2006 Author Share Posted January 8, 2006 6. Do not attempt to circumvent the profanity filters. Let the filters do their job. Veiled profanity is unacceptable. We allow the use of either all asterisks/symbols or not at all. For example "****" and "*&*%$" are acceptable, while "*****, “s**t” or “sh*t" are not. Sorry.Didn't read #6. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stratosphere Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 I think Brunell will throw for 200 yards in Seattle just to prove everybody wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rodriggo Posted January 8, 2006 Author Share Posted January 8, 2006 I think Brunell will throw for 200 yards in Seattle just to prove everybody wrong. I hope he does. This team really could sneak into XL if offense gets something going. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsFTW Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 When he got injured I figured this is what would end up happening. I don't care as long as they win but its going to make winning that much harder and I don't see how Ramsey could do worse. Ramsey has some bad bad starts sometimes though, so maybe be safe and go with Brunell in the 1st half and bring in Ramsey in the 2nd as a surprise for them. It worked against the Giants when they came back with Brunell in the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xsinner Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 Brunell's leg is fine. Didn't he scramble for that first down??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SittingBull Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 Our offensive execution against a tough fast swarming D was injured not Brunell's knee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuji869 Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 Marc has been playing hurt but he did go up against the NFL's #1 D today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MidwayMonster31 Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 6. Do not attempt to circumvent the profanity filters. Let the filters do their job. Veiled profanity is unacceptable. We allow the use of either all asterisks/symbols or not at all. For example "****" and "*&*%$" are acceptable, while "*****, “s**t” or “sh*t" are not. I also likeDon't bypass the ****ing language filters! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tarhog Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 I don't think theres any doubt Brunell is beat-up a bit. Didn't stop him from taking off on foot again tonight though, did it? Thing about Brunell is, dinged or not, his M.O. is 'never LOSE the game'. Hence the frequent throw-aways and 'playing it safe' decisions at key moments. While I understand the concerns, you're not acknowledging that we were up against one of the best defenses in the league this evening. While its discouraging that we couldn't do more (btw, our running attack was no less anemic than our passing attack was tonight - are they all injured too?), what is encouraging is that our defense outshone one of the best in the league, despite significant injuries. We have a chance. Every game is unique. Sometimes you win pretty. Sometimes you win ugly. I'll take ugly every time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omnishank Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 I must be crazy,but Brunell is making very good decisions and showing the heart that has always made me proud to be a skins fan.I guess in the prior games one wont count the scarmbles he made for first downs to keep the drive alive while on a bad wheel,after all it doesnt look well on the stats..sure some will say "well if he would complete passes,he wont need to run",im behind brunell all the way this year and he is doing the plays that are sent to him.First down,run,second down run,third down pass then "brunell sucks" when he doesnt make a 80yd bomb to moss,the coaching staff is behind brunell the whole way,so am i ,and if your not and want to flame him go ahead,its really productive to get down on a guy who plays with intensity and wants nothing more than to bring us back a championship.The QB controversy was over long ago its brunell or bust this year,so relax and get behind your team and coaches if not brunell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLongshot Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 You can't complete passes to receivers who are not open. Jason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MCruz1984 Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 I think Brunell will throw for 200 yards in Seattle just to prove everybody wrong. DAMN RIGHT!!! GO BRUNELL...I hate how Brunell is always overshadowed...I love Portis as much as the next HOG, but damn Brunell is a capable and talented QB...He's one of the guys that got us here!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbo Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 Simms gave a good example of a young skilled QB who made a lot of sharp throws and drove the team downfield, but also gets rattled and makes a number of game-changing bad plays. taking them out of FG range twice, sacked several times for not throwing the ball away and losing yardage to kill other drives, and finally not just a tunrover but one that totally kills the game. Brunell, for all his limitaions, outplayed him by not losing the game like he did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 Thing about Brunell is, dinged or not, his M.O. is 'never LOSE the game'. Hence the frequent throw-aways and 'playing it safe' decisions at key moments. Like that pick that against an even moderately experienced QB would have resulted in certain defeat? Also incomplete passes that skip in front of OPEN receivers that would have resulted in first downs (does it get any more 'safe' than that?) I have no problem anymore with a healthy and POCKET UTILIZING Brunell as he was, ironically, earlier in the year (when we were also losing.) He's not playing it safe, he's not getting it done. 40 yards passing has NOTHING to do with the D he faced. No one throws for 40 yards passing without getting put in the Jonathan Quinn category and that pick nearly put him there for good. Thank goodness for our D, huh? I posted numbers that a poster on CPND had up. They do not look good for Brunell. He's just not playing well. Are we so happy with wins that we can't see that we'd be even BETTER with competent QB play? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terpfan Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 You can't complete passes to receivers who are not open.Jason Especially when you have no time. Brunell didnt play great today, but you can hardly blame it all on him. The offensive line didnt block well, the WRs didnt get open, the play calls werent working, etc. Tampa has a good defense, lets move on and hope for better things next week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Truant Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 I don't know people are so anxious to overlook Brunell's obvious decline. He is not playing as effectively as he has earlier in the year. Have you watched the games recently? In every game the commentators make observations that Brunell is surprising off-target with his throws. He is injured and should be given a chance to heal if we want to actually do some damage this season. Healthy Ramsey > Injured Brunell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 I don't know people are so anxious to overlook Brunell's obvious decline. He is not playing as effectively as he has earlier in the year. Have you watched the games recently? In every game the commentators make observations that Brunell is surprising off-target with his throws. He is injured and should be given a chance to heal if we want to actually do some damage this season. Healthy Ramsey > Injured Brunell They're going to follow the coach and his handpicked Qb over a cliff. The only thing that would "own" them is Ramsey coming in and throwing for 300 yards after Mark didn't do ____ in a game. Even then, there'll be some excuse. I use to think it was strictly our record (which I'm actually disappointed with, in comparison to a 12-4 mark or even 11-5) but now I realize it's Joe Gibbs kool-aid. Once Mark loses that imprimatur again, he will be viewed WORSE than Ramsey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cjcdaman Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 Where were all these threads about Brunell after the Dallas, or NY games? My goodness guys! We played the best defense in the league at their house and won! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonard Washington Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 Brunell, for all his limitaions, outplayed him by not losing the game like he did. i wouldn't go that far! :laugh: simms played winning football imo. both of his INTs were off tipped passes, not bad reads. brunell's int was a bad read imo. anyway its water under the bridge. we won and that's that! :point2sky Healthy Ramsey > Injured Brunell i wouldn't go that far. brunell brings some intangibles that ramsey doesn't seem to have. ramsey however is a yardage machine, you know he's going to move the ball. i firmly believe that we can win with either pat, mark, or scott. however if brunell is injured and his play is limiting the offense, gibbs should make a move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbo Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 They're going to follow the coach and his handpicked Qb over a cliff. The only thing that would "own" them is Ramsey coming in and throwing for 300 yards after Mark didn't do ____ in a game. Even then, there'll be some excuse. I use to think it was strictly our record (which I'm actually disappointed with, in comparison to a 12-4 mark or even 11-5) but now I realize it's Joe Gibbs kool-aid.Once Mark loses that imprimatur again, he will be viewed WORSE than Ramsey. "They're"? Beware of "them", eh? Personally, cliffs scare me. Can i just follow them to the play-offs ? j/k When you're in your this <edited > mode ghosty, I think you may not distinguish the variety of positions that don't agree with yours with much clarity... I know some people here join me in openly seeing how brunell has a lot of limitations, but do feel he's still the best choice overall to lead the team. That doesn't mean that Pat might not be needed and step-in and do great like he did in the Giants. But this stuff isn't working out barely or otherwise so far by accident of just good fortune, IMV. Look at it this way, ghost: In your POV, when do you go ok, "we should still stay with Mark". Only when the stats and throws are a bigger part of the win? But not now? We should switch NOW? You don't see even see it at least a close-call with trade-offs either way? Because you're offering the impression that only "Gibbsian Kool-aid" drugged fools are still supporting Brunell. :laugh: If we do happen to win another game with such unimpressive QB play iI trust you will still enjoy it as much as I did this one And if we lose and Mark is singled out as to why, I trust you'll make the most of that too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.