dadyjr Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 I don't think this is a "We hate Brunell" thread. Obviously after winning six in a row we will not bench our starting QB Orton-style but today was dreadful and if Brunell was favoring his leg, Ramsey is a definetly an option. With that being said Brunell in his post-game did comment that he felt great and had no pain in the knee. That means it's all in his hands and once again let's pray that we get the passing game clicking again. Amazingly today if Portis would have connected with Moss on that RB Pass he may have led the team in passing yards!! And we won!! HTTR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheSmokingMan Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 Also just a note about the running game. The Bucs were stacking the box because they knew we couldn't complete anything besides short passes. That's the reason the running game couldn't get going. The offense, particularly the passing side, has to get something going in Seattle and score some points, because there's no way we will be able to shut their offense down like we did Tampa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbynice 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. You may be right but I doubt it. Besides unlike 2004 Brunell is managing the game well and he is winning. Dude it is all about winning in the playoffs. With that said, I hope Brunell and the offense picks it up in Seattle. We will need them to win comfortably because I know the defense will show up as usual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsmania123 Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 1) All players are injured to some degree greater or worse at this time of year. So I am sure Brunell is banged up. 2) Our O line play was really not up to par in this game, so it is not on Brunell 100% IMO. Good God Simm's was running for his life against us and he got off some good and bad plays as a result. If we are blocking well up front and we give Brunell time and he still cannot get it down the field than, well, that would be a big problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 In hindsight, I think with the 14 point cushion, Gibbs decided to rest his players. That's why Portis was mostly off the field. That's why Mark only passed on third downs. Hopefully, that helps. Mark didn't get hit too much the last two weeks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 I don't understand for the life of me why this is hard to figure out. Against Philadelphia there was absolutely NO reason to throw risky passes, no reason at all to require Brunell to do anything but not turn it over. the eagles were beat up beyond hope, and even being down to them ten points at one spot meant nothing, because obviously the gameplan was to create turnovers and work conservatively off the mistakes Philly's second and 3rd team offense would provide. And lo and behold, they did exactly that. No need to push Brunell. Yesterday, the Defense spots us 14 points in the first QUARTER, and then proceeded to play a terrific game of shutdown football. No NEED for us to expose anything risky. No NEED for Brunell to have to be a star and win the game. Of course, to the eye of the worrier, this looks like Brunell can't do it. Re-train your eye. It simply means he was asked to manage the game and let the defense pull it off against inferior offensive opponents. If YOU were the coach, would you say, OK, let's go out and play the number one defense by taking chances, or would you say,, OK, let's go out and play the number one defense conservatively, and rely on our own lights-out defense to put pressure on a young QB in his first playoff game, and make him turn it over to you? (NOT coincidentally, that is exactly what he did.) Simple effective strategy, gentlemen. In both of our last two games, Brunell was not required to bomb it downfield or to open it up all over the place to win. And win is exactly what he did, once on the road against an inferior team, and once on the road against a team who scored 36 on us once, won their division, had the number one defense in the NFL. Hats off to the coaches for a dynamite gameplan. ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cjbrown Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 Brunell led us to a successful season. Unless his injuries are so bad the coaches believe he will again put up 40 yards, and Patrck would give us multiple bad decisions, Brunell should finsh the season as starter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rodriggo Posted January 8, 2006 Author Share Posted January 8, 2006 Re-train your eye. It simply means he was asked to manage the game and let the defense pull it off against inferior offensive opponents.~Bang Manage the game? MANAGE THE GAME?! He almost threw the game away with his pick in the 4TH QUARTER!!! I would love to re-train my eye to see what your seeing man. You see managing the game and I see a qb who is S-TR-UGGG-GULING. We know Moss and Portis are playing well, but Brunell has not and did not yesterday. If we want to go to the show Gibbs is going to have to address this somehow because I'm afraid Bru is going to offer up absolutely nothing from here on out. If he had played only marginally better and been able to get us a field goal or two in the second half I would have agreed with your assessment, but he went in the tank, BIGTIME. Gibbs is not as conservative as last year, it's Brunell who is hearing the footsteps and unable to make sharp, quick throws to Moss and Co.. Either he has hit the wall or his knee is bothering him because he has looked pretty bad against Philly and TB and nobody is feeling confident about his performance in Seattle. I hope I'm wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ntotoro Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 We know Moss and Portis are playing well, but Brunell has not and did not yesterday. Neither did Moss or Portis. Portis played hard and got some nice blocks in. Moss had at least two throws (one for a first down) go right off his fingers. A lot of credit has to go to Tampa Bay's D and Simeon Rice in particular. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tarhog Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 I don't understand for the life of me why this is hard to figure out. Against Philadelphia there was absolutely NO reason to throw risky passes, no reason at all to require Brunell to do anything but not turn it over. the eagles were beat up beyond hope, and even being down to them ten points at one spot meant nothing, because obviously the gameplan was to create turnovers and work conservatively off the mistakes Philly's second and 3rd team offense would provide. And lo and behold, they did exactly that. No need to push Brunell. Yesterday, the Defense spots us 14 points in the first QUARTER, and then proceeded to play a terrific game of shutdown football. No NEED for us to expose anything risky. No NEED for Brunell to have to be a star and win the game. Of course, to the eye of the worrier, this looks like Brunell can't do it. Re-train your eye. It simply means he was asked to manage the game and let the defense pull it off against inferior offensive opponents. If YOU were the coach, would you say, OK, let's go out and play the number one defense by taking chances, or would you say,, OK, let's go out and play the number one defense conservatively, and rely on our own lights-out defense to put pressure on a young QB in his first playoff game, and make him turn it over to you? (NOT coincidentally, that is exactly what he did.) Simple effective strategy, gentlemen. In both of our last two games, Brunell was not required to bomb it downfield or to open it up all over the place to win. And win is exactly what he did, once on the road against an inferior team, and once on the road against a team who scored 36 on us once, won their division, had the number one defense in the NFL. Hats off to the coaches for a dynamite gameplan. ~Bang Common sense was an uncommon virtue. Nice post Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bat~man Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 hes a bit dinged yes but he got us here and he does not need to be pulled , he still makes good decisions and has the exp and manages the game , BUT REMEMBER it was said he is fine once he gets warm and he could NOT get warm last night we couldnt keep him on the field , WE HAVE to get our running game going and let brunell get warm and stay loose and he should be fine , that was the number 1 D we faced AND it was a playoff game so it was going to be tough no matter what Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rodriggo Posted January 8, 2006 Author Share Posted January 8, 2006 I'm not doubting TB's defense but the opportunities were there yesterday. The Portis option pass was a 50/50 ball in the endzone. Portis almost turned the corner on a big td run late in the game. The fake WR screen would have gone for big yards if not a td had Brunell not thrown a duck. The game would not have been as in doubt late if Brunell had not thrown that pick and we would have been able to move the ball on third down if Brunell could have made a pro level throw yesterday, which he obviously couldn't. Their defense was good but we had our chances and if Brunell had executed a single time we would have won going away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grampi Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 Why do people keep saying MB is hurt. He's not. We simply played a very good D in Tampa. Did any of you happen to watch any of the Skins last 3 regular season games? MB didn't look hurt to me. He will have a dam good game against the Seachickens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ant15fromNJ Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 I just think he played two tuff D's on the road doesn't help. I hope he is okay we need him to play like he did all year ...great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brave 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. Is this true always? Are there exceptions? Quotes, posts by mods, etc.? After reading Art's story of his conversation with Lenny P. which contained no less than 4 examples circumventing the profantiy filters, I must admit to being a bit confused. Can we get additional clarification on this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gotgibbs? Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 I think Brunell will throw for 200 yards in Seattle just to prove everybody wrong. I agree, hes done great all season and these guys are whining b/c he hasnt done well in 2 VICTORIES!! keep the faith, brunell is the man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCalRedskinFan Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 Hey the Man is Winning games! :point2sky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrossWalker Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 Before you go crazy lets try to remember that the Eagles and Buccs are extremely good against the pass. They get up the field quickly without needing to blitz to pressure which means that the field is literally covered with defenders downfield. The fact is we won both of these games with Brunell under center. Let's give credit to the fact that the Skins have beaten Dallas (good D), NY (Playoff team), Philly (Great D), and now TB(best D in NFL) in the past four weeks. Don't buy into the hype about not putting up explosive numbers against Philly in their place or TB in thiers. Rather, remember that the Seahawks DO NOT play defense the way either Philly or TB do meaning that there will likely be more looks downfield. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tazhog Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 Mr. Brunell is a STUD!!! "Some people were born to be QB" joe gibbs... on brunell... Mark will be fine and lead us to victory over Seattle... Go Mark!!! He's playing through injury and scrambled for a first down!!! get on the brunell train!!! It's going through Seattle!!!:notworthy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
autographcollector Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 I don't understand for the life of me why this is hard to figure out. Against Philadelphia there was absolutely NO reason to throw risky passes, no reason at all to require Brunell to do anything but not turn it over. the eagles were beat up beyond hope, and even being down to them ten points at one spot meant nothing, because obviously the gameplan was to create turnovers and work conservatively off the mistakes Philly's second and 3rd team offense would provide. And lo and behold, they did exactly that. No need to push Brunell. Yesterday, the Defense spots us 14 points in the first QUARTER, and then proceeded to play a terrific game of shutdown football. No NEED for us to expose anything risky. No NEED for Brunell to have to be a star and win the game. Of course, to the eye of the worrier, this looks like Brunell can't do it. Re-train your eye. It simply means he was asked to manage the game and let the defense pull it off against inferior offensive opponents. If YOU were the coach, would you say, OK, let's go out and play the number one defense by taking chances, or would you say,, OK, let's go out and play the number one defense conservatively, and rely on our own lights-out defense to put pressure on a young QB in his first playoff game, and make him turn it over to you? (NOT coincidentally, that is exactly what he did.) Simple effective strategy, gentlemen. In both of our last two games, Brunell was not required to bomb it downfield or to open it up all over the place to win. And win is exactly what he did, once on the road against an inferior team, and once on the road against a team who scored 36 on us once, won their division, had the number one defense in the NFL. Hats off to the coaches for a dynamite gameplan. ~Bang Nice post except you miss one point. Basic execution of safe basic plays is different from bomb it downfield. We couldn't get basic offensive execution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cannonshogs44 Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 Brunell has one more week to get his knee better. With that, I think hes going to play better. With teams doubling on Moss, putting their best LB on Cooley, Taylor has got to get open. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
natem985 Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 Brunell said in his postgame conference that his knee feels fine. What bothers me is how uncomfortable he looks in the pocket. At the slightest pressure he'll start to roll out and usually throw it out of bounds. Our Oline wasn't pass protecting well, for sure. Give the man time, and he can make things happen. He had an 85 rating this year, against good defenses too. Our D bailed out the offense today. Against Seattle, I'm thinking our offense has to put up at least 21 for us to be in it. I'm thinking Brunell will play better against their 17th ranked defense (it will feel like the JV squad compared to the Bucs D). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laurent Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 I see your point Bang, but what are you trying to tell us next, that all those overthrown, underthrown and awful reads were all part of an ellaborate plan to lull the Bucs to sleep? I sat in the endzone and had a chance to watch Brunell operate from behind center for 2 quarters. He had no zip on his passes and made some pretty awful reads missing wide open receivers on the right half of the field. I wouldn't be surprised if Gibbs pulls him going into the third quarter next week if he continues to struggle like he did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
riggins44 Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 No doubt Brunnell is dinged. In his defense, he really didn't have time or anyone to throw to. If Portis is healthy and the OL gives him time in Seattle, he will produce. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsFTW Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 I don't understand for the life of me why this is hard to figure out. Against Philadelphia there was absolutely NO reason to throw risky passes, no reason at all to require Brunell to do anything but not turn it over. the eagles were beat up beyond hope, and even being down to them ten points at one spot meant nothing, because obviously the gameplan was to create turnovers and work conservatively off the mistakes Philly's second and 3rd team offense would provide. And lo and behold, they did exactly that. No need to push Brunell. Yesterday, the Defense spots us 14 points in the first QUARTER, and then proceeded to play a terrific game of shutdown football. No NEED for us to expose anything risky. No NEED for Brunell to have to be a star and win the game. Of course, to the eye of the worrier, this looks like Brunell can't do it. Re-train your eye. It simply means he was asked to manage the game and let the defense pull it off against inferior offensive opponents. If YOU were the coach, would you say, OK, let's go out and play the number one defense by taking chances, or would you say,, OK, let's go out and play the number one defense conservatively, and rely on our own lights-out defense to put pressure on a young QB in his first playoff game, and make him turn it over to you? (NOT coincidentally, that is exactly what he did.) Simple effective strategy, gentlemen. In both of our last two games, Brunell was not required to bomb it downfield or to open it up all over the place to win. And win is exactly what he did, once on the road against an inferior team, and once on the road against a team who scored 36 on us once, won their division, had the number one defense in the NFL. Hats off to the coaches for a dynamite gameplan. ~Bang I buy all that except for the fact that Brunell threw an easy INT late in the 4th Quarter when it was obvious that our offense was not going for anything. Why not run it again? They were lucky that whats his name didn't hold onto the ball, and thats the ball game. Of course I believe that they may have gone back down and kicked a game winning field goal but it was still bad play calling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.