Ghost of Posted January 9, 2006 Share Posted January 9, 2006 MARK BRUNELL WAS PLAYING AGAINST THE #1 DEFENSE IN THE NFL.Patrick Ramsey would have thrown 32 interceptions on Saturday in Tampa. Relax, people. The Seahawks defense will capitulate much more easily. :laugh: Another example of that dispassionate, reasoned and circumspect analysis I've come to expect from Extremeskins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GSF Posted January 9, 2006 Share Posted January 9, 2006 Problem is, Bang, the game would have been easier for the Skins (and saved the D's energy) had Brunell completed even that pass to Moss that skipped in front of him (where he was open.)On that pick, he had a man going down the sidelines and the bomb is still something he can throw. He simply isn't performing and he's being carried by others at this point. And we were ridiculed for pointing out after Dallas that he got every possession (except those bombs) inside Dallas territory. He throws a pick for a TD against the Giants and it's all good. He throws a pick that in any normal circumstance would have led to the eventual tying of the game, and he gets a pass. If you're not going to be 'smart' and avoid those types of turnovers, then shouldn't you at least deliver competent Qb-ing performances? If you can't even hit OPEN guys, then you shouldn't be out there--period. Because you can instruct anyone to NOT hit ANYONE at all. And would anyone else get this kind of pass or at any other position? Please, he's so closely linked to Gibbs--THAT is why people defend him. Ghost, This is an interesting debate b/c I strongly agree with part of what you're saying, and strongly disagree with the rest. I think there is no question that Brunell is banged up, and probably in more than one way. I understand why the team is denying he's hurt, but can't figure out why some fans are. It seems very obvious to me that he's hobbled and can't make all the throws. The part I really disagree with you is that he gets a pass b/c he's Gibbs guy, and that he shouldn't be out there. How can you say a guy that has won 6 must win games in a row shouldn't be out there. 3 of those games were against good teams, and 4 of those games were on the road. He aint pretty, even he says that, but he's getting it done. Every week someone says, "we won't beat whoever we're playing next with Brunell playing like that", and every week we do. It seems pretty obvious to me that Gibbs has more confidence in a banged up Brunell than he does in a healthy Ramsey. Gibbs knows how great the defense is playing and that he needs his QB to not lose the game. Despite his physical limitations, Brunell has played smart football, and managed the offense well. He's made a few bad reads, but for the most part he's been as cool as a cucumber under a lot of pressure. Tampa's defense was playing extremely well yesterday. Rice and the others were all around Brunell the whole game, but he did avery good job protecting the ball. I'm not sure at all that Ramsey could have done that, and obviously Gibbs isn't either. Look at Simms. He was throwing the ball tremendously better than Brunell, but the mistakes he made were the difference in the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsfanno9 Posted January 9, 2006 Share Posted January 9, 2006 Ghost,This is an interesting debate b/c I strongly agree with part of what you're saying, and strongly disagree with the rest. I think there is no question that Brunell is banged up, and probably in more than one way. I understand why the team is denying he's hurt, but can't figure out why some fans are. It seems very obvious to me that he's hobbled and can't make all the throws. The part I really disagree with you is that he gets a pass b/c he's Gibbs guy, and that he shouldn't be out there. How can you say a guy that has won 6 must win games in a row shouldn't be out there. 3 of those games were against good teams, and 4 of those games were on the road. He aint pretty, even he says that, but he's getting it done. Every week someone says, "we won't beat whoever we're playing next with Brunell playing like that", and every week we do. It seems pretty obvious to me that Gibbs has more confidence in a banged up Brunell than he does in a healthy Ramsey. Gibbs knows how great the defense is playing and that he needs his QB to not lose the game. Despite his physical limitations, Brunell has played smart football, and managed the offense well. He's made a few bad reads, but for the most part he's been as cool as a cucumber under a lot of pressure. Tampa's defense was playing extremely well yesterday. Rice and the others were all around Brunell the whole game, but he did avery good job protecting the ball. I'm not sure at all that Ramsey could have done that, and obviously Gibbs isn't either. Look at Simms. He was throwing the ball tremendously better than Brunell, but the mistakes he made were the difference in the game. Agreed. There's something to be said for staying with the girl that brought you to the dance, even if her front teeth get knocked out on the ride there. Regardless of how capable he is now, Brunell is our guy for the playoffs. He has earned the right. We can hope he gets better by next week, but even if he doesn't, I bet he plays the whole game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbuzz1962 Posted January 9, 2006 Share Posted January 9, 2006 Hey, we are the last team left from the East, and that is based partly on the play of Brunell. I know he is injured, most players are by this time of the year. He deserves to finish the season unless injured to a point where he cannot go. This subject has been driven into the ground, and anyone who thinks that Gibbs will pull him for any other reason than injury or blow out is mistaken. Brunell is still playing, and there are only 8 other quarterbacks who can say that now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted January 9, 2006 Share Posted January 9, 2006 Problem is, Bang, the game would have been easier for the Skins (and saved the D's energy) had Brunell completed even that pass to Moss that skipped in front of him (where he was open.)On that pick, he had a man going down the sidelines and the bomb is still something he can throw. He simply isn't performing and he's being carried by others at this point. And we were ridiculed for pointing out after Dallas that he got every possession (except those bombs) inside Dallas territory. He throws a pick for a TD against the Giants and it's all good. He throws a pick that in any normal circumstance would have led to the eventual tying of the game, and he gets a pass. If you're not going to be 'smart' and avoid those types of turnovers, then shouldn't you at least deliver competent Qb-ing performances? If you can't even hit OPEN guys, then you shouldn't be out there--period. Because you can instruct anyone to NOT hit ANYONE at all. And would anyone else get this kind of pass or at any other position? Please, he's so closely linked to Gibbs--THAT is why people defend him. After re-watching the game and going over key plays especially a few times, I have come to the conclusion that Brunell did not play that bad at all except for two key drives near the end. There were maybe two or three really bad plays that he had, being the interception, the bounce pass, and the toss to Portis (which I am not too upset about). Other than that, he played fairly well...except for opting for shorter plays when long ones were available at least twice. (he got first downs anyway, though he might have gotten more.) As for the Tampa Bay defense, I have to disagree with people saying that we struggled because it was the top defense. They played a lot better even than that, and it really can not be understood without watching again and looking how fast they got to the line, tackled, blitzed, and covered the recievers all game long. The other thing is that each part of the offense seemed to have problems. There were times when the runningbacks completely missed the holes and got nothing, there were times when the blockers missed their blocks and let the running backs get swarmed, or Brunell get sacked or rushed from out of nowhere, there were times when they had illegal motion penalties that hurt us (twice), and Brunell blew the second and third last drives on third down mainly all by himself (though he did his best to get what he could, on the most part). The wierd thing is that the bounce pass and the interception were thrown so oddly that I have to wonder if he hurt himself somewhere in there. Because before the bounce pass his throws looked pretty good, but that one was just awful and there didn't seem to be any logical reaosn for what happened on that play. The interception was also bad, and unlike what some have said it was pretty much all on Brunell, and while not a bad idea, since Jacobs was getting open, was badly thrown and there was no way that Jacobs could get to it or stop the defender from doing so. It seemed during that game that not only was the Bucs defense really, really, really unbelievably good, but every part of the offense had a turn to screw up and they did at one point or another. Hopefully this will be fixed for the Seattle game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Posted January 9, 2006 Share Posted January 9, 2006 Look at Simms. He was throwing the ball tremendously better than Brunell, but the mistakes he made were the difference in the game. I'd say it was Cadillac and Shepherd's mistakes that were the difference in the game, GSF. If Brunell gets a pass cuz his D bails him out, then Simms EASILY would get a pass had Shepherd held on. He threw a perfect pass on that. And tipped passes are, partly his fault and partly good plays by the D-line. Basically, my point regarding Simms/Brunell is that Simms played with moxie, poise and took what the D gave him and completed passes FROM THE POCKET to open receivers and receivers in stride. he was a better player than Brunell, ESPECIALLY when you consider his youth and inexperience and the fact that Cadillac is young and that his line is inferior to our line. That's what's funny to me. He was MORE MOBILE than Brunell, and he's not known for being a scrambler. We're a dropped pass away from talking about how Simms did what he needed to against a playmaking, passionate defense and outplaying Brunell. That our D is so great is a testament to the D and to Williams, not really an indication of our QB's play (smart or otherwise.) A win is a win but it shouldn't obscure the truth nor should we diminish what Simms did by saying it was his youth that was the difference. This may be true in the sense that an offense playing that way against a Tom brady-led offense would have been obliterated out of the building, but not in the sense that it was us having Brunell that lifted us to victory or had anything to do with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GSF Posted January 9, 2006 Share Posted January 9, 2006 I agree that Simms played with Moxie, and made some great throws, but he made a lot of throws he shouldn't have which lead to several tipped balls and 2 ints. Forcing throws when Dlineman are standing in front of you with their hands up is inexperience. You can say the dline was playing well, but when you make the same mistake several times you have to chalk that up to inexperience. Also, you didn't answer my main question from my first post. How can you say Brunell shouldn't be in there when he's won 6 must win games in a row? I agree he wasn't the main reason we won those games, but he didn't lose them either, which is something that Pat hasn't been able to consistently do in his career. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Posted January 9, 2006 Share Posted January 9, 2006 Also, you didn't answer my main question from my first post. How can you say Brunell shouldn't be in there when he's won 6 must win games in a row? I agree he wasn't the main reason we won those games, but he didn't lose them either, which is something that Pat hasn't been able to consistently do in his career. Were you asking those same questions of Brunell when he was actually playing well enough and was 4-4 in that stretch and we had lost 6 of 8? basically, if he doesn't 'lose games' then what happened in those other weeks? If he isn't a main factor (and in some cases a detriment) why even ask about the winning streak. As for Ramsey, we now know he was going up against the top D (when you consider playmakers and meaningful game stats, not Tampa's last game capture of the #1 spot) what chance has he gotten? Oh yes, I know, I know, if Gibbs does X and we meet with a certain amount of success it is thus the OPTIMAL level of success (that is where our disagreement is derived I think.) Let me know when Ramsey played with a defense like we had last night. Actually, let me know when Ramsey played with Moss. Or when he hasn't used the middle of the field or stepped up in the pocket. Or when he got a real chance to play with this team. He hasn't. He had Coles and Gardner and was BETTER ON THE FIELD than Brunell was last year. This year he has a higher QB rating (short time I know) than Brunell does. He's shown some improvement from early in the season. GSF, do you know what BRunell's ratings are in situations and on the road? He's below MEDIOCRE. 60 rating on passes down the middle?! The guy just isn't very good, he's had a couple good games, just like he had last year, but the rest of the team is better. My point is this: Are we going to be looking up Saturday and wondering what our season might have been like if we had made a change before it was TOO LATE (like last year?) And if someone asks that question are the resident Pravda mouthpieces going to give us the "acceptable" version of events filled with lavish praise of a mediocre QB who can't get it done when we need him or need a last minute drive (think of the KC, Denver, Oakland, SD games--dude simply doesn't lead that LAST drive. First Dallas was as good as it gets for him. can't even get the ball out, that's how trained he is not to take chances except for in his own territory in the playoffs with a lead lol) If you had asked me 4 weeks ago I would say we'd be OK with him because he was at least capable still, though he DOES limit this offense and I'm not the only guy saying that. I can only hope he gets even healthier and has a better road showing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCdemolition Posted January 9, 2006 Share Posted January 9, 2006 while i want to give brunell the benefit of doubt because tampa was such a good defense, I was concerned by the one-hop pass he threw to Moss (the one that could have kept the drive alive) -- a clear sign of bad footwork. I think we need over 335 yards of offense to beat Seattle and adjustments need to be made. Gibss is 17-6 in the playoffs, he will surely think of something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GSF Posted January 9, 2006 Share Posted January 9, 2006 Were you asking those same questions of Brunell when he was actually playing well enough and was 4-4 in that stretch and we had lost 6 of 8?basically, if he doesn't 'lose games' then what happened in those other weeks? If he isn't a main factor (and in some cases a detriment) why even ask about the winning streak. As for Ramsey, we now know he was going up against the top D (when you consider playmakers and meaningful game stats, not Tampa's last game capture of the #1 spot) what chance has he gotten? Oh yes, I know, I know, if Gibbs does X and we meet with a certain amount of success it is thus the OPTIMAL level of success (that is where our disagreement is derived I think.) Let me know when Ramsey played with a defense like we had last night. Actually, let me know when Ramsey played with Moss. Or when he hasn't used the middle of the field or stepped up in the pocket. Or when he got a real chance to play with this team. He hasn't. He had Coles and Gardner and was BETTER ON THE FIELD than Brunell was last year. This year he has a higher QB rating (short time I know) than Brunell does. He's shown some improvement from early in the season. GSF, do you know what BRunell's ratings are in situations and on the road? He's below MEDIOCRE. 60 rating on passes down the middle?! The guy just isn't very good, he's had a couple good games, just like he had last year, but the rest of the team is better. My point is this: Are we going to be looking up Saturday and wondering what our season might have been like if we had made a change before it was TOO LATE (like last year?) And if someone asks that question are the resident Pravda mouthpieces going to give us the "acceptable" version of events filled with lavish praise of a mediocre QB who can't get it done when we need him or need a last minute drive (think of the KC, Denver, Oakland, SD games--dude simply doesn't lead that LAST drive. First Dallas was as good as it gets for him. can't even get the ball out, that's how trained he is not to take chances except for in his own territory in the playoffs with a lead lol) If you had asked me 4 weeks ago I would say we'd be OK with him because he was at least capable still, though he DOES limit this offense and I'm not the only guy saying that. I can only hope he gets even healthier and has a better road showing. Wow. I love to debate with you Ghost, b/c even when you're wrong you somehow sound right. I've got to give you props there. I'll try to answer your questions here, even though you still haven't answered the one I've asked you twice. First, Brunell didn't lose those games during that 4-4 run, the defense did. Brunell was playing better then than he is now. Griff was out, Salave's was knicked, and Lavar was riding the pine. The defense wasn't playing anywhere near the level they're playing now. You know that. Your points to Ramsey I tend to agree with, except for that to say his ranking is higher than Brunell's this year is just silly. Ramsey hasn't even played a full game, but I agree that he did look improved when he came in. No, I don't know what Brunell's rating is in various situations, but I know his rating is 85.9 for the season, and that he tied with Green and P. Manning with only 10 ints for the year. This is something that Ramsey has never accomplished in his career. Truthfully, I've already wondered numerous times what would have happened if Ramsey had gotten a chance this year. The difference between our viewpoints is that I'm satisfied with how the season has gone, and I won't be second guessing how Gibbs has handled the QB situation, even if we get blown out in Seattle. I never thought we would have made the playoffs this year, let alone win 6 straight to get to the second round of the playoffs. For me, this season has been a great success. Lastly, I also hope Brunell gets healthier, which was the point I was making with my original thread before it got merged into this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rawrage Posted January 9, 2006 Share Posted January 9, 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. I can't disagree on Brunells performance since the giants game. He is hurt and it shows. But I think we'll do good against Seattle. I think they are expecting a blow over win over the skins... especially after the offensive performance in the bucs game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Posted January 9, 2006 Share Posted January 9, 2006 Wow. I love to debate with you Ghost, b/c even when you're wrong you somehow sound right. I've got to give you props there.Truthfully, I've already wondered numerous times what would have happened if Ramsey had gotten a chance this year. The difference between our viewpoints is that I'm satisfied with how the season has gone, and I won't be second guessing how Gibbs has handled the QB situation, even if we get blown out in Seattle. I never thought we would have made the playoffs this year, let alone win 6 straight to get to the second round of the playoffs. For me, this season has been a great success. Lastly, I also hope Brunell gets healthier, which was the point I was making with my original thread before it got merged into this thread. Thanks, I do what I can. :laugh: In any case, we're going to have to wait and see. Like I said, one of the widest gulfs I can identify between various factions originate in the differences between our respective expectations and level of satisfaction. now, if we had Jonathan Quinn at backup, I'd be giving Brunell fellatio at this point. That's why I have different expectations and a different standard for what I think the team could accomplish. At least we are disagreeing and debating respectfully, which is more than I can say for half this board. I will go back and try to answer your questions, though I do believe I obliquely did so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GSF Posted January 9, 2006 Share Posted January 9, 2006 I will go back and try to answer your questions, though I do believe I obliquely did so. You might have. I don't understand some of the big words you use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.