Bradshaw does it again

[The Batman]

This is probably the best thread I have seen in quite a while!!!

I appreciate it fellas, just kinda got tired of everyone finding something to complain about in EVERY situation.

:logo:

[thelarkascend1ng]

this just feels like after the Giants rout.

the entire offense has a bad day, and it's easy to look at the QB and wonder why HE, ALL BY HIMSELF, couldn't get the team going.

of course, they can't see that we had a 5 game winning streak, putting up 35 points against two tough teams - not to mention the bucs have the #1 D in the league. we found a way to win, and that's the way it has to happen sometimes.

[Ghost of]

I appreciate it fellas, just kinda got tired of everyone finding something to complain about in EVERY situation.

:logo:

I'm sorry if it bothers you to hear your age, but to me, while your opinion (here is a compliment) was very well expressed, it still revealed to me a lack of experience when it comes to watching the game.

And yes, there are plenty of people making the same rationalizations and excuses for Brunell post-victory.

If we had lost--what then? The line between winning and losing last night was determined by the DEFENSE. If Shepherd holds onto the ball, you KNOW we don't likely win the game, right? I just think it's hilarious that Brunell gets the free pass on this board. because you win doesn't mean you excuse every terrible play or performance in a game. And it's NOT something you'd do for Jimoh, Ramsey or even Samuels (and definitely not LA.)

Fact is, Brunell STUNK yesterday as he has for the last two weeks. And during our winning streak we could pretend he had a hand in more than one game. It was his pick for a TD that put us in a precarious situation vs. the Giants too. ANd let's not forget his AWFUL performance vs. the Cards.

Stop making excuses for him because it's a double standard. No other player could get away with it. That's what makes me sick.

[thelarkascend1ng]

Look man, I don't need you getting personal about my age here. I went to my first football game [for the Game****s] when I was 3. I also happen to be a 3rd generation Redskins fan, and my grandfather has been a Skins fan for over 50 years. Which, I believe, is before you were born.

Also, I have no idea what game you were watching, because I certainly didn't see these WIDE OPEN RECIEVERS you were talking about. I'd say the Tampa defense did an excellent job of locking us down.

Now, all three of us talk frequently about our Redskins, and what we see is a proven leader. Which is also what Gibbs sees, and it's why he still starts.

With regard to your comment about Trent Green, he's not in the playoffs, is he? Apparently all the better throwing ability in the world couldn't get his team to the postseason.

This might be slightly off-topic, but let's look at Gibbs' decisions in the past couple years. Trade for Portis. People are unsure, proves a great decision. Trade for Brunell. Highly criticized, good decision. Trade for Moss. Everyone whines, GREAT decision.

So maybe if you don't want to take my opinion for it, you should take the opinion of the man who knows infinitely more than you do about the topic instead of telling me that I don't know what I'm looking at because I'm younger than you are.

:logo:

:applause: :applause: :applause: :applause:

[Dirk Diggler]

I'm sorry if it bothers you to hear your age, but to me, while your opinion (here is a compliment) was very well expressed, it still revealed to me a lack of experience when it comes to watching the game.

And yes, there are plenty of people making the same rationalizations and excuses for Brunell post-victory.

If we had lost--what then? The line between winning and losing last night was determined by the DEFENSE. If Shepherd holds onto the ball, you KNOW we don't likely win the game, right? I just think it's hilarious that Brunell gets the free pass on this board. because you win doesn't mean you excuse every terrible play or performance in a game. And it's NOT something you'd do for Jimoh, Ramsey or even Samuels (and definitely not LA.)

Fact is, Brunell STUNK yesterday as he has for the last two weeks. And during our winning streak we could pretend he had a hand in more than one game. It was his pick for a TD that put us in a precarious situation vs. the Giants too. ANd let's not forget his AWFUL performance vs. the Cards.

Stop making excuses for him because it's a double standard. No other player could get away with it. That's what makes me sick.

So what's the solution? Bench him for Ramsey?

[SUNSTONE]

I like Ramsey's chance if Mark goes down.

But since they didn't play Ramsey in the Eagles game, you have to go with Mark as long as you can.

[Doctorfro]

Who is saying we need to switch QB's? Brunell has done a markedly better job than last year when Ramsey was clearly the better QB. Although I never liked how Joe handled the QB sitch it was the right move. But I think you had better go back to the Giants game and see how well our backup did in that game. He piloted the ship just fine, thank you. He even threw the ball away a couple of times that in years past he never did. I think you need to watch who you bash.

[Guest MIKE T]

B-man Good Post! I'd Take A Ugly Win Over A Pretty Loss Anyday. This Is A Team Game When The Offense Doesn't Show Up ,the Defense Does. Hopefully The Skins Offense Will Show Up In Seatle,and Get Off To A Fast Start,andthe Defense Will Do What They Do,paly Their A--es Off. We've Gotten Our Ugly Game Out Of Our System,now Let.s Play Good Smart Skins Football. Hail To The Redskins.

T-togeter

E-everyone

A-achieves

M-more

[SkinsGuy]

There is no reason to switch QBs.

Brunell is doing fine. He isn't stellar, but he isn't costing us games, either.

Just the usual "geniuses", whining and moaning. Still hung up on Week 1's benching of Ramsey. Get over it, already.

It's obvious that Gibbs went conservative yesterday. It shows how much confidence he had in the defense.

Bottom line is... we WON!! The Redskins are headed into the 2nd round of the playoffs.

I don't know about the "geniuses" who have thought all year they know how to coach this team better than Gibbs (and have been proven wrong time and time again), but I'm very comfortable with Brunell as our field general.

I mean, the Jaguars gave up on him and where are they now?

Sitting at home with 23 other teams

[Ghost of]

Brunell is doing fine. He isn't stellar, but he isn't costing us games, either.

I mean, the Jaguars gave upon him and where are they now?

Look, if you want to believe Mark will do better or the gameplan will be better next week--that's fine. But don't give me the 'nost costing us games' garbage either. By ANY standard, 40 yards and a critical pick in your own end in a one-score game is costing games. That it didn't has NOTHING to do with Mark and everything to do with defense AND a WR who dropped the biggest catch of his life. Let me reiterate that--a WR who DROPPED A PASS when he was WIDE OPEN to TIE THE GAME.

But maybe the Jaguars play in a better conference and played the WORLD CHAMPIONS AT NEW ENGLAND in that playoff game?

maybe the Jags D isn't as good?

Also, I'll point out the Jags benched the guy who had won them games recently to bring back their 'guy' who was still hurt and rusty.

[lovemaskins]

Finally, a good topic to chat about instead of just constant complaining. I too think that Brunell's performance yesterday was less than par, however there are a few other elements to the game other than the QB position. Their D-line yesterday was totally dominant, they got pressure, sacks, hurried hurried passes and shut down portis.

Tampa also had great field position most of the game, and we know that Joe, with a 17-3 lead will become extra conservative with the ball when our average field position is inside the 20 and 30 yardline. How can you blame him, anyone can tell different, but I watched a Tampa defense yesterday just itching for an opportunity to make a game changing play. Fortunately, our coach did too, and I believe that's the reason we play the way we did. We were in control, in the lead, and not making mistakes, and we forced Simms to win, which he tried to do, but our D prevailed, and we won.

Now, next week I definitely think we'll need more than 17 to win, and I think we'll get it. Remember, we have the number 2 WR(receiving yards) and number 4 RB(yards from scrimmage) in the NFL, and we didn't just show up for 16 games to get those acolades. When the time comes for us to open it up I believe we will, just like we did last week, coming from behind against the Eagles being led by who else, Mark Brunell and standing in MY highest regards Joe Gibbs. By the way, who in his second season back, after the game passed him by, has caught back up and is putting another imprint on the NFL once again by taking a supposedly average team to the second round of the playoffs. :2cents:

[MontanaRed]

I disagree.

Anyone who has followed this team through Gibbs' first stint as head coach is familiar with one thing to possibly summarize his strategy.

He sandbags.

Of course with a 14 point lead we're not going to be bombing it downfield. He's playing it smart, just as Gibbs asks. He's not going to crack open the playbook and put his marquee players at risk when it simply isn't necessary. It's why Portis played very little and Springs didn't play at all. The interception was not his fault. Blame that one on Taylor "Look at me, I'm kinda fast!" Jacobs. He batted it down, not the defender. If I'm not mistaken, Brunell hasn't fumbled since the first Tampa debacle, but I could be wrong. True, he did miss a few recievers, but let's face it, the number one defense in the National Football League covered them pretty well. Joe Gibbs is sandbagging. He's running twice to eat clock, then maybe attempting a throw. If nothing's there, he's putting the faith in the defense, just as Gibbs is, by throwing it away. True, Gibbs is not telling him to throw it under or into coverage, but hey, he's doing a pretty fine job of what he needs to do to eat clock in a defensive football game.

In 1991, my dad went to an exhibition game at our local Williams-Brice stadium. Giants vs. Redskins. Unfortunately, at that time I was a little over 2 years old;; as such I do not remember the exact score, but the Redskins were blown out. As you all well know, the Redskins absolutely dominated when they had to. Last night, offensively, they simply didn't have to. They wanted to save every precious drop of offense for Seattle. So in that respect, Brunell is doing exactly what Gibbs asks of him. You are correct, Gibbs is not asking him to make bad throws. However, what Gibbs is asking him to do is to keep those bad throws to a minimum and to let the defense win the game [in the case of last night]. And he is doing that to perfection.

Hail Brunell and Hail to the Redskins.

:logo:

I think you've made some good points here. Moss said basically the same thing in his post-game interviews: with a 14 point lead Gibbs wants to run twice, eat the clock and put the faith in the defense. He pointed out, hey if the game had started differently, they would have certainly made the adjustments.

Anyway, good thread; I think Brunell deserves and needs to be there. I did appreciate his acceptance speech for the "offensive player of the week" award when he stepped to the mike for the post-game interview.:laugh:

And I think you've got a lot of good opinions for any age. Christ, at least you can spell , write coherently, don't get defensive and have a big-arse chip on your shoulder just because you disagree with someone!

[The Batman]

Look, if you want to believe Mark will do better or the gameplan will be better next week--that's fine. But don't give me the 'nost costing us games' garbage either. By ANY standard, 40 yards and a critical pick in your own end in a one-score game is costing games. That it didn't has NOTHING to do with Mark and everything to do with defense AND a WR who dropped the biggest catch of his life. Let me reiterate that--a WR who DROPPED A PASS when he was WIDE OPEN to TIE THE GAME.

But maybe the Jaguars play in a better conference and played the WORLD CHAMPIONS AT NEW ENGLAND in that playoff game?

maybe the Jags D isn't as good?

Also, I'll point out the Jags benched the guy who had won them games recently to bring back their 'guy' who was still hurt and rusty.

Ok. Enough about the INT. Did the Bucs get ANY points off of it? No. So it didn't cost us the game, end of discussion. Mark Brunell did not cost us the game. Would you rather have had Chris Simms? He had great numbers, 65% completion, and lots of yardage. I suppose you'd also want his 2 INTs that resulted directly in Washington's win. The FACTS state he did not cost us the win, because he did not throw critical interceptions like Simms did and he threw it away when there was nothing available, instead of making a young player's mistake [ as Ramsey has been known to do ] and force something that isn't there. And don't say the INT was forced, that was just Jacobs' inability to catch anything thrown near him. Besides, there's no proof that that catch would've won them the game. They could've missed the extra point, or we could've pulled a week 2 in either regulation or overtime. And the Jaguars DO NOT play in a better conference. Brunell did not win us the game, you are correct. But he did not let us lose the game. And that is tremendous when you have a defense that is as dynamic as ours. [ Exhibit A: see Baltimore Ravens, 2001. ] And I can't say there's another QB on our roster that can do what he did for us.

:logo:

[Jumbo]

Look man, I don't need you getting personal about my age here. I went to my first football game [for the Game****s] when I was 3. I also happen to be a 3rd generation Redskins fan, and my grandfather has been a Skins fan for over 50 years. Which, I believe, is before you were born.

Also, I have no idea what game you were watching, because I certainly didn't see these WIDE OPEN RECIEVERS you were talking about. I'd say the Tampa defense did an excellent job of locking us down.

Now, all three of us talk frequently about our Redskins, and what we see is a proven leader. Which is also what Gibbs sees, and it's why he still starts.

With regard to your comment about Trent Green, he's not in the playoffs, is he? Apparently all the better throwing ability in the world couldn't get his team to the postseason.

This might be slightly off-topic, but let's look at Gibbs' decisions in the past couple years. Trade for Portis. People are unsure, proves a great decision. Trade for Brunell. Highly criticized, good decision. Trade for Moss. Everyone whines, GREAT decision.

So maybe if you don't want to take my opinion for it, you should take the opinion of the man who knows infinitely more than you do about the topic instead of telling me that I don't know what I'm looking at because I'm younger than you are.

:logo:

Don't mess with The Batman

[SkinsGuy]

Look, if you want to believe Mark will do better or the gameplan will be better next week--that's fine. But don't give me the 'nost costing us games' garbage either. By ANY standard, 40 yards and a critical pick in your own end in a one-score game is costing games. That it didn't has NOTHING to do with Mark and everything to do with defense AND a WR who dropped the biggest catch of his life. Let me reiterate that--a WR who DROPPED A PASS when he was WIDE OPEN to TIE THE GAME.

But maybe the Jaguars play in a better conference and played the WORLD CHAMPIONS AT NEW ENGLAND in that playoff game?

maybe the Jags D isn't as good?

Also, I'll point out the Jags benched the guy who had won them games recently to bring back their 'guy' who was still hurt and rusty.

I can go on about him not costing us games, cause he didn't cost the game. We won. Or have you forgotten that?

Of course, that isn't why you're here. It's b/c you are still stuck on that Ramsey/Brunell thing from week one.

Well that's why you are just an insignificant internet malcontent and Joe Gibbs is coaching this team.

He made his bold decision and has moved on. And its paying dividends. We are 11-6 and in the 2nd round of the playoffs.

WITH Brunell as our QB, thank you very much.

The only thing that's sad here are the "geniuses" who think that Ramsey would've been SO much better. After he bumbled his way through two off-seasons and the first game this year.

You may not like Brunell being in there, but you better start dealing with it. Cause outside of injury, its not changing.

Unlike you, I'm going to enjoy this post-season run that was wonderfully given to us by Gibbs, the players, and the coaching staff.

You can just stay back in week 1 and whine and nit-pick every little thing. We've moved on.

[Hitnskins]

I don't think you understood what I wrote...lol...I was talking about using the "Brunell's playing the way Gibbs wants him to play" explanation as a catch-all response towards anything dealing with Brunell's play...I've seen it used no matter what the discussion is about Brunell. And I was pointing out that things like missing open receivers or causing turnovers hardly qualify as playing "the way Gibbs wants him to play"..lol. It's become a cliche' tossed out in instances where it doesn't belong...

YOU don't get it buddy!!! I mean, do you expect Brunell to complete every single pass????????? I think you need to open your eyes and think outside the box here! Most times when Brunell threw the ball in the Tampa game(and he only attempted 15 passes total), was on third down, and long for a first down! I don't know how much you know about football, or the way that Joe Gibbs coaches, or strategy, but we're trying to help you here!!!

[Ghost of]

Did the Bucs get ANY points off of it? No. So it didn't cost us the game, end of discussion. Mark Brunell did not cost us the game. Would you rather have had Chris Simms? He had great numbers, 65% completion, and lots of yardage. I suppose you'd also want his 2 INTs that resulted directly in Washington's win. The FACTS state he did not cost us the win, because he did not throw critical interceptions like Simms did and he threw it away when there was nothing available, instead of making a young player's mistake [ as Ramsey has been known to do ] and force something that isn't there. And don't say the INT was forced, that was just Jacob's inability to catch anything thrown near him. Besides, there's no proof that that catch would've won them the game. They could've missed the extra point, or we could've pulled a week 2 in either regulation or overtime. And the Jaguars DO NOT play in a better conference.

:logo:

You don't get to decide how things are discussed, dude. Because no points were scored. Hey, if no points were scored off of 6 fumbles and 5 INTs, would that make a difference? No. If I shoot a gun in a crowded restaurant and no one is harmed, does that make much of a difference in my behavior being perceived as reckless? No. As I've stated repeatedly. If you do as much as you can to lose a game, including skipping passes to open receivers, getting your RB killed on a nonsensical rookie pass (the one where portis had guys ready to pound him and he threw it anyway) and then you throw a pick in your own end--you are LOSING THE GAME FOR YOUR TEAM. If the Skins had 5 return TDs off special teams and Brunell threw 4 picks, would you be telling me he didn't lose the game for the team? Not converting first downs and throwing picks in your own territory--REGARDLESS of how it turns out is bad. Because someone else rose up to save his hide doesn't excuse those decisions.

Also, Simms mistakes yesterday were not why the Bucs lost. Did you watch teh game? He was the ONLY REASON they were in it! Yeah, a ball was tipped that went to Lavar. I guess that's what happens when you actually use the pocket, there's a chance the ball will get tipped and he hasn't worked enough to change up his passing lanes or learn 'altered' delivery. All his guy had to do was catch the perfect pass he threw. If Brunell does that, all of you cats are talking about how great Brunell threw teh ball and why didn't Moss/Jacobs/Thrash catch it. Stop with the double standards. SIMMS WAS THE REASON THEY WERE IN IT (offensively.) It was Cadillac that fumbled the ball for that Taylor TD, not Simms. Simms led a TD drive, an ACTUAL DRIVE, not one bomb or a defensively forced short field, but a DRIVE.

Let me ask you, when Brunell led late comebacks but didn't do enough on the very last drive (including getting sacked rather than throwing the ball on 4th down to anybody) earlier this year, did you hold him responsible? That last INT was no different. It was another tipped ball and it was a desperation last drive, which Brunell was no better at this year either. Simms outperformed Brunell yesterday.

You say the Jags don't play in a better conference. You state this as a fact, but the problem is, it does not comport with our OWN EXPERIENCE. We were 0-4 vs. the AFC West. Not only that, the NFC does not have the most recent SB winner (3 of last 4) nor does it have one of the better runners-up in Indy. The weakest division in football is the NFC West. One of the weakest after that is the NFC North. Nor does it have a Denver which had a great record in a tough division. You state that the AFC is NOT the better conference and we're supposed to take your word on that, rather than do any examination beyond what you're telling us because your misstatement or self-deception is aimed at boosting the self-esteem of Skins fans or to support your position.

The rest of your post is assertion of unlimited possibility as a DEFENSE for poor play or decision-making. "they could have missed the extra point or gone for a 2 point conversion." Batman, that's RIDICULOUS. I'd also add that the Bucs would still have had an opportunity to make up for a 1-2 point difference, since they DID get the ball back after that.

BTW, I didn't whine about the Moss trade, bringing in M. Washington, Rabach, etc. Some of you cats like to pretend that EVERY move has been protested, but in that you don't give enough credit to some individuals who are more balanced than that.

[Ghost of]

YOU don't get it buddy!!! I mean, do you expect Brunell to complete every single pass????????? I think you need to open your eyes and think outside the box here! Most times when Brunell threw the ball in the Tampa game(and he only attempted 15 passes total), was on third down, and long for a first down! I don't know how much you know about football, or the way that Joe Gibbs coaches, or strategy, but we're trying to help you here!!!

:laugh: I love this board. Full of people like you that all of a sudden, after accusing others of not knowing football, have no opinion other than "whatever happens in a victory is right."

[Hitnskins]

:la;ugh: I love this board. Full of people like you that all of a sudden, after accusing others of not knowing football, have no opinion other than "whatever happens in a victory is right."

Of course i have an opinion which i already stated in an earlier post........sorry if you didn't see it. You can laugh all you want, but that's just an obvious disguise for knowing when you are wrong. Your posts show anger towards Brunell, and a strong disliking for the way the Ramsey situation was handled. If you don't like Brunell, or the 6 game winning streak, or the decision that Gibbs has made at Quarterback which has us going in to round 2 of the playoffs, then why don't you do us all a favor and just wait till next year to start rooting for the TEAM again. By your way of thinking, you seem to be implying that Joe Gibbs doesn't know what he's doing, or that you think he's playing Brunell for the sole purpose of hurting the team?????????? So youtell me, which is it???

[monkforhall]

You don't get to decide how things are discussed, dude. Because no points were scored. Hey, if no points were scored off of 6 fumbles and 5 INTs, would that make a difference? No. If I shoot a gun in a crowded restaurant and no one is harmed, does that make much of a difference in my behavior being perceived as reckless?

Great analogies. Brunell didn't play defense, all he did was make it Very, very hard on our defense. Just because the defense came up HUGE, doesn't mean Brunell had a great game. We have one despite Brunell for Two games now, and I hope he snaps out of it. Because we have (offensively) deserved to lose the last 2 games. Plus the horrible game in Arizona. Looks like Brunell maybe wearing down, hopefully he can bounce back, because Gibbs, won't take him out. I don't think he should, but if (god forbid) Brunell get's hurt. I think Ramsey could be a good spark plug to out sputtering offense. We could win 3-0, and Brunnell could throw 3 picks, and the defense bails him out. Doesn't mean that he had a good game. Just means the defense had to play extra hard. Hopefully, we get some offense and give the defense a break, they will need help against Seattle.

[Hitnskins]

You don't get to decide how things are discussed, dude. Because no points were scored. Hey, if no points were scored off of 6 fumbles and 5 INTs, would that make a difference? No. If I shoot a gun in a crowded restaurant and no one is harmed, does that make much of a difference in my behavior being perceived as reckless?

Great analogies. Brunell didn't play defense, all he did was make it Very, very hard on our defense. Just because the defense came up HUGE, doesn't mean Brunell had a great game. We have one despite Brunell for Two games now, and I hope he snaps out of it. Because we have (offensively) deserved to lose the last 2 games. Plus the horrible game in Arizona. Looks like Brunell maybe wearing down, hopefully he can bounce back, because Gibbs, won't take him out. I don't think he should, but if (god forbid) Brunell get's hurt. I think Ramsey could be a good spark plug to out sputtering offense. We could win 3-0, and Brunnell could throw 3 picks, and the defense bails him out. Doesn't mean that he had a good game. Just means the defense had to play extra hard. Hopefully, we get some offense and give the defense a break, they will need help against Seattle.

what game were you watching??????????? you act like Brunell threw 40 passes or something? He only thre the ball 15 times? Can you guys not see that it's not just him it's Gibbs play calling? Do you guys remember the way Ramsey has played in the past? I'd love to see how he'd do in all of those 3rd and longs that Brunell is being put in to due to the running plays on 1st and 2nd downs......drive after drive after drive!!!!

:doh:

[The Batman]

You don't get to decide how things are discussed, dude. Because no points were scored. Hey, if no points were scored off of 6 fumbles and 5 INTs, would that make a difference? No. If I shoot a gun in a crowded restaurant and no one is harmed, does that make much of a difference in my behavior being perceived as reckless? No. As I've stated repeatedly. If you do as much as you can to lose a game, including skipping passes to open receivers, getting your RB killed on a nonsensical rookie pass (the one where portis had guys ready to pound him and he threw it anyway) and then you throw a pick in your own end--you are LOSING THE GAME FOR YOUR TEAM. If the Skins had 5 return TDs off special teams and Brunell threw 4 picks, would you be telling me he didn't lose the game for the team? Not converting first downs and throwing picks in your own territory--REGARDLESS of how it turns out is bad. Because someone else rose up to save his hide doesn't excuse those decisions.

Also, Simms mistakes yesterday were not why the Bucs lost. Did you watch teh game? He was the ONLY REASON they were in it! Yeah, a ball was tipped that went to Lavar. I guess that's what happens when you actually use the pocket, there's a chance the ball will get tipped and he hasn't worked enough to change up his passing lanes or learn 'altered' delivery. All his guy had to do was catch the perfect pass he threw. If Brunell does that, all of you cats are talking about how great Brunell threw teh ball and why didn't Moss/Jacobs/Thrash catch it. Stop with the double standards. SIMMS WAS THE REASON THEY WERE IN IT (offensively.) It was Cadillac that fumbled the ball for that Taylor TD, not Simms. Simms led a TD drive, an ACTUAL DRIVE, not one bomb or a defensively forced short field, but a DRIVE.

Let me ask you, when Brunell led late comebacks but didn't do enough on the very last drive (including getting sacked rather than throwing the ball on 4th down to anybody) earlier this year, did you hold him responsible? That last INT was no different. It was another tipped ball and it was a desperation last drive, which Brunell was no better at this year either. Simms outperformed Brunell yesterday.

You say the Jags don't play in a better conference. You state this as a fact, but the problem is, it does not comport with our OWN EXPERIENCE. We were 0-4 vs. the AFC West. Not only that, the NFC does not have the most recent SB winner (3 of last 4) nor does it have one of the better runners-up in Indy. The weakest division in football is the NFC West. One of the weakest after that is the NFC North. Nor does it have a Denver which had a great record in a tough division. You state that the AFC is NOT the better conference and we're supposed to take your word on that, rather than do any examination beyond what you're telling us because your misstatement or self-deception is aimed at boosting the self-esteem of Skins fans or to support your position.

The rest of your post is assertion of unlimited possibility as a DEFENSE for poor play or decision-making. "they could have missed the extra point or gone for a 2 point conversion." Batman, that's RIDICULOUS. I'd also add that the Bucs would still have had an opportunity to make up for a 1-2 point difference, since they DID get the ball back after that.

BTW, I didn't whine about the Moss trade, bringing in M. Washington, Rabach, etc. Some of you cats like to pretend that EVERY move has been protested, but in that you don't give enough credit to some individuals who are more balanced than that.

I'll take this step by step.

One, I did not try to dictate the course of discussion. End of discussion is an expression, so don't try to play semantics with me.

Two, he did not do everything he could to try and lose us the game. That expression is so inappopriate in this context. It makes him sound like he plays for the other team. He did everything in his power to win us the game. I suppose you intend to blame him for good defensive coverage, arguably one of the best corners in the league, and conservative playcalling?

Three, your spout off about desperation last drives espouses ignorance. Clearly you didn't see Week 2, in which Brunell executed to perfection not once, but twice, to win us the game. Therefore, you could realistically thank Brunell for us even being in the position for him to throw an INT in his own territory in the postseason.

Four, that weak NFC West. With the number one seed in the NFC. Yes. It is a pushover division.

Five, there is absolutely nothing ridiculous about my assertion that that touchdown catch [ which was not dropped by Shepherd of his own accord but was in fact the result of a stellar defensive play by Carlos Rogers ] was not guaranteed to win them the game. I say that because I can't predict the future, unlike you. I can't say beyond the shadow of a doubt that that catch would've won them the game. But obviously you are clairvoyant and I bow to your superior wisdom.

Six, I never said YOU whined about all those trades. I only said that a lot of people did, and that's the truth. I speak not only of Redskins fans on websites, but of people I know that live in my area.

Hope that clears things up a bit.

:logo:

[fight_on_til_you_have_won]

Listen up!

What is the deal with all of the infighting? Trying to invalidate someone's opinion by pointing out his age? We're all Redskins fans here, right? Can't we have a discussion without resorting to taunts and insults? This is ridiculous!

[The Batman]

Also, Simms mistakes yesterday were not why the Bucs lost.

One more thing.

On the Bucs' second drive, Chris Simms threw an interception that was returned by LaVar Arrington to Tampa's 5 yard line. Clinton Portis then ran in for a touchdown on the left side. We won the game by 7 points. Therefore, Simms' mistake was directly responsible for Tampa Bay losing the game.

[Peregrine]

How soon we forget about how ramsey throws interceptions?????

How soon we forget how bad Brunell was injured last year(and is right now) and how soon we forget how GOOD Ramsey has been. I will say it again, DONT use Ramseys past history as reason to not play him. Because hes been to good for that. Under a horrific system, and offensive line in washington Ramsey has...:

Year 1, one of 3 Rookie QBs in NFL history to throw more TDs and INTs. Year2. Throws 14 TDs 10 INTs, partial season, injured(partial like the first). Third year, new system, comes in for Brunell after midseason, plays ONLY a partial season, and in the last 5 games of the year(playing 3 playoff teams and 2 top defenses) throws 8 TDs 5 INTs(mostly recievers faults), and has a QB rating above 90.

Yes he struggled some this preseason(also managed over 20 yards per pass against the Bengals...), but DONT talk about his past history as if the man hasnt played admirably even given the circumstances he has been in.

If you want to talk about why Brunell should be in there, say Brunell probobly wont turn it over, and he has been in the whole year, for contunities sake. Just dont lie.