Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Brunell not solely responsible for lost season!


painfulyetloyal

Recommended Posts

Ok, I wanted to let the dust clear a little bit before I put this out there. We all have opinions and thats whats great about these chats. That being said, Im going to list my opinions on why I think Brunell did a fine job this year and why we were unable to do all the things every single one of us as Skins fans wanted to see.

First, I gotta state the obvious. Our defense played phenomonal this season, hats off to Coach Williams and all the players.

Lacking Offense, reason 1.

Surrounding talent. Maybe the biggest reason we lacked the ability to score as many points as a team needs to to be successful in the post seaon. Santana, need I say more. Yes I do, UNBELIEVABLE! Chris Cooley, stud. I love this guy, and he's only going to get better. Clinton Portis, workhorse, THE MAN. Mike Sellers, unmentioned Hero, keep it up. Am I forgetting anyone? No, Im not. Thats it. Our O-Line, good job this year, keep improving, we need you. Brunell, or any QB for that matter, needs more time to throw, period. P. Manning is a good example of that. Of-course with the exception of the Pittsburgh game, he had as long as he wanted to throw the ball this year. If Im not mistaking, Manning took the fewest sacks of anyone this year. Again, I like the personel on the O-Line, we just need to keep improving. Taylor Jacobs, I heard the coaches say this season that he is very good and I was excited to see him play after Patten went down but was almost embarrased for him. Not much production at all. My point is this. You take a look around the league, especially at the remaining playoff teams and they all have GREAT O-Lines and AT-LEAST TWO BIG PLAY RECIEVERS. What this does is take a ton of focus off of players like Santana. Lets face it, teams could double, even TRIPLE COVER SANTANA at times because he's the only reciever on the field. We really need, in my opinion, another big play reciever. (Keep your eye on Reggie Wayne!) Another very talented reciever would open up Santana and Cooley more and would clear the line of scrimmage for Portis to run wild, which leads me to my next point.

Formations/Play calling, Reason 2:

I've heard some talk in these forums about needing to hire an Offensive Coordinator. This is almost comical. Have we already forgotten that Gibbs is a HALL OF FAME COACH? Offensively minded, mind you. Now I agree, I think we're way too conservative at times. I was so upset that we didnt start throwing the ball with consistancy until we were down by 14 in Seattle. When we see a team stacking the line of scrimmage, THEY ARE EXPECTING RUN. The run only opens up the pass if the run is EFFECTIVE. NOW WHY CANT IT WORK THE OTHER WAY AROUND? CANT THE PASS OPEN UP THE RUN? Even if our other recievers arent effective, put them out there anyway when they are stacking the line. The other team isnt going to just leave them uncovered! This, in my opinion would not only take men out of the box but also take men off of Santana. And if they still double Santana, someone else has to be open! I dont know about you guys, but Im sick of seeing the I-Formation, which enables them to put 8 or 9 guys in the box. Now I know I started this paragraph off by talking Gibbs up as a Hall Of Fame Coach, and I'll tell you why he is. He listens to the players and coaches around him and makes adjustments. He is totally aware that he needs recievers, and he'll get them. And I also think he'll adjust his play calling. I think until we are capable of pounding the run game down the defenses throat, he will start to mix it up so we are not so predictable. The man spends more time at redskins park than he does at home, he will study film and figure this thing out. So, I thought Id never say this but our lack of offensive production, I put more on Gibbs and the coaching staff than I do on Brunell. I think he took this team as far as it was capable of going this year.

Also, I made mention of this to another fan here on Redskins.com. As we've all heard a million times, Gibbs has won three SuperBowls with three different quarterbacks, none of which, in my opinion, Id say were BETTER than Mark Brunell. Instead Id say they were good, not great qb's, surrounded by very good talent in key poisitions, with great coaches. Theisman had a good career, but Williams and Rypien were pretty much one hit wonders. I realize their SuperBowl seasons were not their only good seasons, but these were not considered great, not even very good QB's. They had one of the best O-Lines ever assembled, which any running back could run behind and they also had 'the posse'. If we surround Mark Brunell with a bunch like that, there is no doubt in my mind we could win it all. Please, tell me what you guys think. I just dont see how theres any way we can put this on Brunell. By the way, Im not even a Brunell fan, Im a Redskins fan. I just dont see how Ramsey could have taken us any further, and I was one of the ones looking forward to seeing Ramsey at the beginning of the season. The above are just my opinions based on what I saw this season. Now, hit me with some feedback. Thanks. ~J~

:logo: :eaglesuck :gaintsuck

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, I wanted to let the dust clear a little bit before I put this out there. We all have opinions and thats whats great about these chats. That being said, Im going to list my opinions on why I think Brunell did a fine job this year and why we were unable to do all the things every single one of us as Skins fans wanted to see.

First, I gotta state the obvious. Our defense played phenomonal this season, hats off to Coach Williams and all the players.

Lacking Offense, reason 1.

Surrounding talent. Maybe the biggest reason we lacked the ability to score as many points as a team needs to to be successful in the post seaon. Santana, need I say more. Yes I do, UNBELIEVABLE! Chris Cooley, stud. I love this guy, and he's only going to get better. Clinton Portis, workhorse, THE MAN. Mike Sellers, unmentioned Hero, keep it up. Am I forgetting anyone? No, Im not. Thats it. Our O-Line, good job this year, keep improving, we need you. Brunell, or any QB for that matter, needs more time to throw, period. P. Manning is a good example of that. Of-course with the exception of the Pittsburgh game, he had as long as he wanted to throw the ball this year. If Im not mistaking, Manning took the fewest sacks of anyone this year. Again, I like the personel on the O-Line, we just need to keep improving. Taylor Jacobs, I heard the coaches say this season that he is very good and I was excited to see him play after Patten went down but was almost embarrased for him. Not much production at all. My point is this. You take a look around the league, especially at the remaining playoff teams and they all have GREAT O-Lines and AT-LEAST TWO BIG PLAY RECIEVERS. What this does is take a ton of focus off of players like Santana. Lets face it, teams could double, even TRIPLE COVER SANTANA at times because he's the only reciever on the field. We really need, in my opinion, another big play reciever. (Keep your eye on Reggie Wayne!) Another very talented reciever would open up Santana and Cooley more and would clear the line of scrimmage for Portis to run wild, which leads me to my next point.

Formations/Play calling, Reason 2:

I've heard some talk in these forums about needing to hire an Offensive Coordinator. This is almost comical. Have we already forgotten that Gibbs is a HALL OF FAME COACH? Offensively minded, mind you. Now I agree, I think we're way too conservative at times. I was so upset that we didnt start throwing the ball with consistancy until we were down by 14 in Seattle. When we see a team stacking the line of scrimmage, THEY ARE EXPECTING RUN. The run only opens up the pass if the run is EFFECTIVE. NOW WHY CANT IT WORK THE OTHER WAY AROUND? CANT THE PASS OPEN UP THE RUN? Even if our other recievers arent effective, put them out there anyway when they are stacking the line. The other team isnt going to just leave them uncovered! This, in my opinion would not only take men out of the box but also take men off of Santana. And if they still double Santana, someone else has to be open! I dont know about you guys, but Im sick of seeing the I-Formation, which enables them to put 8 or 9 guys in the box. Now I know I started this paragraph off by talking Gibbs up as a Hall Of Fame Coach, and I'll tell you why he is. He listens to the players and coaches around him and makes adjustments. He is totally aware that he needs recievers, and he'll get them. And I also think he'll adjust his play calling. I think until we are capable of pounding the run game down the defenses throat, he will start to mix it up so we are not so predictable. The man spends more time at redskins park than he does at home, he will study film and figure this thing out. So, I thought Id never say this but our lack of offensive production, I put more on Gibbs and the coaching staff than I do on Brunell. I think he took this team as far as it was capable of going this year.

Also, I made mention of this to another fan here on Redskins.com. As we've all heard a million times, Gibbs has won three SuperBowls with three different quarterbacks, none of which, in my opinion, Id say were BETTER than Mark Brunell. Instead Id say they were good, not great qb's, surrounded by very good talent in key poisitions, with great coaches. Theisman had a good career, but Williams and Rypien were pretty much one hit wonders. I realize their SuperBowl seasons were not their only good seasons, but these were not considered great, not even very good QB's. They had one of the best O-Lines ever assembled, which any running back could run behind and they also had 'the posse'. If we surround Mark Brunell with a bunch like that, there is no doubt in my mind we could win it all. Please, tell me what you guys think. I just dont see how theres any way we can put this on Brunell. By the way, Im not even a Brunell fan, Im a Redskins fan. I just dont see how Ramsey could have taken us any further, and I was one of the ones looking forward to seeing Ramsey at the beginning of the season. The above are just my opinions based on what I saw this season. Now, hit me with some feedback. Thanks. ~J~

:logo: :eaglesuck :gaintsuck

I'll bet Mark Brunell stole your paragraph breaks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How can ANYONE say this season was "lost"?

My lord...........we went from a 6-10 team to a 11-6 team.

We went to the 2nd round of the playoffs.

Good lord................do you NOT see what an improvement that is from last year..........and............from the year before that when we had DOUBLE S?

Geeeeeezzzzzzzzz.

Blondie

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What lost season? We won a playoff game for the first time in a long time. It's been a great season!

BTW - All the excuses in the world aren't going to change my mind. If you go to a game you'll see clearly that Mark doesn't see the field. People are in fact getting open and he either hesitates too much and misses the window or fails to see them entirely. He didn't have a horrible year, I think he played pretty good at times. But he isn't the answer we need and has absolutely no upside at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How can ANYONE say this season was "lost"?

My lord...........we went from a 6-10 team to a 11-6 team.

We went to the 2nd round of the playoffs.

Good lord................do you NOT see what an improvement that is from last year..........and............from the year before that when we had DOUBLE S?

Geeeeeezzzzzzzzz.

Blondie

11-7

Blondes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How can ANYONE say this season was "lost"?

My lord...........we went from a 6-10 team to a 11-6 team.

We went to the 2nd round of the playoffs.

Good lord................do you NOT see what an improvement that is from last year..........and............from the year before that when we had DOUBLE S?

Geeeeeezzzzzzzzz.

Blondie

I agree, "Lost Season", bad choice of words. I just dont think there is a QB in the league that couldve taken this team further than Brunell did this year, given the circumstances.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brunell is late on his release and still took us to 11 wins.

Playcalling is always going to be questioned after a loss, that's just what fans do.

We had our chances against Seattle and just woke up to late. Convert a couple of turnovers and we would still be playing.

I am very proud of the team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah...Brunell missed the field goal to bring us within 7 and also dropped the touchdown in the end zone which could have potentially tied the game. Give me a break.

The season was a complete success...and anyone who disagrees really needs to get their head checked. The fact of the matter is that we basically won 6 playoff games in a row...we had some key injuries (Thomas, Wynn, etc..)...and we STILL showed up in Seattle and could of won that game.

I ma proud of Joe Gibbs and the Washington Redskins. This season was magical and in no way was "lost".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I wouldn't say the season was lost- who thought we would have made it to the divisional playoffs? I think if Brunell wasn't playing through an injured knee (despite what he says), we would have gone even farther.

However, I think the Redskins are sitting now, instead of practicing, is because Santana Moss has no one to compliment him. Expect the Redskins to pick up another impact reciever to put a couple more Ws on the board next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Lack of offense has nothing to do with not having a good # 2. Look at some of the other succesful offenses. Carolina just steve smith, Kansas City has Lary Johnson and Tony Gonzales but WR suck. It's just not correct.

With Cooley and Moss we should be fine, but Brunnell was pathetic after getting hurt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You take a look around the league, especially at the remaining playoff teams and they all have GREAT O-Lines and AT-LEAST TWO BIG PLAY RECIEVERS. What this does is take a ton of focus off of players like Santana. Lets face it, teams could double, even TRIPLE COVER SANTANA at times because he's the only reciever on the field. We really need, in my opinion, another big play reciever. . ~J~

:logo: :eaglesuck :gaintsuck

Yeah, Carolina has a bigtime receiver opposite Steve Smith right? No, they have a qb who isn't washed up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This season was awesome. Period. I would be content with seasons like this forever, even if we never make the Superbowl.

We must be forgetting the last friggin decade!

Anyway, I agree 100% with what the original thread starter is saying. Not only did Brunell do a good job with what he had, he saved us an even worst performance at the quarterback position. Am I the only one listening to Gibbs' conferences? He mentioned it a thousand times. Brunell saves us when the play simply isn't there. He doesn't make bad decisions for the most part. He ran for some key first downs. He single-handedly won us games this year. YES! I said it. Single-handedly. Even when we're up 28-0 against Dallas, you think we couldn't have lost the game if we had a QB in there making bad decisions?

I don't know how anyone else can't see how many times he saves plays for us during the game. We should be so thankful every time we see him scramble out of the pocket, even if he does end up throwing the ball away. Earlier in the season, he was constantly making those plays, and they would end up being huge gains. As time wore on, defenses figured it out. We had no real viable threats besides Santana. That was the problem.

I was the biggest Ramsey fan coming into this season. You can look up my post history. I was very angry when Gibbs made the decision to start Brunell. I didn't raise too much a ruckus, cuz I believed he knew more than we do. As I watched the game against Dallas that week, I was so angry by the 3rd Quarter, I was yelling at the screen. "Here goes another season like this". Then it happened. The two touchdowns. A miracle!!! I was still unsure about everything, but when we played Seattle we came out firing with an offense on par with their number one offense. After that we played KC and Denver, and we put up big numbers against both teams, almost winning both games had it not been for our defense giving up big runs.

We're forgetting that our offense helped our defense when it was in need. Now that our defense is doing the same, we're mad about it. We actually have a team this time, and it's awesome. We just didn't have enough depth at Wide Reciever when Patten and Thrash were out. That was huge. Their presence alone caused defenses trouble, cuz they simply couldn't double up on Moss the whole time, or we'd hit them. I remember Thrash making some big plays for us. I remember Patten doing so as well, but he was always covered well... which freed up Moss. It's only a matter of time guys. Be patient. We had an awesome season. Noone is to blame here. We are a team everyone fears and noone wants to play. So what if the media doesn't realize it... the NFL does.

Redskins are coming back... it's time we stay excited about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Lack of offense has nothing to do with not having a good # 2. Look at some of the other succesful offenses. Carolina just steve smith, Kansas City has Lary Johnson and Tony Gonzales but WR suck. It's just not correct.

With Cooley and Moss we should be fine, but Brunnell was pathetic after getting hurt.

Dude, Ricky Proehl is a huge part of Carolinas success. He's been a playmaker everywhere he's played.

K.C.~~~Dante Hall is not a threat?? What rock do you live under?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How can ANYONE say this season was "lost"?

My lord...........we went from a 6-10 team to a 11-6 team.

We went to the 2nd round of the playoffs.

Good lord................do you NOT see what an improvement that is from last year..........and............from the year before that when we had DOUBLE S?

Geeeeeezzzzzzzzz.

Blondie

This WAS a a lost season but its that it was lost in the end, not in the begining, that makes it different. It was a disappointment but I've not been so disappointed since '92 as I wanted and expected back-to-back SBs. In 1999, I was not this disappointed as I that team did better than I expected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dante Hall is not a great wideout threat. He's had a couple nice plays, true, but he's not a Santana Moss. He's a return guy.

I think youre missing my point. Im not saying we need another Santana Moss on the other side, just someone that will take some attention off of Santana. But to say that Dante Hall is not a threat is a joke.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...