IBleedBurgundy&Gold1369225669 Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 Quote: Originally Posted by shallyshal here is the deal.. next year the skins will only ask their qb-- either brunell or campbell-- not to lose the game. that is it. just don't lose it. the rest of the team will be so deep and explosive that even mediocrity at the qb position will be good enough... by the next year, campbell should be ready to be to match that lights it all, but for this year, just don't lose it.. good point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hail2skins Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 We'll see what happens in camp, but based on last year, Brunell has earned the right to keep his starting position come opening day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rypien1191 Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 Wilbon is always on. Him and Tony always make good points... Wilbon knows hes a Bears fan, but he also lets the readers know it and doesnt try to hide it. Tony is always outrageous, but he KNOWS he is and doesnt try to hide that either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Jones Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 I agree with Wilbon and have been saying the same thing. The QB position will be the key. It would be nice to get Campbell in there for 8 - 12 games and insert Brunell at the end for a playoff run. Campbell would get experience and Brunell would be fresh for the playoffs when a vet QB is most valuable. I am assuming Brunell will be on par with his play last year and has not lost further steps and arm strength. First or second year QB's generally tend to struggle in the playoffs. Brady and Ben R. are exceptions to the rule and not the norm. I am not saying Campbell can't get it done, but the odds are not in his favor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frommd Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 Only two things concern me with this team, the quarterback position and depth. We have great star-power in the starting line-up, but a lot of unknowns behind them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 The one thing I don't necessary agree with is just an implication. Wilbon wrote this entire article making it seem as though we had one year to realize the potential of this team. I don't believe that to be the case at all. This team is set up for a few years together. I think we can be fine at QB for those next few years with Brunell eventually backing up Campbell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylor 36 Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 Right now, we don't even know who is going to start the season. I'm partial to Campbell, since I wouldn't mind spending this year getting everyone acclimated with the program and make a more serious run in 2007. Plus, I think we can still be successful if we minimize Campbell's impact. He doesn't have to win games... Saunders just has to put him in a position not to lose games. That's much easier with a strong running game... which the Redskins do have. Then in 2007, with a year of experience and confidence, Jason might be ready to take the leap. And we'll have the team core in tact for another 5 years. But the QB position is key in 2006. Where have you read or heard that Brunell isn't starting next season??? NOWHERE, because he is the starter of this team. We need him to start. He will adjust to a new scheme (Saunders) much quicker and easier than a second year QB with NO playing time. Plus, we did not bring in all of these players with these large contracts (that really only last for two to three years due to the cap) and pay record money for a coaching staff to just have a rebuilding/fine tuning year. We are going for the gold now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Air Force Cane Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 why does no one raise the issue that we could have Brunell as the starter, and then once the game is in our grasp in the second half put in Campbell for some seasoning. that solves all our problems.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 Where have you read or heard that Brunell isn't starting next season??? NOWHERE, because he is the starter of this team. We need him to start. He will adjust to a new scheme (Saunders) much quicker and easier than a second year QB with NO playing time.Plus, we did not bring in all of these players with these large contracts (that really only last for two to three years due to the cap) and pay record money for a coaching staff to just have a rebuilding/fine tuning year. We are going for the gold now. I disagree with your logic (but agree with your QB choice). We are not in a SB or bust mentality. Everyone we have on this team will be here for a while so we don't have to win anything in 2006. I think Brunell will start the season but I wouldn't be surprised if Campbell gets some reps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gusthecat Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 Wilbon brings up a point, however if we'd signed a QB he would find something else to complain about. He IS one of the wet-blanket twins. I'd love to have a Redskins fan writing for the Washington Post. Can you imagine after yesterday complaining about anything?! I'll take Brunnel's performance last year, especially when you add in two credible receivers to get people off Moss's back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
themurf Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 Holy cow, it's as if every team in the league has a question mark or two. Oh wait - they do. There is no such thing as a team without any question marks. Even if we had a Tom Brady instead of Mark Brunell, an injury can always mess up a "paper champion." Nothing Wilbon wrote is earth-shattering. The bottom line is that these additions strengthen an already solid core and put the Redskins in pretty good shape heading into next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoSkins561 Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 Wilbon makes a good point in this article. All these signings are great, but it all hinges on A: Brunell lasting the season, or B: Campbell being ready to take over. We can't afford for the QB position to hold us back, because it CAN hold us back. I would have to agree and say that Ramsey and his little bit of his experiance over Campbell is looking like a really , really good option at this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsFan47 Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 why does no one raise the issue that we could have Brunell as the starter, and then once the game is in our grasp in the second half put in Campbell for some seasoning.that solves all our problems.. This certainly seems like the most fesible choice. Brunell is our starter, that will not change, only thing we need to do is start giving Campbell a little playing time to help ease the transition. I mean, if Brunell gets hurt *knock on wood* we don't want Campbell jumping in cold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philip Pease Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 here is the deal.. next year the skins will only ask their qb-- either brunell or campbell-- not to lose the game. that is it. just don't lose it. the rest of the team will be so deep and explosive that even mediocrity at the qb position will be good enough... by the next year, campbell should be ready to be to match that lights it all, but for this year, just don't lose it.. I agree completely. Success will depend on the OL giving protection long enough for the QB to be able to go to the 2nd or 3rd receiver. Last season Mark gained extra time via roll-out. That worked fairly well as Santana had a record year and Chris had good success. However, the roll-out cuts down the field of play. So, in my opinion, in order for our 2nd and 3rd WRs to be effective our QB needs to be able to stay in the pocket so as to have the whole field in play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iheartskins Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 Wilbon is the less retarded half of the dumshiite twins.Know nothing hacks. I thought Tony Kornheiser was Sunni? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoudMouth12thMan Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 Wilbon is my favorite journalist other than Tony K., but hes just jealous Chicago didn't sign RE ha ha...after all he's a Chi Town Boy. Wilbon rocks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tazhog Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 Thanks for the link! Good read, Wilbon put together a nice article that read true... Our team coming into this season reminds me of the run we made to SuperBowl XXII... we had a very good team, with a fairly unproven quarterback Jay Schreoder and a crafty old vet Doug Williams... Schreoder started most games, Williams playing sparingly... We made it to tournament (playoffs) with a healthy vet (Williams) who hadn't played the entire season... And when the games really counted... Doug Williams SB XXII MVP!!! SuperBowl Champs the Washington Redskins!!! I see history repeating itself... Jay Scheoder / AKA Jason Campbell Doug Williams / AKA Mark Brunell Sing Bobby Mitchell, sing.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gortiz Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 Wilbon makes a good point in this article. All these signings are great, but it all hinges on A: Brunell lasting the season, or B: Campbell being ready to take over. We can't afford for the QB position to hold us back, because it CAN hold us back. tell me one team's season that does not hinge on the play of their starting qB and the overall depth at that position? Who is Peyton's back up? Dante? Trent Green? Brady's? hassleback? almost every team is one injury away from a bad season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renegade7 Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 tell me one team's season that does not hinge on the play of their starting qB and the overall depth at that position? Who is Peyton's back up? Dante? Trent Green? Brady's? hassleback? almost every team is one injury away from a bad season. Um, okay. Thanks for the backup Captian Obvious. :laugh: Seriously, am I the only one that believe that Campbell wasn't brought in to be the kyle boller of the offense? Hell no, Gibbs wants him to be the franchise QB. That way we aren't making a one year super bowl run. This isn't about next year, this is about the next couple years. And the teams that consitently make runs and making noise are the ones with franchise Qbs. That's the best thing for us, not a medeator of the offense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tr1 Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 I'm not sure why anyone is debating who will start this season. Brunell got us to the playoffs. The only way Campbell gets in is if Brunell gets injured...something that is likely to happen once or twice during the year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NavyDave Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 There will be some games that turn into a blow out and in the final quarter Campbell should be in the game to get real game reps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaliforniaSkin Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 I think Wilbon is right about the QB position. Obviously it's the biggest question mark on the team. I'm a Brunell fan but I'm not sure how much he's got left in the tank. He did give us our best chance to win last year but he also looked a little run down as the year ended. I'm torn on Campbell. I think Brunell probably gives us the best chance to win right now. And Campbell is going to need some seasoning before he's likely to lead us deep into the playoffs. But Campbell has got to get that experience some time. No amount of practise will do what real game exposure will do. Honestly I think Brunell will be the starter in week one but that Campbell might be by week 17. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LWC Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 Actually, I was pretty surprised that Wilbon even wrote about the Redskins at this point in the year. He takes personal pride in not talking Redskins, even when training camp and the Preseason are in full swing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bishope Posted March 16, 2006 Share Posted March 16, 2006 Let's not forget that MB's performance was also impacted by teams keying in on our only offensive weapons (Moss, Cooley, and Portis), while protection was inconsistent from game to game. With consistent protection, Al's offense, and our new "targets of opportunity," MB can take us the distance. Keep the faith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoGood28 Posted March 16, 2006 Share Posted March 16, 2006 The only thing that can settle this thing is a good old QB competition in Training Camp and Preseason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.