Butz65 Posted March 15, 2006 Share Posted March 15, 2006 This fact may be true but the starting QB is only part of the equation. That's why we were able to win 3 Superbowls with 3 different QB's - all within 10 years. That's why guys like Dilfer & Rothlesberger have rings while the likes of Marino and McNabb do not. Elway had to wait until the end of his career to get one I think we can win the Superbowl with either guy at QB - perhaps even a combination of both starting next season - Brunell at the beginning and Campbell at the end. Our ability to get to and win a Superbowl will have a lot more to do with our defense and coaching staff than who is starting at QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SackMachine Posted March 15, 2006 Share Posted March 15, 2006 Depends on what happens in training camp, who knows maybe in the playoffs Brunell was just out of fuel. Im thinking we start Jason Campbell against a weaker opponent to give Brunell a rest. It's Brunell's job to be lost and no way else. You don't get your team to the 2nd round of the playoffs without a good QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJ_Skins Posted March 16, 2006 Share Posted March 16, 2006 This fact may be true but the starting QB is only part of the equation. That's why we were able to win 3 Superbowls with 3 different QB's - all within 10 years. That's why guys like Dilfer & Rothlesberger have rings while the likes of Marino and McNabb do not. Elway had to wait until the end of his career to get oneI think we can win the Superbowl with either guy at QB - perhaps even a combination of both starting next season - Brunell at the beginning and Campbell at the end. Our ability to get to and win a Superbowl will have a lot more to do with our defense and coaching staff than who is starting at QB. There are problems with those analogies though. Dilfer was healthy and played within himself. He made plays when they needed to be made. Brunell has shown consistently in recent years he can't stay healthy towards the end of the year, and when he gets nicked up, he becomes incapable of making plays. Roethlisberger was a prolific passer in college. He threw the ball all over the place. Campbell wasn't that style of QB. More importantly, in the case of both the Steelers and Ravens, the common denominator was their style of play. They both had aggressive, stifling defenses and a ball control offense that started with a power running game. The Redskins defense could potentially live up to that level, but the offense is not set up to be a power running offense with Portis as the main back, and now with Saunders at OC. It's a team that is going to need a QB who can push the ball down the field if they're going to go anywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCsportsfan53 Posted March 16, 2006 Share Posted March 16, 2006 This fact may be true but the starting QB is only part of the equation. That's why we were able to win 3 Superbowls with 3 different QB's - all within 10 years. That's why guys like Dilfer & Rothlesberger have rings while the likes of Marino and McNabb do not. Elway had to wait until the end of his career to get oneI think we can win the Superbowl with either guy at QB - perhaps even a combination of both starting next season - Brunell at the beginning and Campbell at the end. Our ability to get to and win a Superbowl will have a lot more to do with our defense and coaching staff than who is starting at QB. :notworthy :applause: I've been saying it for a while now. Gibbs' style is to put an excellent team around a smart QB, not a franchise QB with players around him. If you make Mark's job easier, he'll play better. He's always had the smarts, hopefully now he has the complemntary talent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJ_Skins Posted March 16, 2006 Share Posted March 16, 2006 :notworthy :applause: I've been saying it for a while now. Gibbs' style is to put an excellent team around a smart QB, not a franchise QB with players around him. If you make Mark's job easier, he'll play better. He's always had the smarts, hopefully now he has the complemntary talent. Health is the problem. Health. He can't hold up through a whole season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheSchwartz Posted March 16, 2006 Share Posted March 16, 2006 Well how many teams have won a Super Bowl with a QB as old as Brunell who had never been to a Super Bowl before? I know Elway won two in his last two years but he'd been before a couple time and lost right?, so now what other geezer of a QB who hadn't shown he could even get his team to a Super Bowl was able to finally get there and then winl? Are the Skins screwed either way? Or will Ramsey have to hang around to make sure the Redskins have a shot at it this year? And if the Skins want to win back-to-back does that mean Campbell can't play ever? Because if he starts his first game this year the Skins won't win, but he'll have to start his first game at some point, and whenever that is the Redskins won't be able to win a Super Bowl that year. So I guess we should just cut him and move on with Ramsey right? Maybe we can trade Ramsey and a 4th round pick for Roethlisberger, seems fair to me or at least as fair as some of the trades that get thrown around here so often. That guy has only lost like 4 games ever as a starter, Washington would be unstoppable with him at QB. The Redskins would run the table every year like when I play Madden...Giggity, giggity, giggity... (P.S. I really don't know the answer to the Super Bowl QB question so I'm not really trying to prove a point there and I'm not saying Brunell can't do it because he's too old. There probably is a QB as old as Brunell who did it, so don't try and throw that in my face I didn't look up the facts. I believe Brunell can't do it because he's not good enough, and that's an argument for the other thread so let's not get on that here. But in the current argument it seems age/experience is the key issue so I'll go ahead and push that edge for those that think Brunell is gonna be the guy.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jesus, Mary & Joe Gibbs Posted March 16, 2006 Author Share Posted March 16, 2006 Who says he can't sit his whole first two years? You? Forgive me if I take Joe's approach as more legitimate. His history with QB's says it all. I have no clue where you got this idea from and to say that's the way it is, period, is a little ridiculous considering it's been successfully done many times before and that Gibbs prefers this method.I'll have no problem if JC unseats MB WITH HIS PLAY at any point whether that be training camp or week 14. To say that he needs to be playing because he was a first round pick and that you'd rather not win the SB now so that he can develop sooner is just baffling to me. We couldn't have a more opposite view of how we like the team to operate. Personally, I'm just a little sick of everyone saying we need to do this or that when this or that contradicts what Joe Gibbs believes in and how he operates. How many times has Joe Gibbs used a 1st rounder on a QB? I didn't say he HAD to play this year. IF Mark Brunell can be as effective as he was early on last year, all year long, he'll play all year and into the playoffs. My point is that there is a HUGE possibility that Brunell is gonna get banged up at some point and Jason Campbell will get his shot. Just don't think that Jason Campbell can't play more games in '06 than Mark Brunell... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedskinsSuperBowl21 Posted March 16, 2006 Share Posted March 16, 2006 I Dont care if the Redskins win a super bowl this year IF Jason Campbell is the Quarterback. I just want a franchise quarterback. QBs seem to be the backbone or atleast one of the most vital roles..i hope the season campbell sits the bench he develops great field sense our previous QBs have struggled with Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Butz65 Posted March 16, 2006 Share Posted March 16, 2006 Well how many teams have won a Super Bowl with a QB as old as Brunell who had never been to a Super Bowl before? I know Elway won two in his last two years but he'd been before a couple time and lost right?, so now what other geezer of a QB who hadn't shown he could even get his team to a Super Bowl was able to finally get there and then winl? Mark Rypien sound familiar? - how about Doug Williams (that research shouldn't have been too hard for you)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred288156 Posted March 16, 2006 Share Posted March 16, 2006 I don't see what the problem is with letting Campbell WIN the starting job. You don't just jam him in there to get him seasoned. Gibbs has never done it that way. And if ANY organization or Head Coach has proven that you can win multiple Super BowlS without a "franchise" QB, it has to be the Joe Gibbs Washington Redskins. In addition to the coaching staff and front office, there are other players on the team who would rather spend every year trying to win the Super Bowl rather than get a QB some OJT. Otherwise, Gibbs would have never gone through all the trouble he did to get a veteran QB like Brunell in the first place. There would be absolutely nothing wrong with Campbell sitting another year. Rypien sat out his first 2 1/2 and things worked out fine for him. His first full season in ('89) he went to the Pro Bowl and of course there was the '91 season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doctorfro Posted March 16, 2006 Share Posted March 16, 2006 We should have traded Brunell and Ramsey and some other fodder for Daunte. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slateman Posted March 16, 2006 Share Posted March 16, 2006 Thats why Brunnel starts this season and the Redskins get Campbell as much playing time as possible Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s0crates Posted March 16, 2006 Share Posted March 16, 2006 Let's pray Jason Campbell is the real deal!!!!!!!!!!Here I was praying that Brunell would stay healthy all season. Silly me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s0crates Posted March 16, 2006 Share Posted March 16, 2006 Mark Rypien sound familiar? - how about Doug Williams (that research shouldn't have been too hard for you)?That Joey Theismann guys was no spring chicken either. If Gibbs wins his fourth title, it will be with an old vet like Brunell. Its only right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeyf316 Posted March 16, 2006 Share Posted March 16, 2006 Huh? Would you give up the prior 3 Lombardi's given that none of those QB's qualified as "franchise" QB's? Ask Dolphin fans how many would have traded away Marino if it would have meant a Superbowl win during his tenure. ??? Theismann was our QB for over a decade. 12 years, as a matter of fact. How is that not franchise? Rypien played six years before he decided to move on. He had every opportunity to be our franchise QB. He just didn't want to hang out when the Hogs, Gibbs and everybody else left or retired. He played five more with five different teams, I believe. Williams spent five years with Tampa Bay, disappeared for four or so, then came back at the end of his career for four with us. From 78 to 82 or so, he was the man in Tampa. He was a franchise QB, just not for us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s0crates Posted March 16, 2006 Share Posted March 16, 2006 Theismann was our QB for over a decade. 12 years, as a matter of fact. How is that not franchise?Rypien played six years before he decided to move on. He had every opportunity to be our franchise QB. He just didn't want to hang out when the Hogs, Gibbs and everybody else left or retired. He played five more with five different teams, I believe. Williams spent five years with Tampa Bay, disappeared for four or so, then came back at the end of his career for four with us. From 78 to 82 or so, he was the man in Tampa. He was a franchise QB, just not for us. Brunell was also a franchise QB (in Jacksonville). However, I'm not sure that whether or not these guys were franchise QB's is really the pertinent point. The more relevant fact is how old Theismann, Williams, and Rypien were when they won the Super Bowl. Theismann was 33 (and appeared again at 34), Doug was 31, and Ryp was 29. All three were much more like veteran Mark Brunell than 2nd year player Jason Campbell. If history is any indication, Brunell will be the one that brings Gibbs and the 'skins their fourth title. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jesus, Mary & Joe Gibbs Posted March 16, 2006 Author Share Posted March 16, 2006 Here I was praying that Brunell would stay healthy all season. Silly me. So Mark Brunell is gonna be around the next 10 years? :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartinC Posted March 16, 2006 Share Posted March 16, 2006 Who made his first career start that season...Kurt Warner/Rams Tom Brady/Patriots And I expect to see Jason Campbell sometime this season starting a game... That's a hard road to follow for the Redskins to be able to win a Super Bowl if Mark Brunell goes down and Campbell comes in and takes over from there... Let's pray Jason Campbell is the real deal!!!!!!!!!! I don't think we will see Jason in a game this season unless we have injuries or we have a terrible start and are out of the playoff picture. I saw a quote from Todd Collins agent on Reskins.com which said that Collins had been told he would start as the #2 on the depth chart behind Brunnell while Campbell continued to develop. I would think though that Campbell will get plenty of reps in mini and training camp and also preseason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Butz65 Posted March 16, 2006 Share Posted March 16, 2006 ???Theismann was our QB for over a decade. 12 years, as a matter of fact. How is that not franchise? Wrong Theisman played QB for the Skins from '78 to '85 - he's the closest of the three to qualify as a franchise QB. Williams spent five years with Tampa Bay, disappeared for four or so, then came back at the end of his career for four with us. From 78 to 82 or so, he was the man in Tampa. He was a franchise QB, just not for us. How does time spent with another franchise count? As another post mentioned - Brunell was a franchise QB for Jacksonville - does that qualify as a franchise QB for us? I think it's idiotic for anyone to say they would rather have a franchise QB than a Superbowl victory - ask Eagles fans - many were ready to dump McNabb after his loss in the Superbowl. How many fans do you hear boast about the number of franchise QB's their teams have had (vs. the number of Superbowls they've won)? :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NavyDave Posted March 16, 2006 Share Posted March 16, 2006 Rookie or know, how hard is it going to be to manage this offense with the amount of weapons available now? Spread out the defense dare them to put 8 in the box and run portis, throw the deep pass to our deep threats to keep them honest and dink and dump passes to boost his confidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D Al Posted March 16, 2006 Share Posted March 16, 2006 My vote, let JC sit until an injury to the starter forces him in. Use Todd Collins as a safety valve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CommDownMan Posted March 16, 2006 Share Posted March 16, 2006 how about let him take a quarter for a bunch of the games. rotating which quarter he plays in. Brunell still the #1, but JC getting experience at different points in the game. May not be the best idea, but it gives the skins grooming time and most likely the best QB in the game 3/4 of the time. PLus having a bit of a rotation will keep MB fresher week to week.:eaglesuck :gaintsuck :dallasuck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thinker Posted March 16, 2006 Share Posted March 16, 2006 If we had a stud qb in his prime we would be strong preseason favorites to win it all. But we don't. History does show that few first time qb starters do great in their first post season experience. Heck Big Ben played horrible in the recent SB after 2 full years of playing. I know a lot of you don't like Wilbon but he pointed this out as well - do we have a qb that could win the SB this year? In some ways in this year we would have been helped not making the improbable run last year and being able to get JC some serious playing time the last 4-5 games. After seeing Brunell for two years it hard to be confident that he could hold up for 4 preseason, 16 season and 3-4 postseason games. He honestly wears down and in the latter part of the year he seemed to lose zip in his arm and not have the patience to go to third options - it was more Santana -- Cooley -- throw it out of bounds. I think he had to do that because he just can't take a lot of hits. Maybe the perfect solution will be that Brunell starts the year, plays well for 6-7 games, gets nicked and JC plays well for 6-7 games, Brunell heals up and comes back for the SB drive. The 2007 belongs to JC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onedrop Posted March 16, 2006 Share Posted March 16, 2006 We should have traded Brunell and Ramsey and some other fodder for Daunte. culpepper? he sucks without a WR that is taller than everyone else. miami can have him. watch this season and see what im talking about, oh wait did you watch last season? duante = overated Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsTerps26 Posted March 16, 2006 Share Posted March 16, 2006 theres nothing wrong with having mark play qb, get us there and win with our excellent players on offense and saunders and gibbs on the offensive front. Then we have the luxury of having the same pieces back with a young and well groomed qb stepping up to do the exact same thing. Gibbs can win with different qbs. how sweet would 5 be? and it shuts up those cowboy fans with the "we have 5 superbowls" argument Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.