redman Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 Gary Horton's piece today saying that he expects the 'Skins to go deep into the playoffs this year whether Brunell or Campbell was playing got me thinking. Fact: No Joe Gibbs-coached team has ever reached the playoffs when a player who has never started for him before that year has been the starting QB at the end of the regular season. Fact: No Joe Gibbs-coached team has ever reached the playoffs when the starting QB at the end of the regular season has had fewer than 7 career starts going into that season. Examples: 1985: Theismann goes down to career ending injury and the 'Skins miss the playoffs, going 10-6 behind Schroeder. 1988: Williams is pulled from the lineup due to injury and ineffective play, and Rypien replaces him, but the team goes 7-9. 1987: this year is not an example supporting the first statement - Williams didn't become the starter over Schroeder until after the team had already made the playoffs; even so, he had approximately 67 career starts to his name before that point which supports the second statement. 1989: This year does not support the first statement (it doesn't refute it either) given that Rypien had some starts the year before. However, the experienced Williams again begins the year as starter; Rypien replaces him and the team finishes 10-6 but misses the playoffs. Yes, it's a new era and the salary cap and free agency forces players into the lineup more quickly than in the Gibbs I era. Nevertheless, Gibbs' system requires poise, maturity and good decision making to be run successfully. Note that Saunders' history likewise tends to have older (Warner) if not more experienced (Green) QB's running his system. Even to the extent that Warner is an exception to the statements above (he went into the '99 Rams with virtually zero NFL experience), he's probably the exception that demonstrates the rule as we'd all agree that his career path is about as atypical as it gets, and he was still 28 years old when he got that chance. If we can't keep Brunell healthy, I would suggest that our chances of making the playoffs out of this division will be almost nil. That's not a shot against Campbell, who I still reserve judgment on (because I must - we've not seen him play), but it's just realistic. Comments? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 Well, didn't Schroeder lead us to the playoffs in 1986 with less than 20 starts under his belt? Other than my nitpick, I totally agree that we need Brunell if we're going to be a serious contender this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted May 18, 2006 Author Share Posted May 18, 2006 Well, didn't Schroeder lead us to the playoffs in 1986 with less than 20 starts under his belt? Other than my nitpick, I totally agree that we need Brunell if we're going to be a serious contender this year. True. Admittedly, I gave the second proposition less thought than the first. I'll have to change that number to the number of starts that Schroeder had going into the '86 season, which was, I believe, 7. Still, that's half a season's worth of starts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 True. Admittedly, I gave the second proposition less thought than the first. I'll have to change that number to the number of starts that Schroeder had going into the '86 season, which was, I believe, 7. Still, that's half a season's worth of starts. No I know...and the point is still well-taken... I was just being a brat and trying to show off a little. I 100% agree that we need Brunell to lead us this season or it isn't happening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Jones Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 If the skins can win some games and get home field advantage in the playoffs and Brunell is healthy going into the playoffs I think the team is set. Brunell will obviously start the season. If Campbell has to come in for a few games while Brunell gets healthy, as long as the team wins, I don't think it will matter. Brunell just needs to stay relatively healthy through the season and be healthy in the playoffs. We do not need to go into the playoffs with an inexperienced Campbell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lead commander Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 no doubt about it,with all the weapons we have..it comes down to how brunell plays period...if he plays at a high level,nfl watchout!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CPstretch Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 if we see campbell play this year and brunell is NOT hurt, then that will be a bad thing for the redskins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fdarugar Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 Every team is different, imo. Especially in a new era of the league. We won't know anything about Campbell...for all we know he could be a complete bust or a huge star. He could take us to the toilet or the SB. You really can't measure what would happen if Mark goes down from the past. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
celder Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 Ben Roethlesberger has found a lot of success 2 years into the league because of all of the weapons around him. Who's to say Campbell can't equal his success? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonnyJ Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 While not refuting your overall point, I will point out in '85 that Theismann was 5-5 as the QB, while Schroeder was 5-1. Would seem that a little inexperience worked out better there . Also, I'm pretty sure Rypien was the starter going into '89. I remember him throwing some bombs against the Giants and Eagles in losing efforts (that Eagle game is STILL one of the most frustrating games I've ever experienced). Seems that Williams filled in for a few games for whatever reason, but Rypien saw the bulk of the action. Nitpicking, I know . Still, I agree with the gist - in my mind right now, the team has greater potential with a competent vet like Brunell rather than a talented youngster. I'm anxious to see what Campbell has, but I still feel that Brunell is a better pick to lead a successful season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbuzz1962 Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 This has been the point every analyst has made. The Redskins have made all the right moves in the off season. The only question mark remains at the quarterback position. Brunell is the key this season, and if he does not have his best year, things could get ugly quick. Jason Campbell may not be ready to take over a offense as complicated as Saunders, and the only other quarterback we can count on, is well, mediocore at best. I feel Brunell knows this, and he will work harder than ever to get into the best shape he can. He is our best chance at sucess this season unless Campbell surprises us, and can takeover this team in case of injury. There is a lot of pressure on Brunell, and he knows it. He is a veteran, and I wouldn't want a rookie or second year quarterback in their, taking chances that could kill us with turnovers. I feel Brunell barring injury will have his best season ever, and take this team to Superbowl 41, and win. Yes, win. I said it here, at Extremeskins first, but I honestly feel the dynamics are in place. HTTR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DWinzit Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 The key to this season is really the whole team staying healthy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted May 18, 2006 Author Share Posted May 18, 2006 The key to this season is really the whole team staying healthy. Obviously we want as many players to remain healthy as possible, but I'd also suggest strongly that there's no single injury that would have more devastating effects than an injury to Brunell. That includes injuries to Portis, Moss, Taylor, Washington, Springs, Griffin, Samuels, or any other key person you'd like to identify. Brunell touches the ball on every offensive play. He's got to stay healthy for us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Rook Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 Yes - Joe Gibbs likes smart, experienced QB's (minimal turnovers etc.) and has his best success with them. He is also fiercely loyal to them - just look at the 2004 season and remember how poor Joey T. was playing the year LT broke his leg. It will be up to the coaching staff to overcome whatever injuries or poor play happens. I think our chances will be better with a healthy, productive Brunell but we should still expect professional, competative football regardless. :helmet: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smalex41 Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 Your thoughts and opinions seem to be based on statistics that "reek" of negativity and despair. I recall a player who overcame all the "odds" you've cited. Ben Rothlisberger ! Where there is a "WILL THERES ALWAYS A WAY" !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
talk show host Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 Not to show disrespect to someone with 13,000 posts, but don't we have enough Brunell threads in this forum? They're popping up like weeds again. Last week it was "hey everyone, look at me. i have 1000 posts." This week, its "let me share my thoughts on mark Brunell. I think all the tens of thousands of extremeskins members should start a thread about their own thoughts on mark brunell." That being said, you make some good points. A healthy productive QB is the key to ANY teams season. PS - thanks for atleast naming this a Brunell thread, instead of titling it "an interesting idea." or some other crap like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3sbs3diffqbs Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 Your thoughts and opinions seem to be based on statistics that "reek" of negativity and despair.I recall a player who overcame all the "odds" you've cited. Ben Rothlisberger ! Where there is a "WILL THERES ALWAYS A WAY" !!! Ben Roethlisberger never played for Joe Gibbs. The original post was clearly pertaining to QB's under Gibbs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan81 Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 I certainly hope whatever happens at QB it allows Washington to win. Theres the whole they only win when a Republican is in office thing too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skins11 Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 By the way, we would probably be screwed if Brunell were to go down... but just think for a second about our other NFC East rivals. Who is behind Eli Manning and Drew Bledsoe? We know who is behind McNabb - both guys played in our last game :laugh: Those teams would probably be more screwed than we would be. Still, it is disturbing to think of Brunell returning to 2004 form. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbo Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 I realize I'm inviting a lynching here, but along with being secure with Campbell until I have evidence not to be, I don't assume Collins would be totally uselss in substitution, either. If he had knowns this system enough, might he not be able to game-manage this team for a few times if need be? Just a factor to consider IMO, and not just automatically dismiss. And when you respond, keep in mind I know at least as much of the really obvious stuff to say as you do. :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted May 19, 2006 Author Share Posted May 19, 2006 I realize I'm inviting a lynching here, but along with being secure with Campbell until I have evidence not to be, I don't assume Collins would be totally uselss in substitution, either. If he had knowns this system enough, might he not be able to game-manage this team for a few times if need be? Just a factor to consider IMO, and not just automatically dismiss. And when you respond, keep in mind I know at least as much of the really obvious stuff to say as you do. :laugh: I don't think you can assume a young QB will be good when in doubt. Most fail. Campbell is not a great amount of security for us unless and until he proves it on the field. As for Collins, guys like him tend to perform well only in small doses, e.g. come in in relief in one game, start the next game, and then return to the bench. Usually the flaws in their game are so great that the defenses have planned for him by the third game or so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NavyDave Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 I certainly hope whatever happens at QB it allows Washington to win. Theres the whole they only win when a Republican is in office thing too. True so I'm hoping for a 3peat 2 with dubba ya and one with............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.