tonyriggins Posted August 16, 2006 Share Posted August 16, 2006 It's terrible! Bill Cowher average 10 wins with the Steelers his first 11 years before Ben got there. Thats as good as most anybody. I said and alot of you did too that all they need was an QB. Well it was something that coach Cowher refused to address for along time, the position didnt seem that important to him. We know what happen they got a good quarterback! Are we the Pittsburg Steelers? It just kills me to see the talent we got and yet no one to pass the ball! I dont even know who the best qb of this team is but I have seen too much of Brunell. I am tired of coach Gibbs protecting him, and the fans making excuses for him. Brunell is not injured he is just that bad! He did not out perform Ramsey in 2004 or 2005. While Mark did have a good QB rating in the mid 80s, he was inconsistant! I know I have said this before 1/3 of his games he played last year he was bad as in 2004 bad! But that is not counting the games that he played bad in and yet had a good rating like most of the Dallas game or the Seattle playoff game. I am saying that 86 rating seems a bit misleading. I dont have time for Collins or Campbell the gamble, will check back later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turbodiesel#44 Posted August 16, 2006 Share Posted August 16, 2006 You must have Tivo'ed the 2004 season and watched it again by mistake in 2005. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RunPortisRun Posted August 16, 2006 Share Posted August 16, 2006 I agree I'm tired of Brunell. We are the Steelers pre Big Ben. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
909997 Posted August 16, 2006 Share Posted August 16, 2006 You must have Tivo'ed the 2004 season and watched it again by mistake in 2005. amen:doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AllAboutSkins08 Posted August 16, 2006 Share Posted August 16, 2006 well brunell had enough talent to help us win 11 games with basically only two options (three if you include portis) to pass the ball to. why not trust a guy that led you to the playoffs? i mean, i don't know what you want the team to do. should we have gone for some high priced QB this offseason? should we have gotten culpepper? drew brees? i mean, you seem to know what's wrong, but offer no other option that the team could have followed instead of keeping brunell as the starter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RunPortisRun Posted August 16, 2006 Share Posted August 16, 2006 well brunell had enough talent to help us win 11 games with basically only two options (three if you include portis) to pass the ball to. why not trust a guy that led you to the playoffs? i mean, i don't know what you want the team to do. should we have gone for some high priced QB this offseason? should we have gotten culpepper? drew brees? i mean, you seem to know what's wrong, but offer no other option that the team could have followed instead of keeping brunell as the starter. How did Brunell did lead the Redskins to the playoffs, was he really that good? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeakeJS Posted August 16, 2006 Share Posted August 16, 2006 Let me get this straight tonyriggins... Brunell is bad, and you don't have the time to wait on Collins or "Campbell the Gamble" as you call him. So exactly WTF is your solution? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terpfan Posted August 16, 2006 Share Posted August 16, 2006 Yeah because good QBs just grow on trees. Patience man, we drafted Campbell for a reaon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlwredskins Posted August 16, 2006 Share Posted August 16, 2006 Brunell is just an older guy...I love Brunell. Would I want him to be 5 years younger of course. But he is a smart QB, he did well last year and as long as the O-line protects him (like we did for Rypien) and he stays healthy he'll do just fine back there! Let's just hope Clinton will be OK and we can see what how far we can go with the new offensive weapons. A better back-up than Todd Collins would have made me happy, I wanted to keep Ramsey to back up Mark. So let's just protect Mark and hope he stays healthy and give him his due. Santana Moss didn't throw and catch those passes in Dallas himself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Santana Clause Posted August 16, 2006 Share Posted August 16, 2006 Jason should've been given a fair chance to compete in camp, all things considered last year. Brunell had a good year overall, especially lighting up the Bucs, Broncos, Cowboys etc. However, he fumbled A LOT, and almost all of his touchdowns came on dumpoffs to Mike Sellers or screens to Santana. It made his td/int ratio look great, when really he lasered in on receivers, never-ever worked the middle of the field and, especially for a veteran qb had usually terrible footwork. However, he did not have many weapons and Gibbs bunched up offense and often conservative approach did not always put him in the best position to succeed. With this collection of talent, I understand the desire to win it all now. I do think however that there are qbs in this league that have done more than Brunell (Kurt Warner or someone like that) that have had to compete with younger QBs. If Mark beat out Jason, fine, but the guy is a first-round pick in his second year who has been babied right up to the retarded Todd Collins hoop-la. All in all, Mark should be better with these weapons and probably gives us the best chance to win, though a competition should've been considered IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terpfan Posted August 16, 2006 Share Posted August 16, 2006 Jason should've been given a fair chance to compete in camp, all things considered last year. Brunell had a good year overall, especially lighting up the Bucs, Broncos, Cowboys etc. However, he fumbled A LOT, and almost all of his touchdowns came on dumpoffs to Mike Sellers or screens to Santana. It made his td/int ratio look great, when really he lasered in on receivers, never-ever worked the middle of the field and, especially for a veteran qb had usually terrible footwork. However, he did not have many weapons and Gibbs bunched up offense and often conservative approach did not always put him in the best position to succeed. With this collection of talent, I understand the desire to win it all now. I do think however that there are qbs in this league that have done more than Brunell (Kurt Warner or someone like that) that have had to compete with younger QBs. If Mark beat out Jason, fine, but the guy is a first-round pick in his second year who has been babied right up to the retarded Todd Collins hoop-la. All in all, Mark should be better with these weapons and probably gives us the best chance to win, though a competition should've been considered IMO. So what, you are accusing Gibbs of not giving Campbell a "fair shot"? I believe you are mistaken if you dont think every position is always a competition. But you have to be kidding me if you think Jason Campbell would have been ready to start for us last year, or even this year. A nice arm does not a NFL starting quarterback make. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MRMADD Posted August 16, 2006 Share Posted August 16, 2006 Sigh... Brunell doesn't have to be Peyton Manning to win the Superbowl. He just needs to be a steady, veteran leader who avoids mistakes and gets the ball into the hands of the many talented players around him. And I'm so sick of all this Ben Roethlisberger worship. The guy completed only 10 passes a game last year! TEN! Let's see: they ran the ball 35 times per game, averaged 4 yards per carry, and only completed 10 passes per game... and you want to credit Ben for their success. Get real. Just for comparison, Brunell completed 17 passes per game. He was far more important to the Skins than Ben was to the Steelers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TenandSix:Unacceptable Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 The QB situation to me is simple, really. This is Brunell's chance to take us somewhere. If he doesn't get the job done this year, he's done as our starter, period. However, he deserves the benifit of the doubt because he played well enough last year to get us to the playoffs. The proof is in the pudding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The 12th Commandment Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 I don't get why some people seem to have the desire for drama. There's none here. Brunell is our QB and there's not a lot that is going to change that except for injury. He's a competent journeyman and he's up to the task of leading this team as long as he gets the protection he needs. We have the O line to do that albeit again as long as we don't have any injuries. But that's always the gamble any team makes. Let's just hold on for the ride and hope that things go our way. That's really the only choice here. Gibbs knows what he's doing and he's recovered mid-season in the past with QB changes. Campbell is up to it too I think. I trust that with the talent surrounding the position, Gibbs could do it again if he had to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCalRedskinFan Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 ...While Mark did have a good QB rating in the mid 80s he was inconsistant! ... WOW Brunell was playing in the Mid 80's??? He's my age...that means when I was suiting up to go play some JV football a guy my age was in the NFL?? Will these wonders ever cease to happen?! WOW Give Brunell a brake and I think that Gibbs might actually know what he's doing. He is bringing Cambell along nicely. Granted I pray he moves up on the depth chart and I look forward to him starting...BUT MB will lead the SKins to Victory this year! H T T R Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Santana Clause Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 So what, you are accusing Gibbs of not giving Campbell a "fair shot"? I believe you are mistaken if you dont think every position is always a competition. But you have to be kidding me if you think Jason Campbell would have been ready to start for us last year, or even this year. A nice arm does not a NFL starting quarterback make. No, actually I said Jason should have been given a chance to compete in THIS YEAR'S CAMP. Of course he should've sat last year. But naming Brunell the starter before camp this year without giving him a chance to compete (a reverse Carson Palmer) was not the right thing to do I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[[ghost]] Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 You must have Tivo'ed the 2004 season and watched it again by mistake in 2005. :rotlmao: That should be said of ever chicken little here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JWB Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 No, actually I said Jason should have been given a chance to compete in THIS YEAR'S CAMP. Of course he should've sat last year. But naming Brunell the starter before camp this year without giving him a chance to compete (a reverse Carson Palmer) was not the right thing to do I think. It was completely the right thing. The last thing we need is a qb controversy, besides the fact that this is a completely new offense. Brunell the veteran is definitely able to pick up the offense alot faster than Cambell would be able to. Also, I am not quite sure what you're point is tonyriggins. Are you saying that when the steelers put in ben he was not a gamble? Your thoughts are very confusing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyriggins Posted August 17, 2006 Author Share Posted August 17, 2006 that they reach for him in the draft, but we're in such bad shape that it maybe time to take that gamble. Ethier him or Collins. I know that is not a good answer, but can it really be worst? Todd Collins player with the 2nd Oline and even before the game we knew we had problems with depth there. Yet Collins faced Cinny 1st Dline most of the half. He look bad, but at least he had some kind of an excuse. Was Brunell injuried again? Both of these guys had the same QB rating of 30 for the game, yeah Mark did just as bad or worst if u consider he had a much more talent line. http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/gamebook/NFL_20060813_WAS@CIN. I know that I am being harsh on Mark, I just want to be sure that people understand that he isnt clearly better than our other QBs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmorina69 Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 Yeah because good QBs just grow on trees. Patience man, we drafted Campbell for a reaon. Well put, Campbell is the future he will be playin by next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XxSpearheadxX Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 So what, you are accusing Gibbs of not giving Campbell a "fair shot"? I believe you are mistaken if you dont think every position is always a competition. But you have to be kidding me if you think Jason Campbell would have been ready to start for us last year, or even this year. A nice arm does not a NFL starting quarterback make. I agree about last year you could tell Campbell was hella raw, but I haven't seen enough of Campbell this preseason to say that with as much certainty as you. Remember none of us thought MB would beat out Ramsey for the Job in 05, but he did. If Campbell just gets better each game in the preseason, we could very well have a quarterback controversy if Brunell continues to have trouble making simple throws if he isn't completely set each time. BTW - its funny that only our fans and Cowboy fans bring up us "reaching" for Campbell in the draft anymore, scouts/experts all agree that Gibbs made a good decision - this just from their outside viewing of Campbell's development. Only half the analysts ever thought we reached for him in the first place - and that mostly because they thought we would never be a top 10 team the next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whatmeworry Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 Nice rant. Misguided but.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chaz13 Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 We don't need a pro bowl QB to win. We need a game manager that is smart( or super smart) and makes good decisions and a great play here and there. We have a great defense and a ton of weapons. We need someone to get the ball to our playmakers and let them do their thing. We are built to win now. Not go through the growing pains of a young QB. If we were coming off a 4-12 season w/ a bunch of young players and in rebuilding then I would be all for Campbell. I understand that he will need to go through the process eventually, but not this year w/ this team. Our potential is too great this year to be losing games from a young QB making mistakes. Let him continue to learn. If we get in a blowout situation this year then put in Campbell to get some action. Otherwise we need the best player right now and that is M. Brunell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
headhunter39 Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 i cant believe we signed joe gibbs when we could have had tonyriggins:doh: god we suck. we cant even make it to the ****ing playoffs. how do we keep brunell when he only throws for over 250 yrds in 4 or 5 games. that sucks. he sucks, and we are all gonna dieeeeeeeeeeeee. dont get me started on campbell. do the words "no arm" mean anything. come on:doh: tony agrees with me, he saw that auburn fluked its way into beating LSU, florida and Tennessee, and jason campbell had nothing to do with that. what damn morons we have running our team. we should have drafted roethlis burger. ya, luck doesnt exist at all for him. he is just that good. tony:stfu: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XxSpearheadxX Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 We don't need a pro bowl QB to win. Never hurts either though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.