d0ublestr0ker0ll Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 Ok so Brunell actually does look pretty rusty. And let's hope a car with that many miles on it can still get warmed up. Let's remember, he's a good one! Besides that, what can a QB do, when the system he plays in is supposed to focus on HUGE running games? I mean has everybody forgotten the hype surrounding how many yards CP was going to get? Yeah so CP is hurt, why does Ladell look like he should still be playing in High School? Why can he only gain more than 10 yards on a swing-out pass play? The reason this should be focused on WAY more than Brunell's play is because teams have no fear of our running attack. Their DB's trust the Linebackers and OL to clean up our shotty 2 yard efforts. If this is going to be the case, ole' man Brunell won't have a prayer. We haven't kept defenses guessing and it's because we have no running back. If you think Brunell is terrible, wait till J.C. puts it in to the arms of the other team 3 times a game. Especially against the DB's of the two teams we just played. :doh: :doh: Run before pass. Brunell needs to sharpen up. Betts needs Wheaties. Hail. :logo: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmorina69 Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 Agreed man, it is not brunells falt, the 700 new play have somthing to do with it but i think are O line is a biger problem, brunell allways has people in his face, u cant make good pass if have a 300 pound man runnin at you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zallera Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 I agree, I've been very unimpressed with Betts. It looks like he's scared of contact so he doesn't pick a hole and hit it with any authority. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hkHog Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 Just put Duckett in! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SC3 Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 Yeah, Sellers and Duckett FTW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinzFanatic Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 Im all for Duckett but for the love of football he needs to learn how to block Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d0ublestr0ker0ll Posted September 19, 2006 Author Share Posted September 19, 2006 Duckett looked like a 950 lb OX out there. Are you kidding me? Duckett this Duckett that. All they did to stop him was jump 4 bodies on his slow butt. I want to keep Duckett. I think he's a great Red Zone back. But he cannot run an offense. Especially one that focuses on making the running back the focal point. Too slow, not enough agility. Saunders utilized Marshall Faulk and Priest Holmes. Quick, athletic, slippery backs. Duckett is good for us, but he definitley is not a premier explosive back . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willmb5 Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 Im all for Duckett but for the love of football he needs to learn how to block yea i noticed that in this week's game too. he's a big boy but was struggling against the blitz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sugarbear326 Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 Your first statement was ok, Brunell is a little rusty. How much does that play into him not hitting receivers or RB's. I think JC can be that rusty and move around the pocket and escape the pass rush if it's the O'Line. I just think Brunell has lost his mobility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoCalMike Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 Yeah but it' not exactly like Julius Jones did anything good against the Redskins, I think he had 1 or 2 runs against us of 10 yards, and the rest of the time he was stuffed. The difference is, Bledsoe made most of the throws he had to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d0ublestr0ker0ll Posted September 19, 2006 Author Share Posted September 19, 2006 Your first statement was ok, Brunell is a little rusty. How much does that play into him not hitting receivers or RB's. I think JC can be that rusty and move around the pocket and escape the pass rush if it's the O'Line. I just think Brunell has lost his mobility. This is a quick, efficiency offense. And it's livelihood comes from a running game that is supposed to tire out and ravage defenses. There isn't supposed to be any running away from a consistant pass rush if you're the QB. Brunell is quite rusty, but I think it has to do with the stress-load that's being burdened upon him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d0ublestr0ker0ll Posted September 19, 2006 Author Share Posted September 19, 2006 Yeah but it' not exactly like Julius Jones did anything good against the Redskins, I think he had 1 or 2 runs against us of 10 yards, and the rest of the time he was stuffed. The difference is, Bledsoe made most of the throws he had to. Julius Jones had 94 yard rushing. And our pass rush is the worst in the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
christopher44 Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 A good qb find ways to win ,not excuses on why he loses.Just ask Tom Brady. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbo Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 It's not a thread!!!! It's a revelation!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbo Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 I made an unmajestic post. Pulled a hammy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsWizCubsDukes Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 Duckett looked like a 950 lb OX out there. Are you kidding me? Duckett this Duckett that. All they did to stop him was jump 4 bodies on his slow butt.I want to keep Duckett. I think he's a great Red Zone back. But he cannot run an offense. Especially one that focuses on making the running back the focal point. Too slow, not enough agility. Saunders utilized Marshall Faulk and Priest Holmes. Quick, athletic, slippery backs. Duckett is good for us, but he definitley is not a premier explosive back . Duckett had 5 carries for 24 yards...4.8 yards per carry...PUT HIM IN THE GAME IDIOT!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d0ublestr0ker0ll Posted September 19, 2006 Author Share Posted September 19, 2006 Duckett had 5 carries for 24 yards...4.8 yards per carry...PUT HIM IN THE GAME IDIOT!!!! Ok then YEAH. PUT HIM IN THE GAME. Running the ball well is the only way we'll be able to have a chance at a mythotical offense.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsWizCubsDukes Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 Brunell just sucks...he's a great backup Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darrell1106 Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 I'm looking at the game now and our tight ends are getting beat every time and the run support is pulling Betts down from behind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d0ublestr0ker0ll Posted September 19, 2006 Author Share Posted September 19, 2006 Brunell just sucks...he's a great backup How exactly does a "sucky quarterback" make a "great backup?" If the person were to suck, he would suck at the position no matter how he got in the game. How easily people forget our unsung hero of last season, #8. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammond72 Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 Last year, Gibbs kept a tight end or a running back into block. This year, Saunder's system is send out 3 receivers and two backs. Leaves only the 5 o-linemen to block. It's like watching Steve Superior's system and see how many hits the QB can take. At KC, Saunders had an outstanding line. This one is a little above average. Brunnel is not mobil enough. Change the blocking scheme to get more protection or change the quarterback. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darrell1106 Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 Last year, Gibbs kept a tight end or a running back into block. This year, Saunder's system is send out 3 receivers and two backs. Leaves only the 5 o-linemen to block. It's like watching Steve Superior's system and see how many hits the QB can take. At KC, Saunders had an outstanding line. This one is a little above average. Brunnel is not mobil enough. Change the blocking scheme to get more protection or change the quarterback. I think that's the understatement of the year. We have one of the most over rated o-lines in the NFL. I agree that 5 lineman will not do for MB. It was definitely evident against that 3-4. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheNewU Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 when a QB has no running game, thats when they put up the huge stats and lose, brunell just loses Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mangan Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 This thread is pathetic....I'm so sick and tired of all this negative s#!t.......lets get our key player back (portis), establish some type of running game and see how the team does...............................pathetic.......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbo Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 Right now our running game has two things going against it. 1. The other team will continue to stack the box until Brunell proves he can beat them, especially deep. 2. It's a new offense with new running plays. That means new blocking schemes. Since we didn't work on these new running plays nearly enough in preseason, it's going to take our O-Line a few games to totally get used to them. Fortunately, our O-Line has not had any turnover so that should make the running game transition a little quicker for them and Portis than it will for Brunell and his new receivers in the passing game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.