AP:Don't Expect Gibbs to Pull Brunell Anytime Soon

[Jumbo]

As a member, I just felt like saying--Diesel, good discussion stuff, brother :applause:. And PCS & bubba, you two guys are truly pillars of this site. :helmet: I’m not saying that based on your particular views pro or con on any topic, but more for your commitment, loyalty, knowledge, endurance, and always conducting yourselves with class.

[OverhypedSkins]

How bout we don't get a win against Houston and Brunell makes Houston's defense look like the Ravens. Then we get shutout at home against the Jaguars and its 0-4 for the Skins. And that my friends means the season is over......

Truth hurts lets face it

[Seabee1973]

How about practicing what you preach bubba??

Why is it that you never bring up the fact that after Theismann went down that very next season Schroeder led us to the NFC Championship game(losing to eventually SB champ: Giants)?

And how about quit spreading the falsehood that Joe Gibbs benched Schroeder in favor of Williams.

Schroeder was slammed into the turf late in the season and seperated his shoulder. Williams replaced Jay due to injury, not performance.

After the shoulder injury, Jay was never the same..thus Gibbs traded him away for Lachey.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jay_Schroeder

Actually

it was Poor play JS came back to start because he started the last regular game of the season at Minnesotta and Williams was inserted in the second half and we came back and won Williams started the playoff games also

[The Sisko]

Bubba the chart you posted with Shroeder and Theisman's numbers actually makes the point well that Gibbs tends to stick with veteran QBs a bit too long. We all know that Gibbs' numero uno rule is to take good care of the football...don't turn it over. That Shroeder had 5 TDs and 5 picks while Theisman had a 1:2 TD to INT ratio speaks volumes. Do you honestly believe that he would have stuck with Shroeder for 10+ games if he'd had a similar TD to INT ratio? (Please don't say yes)

Had he realized that Shroeder was better than Theisman in spite of his lack of experience he would have made the switch. Gibbs will make the move he thinks is best for the team but the problem is, his judgement is clouded in this area by a strong preference for experienced vets. I fear we're seeing Theisman and Shroeder played out all over again with Scott and J. Campbell.

[Seabee1973]

Oh Really??

So he was benched due to injury(if I remember correctly, his knees acting up) so it wasn't that hard of a decision for Joe to begin with. In all likelihood, had Doug's injury not occurred,Rypien wouldn't have seen the field then either.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doug_Williams_(football_player)

Actually it was his back he had had surgery or was gonna need surgery on it.

[RedskinsRoll05]

I pray that we don't go 3-6, but right now, I just can't see us beating anyone in our division with Brunell as the QB.

I see you finally came around and are agreeing with me now.

[Seabee1973]

I loved Jay Schroeder when I was younger. That guy was always good for a second half comeback. At least that's how I remember him. His 1986 season was fun to watch. Even though we didn't get to a SB that year, it's one of my favorite Redskins seasons.

At one time I was sure if he had stayed a redskin he would have the record for most last minute victories.

[RedskinsRoll05]

Also at the time Theisman went down, not many people where thrilled that Scheorder was going to take over for the season, in fact many thought we'd be lucky to win a game the rest of the year.

again... those pesky details and facts

Yeah, people like you:laugh:

[Seabee1973]

How bout we don't get a win against Houston and Brunell makes Houston's defense look like the Ravens. Then we get shutout at home against the Jaguars and its 0-4 for the Skins. And that my friends means the season is over......

Truth hurts lets face it

Season is not over till we are eliminated from the playoff race

[evangel_nc]

I remember 85 very well, Scheorder had a bigger arm, that doesn't mean he played that much better ... that is merely your opinion, hardly a "fact"

I remember 85 too, and I have a hard time believing anyone who watched those games would believe Theisman shouldn't have been pulled sooner. Hindsight is supposed to be 20/20

In my "opinion", 5 interceptions over 9 games vs. 16 ints over 11 games is a significant difference. A huge difference. In and of itself, this should = more wins. Do you disagree?

In my "opinion", a 5-1 record with one QB is significantly better than a 5-5 record with another. Do you disagree? (You can credit JT with that night's win if you want, but the fact is Shroeder was leading the team to a come from behind victory while JT was on his way to the hospital.)

In my "opinion", a QB who went 5-1 probably would have done better than 5-5 if he played in 10 more games. (We finished 10-6 that year, tied with NY & DAL, and missed the playoffs on tiebreakers. Sticking with JT so long probably cost us the divison crown and playoffs. This really is an opinion, but hardly unreasonable given the facts)

I was a huge fan of Theisman, and hated to see his play deteriorate. But it did, and Gibbs refused to bench him. To the detriment of the team that year. Gibbs was loyal to a fault, and treated JT differently than any other player he ever coached. Until Brunell, that is.

For probably 95% of anyone old enough to remember, the "Did Gibb's Stick with Theisman Too Long" question is such a no-brainer it's hardly worth discussing, were it not for the painful sense of Deja vu that's occurring now.

Since we've seen it before (some of us twice), it's almost too easy to predict how this will play out:

1) MBs poor play will continue, and the passing game will continue to stink.

2) Baring injury, MB will be kept in despite his poor play.

3) When/if a switch is made, the QB play will improve, and the wins will increase, but it will be too little, too late to make the playoffs.

I hope I'm wrong. I really do. But it's hard to imagine MB suddenly playing like he did the middle of last year, when we haven't seen decent play from him since that time, and he looks like he did in 04. And it's hard to see Gibbs making the switch soon, unless maybe Saunders can convince him his offense simply won't work otherwise. Looking at recent and not so recent history, I'm resigned to hoping the third time is the charm...

[bubba9497]

Bubba the chart you posted with Shroeder and Theisman's numbers actually makes the point well that Gibbs tends to stick with veteran QBs a bit too long. We all know that Gibbs' numero uno rule is to take good care of the football...don't turn it over. That Shroeder had 5 TDs and 5 picks while Theisman had a 1:2 TD to INT ratio speaks volumes. Do you honestly believe that he would have stuck with Shroeder for 10+ games if he'd had a similar TD to INT ratio? (Please don't say yes)

Had he realized that Shroeder was better than Theisman in spite of his lack of experience he would have made the switch. Gibbs will make the move he thinks is best for the team but the problem is, his judgement is clouded in this area by a strong preference for experienced vets. I fear we're seeing Theisman and Shroeder played out all over again with Scott and J. Campbell.

my quote was

because JS stats weren't that different than JT's after he took over except the INT's

[bubba9497]

I remember 85 too, and I have a hard time believing anyone who watched those games would believe Theisman shouldn't have been pulled sooner. Hindsight is supposed to be 20/20 .

I respond in more detail tomorrow

just the main point is we know how JS did now.... no one had a clue how JS would do at that time

and if JS had stunk, no one would questioned Gibbs at all

[dent19]

lets just hope he pulls a groin muscle.....

[GoSkins28]

Regardless of the past, let's look at what's happening right now. The coaches want to sell everyone on the fact that the whole offense is not playing well. But, what I saw Sunday night was a quarterback who looked way too jumpy and who pulled the trigger too quick on quite a few plays when he had more time. I would expect that from a younger quarterback, but not from the seasoned veteran. My vote goes for seeing what Brunell does with Clinton Portis back in the offense. If by the bye week, things continue to look the way they do, the team will be out of the hunt in it's division and conference, and why not go with a change and let the young guy get his start? The Giants committed to Eli, and it's paid huge dividends. Regardless of the past, Gibbs should have Brunell on a short leash. He has only one excuse left, and Sunday Portis will play. So, no more excuses..... it's time to get the job done!

[jimster]

Regardless of the past, Gibbs should have Brunell on a short leash. He has only one excuse left, and Sunday Portis will play. So, no more excuses..... it's time to get the job done!

I agree completely.

I'd like to see this game, and every game treated as an audition for Mark to play another week.

[DieselPwr44]

no one had a clue how JS would do at that time

But But...the coaches see him in practice every day... and and they have film to look at that us fans aren't privy to.............

[christopher44]

Hey , Marks a super smart guy.One of our core guys,hes a redskin for sure.The only way Brunell sits the bench is if he pulls himself out or he gets hurt.

[P007]

if you want to be technical Theisman was credited as the winning QB, and they where still in the hunt for playoffs (we were 5-6 and made it last season ) JS did not offically take over as the starter until the 12th game

lets take a CLOSER look at the stats ALL of them I already admitted JT INT were worse (also the reason his QB rating was a lttle lower) but look at the Completion %... I said the where simular I believe???

I remember 85 very well, Scheorder had a bigger arm, that doesn't mean he played that much better ... that is merely your opinion, hardly a "fact"

And ?????? and how is that relivant to the fact he will bench a player if need be a Veteran has earned a little more rope and again I pointed out clearly it was a veteran team still in the hunt... you are going bto yank the veteran for the youngster who is unproven.... what if he fails.. than you are stuck

Lets see Willaims won the super bowl in 87, and he benched Williams in 88 to start Rypien.... yep that is a LONG time And he also tried Stan Humproes in 89 because Rypien was struggling, he wasn't the full time starter until 1990..... So it seems he was willing to bench a QB who was getting it done, and try one he thought might several times..... exactly what you and this article say he is unwilling to do... imagine that... those darn pesky facts

Yes the are VERY relivant because the main reason everyone is claimimg Gibbs won't Bench Brunell is because of some bound between them, but brother he had a bigger bond between him and The three players mentioned than he ever had with Brunell so far... those guys helped him build a championship team, and win Super Bowls.... but he didn't let loyality stop him from sitting them when he felt it was in the best interest for the team

now those ARE THE FACTS

Don't let them get in the way, again, okay?

So how long does it take to get a little rope and actually become a veteran? You have to get playing experience sometime, he can't keep him on the bench forever. Campbell was drafted in the first round for a reason, and I don't think he sould be sitting on the bench for 3 years, because Coach wants to prove he can win with Brunell. You have to make a change sooner or later.

[scruffylookin]

if you want to be technical Theisman was credited as the winning QB, and they where still in the hunt for playoffs (we were 5-6 and made it last season ) JS did not offically take over as the starter until the 12th game

lets take a CLOSER look at the stats ALL of them I already admitted JT INT were worse (also the reason his QB rating was a lttle lower) but look at the Completion %... I said the where simular I believe???

I remember 85 very well, Scheorder had a bigger arm, that doesn't mean he played that much better ... that is merely your opinion, hardly a "fact"

And ?????? and how is that relivant to the fact he will bench a player if need be a Veteran has earned a little more rope and again I pointed out clearly it was a veteran team still in the hunt... you are going bto yank the veteran for the youngster who is unproven.... what if he fails.. than you are stuck

Lets see Willaims won the super bowl in 87, and he benched Williams in 88 to start Rypien.... yep that is a LONG time And he also tried Stan Humproes in 89 because Rypien was struggling, he wasn't the full time starter until 1990..... So it seems he was willing to bench a QB who was getting it done, and try one he thought might several times..... exactly what you and this article say he is unwilling to do... imagine that... those darn pesky facts

Yes the are VERY relivant because the main reason everyone is claimimg Gibbs won't Bench Brunell is because of some bound between them, but brother he had a bigger bond between him and The three players mentioned than he ever had with Brunell so far... those guys helped him build a championship team, and win Super Bowls.... but he didn't let loyality stop him from sitting them when he felt it was in the best interest for the team

now those ARE THE FACTS

Don't let them get in the way, again, okay?

Oh Bubba, you just don't like to admit it when you're wrong do you?

Theismann was hurt in the 2nd quarter. The game was tied at the time. How exactly does Theismann get the "credit" for beating the Giants that night. Not to be crude, but I guess he deserves credit for getting hurt and allowing Schroeder to come in and jump start the offense and help us actually pull out a key win.

Now you take a closer look at the stats.

Theismann 1985: 10.5 games

at Dallas 35 15 206 1 5

v. Houston 22 15 138 1 1

v. Philly 34 15 124 0 1

at Chicago 39 21 209 0 2

v. St. Louis 20 11 83 2 0

v. Detroit 25 18 153 0 0

at Giants 38 22 272 0 3

at Cleveland 23 16 166 1 1

at Atlanta 24 13 178 1 0

v. Dallas 31 14 195 1 3

v. Giants 10 7 50 1 0

Season 301 167 1774 8 16 59.6 QB rating

Awful QB rating and averaged 169 yards per game.

Jay Schroeder 5.5 games

v. Giants 21 13 221 1 0

at Pittsburgh 28 15 176 1 0

v. 49ers 58 30 348 0 2

at Philly 29 16 175 1 1

v. Cincinnati 35 18 273 1 1

at St. Louis 31 16 214 1 0

Season 209 112 1458 5 5 73.8 QB rating.

Average (for that time) QB rating and averaged 265 yards per game.

Yeah Bubba, real close.

Also, I don't need to remember 1985 like you do. I can pop in the games and watch them for myself if I like. So I'll go on what I've seen when transferring these games to DVD in this last year over your "memory" of 1985 okay?

Also nevermind the fact that by playing in 1985, Schroeder gained valuable experience that allowed him to play a key part in us winning 12 games in 1986. I'm sure if Gibbs had been allowed to keep Theismann as the QB like he wanted, he would have been able to do the same thing in 86 right?

As for your veteran player point. Theismann was failing. As Schroeder proved, he was ready to play and the team improved as soon as he got in there. This happened again in 1988 and yet again in 2004. You are right that IF the young guy falls flat on his face, then you're up a creek but given Gibbs' history of sticking with a vet too long, calling into question his insistance on keeping Brunell in right now is legit.

Now onto 1988. Once again you get your facts wrong. Williams was never benched by Gibbs at first. Rypien got his shot thanks to Williams appendectomy. Gibbs did play musical chairs at QB for the rest of that season, never mind the fact that Rypien was the better QB. Gibbs was going to go into trainingcamp in 1989 with Williams as his starter, once again fate intervened and Williams got that back injury in the offseason that allowed Rypien to take the job. Still, as soon as Williams was healthy, Gibbs reinserted him into the lineup and the offense fell apart. To Gibbs' credit, he did pull Williams once and for all after those two games but the fact that he went back to him at all speaks to how loyal (stubborn) he is about veteran QBs.

Once again regarding other veteran players. Gibbs has shown that he treats his QB differently than any other position player. Yes he finally pulled the plug on Riggins, but the fact that he wasn't willing to pull the plug on Theismann is far more relevant to the Brunell discussion than his pulling of Riggins for Rogers. Also, as for Monk, I'm not sure what you're talking about reducing Monk's role. Monk struggled in the second half of 1992 but still started 14 games for Gibbs. It was Richie Petitbon who finally pulled the plug on Monk and made him the 3rd receiver in 1993.

So in conclusion, I suggest you talk to Tarhog and ask him who was kind enough to lend his collection to this site so ES can fill out their Redskin game library. Then if you like, see if he'll allow you to actually WATCH the 1985 season once again and then get back to me on the whole Theismann/Schroeder thing okay?

[TheGreek1973]

Honestly Bubba. When you say you didn't see a difference in the ENTIRE 85 team after Jay started playing then you weren't watching the Redskins that year pal. And you know what worked great that year with Jay at the helm? The running game. Thats right because all of a sudden we had a QB back there tha can actually get the ball down field. Brunell sucks. He sucked BIG in 04 (you want to defend Gibbs and his decision to stick with him that year?), he sucked big in the last 5 games of last year (go ahead and defend 48 yard passing against Tampa) and he sucks so far this year.

[scruffylookin]

But But...the coaches see him in practice every day... and and they have film to look at that us fans aren't privy to.............

Bingo.

Gibbs saw Schroederr in practice and I guess thought he wasn't good enough to replace Theismann. Yet when fate intervened, Schroerder did show that he was more than good enough and ready to play.

Just like 1988.

Just like 2004.

Well done DieselPwr44.

:applause:

[artnjudy]

:cheers:

Bingo.

Gibbs saw Schroederr in practice and I guess thought he wasn't good enough to replace Theismann. Yet when fate intervened, Schroerder did show that he was more than good enough and ready to play.

Just like 1988.

Just like 2004.

Well done DieselPwr44.

:applause:

Agree and how can I get the No Brunnel icon in your signature file?