Dr. Z Speaks

[TC]

Link

Here's what he had to say about the Skins. He's helping Brunell haters like myself continue to build my case:

Washington Redskins (1-2)

This is how close Mark Brunell came to missing out on that record of 22 straight completions. One incomplete was wiped because Houston DT Thomas Johnson was called for roughing the passer. Another was canceled because the Skins' RT Jon Jansen was called for holding. So after the game did Brunell say, "Hey, great hold, Jon. Great roughing, Thomas." I'll bet he didn't.

[terpfan]

I don't get it....

[cphil006]

Link

Here's what he had to say about the Skins. He's helping Brunell haters like myself continue to build my case:

Washington Redskins (1-2)

This is how close Mark Brunell came to missing out on that record of 22 straight completions. One incomplete was wiped because Houston DT Thomas Johnson was called for roughing the passer. Another was canceled because the Skins' RT Jon Jansen was called for holding. So after the game did Brunell say, "Hey, great hold, Jon. Great roughing, Thomas." I'll bet he didn't.

Does it include how many would-be COMPLETIONS were wiped out because of penelties on us or texans? I bet it doesn't.

[Kurd Cudins]

you definetely DON'T have a future in law if this is the kind of evidence you use to bolster your arguements. what exactly is the point of your post? So, instead he wouldn't have gotten the record and merely gone 24-29 instead of 24-27. That's terrible, you are right. Without the record, it was a bad day for Brunell. :doh:

[Sebowski]

...and I'm sure when Rich Gannon set the record there were no penalties at all :doh:

Brunell should definetly thank David Patten though.

[illone]

Yea, what about the tipped pass that Randle El caught for 25+ yards that was called back?

[budski]

Even with all the TO stuff I knew another Brunell thread would surface.

[#1njskinsfan]

what did the skins do that SI hates them? SOOOOOOOOOO MUCH??????

[Stuckinphilly1]

Does it include how many would-be COMPLETIONS were wiped out because of penelties on us or texans? I bet it doesn't.

It doesn't include "would-be completions"....the plays in which the penalties were called do not count, therefore no pass attempt was recorded, no incompletion was recorded and the streak stays alive.

I don't get the point of this thread either??? And WHY are we continuing with the Brunell bashing. We all know that Gibbs is NOT going to pull the plug on him, if we want the team to win don't you think it would be a good idea to get behind the QB so that he's not questioned about his job security during every interview/press conference he does??? God knows constantly being asked about it really has to be helping his confidence right now:doh:

[Skins n' Bones]

So what if plays were called back due to penalties? That happens in EVERY GAME. And correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe Brunell was playing to WIN THE GAME, not break a record.....jeez.....

Dr. Z zucks!

[TC]

Wow...I don't see what's hard to get about this post. Guess I'll have to break it down for you unwavering Brunell lovers:

All week long on here, everyone has used the excuse that, "Brunell set a freakin' record for God's sakes! How could you ever even think to pull him?" The other response was, "I'll take the dink and dunk all day....I mean, he set a record for most straight completions!".

Those of us against Brunell on here saw right through his performance, and all I was saying is that what Z presented helps to further validate our opinions. Without the "streak", all Brunell had was a fairly decent game that totally consisted of b.s. screens and check downs. You could expect the same performance out of most any QB in the NFL given the same game plan, but the "streak" was what made it so special. I mean, there's a reason nobody even knew it was happening until it did...it simply wasn't all that impressive. If he had gone 24-27 without the streak then yes, I think it would be a whole different argument.

[Zguy28]

Who is this Z guy anyways and how did he get my name? Idiot. :mad:

Yours,

Z

[SittingBull]

You really gotta take a long hard look at your opinion when you're agreeing with Dr. Z, Peter King, and Steve Czaban.

[Skins n' Bones]

Wow...I don't see what's hard to get about this post. Guess I'll have to break it down for you unwavering Brunell lovers:

All week long on here, everyone has used the excuse that, "Brunell set a freakin' record for God's sakes! How could you ever even think to pull him?" The other response was, "I'll take the dink and dunk all day....I mean, he set a record for most straight completions!".

Those of us against Brunell on here saw right through his performance, and all I was saying is that what Z presented helps to further validate our opinions. Without the "streak", all Brunell had was a fairly decent game that totally consisted of b.s. screens and check downs. You could expect the same performance out of most any QB in the NFL given the same game plan, but the "streak" was what made it so special. I mean, there's a reason nobody even knew it was happening until it did...it simply wasn't all that impressive. If he had gone 24-27 without the streak then yes, I think it would be a whole different argument.

I think what made it special was a well executed win by the whole offense, not just Brunell, with the exception of too many penalties. The record was a bonus.

They had a game plan and executed it. I'd like to see them go downfield more often too, but if the dink and dunk is working, why change it? He got the ball in our playmakers' hands and they did put up 31 points.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

Wow...I don't see what's hard to get about this post. Guess I'll have to break it down for you unwavering Brunell lovers:

All week long on here, everyone has used the excuse that, "Brunell set a freakin' record for God's sakes! How could you ever even think to pull him?" The other response was, "I'll take the dink and dunk all day....I mean, he set a record for most straight completions!".

Those of us against Brunell on here saw right through his performance, and all I was saying is that what Z presented helps to further validate our opinions. Without the "streak", all Brunell had was a fairly decent game that totally consisted of b.s. screens and check downs. You could expect the same performance out of most any QB in the NFL given the same game plan, but the "streak" was what made it so special. I mean, there's a reason nobody even knew it was happening until it did...it simply wasn't all that impressive. If he had gone 24-27 without the streak then yes, I think it would be a whole different argument.

I love how accomplishments are severely diminished around here as being something "anyone" could do in the same circustances...and further diminished by arguments that the accomplishment wasn't pristine enough to warrant acknowledging...

For the record, everyone saying Brunell should remain the starter would have STILL been saying so even if he had not broken the record.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

I think what made it special was a well executed win by the whole offense' date=' not just Brunell, with the exception of too many penalties. The record was a bonus.

They had a game plan and executed it. I'd like to see them go downfield more often too, but if the dink and dunk is working, why change it? He got the ball in our playmakers' hands and they did put up 31 points.[/quote']

Not to mention 495 yards of offense...I'm not quite sure I understand the logic that says "They didn't get the 31 points and 495 yards the way I wanted them to get them, so I'm not impressed".

[Taylor 36]

Wow...I don't see what's hard to get about this post. Guess I'll have to break it down for you unwavering Brunell lovers:

All week long on here, everyone has used the excuse that, "Brunell set a freakin' record for God's sakes! How could you ever even think to pull him?" The other response was, "I'll take the dink and dunk all day....I mean, he set a record for most straight completions!".

Those of us against Brunell on here saw right through his performance, and all I was saying is that what Z presented helps to further validate our opinions. Without the "streak", all Brunell had was a fairly decent game that totally consisted of b.s. screens and check downs. You could expect the same performance out of most any QB in the NFL given the same game plan, but the "streak" was what made it so special. I mean, there's a reason nobody even knew it was happening until it did...it simply wasn't all that impressive. If he had gone 24-27 without the streak then yes, I think it would be a whole different argument.

At least you admit that you are against him, now if you'd only admit that is why you will never give the guy credit for anything. You sure pass the credit off to everyone else, despite the fact that NO one else on offense would get anything down without Brunnel in there to run and manage the offense and actually get the ball to all of the play makers that you give ALL of the credit to.

It is really sad that a grown man has so much hate and jealousy built up inside of him, but it makes it worse that you are against the starting QB for your supposedly favorite team.:doh:

[Taylor 36]

Not to mention 495 yards of offense...I'm not quite sure I understand the logic that says "They didn't get the 31 points and 495 yards the way I wanted them to get them, so I'm not impressed".

I hear you, brother. The point is that there is no logic in that statement. That is why you and I can't understand it.

[Redskins Diehard]

So what if plays were called back due to penalties? That happens in EVERY GAME. And correct me if I'm wrong' date=' but I believe Brunell was playing to WIN THE GAME, not break a record.....jeez.....

Dr. Z zucks![/quote']

There are a fair amount of people that point to this "record" as a sign that he is back.

Dr. Z's opinion does nothing to change my mind or outlook. We will need to be able to complete passes beyond the line of scrimmage this year. The performance against the worst defense in the league did not confirm that this is possible.

[Walking Deadman]

We won the game cripes!!!

Brunell had a good day, yay!

I don't get some of the posters here sometimes.....we win the game and Brunell finally plays decent in a game (cause he looked lackluster in the first 2 weeks) and yet:

"So he completed 22 passes in a row but they were dump passes and we played the horrible Texans"

So what. So ******* what!

We won the game, partially in thanks to 22 dump passes (not all were dump off, but you get the point) in a row.

And yes, we beat a poor Texans team. Hey, flashback early in the 1st Qtr.

They were beating us and we could have lost to this team....go back and read the game threads people were freaking out when we were down 7-0 early. Guess everybody has already forgotten

It seems like there are some people who would rather see Brunell play bad and us lose just to prove their points and say "See I told you so you Brunell lovers!!" than have us win.

Frankly the 22 for 22 IS a big deal, b/c he actually made his passes and the WR/TE/RB group caught the balls.

Look back at weeks 1 and 2 and the preseason. Either Mark couldn't hit the broad side of a barn or the guy he was throwing to dropped the ball.

There was execution there and that is key to Saunders O (and some guys like Patten in particular made great plays catching balls). We eliminate all the penalties and this O will be much better and we can go down field.

Everybody talks about "we can't throw downfield beacuse Brunell sucks". Well it takes 3 things to get downfield passes to work in general. QB has to get the ball to the WR, WR has to get open and catch the ball, O-line has to block for QB so 1&2 can happen. Clearly (per last year) we know Brunell can still throw.....the WR corp can get open and the O-line can block, however they weren't doing it at the same time. We start executing and balls will go downfield for big plays.

As for Dr. Zzzzzzzzzzzz, yeah he's a reliable source. Another one of the keep Art Monk out of the HOF but put Mike Irvin in b/c he's flashy posse of SI writers. Let's see what we do to the Jags. Hopefully Mark has another good day and we win.....although I know some here would be pretty miserable after having 2 wins in a row and not getting a chance to go after Gibbs or Brunell.

[TheLongshot]

Dr. Z's opinion does nothing to change my mind or outlook. We will need to be able to complete passes beyond the line of scrimmage this year. The performance against the worst defense in the league did not confirm that this is possible.

No, but one thing you can't argue is Brunell's execution, which was flawless. Sure, he didn't throw down the field like you wanted him do, but every pass he threw was on target.

When you have this many exposive guys on offense, you don't have to do much as a QB to get big plays from your offense. Just get it in the hands of your playmakers and have them make plays. Seems like a simple plan to me.

Jason

[Califan007 The Constipated]

There are a fair amount of people that point to this "record" as a sign that he is back.

To be honest, I have seen almost noone claim Brunell is "back" due to the record being broken...in fact, there have been fans from rival teams on this very site saying they were "glad" to see the Skins fans not making too much of Brunell's record.

[TC]

At least you admit that you are against him, now if you'd only admit that is why you will never give the guy credit for anything. You sure pass the credit off to everyone else, despite the fact that NO one else on offense would get anything down without Brunnel in there to run and manage the offense and actually get the ball to all of the play makers that you give ALL of the credit to.

It is really sad that a grown man has so much hate and jealousy built up inside of him, but it makes it worse that you are against the starting QB for your supposedly favorite team.:doh:

Look here, buddy. I have no hate or jealousy when it comes to Mark Brunell. I think Brunell is a very stand up guy and a good "team player". However, I do not want him to start at QB any longer for the Redskins. If you don't think any NFL caliber QB could have carried out that game plan with the same or at least very similar results, then I'm sorry. I do. I give credit where credit is due, and in his case I haven't been impressed enough with his play to give him any just yet.

QUOTE: REDSKINS NATION:

There are a fair amount of people that point to this "record" as a sign that he is back.

END QUOTE

This thread is meant to discredit those who think "he's back" because of this record.

[Walking Deadman]

This thread is meant to discredit those who think "he's back" because of this record.

I would like to hope "he's back" (if that mean's throwing deep passes).......but we haven't seen a 40+ yrd. bomb to anybody yet.

But what this game did was show that Brunell is accurate,can execute (along with the WR/TE/RB) and do what the coaches wanted in the gameplan.

That's a huge step.

[jnhay]

...and I'm sure when Rich Gannon set the record there were no penalties at all :doh:

Brunell should definetly thank David Patten though.

And the sad thing about that is, Dr. Z doesn't realize that his readers will probably think that within 10 seconds of reading it. Pretty dumb comment.