Smurf85 Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Last I checked......JC was listed as a QB. So how is benching Mark for Jason to going to help us with: A.) stopping bumb RBs from gaining 170+ yards? B.) cover oppossing WR's all over the field? C.) pass rush the QB? It just makes me sick that people are still calling for Mark's head after this lose, becasue it was painfully obvious he's not he problem. It's aggravating to hear some of you fan's constantly rip Brunnell, I mean did you morons even watch the game? Or do you just run with what ever petty thought that appears in your feeble mind? Let me explain somthing to you.Its not about winning anymore this year.Its about getting him ready for next year.Simple as that if you want a chance next year get the kid in there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLU44 Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Mark Brunell throws the deep ball better than just about any Quarterback in the NFL. Unfortunately, for Mark and the rest of our fans we're paying a real "moron" 2 million dollars a year to call offensive plays not catered to our personnel. Does anybody remember this? "Gary Horton: (11:21 AM ET ) They are going to go to a 3 WR formation with one back which could be devastating. Moss will be the go-to guy, Randle El will be the slot guy and Lloyd the possession guy. I think their philosophy will be much like Indy. Force defenses into nickel and dime coverage, spread the field, and you have a great speed runner in Clinton Portis. This offense could be devastating if they gel. That is obviously easier said than done. Their moves have been very true to what they want to do. As a fan, you have a clear idea of their plan heading into '06". Bullsh**...........right? I say we go back to our roots and run Portis 35 times a game and if that's not enough we pound Duckett inside for another 15 times! Let's keep the Indiannapolis' Offense off the field, eat as much of the clock as possible and grind out a good old fashion Redskins win, the way we know how! The Colts cannot defend the run. The Redskins know it and we know it.....Unfortunately for us, there's only one idiot who doesn't know it and he's sitting up in the booth collecting $2 million a year to call the plays! That's what frightens me..........and why you'll probably see Portis run the ball only 12 times on Sunday! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thirtyfive2seven Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 i agree with the OP(original poster) the problems on offense are NOT Mark Brunell. Lots of QB's throw a bad pass they wish they had back. Hell, just take a look at Bledsoe. That guy throws to the other team more the he throws to TO if you ask TO. Mark is fine when the Redskins establish the run you will see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
staffva Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Last I checked......JC was listed as a QB. So how is benching Mark for Jason to going to help us with: A.) stopping bumb RBs from gaining 170+ yards? B.) cover oppossing WR's all over the field? C.) pass rush the QB? It just makes me sick that people are still calling for Mark's head after this lose, becasue it was painfully obvious he's not he problem. It's aggravating to hear some of you fan's constantly rip Brunnell, I mean did you morons even watch the game? Or do you just run with what ever petty thought that appears in your feeble mind? Did you watch the game? Brunnell had great pass protection yesterday. He is the one that sent the ball over the heads of the recievers or behind them. He is the one that thought the game was over with a minute left and threw the ball to the only person he see's MOSS with five defenders around him. He is the one that can't complete a pass beyond 15 yards, oh excuse me he hit one for 53. Mark had a good year last year but his better days are well behind him. Let's bring in what is called the future and get started on it. Why waiste another year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCS Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 I really wish that xtra E would find it's way out of there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gex Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 the only thing i know is that brunell sucks!!!!!!!!! and so does gibbs for keeping him in the game!!!!! go back to nascar gibbs!!! you must be having with drawels from not getting any fumes!!!!!!!!!!!!! you don't know football anymore!!!!!!!!!! you let us down!!!!! you failed!!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
staffva Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 It won't. But our options at Qb are limited, and JC's presence is not going to change things around. Granted, JC might be Peyton Manning in his first start........but can you honestly blmae Brunell for yesterdays lost, beside the INT in the 4th quarter of course. The defense sucked, there is no question about it, but if the offense could of stayed on the field for a while maybe the defense might have stood a small chance of slowing them down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeknows Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 the only thing i know is that brunell sucks!!!!!!!!! and so does gibbs for keeping him in the game!!!!! go back to nascar gibbs!!! you must be having with drawels from not getting any fumes!!!!!!!!!!!!! you don't know football anymore!!!!!!!!!! you let us down!!!!! you failed!!!!!!!!!! i must say that i really dont agree with....... uh oh.... you hear that? you better run i hear a mob gathering for a lynching!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
staffva Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 I agree with the subject of this thread. Campbell isn't the answer. 22 points should have been more than enough to put away the titans. Our defense is horrendous, Brunell can score 40 points, but our defense will allow 41. This pretty much sums it up: From Tuesday's Washington Post He completed just 5 of 16 passes in the final 30 minutes for 77 yards and an interception. He started the half with three straight incomplete passes and finished the game by failing to connect on his final six attempts. Enough said! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red dot in a sea of blue Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Well lets see quagmeyer........I'm at work......and I could care less about spell checking my comments so that homo's such as yourself could read them more fluently. So suck ass, or else i'm going to yo mamma's house!!!! When I read intelligent responses like this it really makes me understand the heart of your arrgument clearly.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbo Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Well lets see quagmeyer........I'm at work......and I could care less about spell checking my comments so that homo's such as yourself could read them more fluently. So suck ass, or else i'm going to yo mamma's house!!!! Now see there? I don't even really agree with all-out Brunell bashing and here I have to give you a rest for language and trashing rule #5. And Mark loses one of his increasingly rare supporters. Not cool. Remember, in battle, you do your fellows no service when the grenade you throw yourself on is the one you pulled the pin on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
staffva Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 no offense, stupid post. whats wrong with brunell please tell me something other than the fact that hes 36. hes still got a hell of a strong arm and great accuracy on most plays. Which Brunell have you been watching this year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.