daveakl Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 lmao at all the people saying it would be suicide to play Campbell. 1. He is not a rookie, it is his second year. 2. Tenn. almost beat Indy with a rookie QB. 3. People say we don't want to get into a shooting match with Campbell at QB. What makes you think we would win a shooting match with Mark B at QB? 4. We don't want to be at the end of the game with Campbell having to run the 2 minute drill. Because Mark. B. runs it better? ARGH! This season is pissing me off! I almost think we need to just suck it up and put Campbell in the game. Let's see how he does with our WR's and RB's. Let's get an idea abotu how our O-Line blocks for a more mobile QB who throws with his right hand. Can D. Dockery block as a guard from the blind side? Do we need O-Line help in the 1st round next year? Put in Rocky M. on D. Get our rookie D-Linemen as much reps as possible to see if we need more help there early. Do we need another CB next season? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ntotoro Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Didn't Pittsburgh do that year before last w/ Big Ben in the playoffs? They didn't have any choice, considering their starter was injured. The choice belongs to Coach Gibbs, even if I think he's making the wrong decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsbosoxheels Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 You people forgetting 1 thing...GIBBS loves BRUNELL...he will not come out of a game this year unless injured...so forget about Campbell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CustomApparelDirect Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 No, playing Brunnell against anyone is suicide. Leinarts a rookie, plays fine. Great last night. Vince Young is playing fine on a terrible team. Why do you think its suicide to play Campbell against Indy. There defense isn't all that. :applause: IMHO, I couldn't AGREE with you more!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbo Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 At this point, I don't think it matters who we start at QB. It's VERY clear to me that our Offensive players and Al Saunders are simply not on the same page yet. For some reason or other, they don't have a real good feel for each other and it's preventing the offense from building any consistancy. Sure, I'd love to see Campbell come in and play like Leinart has so far but who knows if that would be the case. I do know that if we lose the next two games, it sure as heck wouldn't hurt. The thing that bothers me the most is that our Defense is as erratic as I've seen them since before Gregg Williams arrived. The D-Line doesn't seem to be stuffing the run as well and Lemar Marshall is not playing as well as last year. Thus far, Adam Archuleta has been a disappointment. Combine all of that together and perhaps Williams can see the problem and fix it. I suspect it may take a personnel change or three but something has to be done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Idaho fan Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Wilbon is right about everthing in this article. This is very depressing and it looks as though the Skins future might not be all that bright. I guess all we can hope for is that the Defense finds a way to turn things around in a hurry and that JC is all that we hope he is. I still just do not get the Duckett trade.... We had a decent backup in Betts and a capable RB behind him in Rock to get us through till Portis was healthy. Then even more mind boggling is that Duckett has yet to play a down - even when Portis was out! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uno Mas Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 We're struggling with Brunnell now...Why not struggle with Campbell??? We already destroyed the confidence and career of a young QB (Ramsey, did I even need to say it?) by throwing him into a no win situation. Why do it again? We'll wait until we're out of the playoff picture, until then, Campbell should definately NOT get a start. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NicholSkin Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 We will not see Campbell until the Redskins are mathematically eliminated. Like it, or lump it. That's the way it is. The sooner everyone realizes this, the less cluttered this board will be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uno Mas Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Didn't Pittsburgh do that year before last w/ Big Ben in the playoffs? This is an extremely weak arguement, I wish you people would leave it alone. For every "Big Ben" (who in my opinion is waaaaayyyy overrated), there are 100 Danny Wuerfuls! , however you spell it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyfar Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 This is an extremely weak arguement, I wish you people would leave it alone. For every "Big Ben" (who in my opinion is waaaaayyyy overrated), there are 100 Danny Wuerfuls! , however you spell it. Overrated but has a ring. You have to respect that. But I agree, it is a weak argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hockeysc23 Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 This season isn't over yet, and as rediculous as it may sound, we have a shot against Indy with Brunell. But throwing a rookie to Indy is suicide. How so? Is Indys D that great? How about how leinart did vs. the bears? Saying that it is suicide shows a lack of understanding football. Scott Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 This is an extremely weak arguement, I wish you people would leave it alone. For every "Big Ben" (who in my opinion is waaaaayyyy overrated), there are 100 Danny Wuerfuls! , however you spell it. Danny Wuerful was not a #1 pick. And Campbell is not a rookie. And I'm not asking Campbell to step in and win a Super Bowl. I'm simply following the Bengals' plan with Palmer. Sit during year one (which I'm fine with). Play during year two and take some lumps (8 an 8). Become an All Pro in year three. Heck, I'm not even asking for an All-Pro season in Year 3. Just be as good as - say - Rex Grossman in year 3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stp240 Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Joe Gibbs is just being fair to Brunell, Campbell has more talent, speed, and arm strength. Rivers, Young, Lienart, Gradkowski and even Romo sits to pee have all done just fine this year. I believe that Campbell has the ability to run all 700 pages of Al Saunders' playbook extremely well, Brunell can not. Brunell does have to experience, leadership and history, so there is no right decision to make here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dude Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Then even more mind boggling is that Duckett has yet to play a down - even when Portis was out! He got 5 carries in the Dallas game. But they were of little consequence, so yeah, it's like he hasn't actually played this season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince62 Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 "we have a shot against Indy with Brunell" based on what? this is very likely to become a passing duel very quickly if we fall behind early. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.