mimarino9 Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 I just had to point out the correlation between the Dallas Cowboys quarterback situation with that of our own. Bledsoe and Brunell are both old, immobile quarterbacks. As our losing streak continued to 2 - 5 the echoes of "we want Campbell" were chanted through many homes as Indy made quick work of the Skins in the second half. Well last night as Parcell's had enough of Bledsoe's poor performance against the Giants, he decided to start the backup Tony Romo sits to pee...which was met with cheer from the Cowboy fans (as I'm guessing Campbell would be met with at FedEx)! Romo sits to pee went on the throw 3 interceptions...one of them being his first play of the game!!! Here is my question...Dallas obviously proved last night that things CAN get worse...no matter how bad you think it is it can always be worse! If Gibbs were to cave to the fans demands and started Campbell instead of Brunell, and Campbell came out with a performance similar to that of Romo sits to pee's...would everyone be happy with that decision? Joe Theismann and Tony kornheiser were discussing if now that Parcell's has made the decision to play Romo sits to pee, does that mean this is a season decision...they came to the conclusion that it was, so now Romo sits to pee (the backup) will be starting against the Carolina Panthers next weekend, in Carolina. :dallasuck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulane Skins Fan Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 point it out in the other thread titled Romo sits to pee = campbell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THEHEREAFTER Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 I just had to point out the correlation between the Dallas Cowboys quarterback situation with that of our own. Bledsoe and Brunell are both old, immobile quarterbacks. As our losing streak continued to 2 - 5 the echoes of "we want Campbell" were chanted through many homes as Indy made quick work of the Skins in the second half. Well last night as Parcell's had enough of Bledsoe's poor performance against the Giants, he decided to start the backup Tony Romo sits to pee...which was met with cheer from the Cowboy fans (as I'm guessing Campbell would be met with at FedEx)! Romo sits to pee went on the throw 3 interceptions...one of them being his first play of the game!!! Here is my question...Dallas obviously proved last night that things CAN get worse...no matter how bad you think it is it can always be worse! :dallasuck I don't think you understand. Things got BETTER for Dallas. Romo sits to pee was thrown to the wolves. There was much more to the game than the 3int's. He also showed poise, leadership and threw two TD's. The game was still competitive until the last minutes of the 4th. I can only hope that Gibbs stays with Brunell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CPortJGibbs89 Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 I don't think you understand. Things got BETTER for Dallas. Romo sits to pee was thrown to the wolves. There was much more to the game than the 3int's. He also showed poise, leadership and threw two TD's. The game was still competitive until the last minutes of the 4th. I can only hope that Gibbs stays with Brunell.Dallas took the step forward that most of us want here. But the problem is you took a step forward but you are also taking a few steps back. Yes Romo sits to pee looked great last night and I was pissed as hell that we wont take that chance. But what did you see him do last night, he made rookie mistakes. Of course he is going to have all the preparation to get ready for Carolina this week. And are you sure Parcells is sticking with him? Remember when Parcells toyed with Vinny and Henson two years ago, who's to say he wont do the same thing again. All I am saying is Romo sits to pee looked great but he is going to take his lumps. He is going up against another vicious defense and will make great throws but will also make terrible decisions under pressure. I just cant believe Parcells jumped the gun at 3-2, at 2-5 yea make that decision but you guys were still very much a toss up in the division. Others have come to the conclusion that when Campbell comes in the season is over, but do you believe with Romo sits to pee that he has what it takes to get you all to the playoffs this year? Do I believe Brunell has what it takes, probably not, do I believe Campbell has what it takes not yet but you guys just shook things up in the divison very nicely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thiebear Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 I can only hope that Gibbs stays with Brunell. This is the key point of the post... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buck812 Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 I for one can say that I had rather face Bledso in 2 weeks than Romo sits to pee. If Romo sits to pee gets the benefit of a full week of practice, or in our case 2 full weeks, with the first team he could be pretty good, not to mention a game and a half experience. It looks like to me Dallas is going to be a better team because of this change. I wonder where we would be right now if we had made this change from day one. I doubt we would be any worse than 2-5 and maybe we would be gaining momentum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinz4evr Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 I wonder where we would be right now if we had made this change from day one. I doubt we would be any worse than 2-5 and maybe we would be gaining momentum.That's the truth. Brunell should never have even started the season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roanoker Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 Not a pretty picture of Romo sits to pee's performance, however, he did seem to ignite a spark in the other players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUskins Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 Who is Romo sits to pee anyway? Id never heard of the guy before the Dallas game? I think your analogy is flawed comparing a 1st round draft pick with someone most people have never heard of to begin with. Second, despite the fact that he may not be a NFL quality QB, the Cowboys have the guts to find out. Their aging vet sux so they are finding out if Romo sits to pee has promise. If not they will be ready to make a move in the offseason. The skins are in the same position. Will we answer the same questions or keep running the dead horse out there every Sunday? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saqs Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 Anyone expecting Campbell to come in and be the season savior is a retard. Sane people are calling for Campbell because we realize this season is over, Brunell is NOT the future and will not improve while Campbell can only go up. Of course he'll have some 2 TD, 3 int games as that's what 95% of unexperienced QBs do in the NFL. It's expected. Big Ben was the exception not the rule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedskinzOwnU Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 It doesn't matter if things get worse. No one expects JC to be Jesus Christ, we just want to see him get experience, and have something tangible to root for. This team needs a spark, and has no chance this season. There is no reason NOT to put campbell in. There is to no reason to GIVE BRUNELL more playing time. Snaps given to brunell are wasted snaps that Campbell could be using to get better. That's the bottom line, and that's the only point that matters right now for the team. Sure the D sucks, sure Brunell has more TD's than INTs. IT DOESNT MATTER. The only thing that matters is that EVERY snap BRUNELL takes is a wasted snap that CAMPBELL does NOT get to have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loyal2Washington Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 Brunell should never have even started the season. No Brunell should have started the season, or it would have been Collins, now is the time Brunell should no longer be the starter. By now I mean two weeks ago when the writing was on the wall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loyal2Washington Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 It doesn't matter if things get worse. No one expects JC to be Jesus Christ, we just want to see him get experience, and have something tangible to root for. That and we need to know that if after 11 starts Campbell is no good what we need in the draft. If we are sitting high enough to draft Brady Quinn we need to know whether we should draft him or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsLifer' Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 IT DOESNT MATTER. The only thing that matters is that EVERY snap BRUNELL takes is a wasted snap that CAMPBELL does NOT get to have. I have to point this out once again.... maybe that IS THE POINT. MAYBE... just MAYBE... JC sucks. If he sucks and they know it, there's no reason to put him on the field and decrease any trade value he might still have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whatmeworry Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 I don't think you understand. Things got BETTER for Dallas. Romo sits to pee was thrown to the wolves. There was much more to the game than the 3int's. He also showed poise, leadership and threw two TD's. The game was still competitive until the last minutes of the 4th. I can only hope that Gibbs stays with Brunell. Halftime 12-7 (-5) Bledsoe Game 36-22 (-14) Romo sits to pee. That includes the garbage TD at the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raub Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 I have to point this out once again.... maybe that IS THE POINT. MAYBE... just MAYBE... JC sucks. If he sucks and they know it' date=' there's no reason to put him on the field and decrease any trade value he might still have.[/quote']The guy has never played a down. He doesn't have any trade value. :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 1. I've never understood why you can change your mind on every position on the roster except QB. Put Campbell in for three games. If he sucks, put back in Brunell. 2. Yes...it can get worse. It can also get better. It could stay the same. The bottom line is, the Redskins are one of the league's five or six worst teams with Brunell. We have to accept the fact that the team is going nowhere and that the season is probably unsalvageable. What's the difference if we go 5-11 with Brunell or 4-12 with Campbell? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IrishOrange15 Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 Last night Romo sits to pee was inconsistent. He'd look really, really good at moments, then he made 2 poor decisions and the last INT was a miscommunication on a site adjustment. I think where Bledsoe and Brunnell are most similar is that opposing teams are pretty comfortable in what they have to do to stop both QB's. When Bledsoe was in the game, the G-Men were content on stacking the line or blitzing so they could tee off on Bledsoe. When Romo sits to pee came in, he was getting out into the pocket quicker, getting rid of the ball quicker, and was eluding the first pass rusher. And surely enough, the G-Men had to do different things to combat him. Not to mention that both Brunnell and Bledsoe seem to rely on the same targets. Bledsoe always looks for Terry Glenn and then Owens. Brunnell looks for Moss and then a pass out on the flats (usually to Cooley). When Romo sits to pee came in, Witten, Owens, Crayton, and Fasano started getting involved. As a Cowboys fan, I'm happy with the move. Bledsoe was a known commodity and his decision making and anticipation had been poor all season long. He's 34 years old, so he's definitely not the QB of the future. I honestly think Romo sits to pee is a bit better than Bledsoe right now (especially if he can stop his impulse throws) and by starting Romo sits to pee now, at least we can see what he can do and help prepare for the draft. YAKUZA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IrishOrange15 Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 Yes Romo sits to pee looked great last night and I was pissed as hell that we wont take that chance. As a Cowboys fan who is glad to see Romo sits to pee, he didn't look great last night. He made some really good throws, some tremendous throws, but he was at fault for all of the INT's. Some of that is correctable as 2 of them were impulsive and the last one was an incorrect sight adjustment on his part. However, there's plenty of QB's that have a whole career of impulsive throws and bad sight adjustments that do them in. And are you sure Parcells is sticking with him? Remember when Parcells toyed with Vinny and Henson two years ago, who's to say he wont do the same thing again. I'm pretty sure they are going with Romo sits to pee. Vinny and Henson was a bit different given that Vinny was hurt the game before and Henson was god awful against a lowly Bears team and got yanked. Bledsoe has played poorly in almost every game. His anticipation has been bad (not just with Owens, but with Witten and Crayton as well) and that last INT seemed to broke the camel's back. From the sounds of Parcells, there was absolutely no reason for Bledsoe to throw towards Glenn. All I am saying is Romo sits to pee looked great but he is going to take his lumps. He is going up against another vicious defense and will make great throws but will also make terrible decisions under pressure. I just cant believe Parcells jumped the gun at 3-2, I think it's safe to say that most Cowboys fans know Romo sits to pee is going to take his lumps. I'm certainly not looking forward to him having 3 games in a row on the road. I don't have a problem with Parcells jumping the gun here. Dallas simply couldn't afford to keep Bledsoe turning the ball over. Romo sits to pee doesn't seem any worse than Bledsoe at this point and at the very least they can see what he has and help make their draft decisions easier. at 2-5 yea make that decision but you guys were still very much a toss up in the division. Others have come to the conclusion that when Campbell comes in the season is over, but do you believe with Romo sits to pee that he has what it takes to get you all to the playoffs this year? Dallas is still in the hunt, although the chances are slim. Still, I figure if they can go 10-6, they've got a solid shot at making the playoffs. They'll need to go 2-1 in the next 3 games to do so, which won't be easy, but won't be impossible. The big difference between Romo sits to pee and Campbell is that Romo sits to pee is in his 4th year having played under the same offensive system for all 4 years. Campbell is in his 2nd year and has been through what? 6 offensive coordinators since his freshman year in college. Parcells likes to say that QB's are like boxers in that you have to be careful on how you bring them up in the NFL. If you bring them up too soon, you can destroy their confidence. I believe he's got a great analogy. With Campbell, it's pretty plausible that he may not be ready given his inexperience and going threw a new offensive scheme. For Romo sits to pee, he's pretty much about as ready as you're going to be and the only thing that's going to help him improve is playing time. And if he flunks badly, then Dallas has to look at a new direction. YAKUZA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sugarbear326 Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 I have to point this out once again.... maybe that IS THE POINT. MAYBE... just MAYBE... JC sucks. If he sucks and they know it' date=' there's no reason to put him on the field and decrease any trade value he might still have.[/quote']So we should not play him because if he sucks, his trade value will go down. Please tell me how his trade value is up now and he has not played at all. From Dan Snyder on down to our newest fan, we all know that JC should be playing!!! Dallas' record and playoff hope is much more than we have and Parcell was willing to put in an inexperienced QB to get the team moving forward, so why are the skins so unwilling to do this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donita35 Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 I hate to be the one to point this out but after watching the game yesterday I just have to say it and forgive me if I offend anyone, that is not my intention. But, why in the hell is Campbell not starting? You mean to tell me that Parcells has more guts then Saunders and Gibbs? He had the guts to make a switch in the middle of a winnable game to a young QB. Especially when, as some one pointed out in the other thread, Romo sits to pee was a walk on and Campbell was taken in the first round. I am not buying it. :mad: Also, let me tell you what Arizona, Tennessee, Dallas, San Diego all have in common. The made a switch to younger QB's when the team was losing because their head coaches could see that grooming the young QB was better for the team in the long run (excluding San Diego). If Campbell truly sucks then someone needs to come out a say that we wasted our two first round picks so that we can move one. Otherwise, he should be playing. Period. No more giving Brunell a chance to salvage a ruined season. Just forget about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loxley Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 Of course he'll have some 2 TD, 3 int games as that's what 95% of unexperienced QBs do in the NFL. It's expected. Big Ben was the exception not the rule. Big ben was the exception that proves the rule. Dont mean to be anal about it, great post otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UnKle RUku$ Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 Romo sits to pee is the backup...Campbell is the Third string. Campbell will only be placed in the game with a week of prep time. He will not get in until week 12 or 13 period... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellis Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 Tony Homo impressed me last night against the Giants. Sure he made some mistakes but what the Cowboys need is a QB who leaves the pocket. Tony Homo was very mobile and made some risky yet beneficial decisions on the field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.