tonyriggins Posted October 26, 2006 Share Posted October 26, 2006 http://www.profootballweekly.com/PFW/The+Way+We+Hear+It/default.htm?mode=nfceast Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#1SkinsFan Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 pretty much what we already know. No surprises here. Thanks for the tidbit though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USDsk8ter123 Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 nothing too exciting. i really hope campbell starts from now on. If this isnt our season, at least he will be ready for next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cdowwe Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 Seems spot on to me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 the Redskins are not Super Bowl contenders at 2-5 and with all the holes this team currently has. It is not all Brunell's fault but to continue to start him and guys like Warrick Holmdman whose best days are behind them get us nowhere long-term. whether the 2006 Redskins win 7 or 8 games with Brunell at quarterback or 6 games with Campbell at quarterback, the difference just isn't that important given the state of competition in the East where Eli Manning and Donovan McNabb are clearly a notch above in terms of quarterback play. this team was put together in 2004 for a 3 year run. the team took 2 years to produce a winning record and playoff berth and that turned out to be the reward, not a Year 3 return to the Super Bowl for Gibbs. Like Parcells in Dallas, Gibbs is saddled with a team that has a number of holes and question marks and just appears to be overwhelmed as to how to resolve them. In both cases, these teams don't have functioning GMs whose principal job is to evaluate both talent AND the talent MIX on the clubs. you don't matchup Drew Bledsoe with an offensive line as porous as the Cowboys and expect to contend. similarly, you don't install an offensive system in Washington that depends upon the quarterback getting the ball down the field when the incumbent has the most limited physical talent of any of the qbs in the NFC East. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arkowi Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 the Redskins are not Super Bowl contenders at 2-5 and with all the holes this team currently has. It is not all Brunell's fault but to continue to start him and guys like Warrick Holmdman whose best days are behind them get us nowhere long-term.whether the 2006 Redskins win 7 or 8 games with Brunell at quarterback or 6 games with Campbell at quarterback, the difference just isn't that important given the state of competition in the East where Eli Manning and Donovan McNabb are clearly a notch above in terms of quarterback play. this team was put together in 2004 for a 3 year run. the team took 2 years to produce a winning record and playoff berth and that turned out to be the reward, not a Year 3 return to the Super Bowl for Gibbs. Like Parcells in Dallas, Gibbs is saddled with a team that has a number of holes and question marks and just appears to be overwhelmed as to how to resolve them. In both cases, these teams don't have functioning GMs whose principal job is to evaluate both talent AND the talent MIX on the clubs. you don't matchup Drew Bledsoe with an offensive line as porous as the Cowboys and expect to contend. similarly, you don't install an offensive system in Washington that depends upon the quarterback getting the ball down the field when the incumbent has the most limited physical talent of any of the qbs in the NFC East. Bulldog's Writeup > PFW's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#1SkinsFan Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 Bulldog's Writeup > PFW's. 100 % Agreed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsNoles21 Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 Ok so here it is....Brunell isnt bad, just not a fit for the offense. I think that is a legit thing to say because he isnt the type of qb to fire it all over the field, which we need with Saunders offense, he is the type to keep it smart and not make mistakes...aka....yaaaawn. But seriously I think he might fit better as a west coast type of qb. He still has the physical tools this just isnt the offense for him.. we want Campbell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hooper Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 At this stage of his career, Brunell doesn't fit ANY offense. He simply can't throw the ball downfield with any confidence or accuracy. He may string together a couple good games here and there, but only if everything around him is perfect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roanoker Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 Good job Bulldog. More insightful than the PFW piece. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sisko Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 Like Parcells in Dallas, Gibbs is saddled with a team that has a number of holes and question marks and just appears to be overwhelmed as to how to resolve them.In both cases, these teams don't have functioning GMs whose principal job is to evaluate both talent AND the talent MIX on the clubs. you don't matchup Drew Bledsoe with an offensive line as porous as the Cowboys and expect to contend. similarly, you don't install an offensive system in Washington that depends upon the quarterback getting the ball down the field when the incumbent has the most limited physical talent of any of the qbs in the NFC East. I just thought that bore repeating. Once again, great minds think alike. Like Parcells, Gibbs is finding out that just because you "buy the groceries" yourself doesn't exempt you from having to eat your vegetables. If we're smart, this upcoming offseason Gibbs will tell Danny to bring in the best GM/personnel man money can buy. At that point (and probably no sooner) we'll truly be on our way to long term success. That's the best post I've read in a long time Bulldog. :applause: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CapitalDefense Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 the Redskins are not Super Bowl contenders at 2-5 and with all the holes this team currently has. It is not all Brunell's fault but to continue to start him and guys like Warrick Holmdman whose best days are behind them get us nowhere long-term.whether the 2006 Redskins win 7 or 8 games with Brunell at quarterback or 6 games with Campbell at quarterback, the difference just isn't that important given the state of competition in the East where Eli Manning and Donovan McNabb are clearly a notch above in terms of quarterback play. this team was put together in 2004 for a 3 year run. the team took 2 years to produce a winning record and playoff berth and that turned out to be the reward, not a Year 3 return to the Super Bowl for Gibbs. Like Parcells in Dallas, Gibbs is saddled with a team that has a number of holes and question marks and just appears to be overwhelmed as to how to resolve them. In both cases, these teams don't have functioning GMs whose principal job is to evaluate both talent AND the talent MIX on the clubs. you don't matchup Drew Bledsoe with an offensive line as porous as the Cowboys and expect to contend. similarly, you don't install an offensive system in Washington that depends upon the quarterback getting the ball down the field when the incumbent has the most limited physical talent of any of the qbs in the NFC East. That is the best post I have seen on here in a very long time, dead on. Nice job!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.