nneece Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 A great article in Breaking News re: Brunell's play that you may have overlooked: http://www.washtimes.com/sports/20061026-122251-5349r.htm Extremely unwell played By Dan Daly October 26, 2006 The Greatest Fans in Pro Football are at their wit's end -- which is not to be confused with the split end or the defensive end. It's getting harder to slip through the supermarket checkout line without someone shouting at me, "When are the Redskins going to bench Brunell?" I feel their pain. In fact, I've had a Grade 1 migraine ever since Joe Gibbs uttered the words "extremely well" Sunday -- as in: "I thought Mark [brunell] played extremely well from where I was standing." This was after his team had been trampled by the Colts 36-22, a score that only hinted at the one-sidedness of the contest. This was after his quarterback disappeared yet again when the game was being decided -- only to resurface in the late going to pad his statistics against a prevent defense. "Extremely well," Joe? Let me tell you what I saw from where I was standing. I saw the Redskins take a 14-13 halftime lead, half their points courtesy of an 87-yard punt return by Antwaan Randle El. I saw Peyton Manning -- who did play extremely well -- come out in the third quarter and drive Indianapolis to three straight touchdowns and an insurmountable 33-14 lead. I saw Brunell, in the same quarter, answer Manning's challenge by completing four of six passes for 22 yards, including a 3-yard dump-off to Ladell Betts on third-and-8 and a 2-yard dump-off to Betts on another third-and-8. If that's playing "extremely well," then it's no wonder so many Redskins fans want a quarterback change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingfish50 Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 This whole Brunell situation with Joe Gibbs is really sad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MRMADD Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 Nothing new in there, but depressing to read nonetheless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUskins Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 Interesting. Its one thing to say hes the best we have hes going to start, but to come out and say he played extremely well when everyone on the planet who watched the game knows better.....what do you say? Is he in ultra defensive mode? denial? too proud to admit he is wrong? I doubt even the biggest Brunell supporters here would say he played extremely well. It really is sad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildbill Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 Everything seems to hint as if Mark's arm gets tired in the second half of the game. Not buying it. He seems to be playing not to lose his job, and the frustration of the players on the field is certainly starting to show. Throwing the ball for a two yard completion on third and eight is only half the story.......he's putting Betts and Clinton in some horrible positions and they're getting hammered after every catch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hail2Joe Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 Bench him, NOW!! Start Campbell after the Bye!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsrevival Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 I posted this link on another thread yesterday because people keep talking about or Offensive line play. While we may not have the best O-Line, this is the NFL and every QB is going to get pressured. The problem with Brunell as I've stated various times, he doesn't know how to pick out blizters and point them out to his O-Line. By not reading the blitz he doesn't exploit one on one coverage on the outside with our speed guys. This makes the O-Line look a lot worse than it really is. The Giants don't have the best O-Line, but Manning seems to always know when Plaxico Buress has one on one coverage and gets the ball to him; even while he's being hit... I feel a big reason why Brunell plays the way he does is because he knows one serious injury can put an end to his career. Even if it's not a career ending injury, by going to the bench he may never play again and I think he plays scared because of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLongshot Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 Everything seems to hint as if Mark's arm gets tired in the second half of the game.Not buying it. I don't buy it either, but something is happening in the second half. Course, it isn't just Brunell. He seems to be playing not to lose his job, and the frustration of the players on the field is certainly starting to show. Throwing the ball for a two yard completion on third and eight is only half the story.......he's putting Betts and Clinton in some horrible positions and they're getting hammered after every catch. I'm sorry, but I can't help to see those plays as playing to lose your job as well. When you don't get the job done, you are more likely to lose your job. Jason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MRMADD Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 Everything seems to hint as if Mark's arm gets tired in the second half of the game.Not buying it. He seems to be playing not to lose his job, and the frustration of the players on the field is certainly starting to show. Throwing the ball for a two yard completion on third and eight is only half the story.......he's putting Betts and Clinton in some horrible positions and they're getting hammered after every catch. You're right, he's dumping off some balls to players who have absolutely no chance of making a play -- and I'm sure they appreciate getting knocked senseless after catching a 2 yard pass on 3rd-and-8. The funny thing is, Brunell had to know he was in NO danger of losing his job during the first half of the season because Gibbs is loathe to play a rookie when the playoffs are on the line. So Brunell could have played confidently. But he didn't. And now with our playoff hopes disappearing like coke up Michael Irvin's nose, Brunell's job is (or at least should be) in jeopardy. He has only himself to blame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CPortJGibbs89 Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 This sucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skins4eva Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 Great article...no more Scott BOONELL--WE WANT CAMPBELL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKINZ33 Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 It doesn't hurt when fellow skins fans and others see whats happening with Gibbs and the QB situation, it hurts when EVERYONE can see that something/someone needs to give. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TC Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 Just thinking about Mark Brunell is starting to make me sick to my stomach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flexxskins Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 Great article. I always wonder if the coach reads articles like this. This is one of those articles that kind of has me looking at things in a different light now and open to new possibilties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EersSkins05 Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 He played extremely well... for me to poop on. (lol- those never get old to me...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redskin48 Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 I think that Campbell would bring a spark back to the team and he really needs the playing time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MD.C RedskinsFan Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 Great article...no more Scott BOONELL--WE WANT CAMPBELL Could someone please explain to me the background behind Scott Boonell? Just from how everyone uses it, its definitely not a positive but what is spelling Brunell as Boonell refering to? And Scott? Someone enlighten me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGreek1973 Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 Man we have talked about this in so many different ways. For me Gibbs has lost a lot of respect, especially after benching Ramsey last year after 1/2 a game and sticking with Brunell after the terrible performance in Arizona, Philly and Tampa. Don't forget that Ramsey came in the Giants game and played great so its not that Gibbs had a reason to stick with Brunell after that pathetic showing in Philly never mind Tampa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skins4eva Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 Could someone please explain to me the background behind Scott Boonell? Just from how everyone uses it, its definitely not a positive but what is spelling Brunell as Boonell refering to? And Scott? Someone enlighten me. During one particular game, Dick Enberg, one of the worst color men of all time, referred to Mark Brunell as Scott Brunell for almost an entire half of the game...it's just kind of funny...and Boonell refers to the fact that we as skins fans, often Boo him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wicked99 Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 I saw Brunell, in the same quarter, answer Manning's challenge by completing four of six passes for 22 yards, including a 3-yard dump-off to Ladell Betts on third-and-8 and a 2-yard dump-off to Betts on another third-and-8. If that's playing "extremely well," then it's no wonder so many Redskins fans want a quarterback change. Through three quarters, No. 8 was 14-for-21 for 120 yards and a touchdown. That was the kind of game he had, for all intents and purposes. The rest (13-for-16 for 106 yards and a last-minute TD) was just window dressing. Brunell, alas, leads the NFL in window dressing. His passer rating tells you that. It's currently 90.4, which puts him 11th in the league -- ahead of, among others, Tom Brady (86.9) and Matt Hasselbeck (82.8). Does anyone seriously think Brunell has been playing better than Brady and Hasselbeck? But that's the thing about the passer rating. It tells you how a quarterback is doing statistically, but it doesn't tell you when and where he's doing it. An 11-yard screen pass to Clinton Portis on third-and-13 -- the first throw Brunell made Sunday -- counts the same as an 11-yard completion to the 1-yard line in a tie game with two minutes left. Which would you rather have? Using a formula to determine the best passers in pro football is as dubious as using a formula to determine the best "all-around" players in golf. Have you checked the latter list lately? Tiger Woods is No. 1 -- no argument there -- and No. 2, with zero victories and just three top 10s in 21 tournaments, is ... Robert Allenby. Ladies and gentlemen, I humbly submit that Mark Brunell is Robert Allenby. He's like that magician in the movie, "The Illusionist" -- and Coach Joe is the police inspector who hasn't quite figured out his tricks. Or is it that he doesn't want to figure them out? I'd love to hear what the people who constantly post on this forum saying Brunell isn't the problem and his stats are good this year would have to say about this little gem. The truth hurts... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TankRizzo Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 Yup...not much different than any of our other losses. He's the invisible man when the other teams step up and score points. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackest Eyes Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 I just can't believe that Gibbs is so blind to the situation. Sure Brunell is putting up ok numbers but both Gibbs and Brunell need to grow a pair and either step up the playing level or Gibbs needs to bench Brunell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MD.C RedskinsFan Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 During one particular game, Dick Enberg, one of the worst color men of all time, referred to Mark Brunell as Scott Brunell for almost an entire half of the game...it's just kind of funny...and Boonell refers to the fact that we as skins fans, often Boo him. Oh, I see, thanks for clearing that up Skins4Eva. I had been puzzled for the longest time. I wish this Joe Gibbs, Mark Brunell, Jason Campbell, O-Line, D-Line, Secondary, Linebackers, situation would clear itself up. Wow, that like the whole team. I wish this situation with the whole team would just clear itself up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingGibbs Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 I posted this in another thread. Is he "the" main cause of our offensive woes? No. Is he the solution? No. It has come to the point where defenses are putting their corners at the line and playing bump and run and because of that we now can't even run the ever so popular screen pass and they are sniffing it out on a regular basis now. Why is this happening? Because they know Brunell won't even as much as attempt an intermediate much less deep pass on a regular basis. I would love to know the ratio of intermediate and deep passes to short passes. The defense is crowding the line because of a lack of respect for Brunell and that's why we are seeing a lack of protection and running game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsrevival Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 I'd love to hear what the people who constantly post on this forum saying Brunell isn't the problem and his stats are good this year would have to say about this little gem. The truth hurts... Yep, these people would probably pick Brunell over Hasslebeck and Brady too... You know, the ones that love to beat the passer rating topic to death... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.