Riggins Seventy Chip Posted October 31, 2006 Share Posted October 31, 2006 I am sick and tired of the rationalle being used by Brunell supporters, including Redskins coaches, for starting him as "He gives us the best chance to win this game." Here is why: It doesn't matter if we win this game or the next one or the next one. We are not making the playoffs. We would have to finish 7-2 to have ANY SHOT of making it. Furthermore, even if we made the playoffs, does anyone really think we could win the Superbowl this year?? Therefore, the discussion should be: Who gives us the best chance to win the superbowl? Mark Brunell or Jason Campbell? Well, Brunell is not playing well and is not going to play any better next year. His skills will continue to decline. Campbell on the other hand can only get better. We invested two #1 picks in him. He is "the future of the organization". Therefore, of the two, it is obvious that Campbell gives us the best chance to win the superbowl. Not this year, but in the future. Therefore, shouldn't he be the one playing, making his mistakes, learning, etc, etc??? Who cares if we win a couple of more games this year with MB over JC?? WHO CARES????? It doesn't help us win the superbowl!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CPortJGibbs89 Posted October 31, 2006 Share Posted October 31, 2006 I think that is an excellent point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darc Requiem Posted October 31, 2006 Share Posted October 31, 2006 :applause: :applause: :applause: Excellent post. Nothing else needs to be said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggins Seventy Chip Posted October 31, 2006 Author Share Posted October 31, 2006 I'd like to see a counter argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggins Seventy Chip Posted October 31, 2006 Author Share Posted October 31, 2006 from a Brunell supporter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Killerbo Posted October 31, 2006 Share Posted October 31, 2006 Dude Brunell lovers will always support their boy. Oh wait here come the stats ( where most is made in garbage time when we have no chance of winning and teams are playing prevent defense ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rdskn4Lyf21 Posted October 31, 2006 Share Posted October 31, 2006 We are nowhere near being done for the year: WE ARE JUST 2 GAMES OUT OF THE WILD-CARD. Right now, Brunell gives us the best chance to make up those two games QB-wise. He is experienced and can manage the game. If our D wakes up and we start running the ball, we can come together and make a playoff run. Concerning a Super Bowl...if you make the playoffs, ANYTHING can happen, even Brunell QBing us to a Championship. Once the season is absolutely lost, by all means put JC in and prep him for next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TSO Posted October 31, 2006 Share Posted October 31, 2006 The counter argument is simple. Mark Brunell helps us win games now. The season aint over. We still have a chance. 7-2 is your take on it. It might not have to be that way. It might have to be even a better record, like 8-1, or crazier, 9-0. Either way, the season aint over, and Brunell gives us that chance now. Once we are mathematically eliminated, and Brunell is done playing football, then we should go with Campbell. Either way, Brunell is our best bet. He has not played poorly, and can make all the throws everyone claims he can't. Why he doesn't all the time is both playcalling and his fault. Point is, it's all fixable. I don't want our staff to throw this season down the drain. I want us to win and win now, no matter how slim the possibilities. That's Redskin football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinfan2k Posted November 1, 2006 Share Posted November 1, 2006 sorry brunell wont win a big game unless hes is 25 and can run like he used to.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sebowski Posted November 1, 2006 Share Posted November 1, 2006 I'd like to see a counter argument. I think the counter here (and I am not a brunell supporter, never ever have been) is that maybe letting JC sit another year will help us to the Super Bowl versus throwing him in there too early and having him get killed. I'm for benching Brunell, but not necesarily for starting JC. I am hoping Gibbs makes the right call there and doesn't put him in too early. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johaun Posted November 1, 2006 Share Posted November 1, 2006 Gibbs must have a whole box of Brunell beer goggles that he passes out. I understand what people are trying to say but really out of 2-21/2 years of Brunell how many games can we actually say that HE played well. He has way to many weapons to be only around 100 yards every game going into the 4th quarter. Yes he makes FEW mistakes...but he balances that out by making FEW big plays. I can think of more big plays were he ran the ball then when he actually passed it. Last year it was he needs more weapons, he was hurt, this year its portis was hurt and now its...I don't know what the excuse now is....maybe the Oline. I don't recall Brunell getting sacked all that much this year. O but thats cause of his quick decisions and smart throws out of bounds or dump offs. Can you honestly give me another head coach that would stick with him this long. I honestly think Jason gives a better chance to win even now. If you don't want to put Jason in put Todd in. Someone willing to pull the trigger and not afraid to throw a pick and be scolded by Gibbs. Were half way into the season, Brunell has had his shot. It is time to move on and take our lumps with someone else. Brunell cannot get it done, he has been given plenty of time. No more excuses! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgitta Posted November 1, 2006 Share Posted November 1, 2006 I'd like to see a counter argument. OK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redskin81 Posted November 1, 2006 Share Posted November 1, 2006 Is this another bench Brunell thread? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThomasRoane Posted November 1, 2006 Share Posted November 1, 2006 The counter argument is simple. Mark Brunell helps us win games now. The season aint over. We still have a chance. 7-2 is your take on it. It might not have to be that way. It might have to be even a better record, like 8-1, or crazier, 9-0. Either way, the season aint over, and Brunell gives us that chance now. Once we are mathematically eliminated, and Brunell is done playing football, then we should go with Campbell. Either way, Brunell is our best bet. He has not played poorly, and can make all the throws everyone claims he can't. Why he doesn't all the time is both playcalling and his fault. Point is, it's all fixable. I don't want our staff to throw this season down the drain. I want us to win and win now, no matter how slim the possibilities. That's Redskin football. Did you watch the Patriots give the vikings a major beat down last night? I was at the Redskins-Vikes game. We were miserable. Couldn't stop Brad Johnson from picking us apart. Made Chester Taylor look like Jim Brown. We couldn't move the ball. And what did the Pats do? They just thoroughly destroyed the vikings. Look at what Indy did to us in the 3rd quarter. While Peyton was throwing haymakers MB was still working the jab. All the way to the end. The fight was over by mid 3rd quarter. Even if we magically make it to the Super bowl (I guarantee we won't even make the playoffs with MB as QB) we'd have a mudhole stomped in our ass by the AFC team that makes it. We need some depth on the DLine. We need another DB. We need some O-Line depth. None of this will happen until the off season. So we might as well get on with our future. MB is robbing the Redskins of a chance to be great later on. That's why we have so much malice towards him and the whole situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbuzz1962 Posted November 1, 2006 Share Posted November 1, 2006 I wish everyone would please quit saying Brunell gives us the best chances of winning now. How is 2-5 the best chance of winning now, and that was the easiest part of our schedule. The rest of our schedule is a nightmare, and Brunell gives us the best chances of winning those games? Hell, if you cannot win the so called easy part of a schedule, how are you going to win during the toughest part of a schedule? I don't get your logic. If you ask me, and a lot of sports writers who agree, Brunell gives this team the worst possible chance to win now. Making a change can only help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
box8276 Posted November 1, 2006 Share Posted November 1, 2006 I see some people actually get it. They think leaving our FUTURE on the bench is a great idea. I cant see boonell standing up to the pressure that will be put on him. We will see someone other than the 36yr. old next week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoCommiesGo Posted November 1, 2006 Share Posted November 1, 2006 Where 0-3 in the NFC only Detroit has a worse conference record than we do. A number of teams have a significantly better NFC record including Chicago 6-0, Giants 5-1, Minny 4-1, Seattle 4-2, NO 4-1. The cards are just so stacked against us that its not impossible but it's highly implausible to go on the run we need. We would have to win every NFC game we played to hold any remote chance for a tiebreaker. We got in last year at 10-6 because we went 5-1 in the division and 10-2 in the NFC. We owned so many tiebreakers it was ridiculous. This year not so much. We may go on a run but we would have to win at least the next 8 or 9 games. Only one of the remaining teams has a losing record and thats Tampa they still have a good D. It's a hard hard road that this team has chosen to take. The schedule is not a cake walk its going to be rough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CM916 Posted November 1, 2006 Share Posted November 1, 2006 This probably isn't a superbowl year so beat Dallas before we start worrying about next year. Actually, beat Philly too for good measure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrimReefa Posted November 1, 2006 Share Posted November 1, 2006 I'd like to see a counter argument. One more time, then. The importance of one player coming in and learning the system is dwarfed by the importance of the other 10 players on the offense getting the system down. If Mark Brunell was The Problem, then I could see the arguement for bringing in Campbell right now, regardless of whether he was ready or not. But Brunell isn't The Problem. I don't know if you've noticed, but the offensive line doesn't exactly have the protection schemes down pat. Blitzes still confuse them, and Brunell is spending a good portion of his time running for his life. And I'm not sure if you caught it, but Antwaan Randle El and Brandon Lloyd were exchanging unpleasantries on the sidelines towards the end of the Colts game. Now, it is possible that Lloyd said something about Randle El's mama, but I'm betting the real problem is that one (or both) of them doesn't yet have his routes down. The point is, learning this offense is a process the whole team has to go through, and Brunell provides the offensive players with a measure of stability while they get the offense down. Until they get the offense down, throwing in a QB with no NFL experience is only going to hamper the learning process for all 11 players - including himself. Bring Campbell in now, and it will take th other players longer to learn the offense. Leave Brunell in, and the offense will be able to get through the learning process quicker. Now, sometime towards the end of the season, the offensive players will begin to adjust to the scheme. The receivers will run their routes, the linemen will block their assingments, and the quarterback will go through his progressions without thinking about it. And once that happens, then they can throw Campbell in there. Now, pay close attention here, because this is the important part. If the rest of the offense can play at a high level, then Campbell can come in and begin to produce at a high level almost immediately, as is the case with Phillip Rivers this season, Ben Roethlisberger and Carson Palmer in '04, and Tom Brady in '01. All four of these QBs had virtually no prior NFL experience before they took the helm in those seasons, and yet every one of them enjoyed immediate success. Why? Because the rest of the offense was playing well around them. So the idea that if Campbell doesn't get immediate experience next season will be a waste while he learns the position is a false one. The reason most QBs with little/no experience struggle out of the gate is because the teams that have to play them are themselves struggling (as the Redskins are now). So Campbell will only struggle if we bring him in now, before the rest of the team is ready for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggins Seventy Chip Posted November 1, 2006 Author Share Posted November 1, 2006 Now, pay close attention here, because this is the important part. If the rest of the offense can play at a high level, then Campbell can come in and begin to produce at a high level almost immediately, as is the case with Phillip Rivers this season, Ben Roethlisberger and Carson Palmer in '04, and Tom Brady in '01. All four of these QBs had virtually no prior NFL experience before they took the helm in those seasons, and yet every one of them enjoyed immediate success. Why? Because the rest of the offense was playing well around them. So the idea that if Campbell doesn't get immediate experience next season will be a waste while he learns the position is a false one. The reason most QBs with little/no experience struggle out of the gate is because the teams that have to play them are themselves struggling (as the Redskins are now). So Campbell will only struggle if we bring him in now, before the rest of the team is ready for him. So, your argument then, is that Brunell at QB will allow the rest of the offensive players to learn the system better. I'd like to counter that position with some passages from the Washington Post. Players say they have had difficulty understanding and executing the new offense, but the NFC personnel executive said he believed this doesn't explain the problem. "It's not like they've got six or seven rookies starting out there in that offense," said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity. "It shouldn't take half a season to adjust." Pay attention, here are the important parts: Saunders's high-powered offenses in Kansas City liked to stretch the field with long passes, but his game plans in Washington have been tailored to what Brunell does best -- throwing short passes. Two general managers said they believed Brunell, not a pure drop-back passer, was a poor fit for Saunders's preferred mode of attack, noting that he appears unwilling or unable to thread passes through tight spots over the middle or throw the ball deep downfield. "Trace his offense all the way back to Coryell in San Diego and look at the quarterbacks," said a league source with ties to Saunders's system. "You see guys like [Dan] Fouts, [Kurt] Warner, [Trent] Green. That's not Mark Brunell. What they're running right now is not an Al Saunders offense." So, two curent general managers believe that Brunell is "a poor fit." Maybe a QB with a strong arm would be a better fit. I wonder where we could find one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggins Seventy Chip Posted November 1, 2006 Author Share Posted November 1, 2006 No counter argument Grimm Reefa? Still think that Brunell is the best QB for the rest of the players to learn from? Didn't think so. The truth is, there is no good argument for not starting Campbell immediately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrimReefa Posted November 3, 2006 Share Posted November 3, 2006 No counter argument Grimm Reefa? Still think that Brunell is the best QB for the rest of the players to learn from? Didn't think so. The truth is, there is no good argument for not starting Campbell immediately. You're right, there is no good reason. Somebody fire Joe Gibbs and hire Riggins Seventy Chip. He'll save us all. Here's the reason: HE ISN'T READY, AND THE TEAM ISN'T READY FOR HIM. Oh, and by the way, you must have been unconscious last season, so I'll let you in on the secret: Brunell's deep ball is fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoudMouth12thMan Posted November 3, 2006 Share Posted November 3, 2006 It doesn't matter if we win this game or the next one or the next one. We are not making the playoffs. We would have to finish 7-2 to have ANY SHOT of making it. Furthermore, even if we made the playoffs, does anyone really think we could win the Superbowl this year?? Who gives us the best chance to win the superbowl? Mark Brunell or Jason Campbell? Well, Brunell is not playing well and is not going to play any better next year. His skills will continue to decline. Ladies and Gentlemen Nostradamus has entered the chat room :notworthy I'm kidding of course, but dude this is just your opinion really. In fact, its all rhetoric at this point. You don't have a clue nor do I about what will happen in the next 9 games. Is it likely that we'll win 7 or more games? No and our situation last year wasn't likely either. We're obviously in a deeper hole, so be patient. You may get your chance to see #17 in action sooner rather than later. Call a spade a spade. You're just afraid like all of the rest of the casual fans that we'll go 8-8 with Mark at the helm and miss the chance to get Campbell experience. I'd rather go down swingin' personally. You can give up if you'd like. HTRR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geneva Posted November 3, 2006 Share Posted November 3, 2006 I am sick and tired of the rationalle being used by Brunell supporters, including Redskins coaches, for starting him as "He gives us the best chance to win this game." Here is why: It doesn't matter if we win this game or the next one or the next one. We are not making the playoffs. We would have to finish 7-2 to have ANY SHOT of making it. Furthermore, even if we made the playoffs, does anyone really think we could win the Superbowl this year?? Therefore, the discussion should be: Who gives us the best chance to win the superbowl? Mark Brunell or Jason Campbell? Well, Brunell is not playing well and is not going to play any better next year. His skills will continue to decline. Campbell on the other hand can only get better. We invested two #1 picks in him. He is "the future of the organization". Therefore, of the two, it is obvious that Campbell gives us the best chance to win the superbowl. Not this year, but in the future. Therefore, shouldn't he be the one playing, making his mistakes, learning, etc, etc??? Who cares if we win a couple of more games this year with MB over JC?? WHO CARES????? It doesn't help us win the superbowl!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geneva Posted November 3, 2006 Share Posted November 3, 2006 Very good evaluation of our team todate. I said the same thing two weeks ago. You can't win the division or the SB with a 36 year old QB, that has bad legs and a very average arm. Like you, I don't care if we win two or three more games this season, PARK MARK, lets roll the dice and see what we have for next 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.