So, does Brunell favor Moss? Let's see.

[drowland]

Brunell in the 3rd Q. is horrible. He diappears, and that's when most of our games are lost. Granted the defense falls apart too - which is a different thread entirely - but Brunell does nothing to rectify it. We have been outscored 57-10 in the 3rd Q. I'd love to see his #'s here.

This is something I'm surprised hasn't been talked about more. The 3rd quarter has been a nightmare for the Skins. The offense disappears and the defense self-distructs. Dallas came close to blowing it open again on Sunday. Opposing teams are making adjustments and the Skins aren't. So much for having the largest, most expensive coaching staff in the NFL.

[TheLongshot]

Others of us want a bona fide NFL QB in his prime - not in decline. but we all have our preferences!

That's fine and dandy, but guess what? You aren't going to get that this year. You are either going to get Brunell, who is past his prime but still has the ability to be useful, or Campbell, who is very green and will infuriate fans in a different way.

Looking at the game on Sunday, I couldn't see Campbell doing much better.

Jason

[fansince62]

"He did play well in Indy. Problem is, playcalling went to hell when the coaching staff decided, "we aren't running enough"."

the problem..is that is a hypothesis...not a proven conclusion. And he did not play well in the second half. no one did.

[fansince62]

"That's fine and dandy, but guess what? You aren't going to get that this year. You are either going to get Brunell, who is past his prime but still has the ability to be useful, or Campbell, who is very green and will infuriate fans in a different way."

we are 3-5. MB has manifested obvious weaknesses in MANY games and strengths in others. The record speaks for itself - and it's not all on the defense. The offense simply hasn't scored all that much - and he leads that offense (the same one that couldn't score 7 times from inside the 5 last Sunday).

Most don't care if JC will infuriate folks: better now than next season. Those folks arguiing that he soley sit on the bench for two seasons and that this will somehow assist the grooming process are out of their freakin minds. The only way to learn is on the field. Once one makes the leap that there is no way this team is going to the SB - the defined goal for this team - then why waste time getting to the next stage? It makes no sense.

[TheLongshot]

we are 3-5. MB has manifested obvious weaknesses in MANY games and strengths in others. The record speaks for itself - and it's not all on the defense. The offense simply hasn't scored all that much - and he leads that offense (the same one that couldn't score 7 times from inside the 5 last Sunday).

The defense is 30th in the NFL. If it isn't all the defense, a good chunk of it is.

Once one makes the leap that there is no way this team is going to the SB - the defined goal for this team - then why waste time getting to the next stage? It makes no sense.

Unless the team still believes that it can win this year. From everything I've been hearing, it doesn't sound like anyone on the team wants to give up on the season just yet. Personally, I think that's a good thing.

the problem..is that is a hypothesis...not a proven conclusion. And he did not play well in the second half. no one did.

Unfortunately, I didn't see the 4th Quarter, so I don't know what went on there.

[Neophyte]

The defense is 30th in the NFL. If it isn't all the defense, a good chunk of it is.

Too many 3 and outs by the offense. Yeah, the defense has issues, no doubt. However, if the offense was hanging onto the ball and winning the Time of Possession battle, the defense would be in better shape.

[TheLongshot]

Too many 3 and outs by the offense. Yeah, the defense has issues, no doubt. However, if the offense was hanging onto the ball and winning the Time of Possession battle, the defense would be in better shape.

It goes both ways. I mean, what is the offense going to do when the Giants open up the second half with a 8 minute drive?

And it isn't like the defense gets worn down. They give up drives early as well. The Titans scored on their first three drives.

In any case, we are really getting off topic here.

Jason

[Riggo#44]

Riggo #44, I find it funny that you quoted me and then proceeded to do exactly what I was admonishing, which is picking out every instance of Brunell's mistakes and ignoring every instance of his good play. I prefer to look at the big picture of his total performance, which has been good.

OK refute my poor plays - and there have been many - with some of his good plays! I'd love to hear them. And don't give me stats - I want specific plays.

[Riggo#44]

He did play well in Indy. Problem is, playcalling went to hell when the coaching staff decided, "we aren't running enough". Brunell had a pretty good first half in Tennesee. As far as the Giants go, no one had a good day in that game.

The team in general is horrible in the 3rd quarter. It certainly isn't just about Brunell. And what is Brunell going to do when he has plays called back because of penalties? When that puts you in 3rd and long, you are pretty much in trouble.

Jason

Well I can agree with you that we weren't running enough in that game. The only thing that makes Brunell look like he played well was the 4th q. garbage TD. I am steadfast in my belief that Brunell didn't get it done. He falls apart when pressure is on.

Brunell's 3rd quarter against Indy:

2nd and 8 at WAS 48(10:58) M.Brunell pass incomplete deep right to C.Fauria.

3rd and 8 at WAS 48(10:50) (Shotgun) M.Brunell pass short left to L.Betts to IND 49 for 3 yards (C.June) (Three yard pass on third and 8 is totally unacceptable - this is what infuriates me most about him)

2nd and 8 at WAS 18(7:22) M.Brunell pass short right to C.Portis to WAS 19 for 1 yard (N.Harper, C.June).

3rd and 7 at WAS 19(6:39) M.Brunell pass short right to L.Betts to WAS 21 for 2 yards (N.Harper) [R.Mathis] (Two yard pass on third down and 7 - while trailing by 13 at this point!!).

1st and 10 at WAS 24(2:40) M.Brunell pass incomplete deep right to S.Moss.

1st and 15 at WAS 33(:55) M.Brunell pass short middle to C.Cooley to WAS 49 for 16 yards (G.Brackett).

1st and 10 at WAS 49(:15) M.Brunell sacked at WAS 41 for -8 yards (J.Thomas).

I could go on but it's more of the same until the final drive in the fourth quarter. IF you still want to say he played well, that's fine with me.

Once we hit 7 losses we will see Campbell. With the way the defense is playing we aren't going anywhere this year. Lets get the kid some experience and build for next.

[The Sisko]

"There are 3 types of lies: lies, damn lies and statistics."

I have a problem with dropping the high game and not dropping the low game. That is just plan bad statistics. You either use them all or drop the top and bottom. You can't pick and chose what what to keep and what to throw away while still keeping the integrity of your analysis.

:excited: :wavetowel DING!! DING!! DING!! We have a winner Alex!! :1stplace:

Sorry but you just don't get to pick and choose willy nilly which parts of a sample you want to drop. That is, not if you expect anyone to accept your analysis as even close to valid.

[desertfox59]

:excited: :wavetowel DING!! DING!! DING!! We have a winner Alex!! :1stplace:

Sorry but you just don't get to pick and choose willy nilly which parts of a sample you want to drop. That is, not if you expect anyone to accept your analysis as even close to valid.

please explain to me the difference then when the BB's start talking about YAC....why should we drop those plays out then? Oh..I know why, because you think it makes Brunell look bad. Like he has a noodle arm....

Your hyprocricy is showing.

[s0crates]

OK refute my poor plays - and there have been many - with some of his good plays! I'd love to hear them. And don't give me stats - I want specific plays.

Brunell makes plenty of good plays. Here are some fanatstic plays from last week for example:

1st quarter (13:39): Brunell throws a 11 yard bullet to Cooley to convert a third down. It was a perfectly placed pass with plenty of zip.

1st quarter (6:22): On the first play of the drive, Brunell rifles a 30 yard strike to James Thrash, threading the needle between three defenders.

2nd quarter (12:50): Brunell's 15 yard bullet hits a doble covered Brandon Lloyd on the numbers.

4th quarter (14:11): Brunell finds Cooley for a 20 yard TD throwing off his back foot, on the run, and with a defender in his face.

4th quarter (2:32): With time running out in the fourth quarter, Brunell throws a 25 yard strike to James Thrash to put us in position for a go-ahead field goal. That is clutch!

These are just some examples from last week. There are plenty more like them. Remember the record setting performance against Houston? How about two deep passes to Moss for a Monday Night miracle last year? How about 3 TD's to beat Jacksonville in overtime? How about all the times Brunell did not turn the ball over or rolled out to avoid a sack?

[Beaudry]

To the thread starter: If you take away Moss' best game out of 8, you also have to take away his worst game out of 8.

What strikes me more is that the Betts/Portis combo would have over 25% of our total catches. Considering they are rarely on the field at the same time, that means that Brunell really likes throwing to the running back.

ain't it the truth :laugh:

Oh, and bubba..so long as you keep posting about how dumb it is to bash Brunell, I'll keep bringing back your moment of weakness.

It is time to consider bringing in a new QB, Brunell looks out of shape, slow and old, even older than he did after getting injured last season.

[The Sisko]

please explain to me the difference then when the BB's start talking about YAC....why should we drop those plays out then? Oh..I know why, because you think it makes Brunell look bad. Like he has a noodle arm....

Your hyprocricy is showing.

I'm not sure which posts in particular that you're talking about. However, what we're talking about doing is two different things. Longshot (I think it was) suggested taking away either the single best or single worst performance. To take away only ONE of those from the analysis of a data set will obviously skew the results the opposite way. To take out BOTH of them however allows us to see where Brunell really lives, i.e. in the middle of his range where he's most likely to perform most of the time. This is called removing outliers and it's a well known and fully accepted calculation that is done all the time in statistics. Again, the purpose of doing this is to discount exceptionally different (in this case) offensive performances so that they don't affect what you really want to know.

Conversely, I suspect the folks who pointed out Brunell's YAC yardage were looking at this as a percentage of his entire passing yardage. Therefore, it is a much simpler analysis, i.e. a ratio or percentage of a whole. There's absolutely nothing wrong or inherently biased with doing that either. It's just a different ball of wax altogether from removing outliers.

So, no. It's not hypocrisy, it's math/statistics. Even so, I'll cut you a break since it's hard to understand that kind of thing with a zombie brain

[llcamino]

1st quarter (13:39): Brunell throws a 11 yard bullet to Cooley to convert a third down. It was a perfectly placed pass with plenty of zip.

I love how you make an 11 yard pass out to be some kind of miracle play by using words like "bullet" and "zip".

I wonder how many 11 yard passes are being praised on the Patiots or Colts boards?

[Peregrine]

please explain to me the difference then when the BB's start talking about YAC....why should we drop those plays out then? Oh..I know why, because you think it makes Brunell look bad. Like he has a noodle arm....

Your hyprocricy is showing.

The entire point was you were trying to use statistics without using any known statistical method that exists. You were elminitaing one extreme while leaving another, meaning your mean, median etc would all be skewed.

if the point is to figure out Brunells ability, than yes, you could say that YAC comes into play, because Brunell does not run the ball after the catch. He has nothing to do with that(except on longer balls, where he places it in a location the receiver can keep running). In order to get an accurate statistical reading of how good a QB is, you have to recognize that he is NOT the only part of the equation(Oline, WR, Coach), and then you have to differentiate between what is his and what isnt.

Brunell leads the NFL in passing BEHIND the line of scrimmage. He is at the bottom of the league in passing beyond 20 yards. Its easy to tell from that that the assumption that Brunell is a good NFL QB(considering that anyone can throw short balls, its harder to throw long balls) is false, considering his ranking is so far out of the norm, its an extreme value.

[The Sisko]

4th quarter (14:11): Brunell finds Cooley for a 20 yard TD throwing off his back foot, on the run, and with a defender in his face.

This one is my personal favorite llcamino. Good thing old Socrates doesn't work for the media as he clearly has no concept of unbiased reporting.

In any event, allow me to translate the above.

4th quarter (14:11): Grandpa Brunell just barely lofts a dying duck to Chris Cooley after showing incredible super-smarts, courage, and concentration by ignoring the cracking and popping of his geriatric ligaments and tendons so as to somehow get the "pass" into the air with his left hand while simultaneously balancing himself on his walker with his non-throwing hand. :handicap:

The play was all the more incredible given that it was very nearly picked off and somehow managed to stay within the field of play unlike most of Brunell's passes. Grandpa Brunell then promptly demanded to know "Where's my medicine. I get all cranky and gassy if I don't get my medicine on time" and then retired to take a three hour nap. :yawnee: :snore:

[TheLongshot]

To the thread starter: If you take away Moss' best game out of 8, you also have to take away his worst game out of 8.

I don't know what this has to do with my thread, since I didn't take out either his best game or his worst game. This is about the amount of passes thrown to Moss by Brunell. I threw out the "worst" game because I wanted to show that it severly skewed the results.

If it makes you happy, I didn't include the game where Brunell threw to Moss the least. (Last Sunday)

What strikes me more is that the Betts/Portis combo would have over 25% of our total catches. Considering they are rarely on the field at the same time, that means that Brunell really likes throwing to the running back.

About as much as he likes throwing to his other WRs.

I'm not sure which posts in particular that you're talking about. However, what we're talking about doing is two different things. Longshot (I think it was) suggested taking away either the single best or single worst performance. To take away only ONE of those from the analysis of a data set will obviously skew the results the opposite way. To take out BOTH of them however allows us to see where Brunell really lives, i.e. in the middle of his range where he's most likely to perform most of the time. This is called removing outliers and it's a well known and fully accepted calculation that is done all the time in statistics. Again, the purpose of doing this is to discount exceptionally different (in this case) offensive performances so that they don't affect what you really want to know.

Now you are associating me with something I didn't say. What I wanted to point out was how much the Tennesee game skewed the results, which caused a lot of people to say that Brunell almost exclusively looks at Moss, and the comments this weekend that Brunell finally realised he had other receivers. The data shows that, for the most part, that's not true.

Jason

[The Sisko]

I don't know what this has to do with my thread, since I didn't take out either his best game or his worst game. This is about the amount of passes thrown to Moss by Brunell. I threw out the "worst" game because I wanted to show that it severly skewed the results.

If it makes you happy, I didn't include the game where Brunell threw to Moss the least. (Last Sunday)

About as much as he likes throwing to his other WRs.

Now you are associating me with something I didn't say. What I wanted to point out was how much the Tennesee game skewed the results, which caused a lot of people to say that Brunell almost exclusively looks at Moss, and the comments this weekend that Brunell finally realised he had other receivers. The data shows that, for the most part, that's not true.

Jason

You may contend that the data shows that's not true. However I would contend that you didn't understand what we were talking about. It's not necessarily about best and worst games. Rather, it's about discarding the highest and lowest data points so as to get at what the "real" data shows, minus the outliers. That's all.

However, to prove your point on this one you can't just look at the passing attempts to a specific receiver. Rather, you'd have to have some way of knowing which receiver he was keying on in every play. Quite frankly, I don't think there's any way, short of having access to the coaches film, for us to determine that.

All I know is that dude is barely above .500 (17-18) over the course of almost 3 seasons with us. No matter how you tout his passer rating and avoid our very valid questions, there's just no getting around that one stat...which is the most important one after all.

The lack of wins is enough, given the weapons he has at his disposal and the similar mediocre level of production with those weapons, for me to say it's time to move on. At this point he's just mediocre, certainly not the worst QB in the league, but not starting material either. Whether Coach Gibbs likes it or not, and whether Campbell is 100% ready or not, it's time for the J.C. era to begin.

[TheLongshot]

However, to prove your point on this one you can't just look at the passing attempts to a specific receiver. Rather, you'd have to have some way of knowing which receiver he was keying on in every play. Quite frankly, I don't think there's any way, short of having access to the coaches film, for us to determine that.

The argument is that Brunell doesn't look for other WRs. The numbers say otherwise. Whether or not he chose the RIGHT receiver is a different argument, and one we can't really answer.

All I know is that dude is barely above .500 (17-18) over the course of almost 3 seasons with us. No matter how you tout his passer rating and avoid our very valid questions, there's just no getting around that one stat...which is the most important one after all.

So, it is the QB who is solely responsible for the team's record? You mean that the 30th ranked defense has nothing to do with us being 3-5? I think I even pointed out earlier in this thread where a couple of losses last year were on the defense, that wasted fine performances from Brunell and the offense.

Jason

[DieselPwr44]

So, it is the QB who is solely responsible for the team's record? You mean that the 30th ranked defense has nothing to do with us being 3-5?

Jason

Mark Brunell took this team to 6-10 with the 3rd ranked defense in the league in 2004.

Last season with a top ten defense, Gibbs had to take any responsibility off his boy Mark and put the team on Portis' and the defense's shoulders in order to make it to the playoffs.

What did Mark do? Oh that's right!! He set an NFL record!! Fewest passing yards in a playoff game in NFL history. :applause:

Next excuse please........

[CPortJGibbs89]

Mark Brunell took this team to 6-10 with the 3rd ranked defense in the league in 2004.

Last season with a top ten defense, Gibbs had to take any responsibility off his boy Mark and put the team on Portis' and the defense's shoulders in order to make it to the playoffs.

What did Mark do? Oh that's right!! He set an NFL record!! Fewest passing yards in a playoff game in NFL history. :applause:

Next excuse please........

The man makes a great arguement.

[Neophyte]

The argument is that Brunell doesn't look for other WRs. The numbers say otherwise. Whether or not he chose the RIGHT receiver is a different argument, and one we can't really answer.

No, the numbers you showed us don't say anything about who he was "looking" for, just who he ended up throwing too. Big difference there.

So, it is the QB who is solely responsible for the team's record? You mean that the 30th ranked defense has nothing to do with us being 3-5? I think I even pointed out earlier in this thread where a couple of losses last year were on the defense, that wasted fine performances from Brunell and the offense.

No one ever said that the QB was solely responsible for the team's record but it is the one position you can change and effect the biggest difference in the team. No other single position impacts the outcome as much as the QB and if you are struggling, no other change you can make can impact the outcome as much. I know this may not be fair to Mark but frankly life is not fair. And if he could find an open guy past the marker on 3rd down a bit more I doubt we would be 3-5 or that the defense would be ranked 30th.

[The Sisko]

No, the numbers you showed us don't say anything about who he was "looking" for, just who he ended up throwing too. Big difference there.

No one ever said that the QB was solely responsible for the team's record but it is the one position you can change and effect the biggest difference in the team. No other single position impacts the outcome as much as the QB and if you are struggling, no other change you can make can impact the outcome as much. I know this may not be fair to Mark but frankly life is not fair. And if he could find an open guy past the marker on 3rd down a bit more I doubt we would be 3-5 or that the defense would be ranked 30th.

Once again we're seeing eye to eye Neophyte. I think it is important to also note that many on this board are calling for Rocky to replace Holdman as well. I suppose we could use the Brunell zombies' logic to justify why he should remain in the lineup as well. After all, Rocky hasn't even "cured" on the bench for a full season yet and Holdman is just ripping up the league like Brunell is. I say we start Holdman one more season to give Rocky more time to become a solid pro. :doh:

The overall point is, Brunell and Holdman are average players at this point in their careers-and mind you, I'm being incredibly generous. We do have young players waiting to prove themselves behind those two. OTOH WE DO NOT HAVE ANYONE ELSE SITTING BEHIND OTHERS WHO ARE UNDERPERFORMING ON DEFENSE OR OL!!!! Therefore, these other problems can't be addressed-yet. (Sorry to shout but maybe that's just what it takes to get through.)

In any event, you fix what you can when you can. If you can't fix something right away, then you just make do. In this case we MAY have a fix sitting on the bench losing snaps/experience the longer we stick with Super Smart.

[Neophyte]

Preach on, Yusuf. I totally agree on both players.

I note that Coach Williams had no problems pulling AA in favor of Vincent. Now it is time to do the same with at least Holdman. Frankly, I would likely sit Carter on obvious running downs as well.

I think the point of the whole thing at the moment is that this team has made as many adjustments with the starting personel as can reasonably be made. Now it is time to change the personel where we can.