#1SkinsFan Posted November 8, 2006 Author Share Posted November 8, 2006 To the thread starter, you are exactly right.Unfortunately, there is just no reasoning with some people. That's all I have been trying to say................... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#1SkinsFan Posted November 8, 2006 Author Share Posted November 8, 2006 Are you serious. Have you been watching the games. Are you kidding me.He throws dump offs to the recievers/RB's and they do the rest. Randel El has thrown the longest pass all season, and that was downfield. I dont know what you've been smoking cause you are in just as much denial as Gibbs. You obviously didn't read my post then b/c then you would know that I haven't missed a game in at least 5 yrs and my next door neighbors have season tickets and my fam. buys at least one game set off of them per year so that I can go to the games. What leads you to believe I am in denial? Where in my post do I say that Brunell should automatically be the starter forever, and that we shouldn't play Campbell? I am frustrated, just as the rest of ya'll but was just trying to make good out of a seemingly bad situation, and some of yall took it the wrong way. It was just food for thought................ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canes/skins Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 who cares about his stats its over 4 him. he is 36 how much longer was he going to be good which i never was happy when we got him. as a matter of fact i was so pissed when we signed him. but we need to let the kid play if b/c we need to see if we need to draft another qb or not. but i think we did a great job getting JC and i dont care what anyone says. bye boonell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CapitalDefense Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 The Brunell story is over, move on, its Campbell time finally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AU Burgundy & Gold Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 YAC indeed. How many of those passes are "in the air", and how many consist of a short yardage throw in which the WR catches and runs for daylight. For example, Moss' first TD versus the Jags, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AU Burgundy & Gold Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 Here are some more stats in contrast to the original post: DC Examiner 10/17/06- Gibbs ‘Not Afraid to Change Anything’ http://www.examiner.com/a-347460~Gibbs__not_afraid_to_change_anything_.html - Brunell has completed 62.1 percent of his passes for 1,239 yards, five touchdowns and three interceptions. But many passes have been thrown horizontally. “I saw that in the playoffs,” one NFC general manager said. “He couldn’t get the ball downfield. As the season wears on, his arm wears out.” - (Versus Tennessee) In the first half, he completed 11 of 14 passes – the majority again were screens and dumpoffs… - Against the Titans, Brunell threw 18 passes at receivers – and 15 were thrown to Santana Moss, even when surrounded by multiple defenders. At least three times Brunell threw to him when two or more defenders were close to Moss. “We want the ball to be more spread out than it was,” receiver Antwaan Randle El said. “It was heavy-loaded to Santana. We understand there will be games like that. But that’s a bit extreme.” - Two plays stood out: (1) On the first play of the second half, Brunell under threw a double teamed Moss; but an illegal contact was called. However, receiver James Thrash, who started on the same side as Moss, had broken open deep over the middle a couple of seconds before the pass was thrown. No defender was near him. Brunell never looked his way. (2) Brunell threw a deep ball intended for moss on the Redskins’ last play from scrimmage. Five Titans could be seen near the ball; it was intercepted. DC Examiner 10/19/06- Quiet, Offense at Work http://www.examiner.com/a-351307~Quiet__offense_at_work.html - “They have a lot of plays, but they don’t have an offense,” one NFL source said. “I don’t know what their bread and butter is.” - “We’d like to be the type of team we were in Houston and Jacksonville,” Redskins associate head coach/offense Saunders said. “We’d like to be a balanced offense, a physical offense that can run the ball and throw with equal efficiency. If all you can do is play smash-mouth football you’ll get beat.” - Part of the problem is that Saunders is still learning how he can use, and can’t use, certain players. He’s developed a feel for quarterback Mark Brunell - hence the high number of short throws early in games. “I still don’t have a feeling like that for Clinton [Portis] yet,” Saunders said. “He’s been in and out. I’d like to have two, three, four games to get a feel for what someone can do.” - The offense is not how Saunders envisions it will ultimately be. They have not thrown downfield nearly as much as they’d like. Of Brunell’s 105 completions, 88 have traveled 10 yards or less in the air. Protection issues, an old don’t-make-mistakes mindset and inconsistency on the ground have led to such plays – not to mention more screens than Saunders, who loves such plays, said he’d like to call. “That’s comparable to what he (Brunell) did previously,” Saunders said of the short throws. “I like to stretching the field vertically and if I could do that, I would.” But they’re not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#1SkinsFan Posted November 15, 2006 Author Share Posted November 15, 2006 Why is this still being discussed? It doesn't matter now. I created this a long time ago, and it should be dead by now. Whoever Mark plays for next, it won't be the Skins........... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsFTW Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 Whoever Mark plays for next, it won't be the Skins........... Another team is going to want him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Rafterman Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 Another team is going to want him? Only as a back up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spidernat Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 Why is this still being discussed? It doesn't matter now. I created this a long time ago, and it should be dead by now. Whoever Mark plays for next, it won't be the Skins........... Now that was funny.....:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoudMouth12thMan Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 Is Mark still the starting qb? :paranoid: HTTR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HOF44 Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 I think the problem Brunnell has is a 20 yard out. Or a deep post that has to be stuck in there. He can throw the floater bomb that the receivers go get. He just does not have the zip, or confidence to stick it on a rope to those type patterns I listed above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raub Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 I think it's funny to watch the Brunell Buddies get all bent out of shape when you find stats that actually matter. I know it's beating a dead horse, but if you watched that guy play and thought he was anything other than mediocre to poor....then you are in some serious denial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsFTW Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 Only as a back up. Do you think Brunell is going to Steve De Berg it or what? It would be funny seeing him sub on some team in 2015 when he's 45. He could throw 2-3 yard screens well into his 40's no problem. It might be a handicap using one of your 11 players to push around his wheelchair though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seabee1973 Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 According to those numbers yes, but those are just predictions. They also say Portis is on pace for only 996 yards since he has 498 currently, and we all know that he will def. have 1100 or more. So Brunell could end up with 8 passes at the end of the season of over 40 yards or he could end up with 15. Depends on how well the o-line and receivers play for the rest of the year. Or maybe you Jinxed Portis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUskins Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/1032Check out his stats so far from this year. He has 23 passes for 20 + yards, compared to 36 of ALL last year He has 4 passes for 40 + yards, compared to only 9 of ALL last year! So by going downfield, how far do you want him to go? A hail mary every time? I watch the games as much as the rest of you and sometimes his dumpoffs and screens can get frustarting, but as you can see, he does have the ability to get it deep. He should have at least 6 or more of 40 +, but they have been called back b/c of penalty (i.e- Lloyd catch, called back for holding on Fauris, B.S. call). Maybe it's just b/c the WR's aren't getting open as much as everyone wants them to, and that's why he is forced to throw to his only option which is usually the RB. But if you give him time, and the o-line blocks well, like it did vs. Dallas, he has that oppurtunity which is why we saw so many passes deep down the middle or a few down the sidelines. He has 8 Td's and only 3 ints and isn't making any crucial mistakes, but the poor o-line play has caused most of us to overlook his talent and way of getting the ball to open recievers. If our o-line play improves well enough to give Mark time so that he isn't immediately flushed out of the pocket, then look for his stats to be increased and look for more receivers to get the ball through deep and intermediate passes. He played his 2 best games against good defenses in teh Jags and Cowboys ( and a bad texan defense), but that was mainly due to how good our o-line was. So overall, O-Line improvement=More passes downfield=Better play from Brunell and co, which ultimately equals more wins, and no more calling of Brunell's head (for now ) Just my :2cents:......................... Your whole argument is defeated with one acronym. YAC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scruffylookin Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 I think it's funny to watch the Brunell Buddies get all bent out of shape when you find stats that actually matter. I know it's beating a dead horse, but if you watched that guy play and thought he was anything other than mediocre to poor....then you are in some serious denial. Shhhhhhhhhhhh They're still trying to figure out how their "Pro Bowl" quarterback just got benched. :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.