Where to start? Do you actually watch the same game?

[TheHighlander]

Oh boy. What a day.

Plain and simple we got beat by the better team. It happens. I saw a lot I didn't like on the field, some from the refs, some from the Eagles, and a whole lot from people wearing burgandy and gold.

As usual, the general comment from Extemeskins seems to be bench Brunell, and yet I find myself asking a couple of really simple questions. the first is "Why"? The second is "Would it make any difference"?

Mark Brunell seems to be the most hated man on the team. Gibbs is now apparently so disliked by the fans here that he's probably wishing he'd stayed in racing and told Dan the man to take his cash and shove it. Frankly I wish he'd tell a bunch of the posters here to shove it too. If you're redskins fans you have one hell of a funnny way of showing it. Tell you what, any of you that have three superbowl rings, you have the right to pour scorn on Joe Gibbs, but the rest of you can shut up.

As for Brunell, he's no Peyton Manning, but neither is he Patrick Ramsey. Give the guy a break, he spent the day running for his life.

That brings me to the reason for posting. Based on the comments I've read I don't think that the same game was shown everywhere. I mean, I keep reading about how Mark did this or that wrong, how inept he was, and so forth. Some people seemto have figured out that our defence isn't getting the job done, but apparently Mark Brunell is the sole reason for our Offensive failings. Not so sure.

Here's a few things that seem to be a theme this year for the Redskins on offence;

• O-line weaker than wet tissue
  
• Repetative play calling (like three identical screen patterns in a row)
  
• Clinton Portis has been banged up all year long
  
• Brunell isn't as fast as he once was
  
• Play calling doesn't match the players on the field
  

Take today as an example. Time after time after time I saw Brunell running for his life as one or more pass rushers came through the line *untouched*. Tell me how the QB is supposed to read the field , find an open reciever and deliver the ball when he's running for his life because his O-line didn't get ther wheatties today?

The play calling has sucked hard. We brought in this super duper intelligent offensive coach to build our new playbook. Is it just me, or does that playbook consist of screens and other backfield plays? I went to the colts game, I saw three identical screen passes called one after the other. The first one was stopped early, the second was stuffed and the defenders had camped out waiting for the third one. Why call the same play again and again? Against Dallas we tried to put the ball in the end zone four times from inside the 5 and failed. Where was Duckett? Why call essentially the same play time after time? QB sneak? Bootleg option? TE in the end zone? *Anything* other than another run up the middle when our line isn't moving anything. The playcalling has restricted Portis' ability to really break out his runs, and has left Brunell with a no win scenario. Brunell is an older experienced quarterback. His strength is that experience, he can read the field and make good decisions, he can manage the game. But when plays like these are coing in, and the passing patters are short timing routes that need a short drop and pass with no read, how is that helping Brunell play to his best?

Clinton began the year injured, he had a high ankle sprain, a broken hand, and countless other bangs and knocks, not to mention his shoulders hadn't really finished healing. Clinton has had more annoying injuries this year than before. He's unable to fully get fit and contribute. As a result our running game is second rate, and other teams know it. They know that if they can tire out Portis, the game will become a one dimensional passing game with play calling that simple doesn't suit the quarter back, and an O-line that needs to hit the weights and re-learn their blocking schemes. The defensive players on the teams we face must really look forward to playing the 'skins, it's an easy game for them.

Brunell. Brunell isn't as fast as he was, he's slower this year with a bad leg, his arm doesn't have the same zip, but has he has proven this year he can be accurate (when the O-line is facing a pass rush it can handle - Texans for example) when given the time. Has he thrown interceptions? Yes, has he thrown more than the rest of the league? No, he hasn't. Brunell is a reasonable QB, not great, but not terrible. If the rest of the team was working well, it would be fine. The trouble is that that's not the case, and Brunell isn't good enough to drag the rest of the team behind him, like a Peyton Manning or Tom Brady might do. Would Jason Campbell do any better? Maybe, maybe not, but he hasn't looked ready yet, and I'd rather have Brunell in there than Collins.

That playcalling again. The new playbook could be the single greatest playbook ever written, but if it doesn't match the team capability, then it's doomed to mediocrity at best and failure at worst. Brunell wants to stand in the pocket and read the field, find a reciever and pass the ball. We don't call a lot of those plays. We call a lot of timeing routes and screens. We call a bunch of runs that are those wonderful slow developing rushes, draw plays or the dreaded reverse. I haven't seen much in the way of effective play action, but then when your passing plays are snap - three step drop - pass, play action just gets in the way.

OK, I know I am missing out lots of things, I haven't even talked about the defence, which was pretty poor today. I know lots of people will disagree, but here's what I think will help us, especially as we have no draft picks and are stuck with the people we have for now.

• re-design the playbook around the players, including Jason Campbell for next season.
  
• rejuvinate the offensive and defensive lines. This is footbal, the line is the heart of the game. Everything starts with the line, and ours aren't doing it.
  
• Let Jason play at least 2 quarters a game for the rest of the season, let him start the last few. He has to show he can do it, or next year we will be no better off.
  
• rest Portis, find some blocking for him. Use the rest of the rushing attack.
  

I don't think kicking Joe Gibbs to the curb is the answer, nor is doing the same for Mark Brunell. The problems with this team go far deeper than that. This team has suffered from an owner who things he can build his team through free agents with massive bonuses rather than throught eh draft, by finding the right kind of people. A Gibbs football team is defined by the character of the players, this isn't a Gibbs football team, yet. If you're thinking about the future, then kicking Brunell to the curb doesn't serve the team well if we want/need him to stay on as QB mentor.

Ah well, done rantin'.

[Seabee1973]

i think there is one player that is not adapting to the playbook and thats brunell the offensive line is actually good at run blocking as a team we are 8th in the league in rushing so some where else lies the problem.

[MontanaRed]

Whew! A long one, but good! And I absolutely agree. To answer the question about the simple "Fire Brunell/Fire Gibbs" mentality, well I think it's because it appears to some the easy way, the quick fix. Maybe Campbell can come in tomorrow, and it'll all be ok. The toilet paper Oline will solidify. The 3 yard screen on 3 & 12 will go away. The running backs will be healthy. The defense will tackle and the CBs will cover without a cushion bigger than my grandma's sofa. All of this will happen if you get rid of Mark. It's a combo of wishing it to be true, viewing the world through rose (redskin?) colored glasses, or just simple mentality and too many beers.

I completely agree the playcalling has to suit the players. Or the players have to suit the calling. It can't just be the calling - Saunders didn't suck overnight.

Good post.

[SkinsFTW]

Well its either the playcalling or Brunell. Since the team doesn't say anything and I know Saunders has had great offenses everywhere else I guess on Brunell. But the playcalling isn't much better. If it was they would have benched Brunell a few weeks ago and we would actually be able to have a great running game every week since most of the defenses we have faced are bad against the run but that could also be partially Brunell since he doesn't use the whole field.Other teams know what he is going to do a lot more than other QB's.

[dsciambi]

* O-line weaker than wet tissue

* Repetative play calling (like three identical screen patterns in a row)

* Clinton Portis has been banged up all year long

* Brunell isn't as fast as he once was

* Play calling doesn't match the players on the field

You don't think that maybe the O-Line problems have more to do with the fact that Brunell refuses to step up into the pocket, and instead likes to drop back 10 yards and roll out to pass to the sideline.

Could it be that the play calling is because Saunders has to adapt to the inability of Brunell to throw anything but slants and screens?

[TheHighlander]

You don't think that maybe the O-Line problems have more to do with the fact that Brunell refuses to step up into the pocket, and instead likes to drop back 10 yards and roll out to pass to the sideline.

Could it be that the play calling is because Saunders has to adapt to the inability of Brunell to throw anything but slants and screens?

No, I think the O-Line needs an overhaul. what I saw tonight was just the latest and worst example. I lost count of the number of times that one or sometimes two pass rushers came across the line of scrimmage straight up the *middle* untouched. Brunell dropped back 10 yards because if he hadn't he'd have been sacked within 2 seconds of the snap. It's one thing for blocking to break down and a rusher to break free, or for a rusher to rush around the edge and flush the QB. But these buys were sprinting right through the line like it wasn't there and were in Brunell's face immediately after the snap. I don't care who your QB is, there is no QB in the league that can make that work.

As for Brunell being unable to throw anythng but slants and screens. Is it that week? I mean, one week people are ****ing because Brunell looks downfield too much, and then the next they're ****ing because he doesn't. Football is a team game. If nothing is open downfield, or the O-line isn't holding long enough, a quick slant or screen, some kind of dump off pass is what you get. Frankly, it's as easy to say that Saunders is too set in his ways and hasn't adapted his approach from his KC days.

What I'm getting at here is that blaming Gibbs or Brunell might make a few people feel better, but it'll do nothing practical. Do you honestly think that with the way the *rest* of the team played today Jason Campbel, or for that matter Peyton Manning, could have done any better? I don't. GIbbs has more football knowledge than this entire forum put together, and yet people think it's OK to ***** and whine and call for his head? Yeah, whatever.

If I read one more person suggest that Gibbs is too old fashioned I may break something laughing. Football is a simple game. The fundamentals haven't changes. Blocking and tackling are where it starts. The running game is key, no team without a running game will ever win the SuperBowl. The passing game is the passing game. Everything is new and everything is the same. Has anyone seen anything *new* in the Saunders playbook? I've seen a lot of plays you don't see much outside of college ball, I've heard many a commentator say the same thing. I've see lots of short passing and occaisional flashes of a deep game. Nothing new, nothing we haven't seen before. Nothing that *GIBBS* hasn't seen before. If Gibbs is old fashioned about anything, it's the blame game. He *never* comes out and berates his guys, he has nothing but praise for them, in public. He keeps the chewing out behind closed doors. That's called being a class act, so everything is so super because everything is falling apart and he can't bring himself to say so. It's not his style.

I'm sorry, I got off on another rant that went off at a tangent to my answer to you. I've been a 'skins fan since the mid 70's, after 3 decades I will support the 'skins regardless. I don't post much here, but after today's appalling performance I couldn't resist.

[Enter Apotheosis]

• O-line weaker than wet tissue
  
• Repetative play calling (like three identical screen patterns in a row)
  
• Play calling doesn't match the players on the field

- Our offensive line has NOT been consistent enough in the run game and has committed too many stupid penalties for me to be able to defend them. Nonetheless, you seem to blame them for a lot of the pass protection problems we had against the Eagles when the simple fact of the matter is that NO offensive line is going to be able to stop an 8 man rush from getting to the quarterback quickly outside of a max protect scheme. Even when opposing teams DON'T send the house, our biggest problem seems to be DEs getting to the edge quickly and etting in Brunell's face... know how you remedy that problem? STEP UP INTO THE POCKET. It buys you a couple more second to find the open man downfield (because there is almost ALWAYS someone open that Brunell doesn't even LOOK at).

- The playcalling is a bit lacking in the running game (we need to implement more counter and misdirection plays), in my opinion. However, I would hardly call the playcalling repetitive. We actually do mix it up quite a bit with screens, reverses, quick slants, play actions, draws, HB passes, WR passes, stretch plays, tosses, etc. The reason it may LOOK repetitive is because on nearly every passing play we have, we have an outlet/check-down receiver. As of the last 9 games of the season, the check-down man has been Brunell's favorite target and, as a result of this and the fact that TV cameras don't show the whole field, our plays look exactly the same. We ALL can predict, at this point, that Mark is going to sit in the pocket for no more than 4 seconds before dumping it off to Betts on any given third and long. Furthermore, we don't UTILIZE the whole field (even when our plays do)... teams right now gameplan against us for shutting down the pass from 10-15 yards away from the line of scrimmage because they know they can keep the play in front of them and Brunell won't go deep.

- Playcalling doesn't match the guys on the field?!?! Are you kidding me? Again, look at the reverses we run to El and Moss... the production of our run game as a whole... our receivers' ability to make plays when the ball gets to them... this offense is PERFECTLY suited for 5 of the players on the field at any given time. Brunell, however, is CLEARLY not comfortable outside of a max protect or West Coast offense and our offensive line is just too inconsistent in general (they weren't much better last season, they just had a lot more support).

OK, I know I am missing out lots of things, I haven't even talked about the defence, which was pretty poor today. I know lots of people will disagree, but here's what I think will help us, especially as we have no draft picks and are stuck with the people we have for now.

I thought our defense played pretty damn well on the whole save for two big plays (one of which was noting short of a fluke and the other of which was just the beginning of a LONG list of problems Sean Taylor had). McNabb had a less than 50% completion rate, Westbrook had 113 yards on (half of which came on the last drive when the game was over and the D was worn down), and the only sustained and consistent drives the Eagles had resulted in a grand total of 9 points. This is against a VERY prolific offense. Carlos Rogers played well, Troy Vincent played well, Carter made plays, Springs was solid, Marcus had a great game... Taylor was the only guy who just play SUCKED. In all honesty, this was our best defensive showing this season but our offense just couldn't get it done.

Honestly, are you sure you weren't watching Baltimore play Tennessee?

[Enter Apotheosis]

No, I think the O-Line needs an overhaul. what I saw tonight was just the latest and worst example. I lost count of the number of times that one or sometimes two pass rushers came across the line of scrimmage straight up the *middle* untouched. Brunell dropped back 10 yards because if he hadn't he'd have been sacked within 2 seconds of the snap. It's one thing for blocking to break down and a rusher to break free, or for a rusher to rush around the edge and flush the QB. But these buys were sprinting right through the line like it wasn't there and were in Brunell's face immediately after the snap. I don't care who your QB is, there is no QB in the league that can make that work.

If there are 6 men blocking and 8 rushers... shouldn't someone be open for a quick pass? There's a REASON most teams don't blitz like that so frequently.

I mean, one week people are ****ing because Brunell looks downfield too much, and then the next they're ****ing because he doesn't. Football is a team game. If nothing is open downfield, or the O-line isn't holding long enough, a quick slant or screen, some kind of dump off pass is what you get. Frankly, it's as easy to say that Saunders is too set in his ways and hasn't adapted his approach from his KC days.

I wish I could say he looked downfield too much. Brunell does NOT play the game with any sort of pocket presence or downfield awareness, though. He glances one way, stares down a receiver, then throws it to his dumpoff man on 75% of all pass attempts. It isn't even hard to SEE that he has guys with separation further downfield (on TV at the games... its obvious).

What I'm getting at here is that blaming Gibbs or Brunell might make a few people feel better, but it'll do nothing practical. Do you honestly think that with the way the *rest* of the team played today Jason Campbel, or for that matter Peyton Manning, could have done any better? I don't. GIbbs has more football knowledge than this entire forum put together, and yet people think it's OK to ***** and whine and call for his head? Yeah, whatever.

We would have cleaned up with Peyton. He would have pointed out to the line where the blitz was coming from and would have found the open players. Again, when you see Brunell throw to Lloyd with four guys around him... you know SOMEONE was open.

You do a lot of whining yourself, by the way.

[TheHighlander]

-

I thought our defense played pretty damn well on the whole save for two big plays (one of which was noting short of a fluke and the other of which was just the beginning of a LONG list of problems Sean Taylor had). McNabb had a less than 50% completion rate, Westbrook had 113 yards on (half of which came on the last drive when the game was over and the D was worn down), and the only sustained and consistent drives the Eagles had resulted in a grand total of 9 points. This is against a VERY prolific offense. Carlos Rogers played well, Troy Vincent played well, Carter made plays, Springs was solid, Marcus had a great game... Taylor was the only guy who just play SUCKED. In all honesty, this was our best defensive showing this season but our offense just couldn't get it done.

Honestly, are you sure you weren't watching Baltimore play Tennessee?

Taylor typifies one of my problems with the D. Tackling. Players don't appear to do tackling any more, it's more a case of hitting and hoping that they hand on. I'd like to see sdome solid wrap tackling, and not just from Taylor.

I agree that the offensive style is suited to Randall el, but you can't design your scheme around one player. The O-line was under pressure, but it wasn't defensive ends coming around the edge and collapsing the pocket. It was rushers coming straight up the middle. If Brunell had stepped up, they'd have knocked him into next week.

I didn't see the Tennessee game. Unfortunately I was sharing the TV with my Colts loving wife.....so the 'skins spent a lot of the time in a Pitcure in picture window...

[Enter Apotheosis]

Taylor typifies one of my problems with the D. Tackling. Players don't appear to do tackling any more, it's more a case of hitting and hoping that they hand on. I'd like to see sdome solid wrap tackling, and not just from Taylor.

I agree that the offensive style is suited to Randall el, but you can't design your scheme around one player. The O-line was under pressure, but it wasn't defensive ends coming around the edge and collapsing the pocket. It was rushers coming straight up the middle. If Brunell had stepped up, they'd have knocked him into next week.

Taylor has been playing VERY poorly in coverage and as a tackler, there's no disputing it. However, I stand by the fact that our D played pretty well otherwise and tackling was only really a problem for everyone late in the game on runs.

Suited to Randle El? Did you ignore the fact that Moss is also benefitting from the reverses, hand-offs, screens, and such? Have you also noticed that Lloyd is getting open in single coverage a LOT and has been a factor when throws are made in his direction? Portis has been playing no worse than he did last season even WITH his injuries and, as I've said before, Betts is really involved and is performing well. Brunell and the oline are our only real problems on offense and, even then, Dockery and Randy Thomas are holding up a lot better than the tackles and Rabach.

As for Brunell and pressure... did you lread what I said AT ALL? Most of the season our problem has been on the edges but in this game, as I said before, the eagles were bringing the house and, given that they had more rushers than we had blockers, SOMEONE had to be open almost immediately after the snap. Most teams don't all-out blitz as much as they did against us for a reason (second time I've said that).

[TheDoyler23]

Mark Brunell makes it EASY to pass rush him by dropping back 10 plus yards. The DE's are constanly making outside moves to get around Jansen and Samuels. Rolling out DE's is a good thing if your QB can simply step up in the pocket and fire the ball. But MB refuses to do that. He runs backwards, then sideways into a rusher who has been rolled out.

The D knows this tendency and sends blitzers towards the A gap and its no contest. 7 Men against 5 blockers with a QB running away like a frenchman.

A good play to run against this style is a screen..which is 1/2 of our offense. Maddening as it may be.

[christopher44]

Excuses excuses excuses.What is it going to take for u Boonel lovers to run out of excuses .HEs 16-19 as our starter.Were 3-6 this year.The only touchdown pass he had yesterday was to an eagle.Stop pissin in the wind .Hes done.Im sick and tired of our D holdin teams to 20 points and still losing.Boonell is done.PERIOD>lets get rid of the cancer,like Parcells did,and see what Campbel;ls made of.I think he deserves that.

[CrabR]

As usual, the general comment from Extemeskins seems to be bench Brunell, and yet I find myself asking a couple of really simple questions. the first is "Why"? The second is "Would it make any difference"?

It does not matter if it makes a difference, the season is over so give Campbell some experience for next year

[woodbridge kid]

Brunnel won't even throw a deep pass incomplete to keep the defense honest....there is no excuse for it...

[LiveStrongSkins]

It's as simple as this. These players do not believe in Brunell. He is a lameduck QB. It has been conditioned in their head that once he is pressured there is almost 0% chance of him buying time to hit them. They see the guy make NO throws into the endzone all day and throws for negative 3 yards on a key drive. When will you guys see that the reason he is running for his life is because he is petrified of the pass rush and cant beat the blitz? Coordinators pin their ears back and come after him, leaving 3-4 guys to guard our 4-5 playmakers in space. Maybe the young guy can break off a few scrambles or move around enough to his a streaking Moss down the sideline and ease teams off of the blitz, therefore opening up the running game once more. No matter what anyone says, Brunell is a lameduck QB who is flat out washed up and pathedic. There is a reason we are below .500 with him and Gibbs at the helm even with two of those years having a top flight defense.

[riggins44]

My only problem with Gibbs is his loyalty to Brunell.

The difference in bringing Campbell in is it could provide a spark. Plus

we aren't a good team. It's time to start giving the kid game experience.

Parcells made the switch and look what it's down for them.

I'm still and always will be a diehard Skins fan. I can deal with losing

if we play hard. We're just not a competitive team on a consistent

basis.

Very frustrating morning for all Skins fans. I wonder how many players

care? They still get their paychecks. We still love the Redskins. Many

of us live and die with them. That is the price of being a diehard fan.

The season started with so much expectation. Now we realize that

we're an overpaid bad football team.

[PeterMP]

The problem with the OL is at least partly Brunell, and I put this in a post before it is only going to get worse. Blitzing is simple, send more guys than they can block. The Eagles did it all day long, and it is going to make even a really good OL look bad because nobody can block two people.

So why don't teams just blitz constantly? Because they are afraid of getting beat deep. The Ealges also blized the Giants relentlessy, and E. Manning was sacked eight times, but he also threw for 371 yards, 3 TDs, and was 31 of 43. Even on the last play he was blitzed, but stood in there to throw the TD for the game winner:

"On third-and-11 from the Eagles 31, Manning avoided a blitz and lofted a pass to Burress, who outjumped Sheldon Brown to make the catch and get in the end zone. "

Manning was hit on the play, but still made the throw.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/recap?gid=20060917021

Other teams see this, and they don't blitz. The Redskins send the opposite message: blitz us, and our offense struggles, and we can not make any plays. Teams are just going to come after the QB until plays are made.

I posted this before because I noticed the Colts blitzing us more than the normally blitz, it worked so I knew the Eagles would really bring it. They should be getting one on one coverage, but Brunell has to be willing to stand in there and take the hit and deliver the ball down the field.

[fansince62]

thank you! You just made the case for sitting Brunell...the team is not going anywhere this season and he is a placeolder. Many of us also grow exceedingly weary of the "if everything around him was going well he would be fine" argument. First of all, compared to the Spurrier years the pass blocking is infinitely better than what it was. What's the dividing line here? As long as that is a servicable excuse MB is in the clear? You fail to mention that his preformnace has been spotty even when the pass protection has been good.

On most teams you keep a 36 year old QB if he has been a SB champ or record setter. MB has been neither of these. JG resurrected his carreer when he was shown the door at JAX...at a high cost. It would seem to me that others need to get over their fixations - or willingness to accept mediocrity.

[Riggins Seventy Chip]

ARE YOU OUT OF YOUR MIND? 10 passes of 10 of less yards out of 16 completions.

Please tell me where I am wrong in my assessment of Mark Brunell:

Brunell has lost too much physically, he is not capable of consistently throwing a good long ball. He cannot get the ball into tight spaces. He is frequently not accurate. He has poor pocket prescence. It appears like he is afraid of contact. He is immobile. He all too often checks down instead of taking a chance downfield. He consistently throws the ball very short on 3rd and long (don't tell me it's all the playcalling). That is why I have been saying since week three that we should play Campbell:

http://www.extremeskins.com/forums/...ad.php?t=170545