Skinz_4_life Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 This guy, for example: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :notworthy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 Boosterseat ain't Brunell. Jury's still out on the Insane part though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spartacus87 Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 Why did Campbell have more success you ask? First off, it is debatable whether or not Campbell did actually have more success.... Again, I'm not suggesting that we replace Campbell because that would set the franchise back. However, Brunell is the better quarterback right now. As others have already said- Brunell limited the running game himself by being completely unwilling to even attempt deep passes, rather, he'd roll out and desperately look for a RB in the flat or he'd simply throw it out of bounds. You can't establish a running game with 8 or 9 in the box. Basically, manipulate the past however you want, but if you honestly believe Brunell was so good, you should recall the Titans game that he essentially gave up on in the 4th quarter, throwing a crucial and stupid pick, leading to the Titans cheering "thank you Brunell!" in the lockerroom immediately afterwards. Or since you brought up that Dallas game where he supposedly had such a good performance, the same game where the tide was completely turned the moment he threw an unbelievably bad interception to Roy Williams in the end zone. By comparison, go back and watch Campbell versus the Giants, where Campbell completely outplayed the "great" Eli Manning and fought like hell until the very end, when our defense folded and lost us the game. It's not even close who the better QB is RIGHT at this moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spartacus87 Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 you guys are all too gullable, i've talked to insaneboost many times and he does it purposely to egg you guys on, just like all his trade portis posts, because it's obvious you guys jump all over it like a lion on a gazelle :doh: If true, that's actually the absolute lamest thing I've heard of on Extremeskins in a really long time- it's one thing to be actually crazy (coughMassSkinsFancough;) ), but another to pretend so just to annoy the rest of the board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliffmark1 Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 ROFL :laugh: This guy, for example: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Passizle Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 Not to complain... but WTF is prolly? I see people post this word all of the time. The word is probably. Learn it... love it... its the english language dammit! If you are past the fourth grade, you should know this. HTTR!!! That is all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InsaneBoost Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 Damn I never thought I'd see this day. But no I am not Brunell, unfortunately; I wish I was though! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaimeDeCurry Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 Not to complain... but WTF is prolly? I see people post this word all of the time. The word is probably. Learn it... love it... it's the English language, dammit! If you are past the fourth grade, you should know this.HTTR!!! That is all. Red marks made by your fourth grade English teacher. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InsaneBoost Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 Red marks made by your fourth grade English teacher. Why does there need to be a comma after language? Seems like it doesn't even belong there considering he is saying damnit with it. It's not like he is saying all of that to pause and then say damnit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaimeDeCurry Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 Commas routinely go before interjections (or hyphens, if you want to go that route) and exclamations (which are not preceded by hyphens). "Dammit!" is an exclamation just like "for Pete's sake!" or "by golly!", so you would lead with a comma. Also, think if he had led the sentence with "dammit." Then it would be "Dammit, it's the English language!" instead of "Dammit it's the English language." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InsaneBoost Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 I don't know, you having it before English Language makes perfect sense to me, however, having it after doesn't, oh well, minus one for me. I think I type / write pretty good for the most part so Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaimeDeCurry Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 I don't know, you having it before English Language makes perfect sense to me, however, having it after doesn't, oh well, minus one for me.I think I type / write pretty good for the most part so Can you tell it's finals week? :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InsaneBoost Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 Can you tell it's finals week? :doh: Yes I can :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justsomeguy Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 We are going to be "reborn" with a new QB. So unfortunately out with the old and in with the new. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loxley Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 Prolly is just another internet abbreviation sneaking its dastardly way into modern language. Its in the same boat as "gonna" as in "we are gonna win the sb this year blah blah". I gave up ragging on peoples spelling/grammar a long time ago as any fool with a keyboard can become a blogger/forum spammer these days and the quality of the language has slipped immensely. As for Insaneboost being Brunell, this is the guy who was unsure what "trading down" was recently. I doubt he is THE Brunell, prolly (ooh pasizzle hate me now!) just another fanatic supporter who has differing views to the majority here. As for that crap about he posts to wind people up.... well thats just damaging to a guys reputation tbh. I never thought id see a redskins troll.... Still all in good fun eh guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d0ublestr0ker0ll Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 I don't know, you having it before English Language makes perfect sense to me, however, having it after doesn't, oh well, minus one for me.I think I type / write pretty well for the most part so :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forever21 Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 Brunell or Campbell...blah blah blah... Screw it...I have a new theory...maybe I should start a new thread...nah...here it goes... All of this Brunell/Campbell stuff only gets overshadowed when Smooth/Rogers/Springs debates start as to who the starters will be... Well...has anyone considered that maybe Smoot was brought in to compete with Brunell/Campbell for the starting gig and not Rogers/Springs... Just saying... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Om Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 you guys are all too gullable, i've talked to insaneboost many times and he does it purposely to egg you guys on, just like all his trade portis posts, because it's obvious you guys jump all over it like a lion on a gazelle :doh: Oh, I dunno. Sometimes the problem just kinda of takes care of itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aussieskin Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 I dont know which one is the better at the moment but i do think that JC will be better for having the experience of MB to fall back on and to learn from Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylorfan2179 Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 Can you tell it's finals week? :doh: Don't speak of such things here, it is my retreat from the insanity that surrounds my life now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 In my mind Brunell started last year the following reason. Campbell wasn't ready. No matter how well he showed at the end of the year, it should not be discounted that the team had by that point gotten somewhat comfortable with the new offense that Saunders installed. To have put Campbell in back in September may have been disastrous to his development. One of the things you want with a young QB is for the rest of the offense to be able to help him thru his initial rough patches, but if everyone is learning the new offense at the same time, there is none of that help. Brunell was started to help the offense over the initial hump, the thinking being his veteran savvy would be able to compensate for the team all on the same learning curve. Unfortunately, his lack of arm compounded with his shoulder injury made it impossible for him to throw more than 4 or 5 feet. ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CPortJGibbs89 Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 Well if Insane Boost is Brunell then Brunell also likes hondas, I am a member at this site www.honda-tech.com and Insane Boost is a member as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JC girl Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 I love how everyone went to this thread and starting arguing that Campbell is better than Brunell, so not about that...hehe. I enjoyed it. Made me chuckle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peregrine Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 Why did Campbell have more success you ask? First off, it is debatable whether or not Campbell did actually have more success. Brunell had a better winning percentage as a starter at 3-6 than did Campbell at 2-5. While the offense as a whole improved under Campbell, the passing game regressed. Campbell had the benefit of a prolific running game, accompanied by Gibbs' return to smashmouth football after the Tampa Bay game. Some might say that our success running the football was a result of opponent's respect for Campbell's deep ball, but that was not the case. Brunell did not have the benefit of a similar running game, yet still quarterbacked a more productive passing game. In games where the Redskins ran the ball effectively (Jacksonville, Houston, and the second Dallas game), Brunell had very productive outings. Though Campbell was the beneficiary of strong running game in all but one of his starts, he had few stellar outings. Again, I'm not suggesting that we replace Campbell because that would set the franchise back. However, Brunell is the better quarterback right now. Yes, you are absolutely correct. Lets bring back that 3-6 Brunell record, because if that doesnt scream success, I dont know what does. Given a few years, when Brunell matures and reaches his peak(rookies never perform that well) I expect too see better numbers. And you are absolutely correct on how well he pass last year. In fact, he lead all NFL QBs in passing behind the line of scrimmage. He led the NFL in TDs, QB rating, Comp % behind the line of scrimmage. One thing NFL coaches always look for out of college is a guy who can throw that 0 yard pass, its something you are born with, you cant learn it. I think Brunell exemplifies that, and will have a very succesful NFL career, once he gets his bearings. Nevermind he couldnt throw the ball down the field(bottom of the NFL in that category), or that he took 10 yard drops in the pocket, those are things all young QBs struggle with, and he will get better at as his career progresses. Im looking eagerly forward to the future, to see how this young Brunell matures. Its exciting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyUtah Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 Yes, you are absolutely correct. Lets bring back that 3-6 Brunell record, because if that doesnt scream success, I dont know what does. Given a few years, when Brunell matures and reaches his peak(rookies never perform that well) I expect too see better numbers.And you are absolutely correct on how well he pass last year. In fact, he lead all NFL QBs in passing behind the line of scrimmage. He led the NFL in TDs, QB rating, Comp % behind the line of scrimmage. One thing NFL coaches always look for out of college is a guy who can throw that 0 yard pass, its something you are born with, you cant learn it. I think Brunell exemplifies that, and will have a very succesful NFL career, once he gets his bearings. Nevermind he couldnt throw the ball down the field(bottom of the NFL in that category), or that he took 10 yard drops in the pocket, those are things all young QBs struggle with, and he will get better at as his career progresses. Im looking eagerly forward to the future, to see how this young Brunell matures. Its exciting. I couldn't stop laughing at this post. Let's have a moment of silence...for Mark Brunell's career... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.