turbodiesel#44 Posted August 31, 2007 Share Posted August 31, 2007 If you're letting the guy you know can 'manage' the offense go, I almost think this HAS to be the plan. Palmer appears to have no real usefulness for us this season - we'd be no worse off with some emergency vet off the waiver wire if it came down to needing a 3rd QB than we would with Palmer (a rook who is beyond raw even for a rookie). I'm not saying it has never happened, but I am unaware of a #3 ever doing anything for a postseason team. I'm not so worried about Palmer, because I don't think we'll ever see him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tarhog Posted August 31, 2007 Share Posted August 31, 2007 And this is proof that you can never please everybody (or at least this board) all the time. Most on here have been begging to cut MB for two years, or trade him for a bologne sandwich. Now it looks like we might get a pick in return for him, and people are upset over that.:laugh: I think there'll be a lot more guys on this board who aren't so sure this trade (if it happens) is a 'gimme' positive. Like I said, we lose Campbell and Collins at any point this season, our season will effectively be over. Would it be if we had Brunell at #3? I don't think so. That makes this a risky move if true. Not necessarily the wrong decision. But its risky. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skeenzfan Posted August 31, 2007 Share Posted August 31, 2007 Seattle is moving Seneca Wallace to tight end, Brunell will be the Seahawks' number 2, per Brett Haber, WUSA- 9. If Seneca Wallace is a TE then i am a DT. Did you mean WR? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsDukes Posted August 31, 2007 Share Posted August 31, 2007 Just fyi they are interviewing Saunders right now, and said something like "I know you can't comment on QB issues and pending trades..." Saunders didn't deny, so I think that only adds more credence to the deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirk Diggler Posted August 31, 2007 Share Posted August 31, 2007 Did I have too much Grey Goose tonight? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walking Deadman Posted August 31, 2007 Share Posted August 31, 2007 No matter what happens....it'll be Brunell's fault Anyway, thanks for 2005 Mark (if you really are going)!!! And thanks for being a guy with alot of class despite the mass amount of **** you've gotten by some of the fans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylor 21 Posted August 31, 2007 Share Posted August 31, 2007 i dont like this trade one bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fifty Gut Posted August 31, 2007 Share Posted August 31, 2007 quote from random a Seahawk fan... "Doesn't Brunell have a recent record of 22 straight completions?" :laugh: ahhh, the memories Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
praise_gibbs Posted August 31, 2007 Share Posted August 31, 2007 :rubeyes: uhhh... hmmm. If this is true.. Thanks MB for '05. That is forever embedded in my memory. Plenty of stories to tell to my kids for years to come. :point2sky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sticksboi05 Posted August 31, 2007 Share Posted August 31, 2007 If Seneca Wallace is a TE then i am a DT. Did you mean WR? No, Bret said TE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan T. Posted August 31, 2007 Author Share Posted August 31, 2007 I was VERY comfortable with Mark Brunell as the #2. His style of game at this point in his career - conservative, don't make mistakes -is very suitable for a number two. And god did Palmer look awful. . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
portis426 Posted August 31, 2007 Share Posted August 31, 2007 I think there'll be a lot more guys on this board who aren't so sure this trade (if it happens) is a 'gimme' positive. Like I said, we lose Campbell and Collins at any point this season, our season will effectively be over. Would it be if we had Brunell at #3?I don't think so. That makes this a risky move if true. Not necessarily the wrong decision. But its risky. we could always use ARE lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsfanno9 Posted August 31, 2007 Share Posted August 31, 2007 I think there'll be a lot more guys on this board who aren't so sure this trade (if it happens) is a 'gimme' positive. Like I said, we lose Campbell and Collins at any point this season, our season will effectively be over. Would it be if we had Brunell at #3?I don't think so. That makes this a risky move if true. Not necessarily the wrong decision. But its risky. Problem is, Brunell only has about a game and a half inside his arm at this point. After that, his play drops off considerably. If we can get value for him, we definitely should, even though the risk is we only then have 1 real backup. This is hardly unusual though - most teams down to their 3rd QB are in horrid straights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turbodiesel#44 Posted August 31, 2007 Share Posted August 31, 2007 looks like a done deal on Ch 9. Good luck Mark! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsDukes Posted August 31, 2007 Share Posted August 31, 2007 B Mitch just said a Skins source had told him this morning, "Mark Brunell is playing for his career tonight." Now they are saying that was to indicate the trade was happening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InsaneBoost Posted August 31, 2007 Share Posted August 31, 2007 LOL @ This When it's on Redskins.com Then it's true, till then, sit back a ride out the wave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitchie Posted August 31, 2007 Share Posted August 31, 2007 Saunders fought for TC; Gibbs fought for MB... i bet. if so, interesting in who won the fight. This is a stupid mistake. TC sucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aston Posted August 31, 2007 Share Posted August 31, 2007 We just acquired a draft pick. Wait a minute. What? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
praise_gibbs Posted August 31, 2007 Share Posted August 31, 2007 i dont like this trade one bit. Seconded. **** happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvoSkins Posted August 31, 2007 Share Posted August 31, 2007 The last thing that Mitchell said was VERY true. If the D-Line can get pressure by themselves, the Skins will do well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoDQForums Posted August 31, 2007 Share Posted August 31, 2007 They heard the rumor in Seattle:http://mbd.scout.com/mb.aspx?s=114&f=1936&NO=4#s=114&f=1936&t=916616 Wow, they are really happy about possibly having Mark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaimeDeCurry Posted August 31, 2007 Share Posted August 31, 2007 Damn those Seahawk fans are waaaaaay too excited to be getting Brunell. I mean, I'm all for keeping him as a #2/#3 depending on the week, but they're getting all sorts of excited on that board like he's gonna be the backup to end all backups. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Jones Posted August 31, 2007 Share Posted August 31, 2007 We just acquired a draft pick. Wait a minute. What? I know,something must be amis that the skins actually get a pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tizzod Posted August 31, 2007 Share Posted August 31, 2007 Brunell sucks! Brunell sucks! I hate him! Can he throw anything over 10 yards? WTF is up with this trade??? I hate it! Our front office sucks! You all never cease to crack me up....I gotta hand it to you, you never disappoint! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLongshot Posted August 31, 2007 Share Posted August 31, 2007 I think there'll be a lot more guys on this board who aren't so sure this trade (if it happens) is a 'gimme' positive. Like I said, we lose Campbell and Collins at any point this season, our season will effectively be over. Would it be if we had Brunell at #3?I don't think so. That makes this a risky move if true. Not necessarily the wrong decision. But its risky. To be honest, if you lose two QBs in a season, it probably will be over for you. Typically, the guy at #3 is going to be a developmental guy, not an old vet earning a couple mil. You can't afford that on your roster. BTW, I've been calling this all offseason. I knew that the Skins weren't going to keep both guys, and it looked likely that Brunell was going to be gone. Jason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.