Give Props to Brunell

unk hrujifd rhgl regiuywgrcgc jh;egp cgi; y4 pytc;ewu.rnhj rhurehut hw4ehjrhgk hrgjrngjrhuiebitchtuwl7654kjnbgrjfkhbg rhugh rugbhekjwasslbhljrhguhf u h h uhjnralj hruhgjuboyhujbnj rlh

unk hrujifd rhgl regiuywgrcgc jh;egp cgi; y4 pytc;ewu.rnhj rhurehut hw4ehjrhgk hrgjrngjrhuiebitchtuwl7654kjnbgrjfkhbg rhugh rugbhekjwasslbhljrhguhf u h h uhjnralj hruhgjuboyhujbnj rlh

how useful.

Tripp, it's been explained ad infinitum. it's YAC - that's a stat, so start doing some serious subtraction. maybe if Distance Thrown was a stat, you would pay attention. maybe if stats only applied when In Contention (and not garbage time) you would stop basing Brunell's HOF application based on his 'stellar' numbers.

beware the number crunchers.So you want all QB yardage to be calculated by how far the ball traveled? Figures as much. Then you'd have all the West Coast QBs with really shitty Y/A stats simply because of the system. Then you wouldn't really know anything about the guy except what kind of system he plays in. It would not go in any way toward getting you closer to the "why do teams win/lose?" answer (the ONLY reason for statistical analysis). But it'd make Brunell's stats look like what you think they should be, so thats cool I guess.

You could cut the stats at the point when garbage time starts, and it would make the numbers ever so slightly more accurate, or you could just leave EVERYONES garbage time in and understand that what you are given is a general representation of how well a player has performed. So you can say Brunell sucks, I can show you his stats, you can make any dann excuse you want to, and I'll say fair enough, but in general Brunell has played well. Someone who is doing poorer than him in all major categories is not playing as well. Obviously. QB Rating puts him at #8 in the NFL. You will never hear me refer to him as the 8th best QB. That's not general enough. Conventional stats aren't that accurate.

QBing is all about doing your role in the offense. Some QBs have bigger roles than others. Brunell's is actually quite small, and he does it well. Stats are not what made me come to this conclusion, its what allows me to make an arguement thats actually something and not nothing.

Back to your YAC point, stats aren't going to seperate the QB from the offense (FO's stats try to but that seems a bit advanced for you), but even if you change the QB he still won't be seperated from the offense. So you accept the YAC as part of the offense, and you move on. You don't worry about it skewing the stats. We aren't talking about Brunell moving to another team here.

Which brings me back to my main point. There is no present reason good enough to replace Mark Brunell. People who agree with me: Joe Gibbs, Al Saunders, among others. People who (at least seem to) disagree: Illdefined, RedskinRat, among others.

Here's what's been explained ad infinitum. I've given countless reasons why MB SHOULDN't be benched. You've given baseless reasoning to why he SHOULD, and then have given at least relevant reasoning to why my stats are not all they are cracked up to be. They are what they are. A general representation of how well a player has performed.

unk hrujifd rhgl regiuywgrcgc jh;egp cgi; y4 pytc;ewu.rnhj rhurehut hw4ehjrhgk hrgjrngjrhuiebitchtuwl7654kjnbgrjfkhbg rhugh rugbhekjwasslbhljrhguhf u h h uhjnralj hruhgjuboyhujbnj rlh
fuck you

as for why to bench him - he's not going to get better and we're probably not going to the playoffs, so seeing if campbell can play and giving him experience is in the best long term interests of the franchise.

brunell has been nothing but average. when we needed him in the playoffs, he was MIA. when we had a great defense he was terrible, now that we have a terrible defense, and he's just not good enough to overcome that. his W-L record (which is a valid stat) isn't good, and when we need a play to win, he often takes the sack/inc instead (TB, DEN, KC, etc). he has the worst record BY FAR in 4th quarter comebacks (something on the order of 8-43 - beyond horrible) and that's WITH very favorable conditions (down by less than 7 entering the 4th and failing to win = loss, but coming back from ANY number = win). I've never said he's the ONLY problem, or that he's the BIGGEST problem, just that he's a bottleneck (spending too much time watching the rush vs looking downfield) and we have possibly have the longterm solution in house, but it's important to know whether JC is truly the guy or if we're still looking. before building a team, it's important to be sure that the trigger man is more than just average, and capable of a clutch play more often than what we've seen lately.

14-13 was great, but for brunell, those kinds of plays have been very few and far between across his entire career. it's not a big shocker that he is what he is, only slower now.

that said, this year he hasn't been helped AT ALL by the play calling. he NEEDS shotgun, he NEEDS max protect, he NEEDS a couple audibles. that's WHY he looked good last year, and without them, it looks like he's playing with an arm behind his back.

he played well this week, he played well vs JAC, but I haven't thought much of any of his other games this year, and i've been even more unimpressed with saunders, who's calling plays like he has HoF O linemen and no need to call anything besides screens. gibbs/musgrave 05 was a much better system for this talent.


the chemistry on the defense and a bad offseason by the FO, and what appears to be injured or just under-performing OL (jansen, thomas, dockery) are also big concerns. punter/kicker are pretty shaky too, and while we don't have the pick to fix kicker, we'll be more than able to get sep or fields with one of our 2nd day picks. fields has lechler like leg strength. I mean, there's plenty of blame to go around. but if we're not going all the way, we should do everything possible to get there as soon as possible, which includes getting the young guys ready and evaluating current and future talent as closely as possible.

as for why to bench him - he's not going to get better and we're probably not going to the playoffs, so seeing if campbell can play and giving him experience is in the best long term interests of the franchise.

brunell has been nothing but average. when we needed him in the playoffs, he was MIA. when we had a great defense he was terrible, now that we have a terrible defense, and he's just not good enough to overcome that. his W-L record (which is a valid stat) isn't good, and when we need a play to win, he often takes the sack/inc instead (TB, DEN, KC, etc). he has the worst record BY FAR in 4th quarter comebacks (something on the order of 8-43 - beyond horrible) and that's WITH very favorable conditions (down by less than 7 entering the 4th and failing to win = loss, but coming back from ANY number = win). I've never said he's the ONLY problem, or that he's the BIGGEST problem, just that he's a bottleneck (spending too much time watching the rush vs looking downfield) and we have possibly have the longterm solution in house, but it's important to know whether JC is truly the guy or if we're still looking. before building a team, it's important to be sure that the trigger man is more than just average, and capable of a clutch play more often than what we've seen lately.

14-13 was great, but for brunell, those kinds of plays have been very few and far between across his entire career. it's not a big shocker that he is what he is, only slower now.
Philisophically speaking.... you play the guy that wins your next game. One game at a time. We're one game behind in the wild race. Theres no need to go "big picture" on us right now.

We put Campbell in, he throws picks (that happends to young QB's) and with our defense we can't afford that. We'll lose games with a young QB making mistakes. In-experience usually means turnovers, and our defense cannot win with that at stake. Brunell has not been playing badly as of recent, and if your a coach, your going to put your smart game manager in at QB. You cannot think long term in the middle of the season, and it's just not going to happen.

There really is no debate... JC will not start. We can all look at this when the season is over and say this and that, but right here, right now, we're making the only decision we can, and IMO it's the right one.

that's nice, but unless we go 7-1, it's over for real, and the chances aren't great. right now brunell might be the best choice, but through the first 8 games, i'm not sure he was.

and yeah, campbell is going to throw ints, but if he's throwing more TDs and taking less sacks, it might not be as bad as predicted.

i can't possibly seeing us go 3-0 or 4-0 in the playoffs with this defense... hopefully they shore it up, and i know gibbs wins more late, but for the cost and hype, i need to see a lot more progress real fast.

unk hrujifd rhgl regiuywgrcgc jh;egp cgi; y4 pytc;ewu.rnhj rhurehut hw4ehjrhgk hrgjrngjrhuiebitchtuwl7654kjnbgrjfkhbg rhugh rugbhekjwasslbhljrhguhf u h h uhjnralj hruhgjuboyhujbnj rlh

what????

i voted 'great'

oh well