Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse?

Third, I do take serious issue with the kinds of stats you have cited. You said that they are respected, but I have yet to be proven that. Who else cites those stats? They come from some obscure website. Moreover, I disagree with their rankings of QBs based on some obscure formula. Even you seem to disagree with some of the rankings. So, I have no idea how you can challenge my refusal to accept such stats when you do not completely accept them either.Football Outsiders' DVOA rankings double as the power rankings on FOXSports.com. At least they used to before this season, but they are still posted on FOXSports.com.

The same authors of the site are also the authors of Pro Football Prospectus. It's a statistical evidence book that has drawn rave reviews from trustworthy experts like Ron Jaworski, and is I believe it to be the highest selling football book (not sure if thats by $ or by copies sold).

But if that doesn't make them important, I don't know what does.

I agree that statistically speaking Brunell is having a good year. I mean he is 2:1 in the TD/INT ratio (8td's/4int's), thrown for 1789 yards and has a completion percentage of 62%. That is a pretty good year so far for any QB.

Where I think the problem lies is that Brunell has two (Moss and Lloyd), and some could argue three (ARE), WR's that are known for their ability to strech the field, but Brunell lacks the arm strength to get them the ball. That is why we see a 6 yard pass on 3rd and 9. Another problem that I had said before and still think, is that Brunell has all the confidence in the world in Moss, but he is not sure yet of Lloyd. Look at how long it took Brunell to attempt to throw the ball deep to Lloyd.

Also, Brunell does spread the ball around I will say that but he is only really spreading the ball to the players he knows, Moss, Cooley, Betts. I mean it makes me wonder why did we even bring in Lloyd if Brunell was going to avoid him like the plague. And the one game when Moss sat out Brunell only threw the ball to Lloyd 3 times maybe 4?!?!

In closing I will say that Brunell was a serviceable QB for us this year up to this point. I am glad and thankful for the year that he gave us last year, boy that was fun, but as much as I dont want to admit it, his arm is not what is was last year when he was hitting Moss on the deep bombs. I am looking forward to sunday to see how Campbell will do. I love the fact that he has a strong arm and I hope that he looks for other people downfield other than #89...

SGG has been cool about the whole QB debate, maybe a tad reactionary (every game his position on Brunell seemed to change), but nothing if not fair. So I've said this to him already, but I was calling out him for making a close minded (and out of character) post, NOT for being a close minded person. He, in general, is one of the more open minded members on this fourm, and to clarify, I think he's a great moderator

Not to be a smart ass, but I don't think you actually mean that I am "reactionary" (an ultra right-winger who hates liberals). If you mean that I've been somewhat inconsistent on Brunell (aka a "flip-flopper"), I must clarify my position because I think I've been consistent, not dogmatic.

I have had a major problem with Brunell since the start of the season (hence my posts in these threads). That said, I: (1) am willing to recognize that he's done good things for this organization (hence my "thanks Mark Brunell" thread); and (2) think he's played a few good games this season (hence my "give props to Mark Brunell" thread).

I don't think I'm being inconsistent by calling for Brunell's benching, but recognizing that he is not Adolf Hitler re-born (as I think some posters are close to doing) and that he's done good things for us and occasionally plays a good game. I think that's just being fair to the guy. I'm not going to be unwilling to admit it when he plays well. But just because he plays well one week and I recognize it, I don't think I've abandoned my general position that he is sub-par.

Football Outsiders' DVOA rankings double as the power rankings on FOXSports.com. At least they used to before this season, but they are still posted on FOXSports.com.

The same authors of the site are also the authors of Pro Football Prospectus. It's a statistical evidence book that has drawn rave reviews from trustworthy experts like Ron Jaworski, and is I believe it to be the highest selling football book (not sure if thats by $ or by copies sold).

But if that doesn't make them important, I don't know what does.

I stand corrected, I was wrong that the stats came from some obscure website. I nevertheless disagree with its QB rankings.

Jeez are we really still talking about this?

Campbell is now the starter, let's move on.

Statistics should never override common sense...but then again if you think common sense tells you to bench the league's 10th rated QB, you should probably check which side of the arguement you want to be on.

Look, I have no problem with your position on the issue, but you've never been one to debate me really. You like to look at issues on the surface and draw conclusions quickly and then be stubborn about them when they are questioned.

I disagree with that philosophy.

Common sense finally told Gibbs that Brunell wasn't working out. Why don't you get ahold of him and feed him meaningless statistics that obviously have nothing to do with actually winning games.

And since you think I'm "stubborn" and can't look beneath the surface, I'll use some of your numbers to support my argument. You've said before that Brunell's horrible games have been the result of the rest of the offense playing poorly. That's an odd statement because you claim that since Brunell is ranked 10th based on DVOA, it proves that he's doing a good job, but Washington's rushing offense is ranked 9th based on DVOA. So if the rushing offense is ranked 9th, how does that hinder Brunell's performance?

The same website also has drive statistics, and in all on the times you've quoted DVOA, I've never seen you post drive statistics. Washington is ranked 16th in yards per drive, 23rd in points per drive, 22nd in TD's per drive, and tenth in punts per drive. But I'm sure there's an excuse as to why none of that has anything to do with Brunell...

The offense wasnt threatening with brunell, so the defenses just sat back and made tackles on the short plays, giving up some yards (explaining brunell's high qb rating) but no one felt like brunell was capable of making TD throws so they focused on the run, another reason his rating was high. 8 td throws in 9 games is embaressing. Manning can do that in two games. The THREAT is was campbell brings to the table. Defenses won't be able to just sit in zones against him.

Also, everyone knew that Brunell was going to throw to Moss or Cooley and thats it, so D coordinators could get a way with 1 on 1 with Lloyd because Brunell wouldn't eve look his way. In the eagle game and the Titan game Brunell threw to Moss in triple coverage, that is a throw that any veteran QB should not be making...

It was obvious that brunell could not beat the CBs with his throws, and he relied on Moss to beat them with his routs, and only moss is capable of getting THAT open. Hopefully Campbell can get the ball out quicker than brunell, improving the receiver timing, enabling the receivers to improve their YAC, which is crucial in this offense.

Football Outsiders' DVOA rankings double as the power rankings on FOXSports.com. At least they used to before this season, but they are still posted on FOXSports.com.

The same authors of the site are also the authors of Pro Football Prospectus. It's a statistical evidence book that has drawn rave reviews from trustworthy experts like Ron Jaworski, and is I believe it to be the highest selling football book (not sure if thats by $ or by copies sold).

But if that doesn't make them important, I don't know what does.




:bdh: :bdh: :bdh: :bdh: :bdh: :bdh: :bdh: :bdh: :bdh: :bdh: :bdh: :bdh: :bdh: :bdh: :blah: :blah: :blah: :blah: :blah: :blah: :blah: :blah: :blah: :blah: :blah:




never before have I met anyone with such conviction... I'll give you that... but thats about it. I think the pope would have sex with marilyn manson before you'd admit that brunell isnt a good quarterback.

stats do not make a good qb. results make a good qb. MB has not been a good QB since he's been here. He's been an excellent field general and game manager... but hes not a playmaker, (i know i know the first dallas game last year...) which is something you NEED in a good QB.

Low risk is great, and turnovers can kill you, but if youre not winning anyway, fucking chuck the ball dumbass! Maybe you save yourself a punt....

Did you actually watch the games, or do you just look at a spreadsheet and judge performances?


Gtripp, you are turning me into a brunell hater, and I had some respect for the guy. I can't turn away from this debacle of a thread and every time I hear hes the 10th best QB in the league I want to choke something.

I keep getting pissed off and I shouldn't. You have the right to believe whatever you want and voice your opinion and I'm damn proud to be a part of a forum and a country that allows it.

I get the feeling, though, that you look at these responses everyday and laugh at all the people taking you seriously... and I would respect that position much more than the one you're taking....

please tell me its true!