Now we know why Brunell kept dinking and dunking

The coaches should have diagnosed it when they kept watching the QB throw the ball 3 yards on 3-10.

I think now that the coaches new about the injury and it now makes sense why so many short passes where being used on the offensive game plan. It's too bad the coaching staff did not have more confidence in their back ups. What was the point of having Collins as the back up if he was never going to be used anyway??

Nice... So obviously it was known within the organization, and yet Gibbs would stand at the podium every week and talk about how well Brunell played and that he was fine, knowing he was injured... :banghead:

Well, like I said (http://www.thewarpath.net/268639-post5.html)

Well, like I said (http://www.thewarpath.net/268639-post5.html)

Yeah, but I find it hard to believe that if Brunell was hurt in week 2, that no one else in the organization was aware of it until after the season. If that is the case, and Brunell was sacrificing the season just so he could keep his starting job, he should be cut. And I don't mean cut from the team, I mean cut with a rusty butcher knife...

I doubt Gibbs knew the severity of his injury, either. Gibbs probably asked him "How's the shoulder?" Brunell, not wanting to look like a pansy in front of the coolest dude ever, says "A little sore but usually after a couple days rest it feels better".

Does anyone honestly think that Gibbs would think "Hmm, my super good buddy Mark has a severely torn labrum which will prevent him from performing his duties. He's told me how bad it is but, hell, I don't care. I really don't. I loooove losing."

Yeah, but I find it hard to believe that if Brunell was hurt in week 2, that no one else in the organization was aware of it until after the season. If that is the case, and Brunell was sacrificing the season just so he could keep his starting job, he should be cut. And I don't mean cut from the team, I mean cut with a rusty butcher knife...

Right, but remember hurt and injured are two different things. Maybe he was hurt, aggravated it (tore the labrum), was benched and now it's being made public.

Brunell might miss entire offseason program

By Len Pasquarelli
ESPN.com

http://adsatt.espn.go.com/ad/sponsors/ESPN_In_House_Marketing/Jan_2007/espn-146x46-0062.jpg (http://log.go.com/log?srvc=sz&guid=B5F6ACB4-D09D-464B-A584-68608179DDDD&drop=0&addata=1332:275:271721:275&a=1&goto=https://www.providiancard.com/bap/envwa/jumpApp.jsp?offer_id=esp02&banner_id=espngeneric010220070bnfl4146x0462500)



Veteran quarterback Mark Brunell (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/profile?statsId=2485) could miss the Washington Redskins (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/clubhouse?team=was)' entire offseason program, and might not be ready until training camp in July, following Monday surgery to repair labrum damage to his throwing shoulder.
The question of Brunell's availability in the offseason, coupled with his scheduled base salary of $5.2 million for 2007, leaves his future with the Redskins uncertain. The 14-year veteran lost his starting job to Jason Campbell (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/profile?statsId=7201) at midseason, and the youngster will go to camp No. 1 on the depth chart, meaning that Brunell will almost certainly be asked to rework his contract.
Brunell, 36, faces a grueling four- or five-month rehabilitation stretch on his left shoulder. And his base salary and the salary cap charges for 2007 are exorbitant for a player regarded as a backup. Washington officials are expected to approach several players about restructuring their contracts in the offseason. Brunell readjusted his contract in 2006 to help the Redskins. He is under contract through the 2010 season.
Coach Joe Gibbs reiterated last week that he would like to retain Brunell for 2007. Doing so would give the Redskins a proven backup and provide a steadying hand for Campbell, the team's first-round selection in the 2005 draft.
But with Brunell unlikely to be able to throw at all until June at the earliest, the Redskins might have to make some contingency plans. Little-used veteran Todd Collins (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/profile?statsId=3116) is the other quarterback on the roster.
Brunell started the first nine games of the 2006 season for the Redskins but, with the team out of playoff contention, Gibbs finally turned to Campbell, who didn't take a single snap as a rookie in 2005. Campbell completed 110 of 207 passes for 1,297 yards, with 10 touchdown passes and six interceptions, and a passer rating of 76.5.
The former Auburn standout, who compiled a 2-5 record as the starter, had some rough spots, but also demonstrated great athleticism and a very live arm.
Senior writer Len Pasquarelli covers the NFL for ESPN.com.

So now the question is does it makes sense for Gibbs to bring Brunell back in a back up role even after a retructure?

So now the question is does it makes sense for Gibbs to bring Brunell back in a back up role even after a retructure?

Even though I'm a fan of MB, I would say no. Don't Brunell back.. :(

I think that this now gives Brunell a very convenient excuse to retire. Not implying he's not hurt, I'm sure he is. Now he can say he's not quitting, he's retiring due to injury.

I think that this now gives Brunell a very convenient excuse to retire. Not implying he's not hurt, I'm sure he is. Now he can say he's not quitting, he's retiring due to injury.

I agree. At his age does he even want to tough out a grueling rehab to come back as a backup?? We'll see.