Re: Antwaan Randle El
 

[QUOTE=SKINS73;219097]Don't use him as a franchise or permanent solution. But how confused would Jacksonville or Houston be if we started the game, no huddle, shotgun with Randle El under center? If our quarterback can't get him the ball for whatever reason use him in a capacity where he could have an impact. If it doesn't work throw Brunell in the next drive. Seriously, what could it hurt at this point? I mean we''re 6 for 27 on 3rd down conversions. We need something, anything.[/QUOTE]

Bingo-bammo. Just shake things up a bit here and there. But I'd save it for the Jaguars. Let's see if we get the basics down pat for the Texans.

Re: Antwaan Randle El
 

[quote=SKINS73;219097]Don't use him as a franchise or permanent solution. But how confused would Jacksonville or Houston be if we started the game, no huddle, shotgun with Randle El under center? If our quarterback can't get him the ball for whatever reason use him in a capacity where he could have an impact. If it doesn't work throw Brunell in the next drive. Seriously, what could it hurt at this point? I mean we''re 6 for 27 on 3rd down conversions. We need something, anything.[/quote]

What we need is a running game that gives us 3rd and short so that we can do better than 6 for 27. You want to win, then get back to basics and run the ball with power, don't get fancier - that makes no sense. We don't need to try a bunch of backyard bullsh*t like playing Randle-El at QB. What we need is Portis giving us 2nd and 4 or 3rd and 1 on a routine basis.

Re: Antwaan Randle El
 

I like the Idea, but I like the Idea of Randy Thomas playing QB better...

Think about it... who would want to sack him. He could just drop back and run the ball, or sling it real short becausae it would take the entire defense to tackle him and someone would have to be open.

We could just score on offensive fumble recoveries and win every game...

C'mon I'm a real stratagist here...

Re: Antwaan Randle El
 

[QUOTE=canthetuna;219118]I like the Idea, but I like the Idea of Randy Thomas playing QB better...

Think about it... who would want to sack him. He could just drop back and run the ball, or sling it real short becausae it would take the entire defense to tackle him and someone would have to be open.

We could just score on offensive fumble recoveries and win every game...

C'mon I'm a real stratagist here...[/QUOTE]

That's the spirit!

Re: Antwaan Randle El
 

come on...with as anemic as this offense has been lets try anything. cant be any worse than what we have seen so far.

Re: Antwaan Randle El
 

there's no way in hell

Re: Antwaan Randle El
 

[QUOTE=vaoutlaws2006;219127]come on...with as anemic as this offense has been lets try anything. cant be any worse than what we have seen so far.[/QUOTE]

Randle El under center with the wishbone formation of Portis, Duckett and Betts behind him.

Re: Antwaan Randle El
 

[QUOTE=pg86;219048]Kordell Steward was a reciver and then did very well as a QB.....So why not try Randle El at it?!?[/QUOTE]

kordell had good size, randle el doesnt, and kordell had a big arm

Re: Antwaan Randle El
 

Kordell would have had a better career at WR if he stuck with that full time vs. QB.

Re: Antwaan Randle El
 

[QUOTE=Schneed10;219052]This thread is absurd.[/QUOTE]
only after today do I second this motion

Re: Antwaan Randle El
 

[quote=Schneed10;219116]What we need is a running game that gives us 3rd and short so that we can do better than 6 for 27. You want to win, then get back to basics and run the ball with power, don't get fancier - that makes no sense. We don't need to try a bunch of backyard bullsh*t like playing Randle-El at QB. What we need is Portis giving us 2nd and 4 or 3rd and 1 on a routine basis.[/quote]

Quoting myself because I am not above saying I told you so.

Line up and run right at them. That's Redskin football. Redskin football is not playing Antwaan Randle-El at QB.

Re: Antwaan Randle El
 

[quote=pg86;219048]Kordell Steward was a reciver and then did very well as a QB.....So why not try Randle El at it?!?[/quote]

No, Kordell was a QB at Colorado (threw the miracle pass to Westbrook to beat Michigan) but the Steelers put him at WR because he tanked as a pro QB but they still wanted to keep Slash's speed on the field somehow.

Randel El is better than Stewart ANY day.

I like the no-huddle Randel El at QB trick, but I hope he doesn't throw to Brunell! :D

Re: Antwaan Randle El
 

[quote=Mattyk72;219139]Kordell would have had a better career at WR if he stuck with that full time vs. QB.[/quote]

He certainly couldn't have been WORSE at QB, so any other position he's playing would be better for his teams.

The hype was huge and he WAS exciting to watch for a few games, but only because of his running...not his passing.

Re: Antwaan Randle El
 

[quote=SKINS73;218969]I know I've mentioned this in a couple of threads but I figured I'd start a new one to debate the issue. What if we tried Randle El at QB? His college resume isn't too bad and when things break down in the pocket he could make something happen. I pulled this from wikipedia:

He finished his college career as the fifth on the all-time NCAA total yardage list, and became the first player in college football history to record 2,500 total yards for four consecutive years. He finished his career with 7,469 passing yards, 3,895 rushing yards, and 86 touchdowns running and passing. He is considered to be the 2nd most statistically productive dual-threat quarterback to ever play college football.[/quote]

[COLOR=black]Are you joking? You really want the media to have a field day, don't you? Were you around during the first Gibbs era? Gibbs is all about building a TEAM. Putting people in a spot he feels they are the strongest, getting them to feel good in that spot, and getting the people around them to rely on them and TRUST them in that spot!! He wont' be doing any crazy rotating. That’s not how he works and that's not how he builds a team. GET REAL![/COLOR]
[COLOR=black] [/COLOR]
[COLOR=black]Brunell is here to STAY as our QB. Accept it![/COLOR]

Re: Antwaan Randle El
 

[quote=Schneed10;219052]This thread is absurd.[/quote]

I COULD NOT AGREE WITH YOU MORE!