Re: Brunell is Bad
 

[QUOTE=GoSkins!]Maybe we can agree on this:

maybe Brunnel is better than you think
AND
maybe Ramsey is better than Gibbs thinks.

To me, Brunnel looked good when he had to open up the offense ?(KC, Denver, Dallas...), but there is no doubt that defenses would have backed off if Ramsey was back there and the line could protect him. I'll be interested to see what Saunders thinks if Ramsey stays.[/QUOTE]I would think that with Gibbs given Ramsey the OK to seak a trade gives us some insight to what Saunders thinks of him. Saunders had to of looked at game film and pratice film of Ramsey befor they gave him the Ok to go looking for a trade. If for one minute Saunders thought Ramsey should be the starter or could be the starter of the team he would not be looking for a trade.

Re: Brunell is Bad
 

Paintrain, read my post and I explain how. Ramsey would have given us a better TOP, more passing yards, more TDs, and more INTs. However he'd have far fewer fumbles than Brunell. Ramsey did more in slightly over one quarter in the first game than Brunell was able to pull out in the remainder of it. This was a good defense he was playing very well against.

I think the total amount of turnovers would have been similar, but Ramsey would have had more, yet we would have scored more and had more players worked into the mix. Easily the best season since 1999, big deal, this was "Easily the best season" for every Redskin since 1999, we made the playoffs. Little of that, in my opinion, had to do with the great play of Mark Brunell.

I guess I'm wrong about his contract, I thought the restructure last year made him even easier to cut this year. I could definitely be wrong here.

Re: Brunell is Bad
 

[QUOTE=Paintrain]Couple of points of contention.. First, cutting Brunell would acutally [b]cost[/b] $300K more than keeping him.. Brunell had his best season in years and [b][i]easily[/b][/i] the best season for a Redskins QB since Brad Johnson in 1999 and Ramsey could have done better? How much better are you looking for? You admitted that Ramsey would probably turn the ball over more, how is that an improvement? Brunell certainly isn't the picture of youth or ideal health but I feel 200% better going into the season with him as the starter than I would Ramsey..[/QUOTE]Come on man whats a few turn overs every game. Who needs to play field position and who cares that we toss a few to the other guys in the red zone. We can make all that up on a few long passes. Gibbs is just blind to all of Ramsey's tallent and is not going to look like a fool for picking up Brunell. Thats his guy!

Re: Brunell is Bad
 

[QUOTE=offiss]I am very interested in Saunders evaluation of the situation will be as well, but I have a feeling Ramsey will be out of hear before he has a chance to do so, as we close in on draft day something is probably going to happen maybe even on draft day, right now things are up in the air on which direction teams with QB needs are going to go, once that straightens itself out Patrick will probably be on the move, to bad for us IMO.[/QUOTE]

I'd think if Saunders felt strongly about keeping Ramsey then Gibbs would have listened.

Re: Brunell is Bad
 

[QUOTE=Sean Taylor is God]I'm not going to dazzle you with numbers or deep theory. I just want to see where this goes. I have been concerned with the aquisition of a #2 WR when somone posed that it is Brunell's fault not Patten's. He is absolutely right. I have never been sold on him but what little offensive success we saw last year had little to do with his play and more to do with individual great plays, good team strategy, and a great offensive line. Our most successful pass plays were quick screen's to Moss and Cooley, and passes in the flat to Sellars. This requires nothing from the QB but delivery and every 3rd QB in the league can give you delivery. Our success on these passes were due to great blocks and moss's speed. At no point did Brunell demonstrate an ability to read coverages and complete passes down the middle of the field. The long ball consisted of him throwing it as far as his weak arm could muster and have speedy Moss outrun coverage. He rarely even attempts down the field passes and when he does they make me sad. Honestly, I tear up. His willingness to throw the ball away is something for review, and he has no problem punting the ball away. I often feel that he does not want the ball and would prefer that the other team's offense had it so the defense would be responsible. We have four arguable top-5 at their position lineman who provided remarkable protection last year. Barring injuries they should be better next year, but hopefully the guy responsible for getting the ball out of the pocket will be calm, assertive, and not mark brunell.


PS- I was just watching a recording of Gibbs at the combine. I love him. And I love you.[/QUOTE]

4 top 5 linemen? who would those be? not dockery or rabach... and jansen and samuels are alright, but neither is top 5. (samuels is althletic enough to be in the top 5, but he's too inconsistant). thomas i would say is undoubtedly top 5, but 1/5 is a lot less than 4/5.

brunell threw deep fine. see dallas, see 49ers, etc... moss was in the top 3 in 40+ yard passes. most of his screen stuff went for 10-20 yards, not 40+.

brunell does have the running qb menality where he looks 1,2 and tosses it or runs or dump it off where (good) pocket passers tend to get an extra read in. he's actually good at what he does, but lossing patten really hurt and at the end of the year he was obviously banged up and playing very poorly. that' a far cry from saying he's just outright bad though. The protection wasn't remarkable though, it was average to slightly above average... which would be appaling if we actually did have 4/5 Olinemen that were top5 at their positions.

Re: Brunell is Bad
 

[QUOTE=Duffman003]I agree, I think Ramsey could have done just as well with a very good O- Line, a very good wide reciever and tight end, then also throw in there that we have clinton portis. Don't forget that our defense was the main reason why we had 10 wins because they are the only consistent week in and week out pretty much. I don't have a problem with Brunell though I think he tries as hard as he can but he is getting pretty old and heart can only take you so far.[/QUOTE]

everyone is working off the defense did it all cause of 2004, but they're were a lot of 30 point games this year and the offense wasn't ranked 29th, it was above average. The offense wasn't existant in the playoffs, but in the regular season, the D gave up a lot more points and long runs than expected (36 to TB for example).

Re: Brunell is Bad
 

[QUOTE=firstdown]I would think that with Gibbs given Ramsey the OK to seak a trade gives us some insight to what Saunders thinks of him. Saunders had to of looked at game film and pratice film of Ramsey befor they gave him the Ok to go looking for a trade. If for one minute Saunders thought Ramsey should be the starter or could be the starter of the team he would not be looking for a trade.[/QUOTE]

It's likely that the Ramsey Bridge had already been burned before Saunders got here.

Take a look at the contracts. Suppose Saunders decided he wanted to start Patrick in 2006 and he was tickled pink with his performance...what then? How would we retain Ramsey for the future given his increased value, the Campbell and Brunell contracts, and the salary cap?

Re: Brunell is Bad
 

[QUOTE=Huddle]It's likely that the Ramsey Bridge had already been burned before Saunders got here.

Take a look at the contracts. Suppose Saunders decided he wanted to start Patrick in 2006 and he was tickled pink with his performance...what then? How would we retain Ramsey for the future given his increased value, the Campbell and Brunell contracts, and the salary cap?[/QUOTE]

campbell wasn't a top5 pick, he's cheap. If you cut brunell after june 1, you save 4-5mill this year and 1mill next year. ramsey is also cheap.

Re: Brunell is Bad
 

[QUOTE=firstdown]Come on man whats a few turn overs every game. Who needs to play field position and who cares that we toss a few to the other guys in the red zone. We can make all that up on a few long passes. Gibbs is just blind to all of Ramsey's tallent and is not going to look like a fool for picking up Brunell. Thats his guy![/QUOTE]


You act as if Brunell doesn't turn the ball over? He turned the ball over at basically the same clip as Ramsey, and yes his were very costly because we lost 2 games in 2004 because of defensive TD's off of Brunell turnovers, so to make out Ramsey as some kind of TO machine is fine if you want to admit Brunell is with him step for step, and that's without the offensive output.

Is there any possiblity that Gibbs could maybe be wrong on this matter? At the very least even if he's right about Ramsey don't you think he could possibly be wrong about Brunell? I know if I gave up what Gibbs gave up for Brunell I would defietly feel an obligation to make that work, Gibbs had to make an evaluation on Ramsey based soley on film under SS as if any QB could have survived in that offense, and he gave up the farm for Brunell, that is a tough pill to swallow if your wrong on a major decision like that.

It just seemed to me that Gibbs is scared to death to allow Ramsey any playing time, I just don't understand why? He showed Gibbs in 2004 enough to be named the starter, yet Gibbs would rather put Brunell on the field in a wheel chair than give Ramsey an opportunity, something just doesn't add up? Can anyone disagree that a healthy Ramsey is better than a hobbled Brunell? We all saw how Brunell plays when hurt, if you don't disagree with that question than you will have to agree Gibbs was wrong in playing a player in Brunell who wasen't able to perform properly in our offense. We are all human even the best can make a mistake it happens all the time, maybe he did, and maybe he didn't, but to specualte that is not a bad thing.

Re: Brunell is Bad
 

[QUOTE=That Guy]campbell wasn't a top5 pick, he's cheap. If you cut brunell after june 1, you save 4-5mill this year and 1mill next year. ramsey is also cheap.[/QUOTE]

Ramsey won't be cheap to re-sign for the future if Saunders starts him and he performs well in 2006. That was the scenario.

We aren't talking about this year's cap but 2007's.

So my point was...it doesn't matter what Saunder's opinion is of Ramsey. There's no good reason to keep him in the team's plans.

Re: Brunell is Bad
 

offiss, i think that brunell gives the redskins the best chance at winning,BUT im with you thinking that p ramsey has never gotten a fair shake with the skins since coach gibbs has come back.its probably better for all parties involved that he move on.im not really sure why the skins braintrust thinks about ramsey the way they do,but they have been constant in their thinking so he might as well go somewhere he has a chance to play

Re: Brunell is Bad
 

if he performs well in 2006 and has a starting role then thats the downside of not signing him now. campbell will still be cheap and brunell being cut would still save money. If the skins can't afford a good QB (which would be cheap the first 3 years) then they've got bigger problems.

Re: Brunell is Bad
 

[QUOTE=That Guy]if he performs well in 2006 and has a starting role then thats the downside of not signing him now. [/QUOTE]

Are you saying that you think the Skins and Ramsey could come to terms on an extension now?

Re: Brunell is Bad
 

[QUOTE=Huddle]Are you saying that you think the Skins and Ramsey could come to terms on an extension now?[/QUOTE]

no, but in a different life, thats alwayss the downside to not getting extensions done early, you pay more. the upside, of course, if that if they suck, its easier to kick them out the door.

you were discussing the possibility of keeping him, i was following that with the hypothetical that brunell would be easy to toss (cap wise) and campbell would be cheap enough that taking on a good QB contract would still be possible... SO if ramsey did well, the other QBs' contracts would be a non factor is whether you keep him or not.

as far as reality, he's gone regardless of cap sense, cause gibbs likes brunell and campbell, and its impossible to like 3 QBs and keep them all happy (and he's obviously made his choice).

Re: Brunell is Bad
 

[QUOTE=offiss]It just seemed to me that Gibbs is scared to death to allow Ramsey any playing time, I just don't understand why? He showed Gibbs in 2004 enough to be named the starter, yet Gibbs would rather put Brunell on the field in a wheel chair than give Ramsey an opportunity, something just doesn't add up? Can anyone disagree that a healthy Ramsey is better than a hobbled Brunell? We all saw how Brunell plays when hurt, if you don't disagree with that question than you will have to agree Gibbs was wrong in playing a player in Brunell who wasen't able to perform properly in our offense. We are all human even the best can make a mistake it happens all the time, maybe he did, and maybe he didn't, but to specualte that is not a bad thing.[/QUOTE]

I'll agree with you about Brunell playing hurt. He did look bad and I thought we would have been better served to play Ramsey. That said, we won those games and it is hard to fault a win.

The basic thing that scares Gibbs about Ramsey is his lack of mobility and his last second decision making. I think that both of those things would get better with experience but Gibbs went to Campbell. My problem is not so much that Gibbs went with Brunell because Brunell had the experience to help Gibbs through his own transition back to offensive guru. It's that he gave up on Ramsey before the offense as a whole (coaches too) started to click and yes, Gibbs should have pulled Brunell earlier a couple of times this year so that Ramsey could get more time (San Fran, Dallas-2, Eagles-2).

It also probably scared Gibbs to death that Ramsey couldn't move well and Williams probably had the defense all over him through training camp. You see that and then realize you have to face the Cowboys and Eagles it might make you a little apprehensive also. I know that after the Chicago game all I could think was "Ramsey is going to get killed playing Dallas" once they see the way Chicago rattled him into giving up the ball.

Re: Brunell is Bad
 

[QUOTE=Daseal]Paintrain, read my post and I explain how. Ramsey would have given us a better TOP, more passing yards, more TDs, and more INTs. However he'd have far fewer fumbles than Brunell. Ramsey did more in slightly over one quarter in the first game than Brunell was able to pull out in the remainder of it. This was a good defense he was playing very well against.

I think the total amount of turnovers would have been similar, but Ramsey would have had more, yet we would have scored more and had more players worked into the mix. Easily the best season since 1999, big deal, this was "Easily the best season" for every Redskin since 1999, we made the playoffs. Little of that, in my opinion, had to do with the great play of Mark Brunell.

I guess I'm wrong about his contract, I thought the restructure last year made him even easier to cut this year. I could definitely be wrong here.[/QUOTE]
I read your post, but I didn't see any explanation that despite an increase in turnovers that would lead to an increase in TD, TOP and passing yards. By increased INT doesn't that inherently lead to a reduction in TOP and passing yards? Not to mention the possibility of some of those increased TD leading to INT returned for TD or at least into the red zone?

I'm clearly on record as saying that the Redskins are better with Ramsey not under center.. I believe he is what he has shown, flashes of brilliance, great physical tools, very inconsistent, holds onto the ball too long, makes poor decisions with the football.. In short, Gus Frerotte II.. No he didn't, yeah I went there.

Re: Brunell is Bad
 

[QUOTE=celts32]You love Gibbs yet you don't trust his guidance on the single most important decision on the football team. If Brunell was not the best QB the redskins had last year than why was he playing for 16 straight weeks. I just can't come to terms with how you can be a Joe Gibbs fan and still question the biggest decision he made all of last season. This isn't a run of the mill decision like a call on a particular 3rd & 2 or whether or not Thrash is better than Jacobs...the starting QB is the most major of major decisions. To imply that gibbs started the wrong QB for 16 straight weeks pretty much says that you don't believe he knows what he's doing. I don't see how you can seperate one from the other.

And as for your basic point on Brunels performance, I disagree with it completely. I don't think the Redskins would have been any where near the playoffs with Ramsey or Campbel playing last year. Brunell is not the player he used to be but he had a very good season. He carried out the offense the way Gibbs wanted and prodcued 10 wins.[/QUOTE]



Plus, he had the best year statistically of his NFL career.

Re: Brunell is Bad
 

Yeh, yet another Brunell/Ramsey thread! Gee, haven't seen that lately! :/

Re: Brunell is Bad
 

first of all some1 shoulda closed this thread when it started......2nd u guys are saying that when a qb relys on his arm and tries to squeeze to make big plays is bad? the only way to make a big play like that is to take the gamble of throwing it up.......LOOK AT FAVRE he threw way more ints than td's i think most in his career.......would u take brunell b/c he doesnt go for the big play and doesnt throw ints, or would u take favre whos known for big plays in tight situations but throws ints too? ok then.....bottom line is ramsey didnt get his fair shot and thats bs! i respect brunell for taking us to the playoffs, but u act like ramseys an idiot and hasnt grown and wont grow anymore..........when he played releif for brunells old broken ass he did great he threw a thouchdown pass to santana and he "managed the game" i think better than brunelll he looked fine to me.......if we lose ramsey im really gnna miss him we havent seen ANYTHING in campbell absolutley nothing, he had great offensive supporting cast in aubrn, he threw a couple good balls in a mediocre ass defense in the pre-season......i say stick with ramsey and make big plays

Re: Brunell is Bad
 

[QUOTE=Sean Taylor is God]I'm not going to dazzle you with numbers or deep theory. I just want to see where this goes. I have been concerned with the aquisition of a #2 WR when somone posed that it is Brunell's fault not Patten's. He is absolutely right. I have never been sold on him but what little offensive success we saw last year had little to do with his play and more to do with individual great plays, good team strategy, and a great offensive line. Our most successful pass plays were quick screen's to Moss and Cooley, and passes in the flat to Sellars. This requires nothing from the QB but delivery and every 3rd QB in the league can give you delivery. Our success on these passes were due to great blocks and moss's speed. At no point did Brunell demonstrate an ability to read coverages and complete passes down the middle of the field. The long ball consisted of him throwing it as far as his weak arm could muster and have speedy Moss outrun coverage. He rarely even attempts down the field passes and when he does they make me sad. Honestly, I tear up. His willingness to throw the ball away is something for review, and he has no problem punting the ball away. I often feel that he does not want the ball and would prefer that the other team's offense had it so the defense would be responsible. We have four arguable top-5 at their position lineman who provided remarkable protection last year. Barring injuries they should be better next year, but hopefully the guy responsible for getting the ball out of the pocket will be calm, assertive, and not mark brunell.


PS- I was just watching a recording of Gibbs at the combine. I love him. And I love you.[/QUOTE]

I find your entire post lacking any real knowledge of what the QB position is all about. While I will concede that Brunell is not Payton Manning, I will say this he made the most of what he was given to work with. I don't know if you go to the games or watch on TV, but when your at the game you can see if guys are running wide open and the QB is not getting him the ball. As someone that was at almost all the home games this year and even a couple of the away games that was not the case. I am sure you are a very big Redskins fan but your opinion that big plays in the passing game happen in spite of Brunell rather than because of him is just foolish. I realize bashing Brunell has become the "In thing" to do on a lot of these fan sites, but to make the statements you've made is ridiculous.

Re: Brunell is Bad
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72]Please excuse the hostility but you have to understand we've discussed this very topic ad nauseam... when you're new to a forum try doing a [url="http://www.thewarpath.net/search.php?"]search[/url] before posting. Often you'll find we're already discussing your topic.[/QUOTE]
lmao hahaha damn what can I say

Re: Brunell is Bad
 

[QUOTE=jordanz301]first of all some1 shoulda closed this thread when it started......2nd u guys are saying that when a qb relys on his arm and tries to squeeze to make big plays is bad? the only way to make a big play like that is to take the gamble of throwing it up.......LOOK AT FAVRE he threw way more ints than td's i think most in his career.......would u take brunell b/c he doesnt go for the big play and doesnt throw ints, or would u take favre whos known for big plays in tight situations but throws ints too? ok then.....bottom line is ramsey didnt get his fair shot and thats bs! i respect brunell for taking us to the playoffs, but u act like ramseys an idiot and hasnt grown and wont grow anymore..........when he played releif for brunells old broken ass he did great he threw a thouchdown pass to santana and he "managed the game" i think better than brunelll he looked fine to me.......if we lose ramsey im really gnna miss him we havent seen ANYTHING in campbell absolutley nothing, he had great offensive supporting cast in aubrn, he threw a couple good balls in a mediocre ass defense in the pre-season......i say stick with ramsey and make big plays[/QUOTE]
Very good

Re: Brunell is Bad
 

[QUOTE=Daseal]I've never felt comfortable with Brunell behind center. Never liked the way we acquired him and have a constant feeling of impending doom when he drops back and doesnt hand off to Portis. However, I will be the first to admit he made some spectacular plays this season. Especially in Dallas, and every now and then he'd throw a ball perfectly into coverage that made you say "wow." Even with that, I don't feel that's enough to keep him here and I really thought Ramsey could have done a much better job than Brunell this season. While he'll definitely turn the ball over more, he'll also put up a lot more yards and spread the ball around a lot more than Brunell.

I may be wrong in this, but I think we save a lot of money cutting Brunell, I'd feel much more confident cutting Brunell and keeping a cheap Ramsey to compete with Campbell for the starting job.

Brunell's biggest downfall is when he gets at all hurt, he starts to make Ryan Leaf look like a good pickup. He won't pull himself out, Gibbs won't pull him out, and all he does is hurt the game. One play, in particular, made me nervous about Brunell last year. I think we can all remember Cooley trotting, wide open, along the back of the endzone. While Brunell stared at him the whole time before finally throwing the ball what seemed like hours later. During this time a defensive player locked onto Brunells eyes and was pretty close to Cooley by the time he caught it. After this he said he just had to make sure he was open. Granted he made that one, but how many potential plays did he miss.

I simply don't feel confident with Brunell behind center, while he had few interceptions, like an above poster said, his fumbles were pretty bad. At least Ramsey throws INT's 40 yards up field near the receiver.[/QUOTE]
I know what you mean I was never on his bandwagon he never impressed me i knew the fall would come... anyone can throw an 5 yard pass

Re: Brunell is Bad
 

[QUOTE=Dana87]I find your entire post lacking any real knowledge of what the QB position is all about. While I will concede that Brunell is not Payton Manning, I will say this he made the most of what he was given to work with. I don't know if you go to the games or watch on TV, but when your at the game you can see if guys are running wide open and the QB is not getting him the ball. As someone that was at almost all the home games this year and even a couple of the away games that was not the case. I am sure you are a very big Redskins fan but your opinion that big plays in the passing game happen in spite of Brunell rather than because of him is just foolish. I realize bashing Brunell has become the "In thing" to do on a lot of these fan sites, but to make the statements you've made is ridiculous.[/QUOTE]

Why don't you explain to me what the QB position is all about?

This is my first day actually posting on one of these sites so I am not joining any bandwagon. How are my claims ridiculous? Great you go to the games, so do I. And without santana moss there is no deep threat because Brunell can barely get it down there. You say he made the most of what he was given to work with. The 4th ranked RB, a line with top 5 people at each position except for LG. Moss. Cooley. Dream coaching staff and solid team concept. Shhhh! I don't want to hear from you people any more. He has a tremendous amount of talent around him and he underacheived this year. Period.

Re: Brunell is Bad
 

[QUOTE=Sean Taylor is God]I'm not going to dazzle you with numbers or deep theory. I just want to see where this goes. I have been concerned with the aquisition of a #2 WR when somone posed that it is Brunell's fault not Patten's. He is absolutely right. I have never been sold on him but what little offensive success we saw last year had little to do with his play and more to do with individual great plays, good team strategy, and a great offensive line. Our most successful pass plays were quick screen's to Moss and Cooley, and passes in the flat to Sellars. This requires nothing from the QB but delivery and every 3rd QB in the league can give you delivery. Our success on these passes were due to great blocks and moss's speed. At no point did Brunell demonstrate an ability to read coverages and complete passes down the middle of the field. The long ball consisted of him throwing it as far as his weak arm could muster and have speedy Moss outrun coverage. He rarely even attempts down the field passes and when he does they make me sad. Honestly, I tear up. His willingness to throw the ball away is something for review, and he has no problem punting the ball away. I often feel that he does not want the ball and would prefer that the other team's offense had it so the defense would be responsible. We have four arguable top-5 at their position lineman who provided remarkable protection last year. Barring injuries they should be better next year, but hopefully the guy responsible for getting the ball out of the pocket will be calm, assertive, and not mark brunell.


PS- I was just watching a recording of Gibbs at the combine. I love him. And I love you.[/QUOTE]

[color=black]I actually thought Brunell had a shot at the Pro Bowl last year...More of his lack of mistakes rather than numbers. Before the game in Arizona Brunell had fewer INTs than any other starting QB; I believe he still finished in the top three in that category. Brunell's not going to throw for 300 yds every week but he manages the game and understands our system. Cut him some slack he did manage to get us to the Playoffs as the list goes on of QBs that have tried and failed since our last run.[/color]

[color=black]He made me a believer...I will always be bias when it comes to discussing Brunell after witnessing the game in Dallas (One of the best comebacks that I have seen to this day). He's getting up there and I to am anxious to see Campbell, but I think it was a good move to replace Ramsey last year or we would have added another year to our playoff drought.[/color]

[color=black]For the first time since I can recall, I didn't have to grind my teeth every time the QB dropped back to pass...my palms weren't as sweaty (and I've been a fan since Gus Frerotte). I felt comfortable with Brunell as our starter but Ramsey scares the hell out of me and I don't have alot of patience for a rookie project (Jason Campbell)...I wouldn't mind if Brunell were handed the keys again next year.[/color]

Re: Brunell is Bad
 

Brunell bashers, one question... What were you looking for from the QB position that we didn't get in '05?

Re: Brunell is Bad
 

4,000+ yards passing, 45 TD, 0 Int. 80% completetion percentage, 158.3 Rating and 1,000 rushing yards.


Sorry I have high standards.

Re: Brunell is Bad
 

[QUOTE=Dirtbag359]4,000+ yards passing, 45 TD, 0 Int. 80% completetion percentage, 158.3 Rating and 1,000 rushing yards.


[color=red]Sorry I have high standards[/color].[/QUOTE]
I suggest you pull out the PlayStation2 and set it on Rookie... Brunell is definitely an upgrade from past QBs.

Re: Brunell is Bad
 

[QUOTE=Sean Taylor is God]Why don't you explain to me what the QB position is all about?

This is my first day actually posting on one of these sites so I am not joining any bandwagon. How are my claims ridiculous? Great you go to the games, so do I. And without santana moss there is no deep threat because Brunell can barely get it down there. You say he made the most of what he was given to work with. The 4th ranked RB, a line with top 5 people at each position except for LG. Moss. Cooley. Dream coaching staff and solid team concept. Shhhh! I don't want to hear from you people any more. He has a tremendous amount of talent around him and he underacheived this year. Period.[/QUOTE]

you don't get 40+ yard pass plays with a noodle arm. its not george or farve, but its not as bad as you seem to think.

and again, propagating the rumour that we have top 5 offensive linemen at any position besides RG is a vicious vicious lie.


and then you decide to go with the i'm right causes i said so so shut up line :P that's really a great way to sell your opinion.

Re: Brunell is Bad
 

[QUOTE=Skins_4_Lyfe]I suggest you pull out the PlayStation2 and set it on Rookie... Brunell is definitely an upgrade from past QBs.[/QUOTE]

sarcasm doesn't translate to web forums i guess...

Re: Brunell is Bad
 

guys, why put the blame on brunell? it's obviously nascar boy's fault that our team sucks and is going to fail next year right? he's obviously gotten too old to handle the nfl. we should put him out to pasture.

Re: Brunell is Bad
 

[quote]Brunell bashers, one question... What were you looking for from the QB position that we didn't get in '05?[/quote]

I was looking for a quarterback to go out and win games, not go out and try not to lose games.

Re: Brunell is Bad
 

We did win 10 games and a playoff game too, right?

Just checking.

Re: Brunell is Bad
 

[QUOTE=Daseal]I was looking for a quarterback to go out and win games, not go out and try not to lose games.[/QUOTE]

dallas, reg season tampa bay (defense blew that one ten times over), dallas 2, giants-2, san fransisco, etc.

Re: Brunell is Bad
 

[QUOTE=That Guy]you don't get 40+ yard pass plays with a noodle arm. its not george or farve, but its not as bad as you seem to think.

and again, propagating the rumour that we have top 5 offensive linemen at any position besides RG is a vicious vicious lie.


and then you decide to go with the i'm right causes i said so so shut up line :P that's really a great way to sell your opinion.[/QUOTE]

I can throw an NFL football 40 yds. So can a bunch of people on this message board. Samuels is a top 5 LT, Jansen?, Rabach, and you think randy thomas is the only good one? Brunell has a offensive line, that I might ad is run by one of the best line coaches of all time, Joe Bugel.

Re: Brunell is Bad
 

[QUOTE=Sean Taylor is God]I can throw an NFL football 40 yds. So can a bunch of people on this message board. Samuels is a top 5 LT, Jansen?, Rabach, and you think randy thomas is the only good one? Brunell has a offensive line, that I might ad is run by one of the best line coaches of all time, Joe Bugel.[/QUOTE]

Our OL gave up 35 sacks last year, not really a great number for a top unit as you say.

The OL is still a work in progress.

Re: Brunell is Bad
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72]Our OL gave up 35 sacks last year, not really a great number for a top unit as you say.

The OL is still a work in progress.[/QUOTE]

Actually, you are proving my point. We had an excellent OL but Brunell's indeciciveness and lack of awareness were the cause of those sacks. A lineman can only be expected to block for so long.

Re: Brunell is Bad
 

I'm still baffled by the title of this thread. We were a couple of wins away from the big dance, and somehow people find things wrong with Portis, or Brunell, or this or that guy. I know it's an open forum and I'm totally cool with that, but to bash guys who had Pro-Bowl caliber seasons is just beyond me.

Re: Brunell is Bad
 

I really can't believe that many of you disagree that Mark Brunell had an excellent supporting cast. It boggles the mind.

Re: Brunell is Bad
 

So after all this is said and done, you've flip-flopped a bit, do you still think that Brunell is bad or do you think that he's not as great as he was made out to be last year?

I strongly feel that he made plays when he had to and definitely had a Pro Bowl caliber season, however I feel he should have had the balls to sit down when his knee wasn't 100% in the playoffs.