Re: Gas in the tank: Brunell (sponsored by big oil)
 

[QUOTE=skinsguy]Not really no. For at least most of the season, Mark Brunell had played quite well. He was clutch in 3rd down situations. Maybe if you have access to every game of this past season, you'll find that Brunell played pretty well up until the point where he had gotten injured.[/QUOTE]

and the point where both patten and thrash were out and guys like jimmy farris were lining up opposite moss

My feeling is there is enough support both talentwise and depthwise around him and he's got enough left in the tank, but it never hurts to have the young backup ready to go. I doubt we'll see much of Brunell at all this summer.

Re: Gas in the tank: Brunell (sponsored by big oil)
 

At age 35, Mark Brunell is one year [I]younger [/I]than John Elway was when he won his first Super Bowl.

Just a thought.

Re: Gas in the tank: Brunell (sponsored by big oil)
 

master, i like your thinking

Re: Gas in the tank: Brunell (sponsored by big oil)
 

[quote=Master4Caster]At age 35, Mark Brunell is one year [I]younger [/I]than John Elway was when he won his first Super Bowl.

Just a thought.[/quote]

And he's younger than Rich Gannon when he got the Raiders to the bowl

Re: Gas in the tank: Brunell (sponsored by big oil)
 

Time, time is the key now. MB is going to get tons of it. This is the lines 3rd year together, play action and the running game are going to keep offenses off balance, Mark will have another career year, 25 TD's 8 Ints, 3500 yards

Re: Gas in the tank: Brunell (sponsored by big oil)
 

[quote=skinsguy]Not really no. For at least most of the season, Mark Brunell had played quite well. He was clutch in 3rd down situations. [/quote]

Sorry, but I don't consider 50% completion percentage and 76.9 QB rating on third down's last year "phenomenal". By comparison, Drew Bledsoe and Michael Vick had better third down numbers than Mark Brunell last year.

And the exact comment I was calling a joke was the remark that "[B]Every pass was amazing[/B]".

Re: Gas in the tank: Brunell (sponsored by big oil)
 

I think Mark is gonna be the best he has ever been this year last year protection was decent and I think it will be better this year. I agree this is his best year to get a ring and I think he knows that. We have great depth and even if he does go down Jason Campbell is gonna be awsome. Our best assest this year is gonna be the 3 and 4 wideout sets that are gonna set up portis for a 2000 yrd season. Hail to the skins baby the dynasty is comin back to D.C.

Re: Gas in the tank: Brunell (sponsored by big oil)
 

Guys! What more would you want form Mark Brunnell!? He was good in the clutch, made great long throws, crafty runs, managed games well, didn't make stupid mistakes often, and was overall a good player. Look at his stats last year and say to yourself "If I was told a Redskins quaterback would do this well this year, what would i think about this?"

Re: Gas in the tank: Brunell (sponsored by big oil)
 

[quote=BrudLee]The wealth of weapons we have will afford Brunell more time than he had last year - no one is sending the house and leaving (Portis, Moss, Randle El, Lloyd) uncovered.

I want Campbell ready for more than just age-related issues, though. Injury strikes old and young players without mercy.[/quote]
I totally agree ,last year defenses could send the house, if they do that this year they will get burned. the best part of the article was Al Saunders take on Brunell.
“He can get the ball out of his hands extremely fast,” Saunders said. “He’s more accurate than I expected him to be ... .He’s adjusted to the offense quicker than I thought. He’s probably one of the guys I’m most excited about.”
“You can’t give him [anything] that he can’t handle,” Saunders said

Re: Gas in the tank: Brunell (sponsored by big oil)
 

I have a question. Is every posting that Southpaw makes totally [SIZE=2]
ridiculous? This guy would get on his knees for Ramsey.
[/SIZE]

Re: Gas in the tank: Brunell (sponsored by big oil)
 

hahahaha, probably.

Re: Gas in the tank: Brunell (sponsored by big oil)
 

[quote=skins4me58203]I have a question. Is every posting that Southpaw makes totally [SIZE=2]
ridiculous? This guy would get on his knees for Ramsey.
[/SIZE][/quote]

Nice first post. Please find a post that I have ever made that is any more ridiculous than "[I]Every pass Mark Brunell threw last year was amazing!!1!1![/I]".

And at least the majority of my posts include some actual thought and a reasonable basis in fact. If the rest of yours are anything like this one, I don't imagine you'll be in this community very long.

Re: Gas in the tank: Brunell (sponsored by big oil)
 

[QUOTE=Southpaw]Nice first post. Please find a post that I have ever made that is any more ridiculous than "[I]Every pass Mark Brunell threw last year was amazing!!1!1![/I]".

And at least the majority of my posts include some actual thought and a [B]reasonable[/B] basis in fact. If the rest of yours are anything like this one, I don't imagine you'll be in this community very long.[/QUOTE]

Wouldn't you say that's a bit of a stretch? BAH-Zing!

No, seriously, most of your posts are well thought out. You just don't hold the majority view that Ramsey sucked donkey balls, so you get harassed for it.

And rightfully so I might add. BAH-Zow!

I'm on fire!

Re: Gas in the tank: Brunell (sponsored by big oil)
 

[quote=mheisig]Wouldn't you say that's a bit of a stretch? BAH-Zing!

No, seriously, most of your posts are well thought out. You just don't hold the majority view that Ramsey sucked donkey balls, so you get harassed for it.

And rightfully so I might add. BAH-Zow!

I'm on fire![/quote]

I don't mind going against the majority. I've never been much of a sheep... Bah-Zing!

Seriously though, I don't mind getting singled out since I don't hold the majority view on the Ramsey issue, but when someone makes an account just to slam me in a thread and send me retarded private messages, I get a little agitated. But like Mike Golic said, the internet is the beer courage of the 21st century.

Re: Gas in the tank: Brunell (sponsored by big oil)
 

[QUOTE=Southpaw]I don't mind going against the majority. I've never been much of a sheep... Bah-Zing!

Seriously though, I don't mind getting singled out since I don't hold the majority view on the Ramsey issue, but when someone makes an account just to slam me in a thread and send me retarded private messages, I get a little agitated. But like Mike Golic said, the internet is the beer courage of the 21st century.[/QUOTE]

Well we're not ALL retards on this board. I mean there's the weird new guy, and TMC, but what can I say.

Everyone's a bully on "teh intarwebs."

Re: Gas in the tank: Brunell (sponsored by big oil)
 

[quote=mheisig]Everyone's a bully on "teh intarwebs."[/quote]

LOLZ!1!!1! I don't feel "bullied" in the least, but I agree.

Re: Gas in the tank: Brunell (sponsored by big oil)
 

Southpaw, I have no problem with you and your thoughts that Ramsey never really got a fair shake. I used to like him a lot; hell, I bought his jersey after his rookie year and I used to tell people that in a few years people would call him Brett Favre-like (mainly because of his toughness and arm). I thought he'd be great for Gibbs because of his strong arm, but I guess I forgot about the questionable throws that he's capable of when he's under pressure.
I think that people like Carr and Harrington have had longer to try to get better because their team owners didn't have the urge to win right away. Carr is at the helm of a new franchise with a terrible O-line, so the blame gets shifted away from him. And Harrington was on a team ran by Matt Millan, so again, the blame was typically shifted away from him. Now, Harrington voluntarily went to a team where he knows he'll probably just be a backup, and Carr is probably in his last season if he doesn't step up. So, really, they're not in that much of a different situation than Ramsey.
I just feel like, at this point, Ramsey's been so beat down and confused by all the changes and whatnot that he'll be nothing better than a good backup for some team for the rest of his career, and that kind of sucks.

PS - I've been drinking

Re: Gas in the tank: Brunell (sponsored by big oil)
 

Last year, until the last 5 weeks, every game was close. Only 2 games in the first 11 were decided by more than a touchdown (SF, Giants#1). So Brunell had to stay in. At the end, we finally started putting teams away. This year I think we should be able to get a healthy lead in a number of games. Since Joe Gibbs probably sees what we do (i.e., Brunell has more chance to be hurt for the playoffs if he's left in more time) he (and Saunders) may start putting in Campbell (and Betts) to preserve Brunell and Portis, as well as seasoning Campbell. In his first few chances, I expect Campbell to pass little, but if he shows ability, they'll probably let him pass more. That way, if something does happen to Brunell, they have someone who can replace him (assuming Campbell or Collins appear good enough.)

As far as Brunell in 2004, I'd have to say that Coles was our best receiver after the catch...he sure could tackle those defensive backs!

I also think that Thrash may have been more injured than he let on last year (like Brunell in 2004), and he may once again be a good 3rd down receiver, since he always knows where the first-down line is.

Re: Gas in the tank: Brunell (sponsored by big oil)
 

[QUOTE=Southpaw]Sorry, but I don't consider 50% completion percentage and 76.9 QB rating on third down's last year "phenomenal". By comparison, Drew Bledsoe and Michael Vick had better third down numbers than Mark Brunell last year.

And the exact comment I was calling a joke was the remark that "[B]Every pass was amazing[/B]".[/QUOTE]

This biggest thing you're ignoring is the fact that we made the playoffs, and neither the two quarterbacks you mentioned did. So, considering the argument of stats vs. playoff appearances, I'd take playoff appearances anyday of the week.

It's a joke to assume any quarterback in the league is going to throw a pretty pass on every attempt.

Re: Gas in the tank: Brunell (sponsored by big oil)
 

[quote=scowan]I think Brunell is tougher than you guys are giving him credit for. He knows this year is probably his best opportunity ever to get to a Super Bowl. He know Campbell is waiting in the wings, and my bet is that he plays his butt off this year.[/quote]When your biggest offseason worry is how a seasoned vet will perform at QB, it's time to buy those SB tickets.

Re: Gas in the tank: Brunell (sponsored by big oil)
 

[quote=skinsguy]This biggest thing you're ignoring is the fact that we made the playoffs, and neither the two quarterbacks you mentioned did. So, considering the argument of stats vs. playoff appearances, I'd take playoff appearances anyday of the week.[/quote]

I'm not ingnoring the fact that Brunell performed adequately enough for the Redskins to make the playoffs last season. What I'm disputing is everyone talking about him like he's a world beater. Yes, he kept the F-ups to a minimum, but when it was time to put up or shut up(ie. 3rd down), he got the job done only half of the time. I do think he'll be able to improve on 3rd downs this season, if he's able to remain upright, but that's a big if.

And if any part of this team deserves props for making the playoffs, it's the defense which was on fire for the late season run, and actually put points onto the board, while Brunell and the offense limped into the playoffs.

Re: Gas in the tank: Brunell (sponsored by big oil)
 

[QUOTE=skinsguy]This biggest thing you're ignoring is the fact that we made the playoffs, and neither the two quarterbacks you mentioned did. So, considering the argument of stats vs. playoff appearances, I'd take playoff appearances anyday of the week.

It's a joke to assume any quarterback in the league is going to throw a pretty pass on every attempt.[/QUOTE]

That is a good point. However, a lot of the people on this board were angry because Brunell didn't make the Pro Bowl and Vick did. A lot of people were arguing that Bledsoe or Brunell should have gone in ahead of Vick. So, Brunell was naturally being compared to those two. I can see why the comparison was made.

I, however, have made it clear that I think this team could be in trouble with Brunell at the helm. I think his time is really running out and I do think the offense is better, I just don't think he'll be considerably better than last season which may not be good enough to make the playoffs this year.