Warpath  

Home | Forums | Salary Cap Info | Shop | Donate | Stay Connected




Go Back   Warpath > Redskins Forums > Redskins Locker Room


Campbell or Brunell in 2006?

Redskins Locker Room


View Poll Results: Assuming Campbell is ready to go, who would you like to see starting opening day '06?
Campbell 105 60.34%
Brunell 69 39.66%
Voters: 174. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-19-2006, 03:17 PM   #16
Camp Scrub
 
ParkerGibbs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 61
Re: Campbell or Brunell in 2006?

Quote:
Originally Posted by celts32
If "ready to go" means campbel is ready to play at a level at least close to Brunell last year than I say Campbel, but if not than Brunell. I want the best QB on the field...this is a playoff team now so i don't want to squander a whole season waiting on Campbell.

The Bills made a similar decision last year by replacing Bledsoe with losman on what was a contending team and it blew up in their faces.
Well obviously we would want the best QB on the field. The thread is to debate whether you think Campbell will put in the offseason work and be mentally ready for the starting roll (to which I say yes).

Phenomenal point about the Bills though, I can easily see the same scenario playing out in DC, and that would really suck.
ParkerGibbs is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
Old 01-19-2006, 03:23 PM   #17
Uncle Phil
 
SmootSmack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 44,636
Re: Campbell or Brunell in 2006?

Quote:
Originally Posted by mooby
I say we go with Brunell until he either:
A. Gets injured, because we all know how he plays when he's injured
B. Just generally sucks ass, or does not perform up to expectations.
The reason is, because Campbell has only learned for a year. Give him a few extra games, or another year on the bench, if Brunell can consistently play at a high level. There is no reason to put such a young quarterback out there. In case you don't know who J.P. Losman is, he was a second year quarterback for the Bills this year. They let Bledsoe go because they thought Losman would be ready to go as well. Instead, they wound up with a horrible record and Losman didn't even start the full season because he sucked so bad. I could see the same thing happening to us if we started Campbell on opening day.
But it could be like the Bengals, who benched a solid vet in Kitna to get Palmer playing time in 2004. The teams' and Palmers' performance in 2005 showed that it was probably worth it.
__________________
You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You
SmootSmack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2006, 03:25 PM   #18
Playmaker
 
irish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 3,597
Re: Campbell or Brunell in 2006?

There is no way Gibbs will turn a playoff contending team over to an unproven QB. MB will be the starter next year and if he gets another WR will do just fine.
irish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2006, 03:29 PM   #19
Karma Chameleon (I come and go)
 
jdlea's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Annapolis, MD
Age: 29
Posts: 3,087
Re: Campbell or Brunell in 2006?

Let's say, though, that the team contends and does the same next year under Brunell? How long do we live and die by him? I'm not even injecting my own opinion, I just want to know when people think we should turn it over to Campbell if we don't do it next year.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmootSmack
Albert Connell is perhaps the worst Redskin I ever had the misfortune of meeting. He's the kind of guy that makes media people covering their favorite team growing up no longer like that team
jdlea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2006, 03:38 PM   #20
Playmaker
 
onlydarksets's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: all up in your business
Posts: 2,693
Re: Campbell or Brunell in 2006?

Quote:
Originally Posted by irish
There is no way Gibbs will turn a playoff contending team over to an unproven QB. MB will be the starter next year and if he gets another WR will do just fine.
Yeah, he didn't do that with Schroeder and Rypien
onlydarksets is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2006, 03:40 PM   #21
‎\m/
 
Mattyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 41
Posts: 81,297
Re: Campbell or Brunell in 2006?

Quote:
Originally Posted by onlydarksets
Yeah, he didn't do that with Schroeder and Rypien
Big difference though, Campbell has 1 year under his belt, Ryp and Schroeder were stashed on the Skins roster for alot longer than that before they saw action.
Mattyk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2006, 03:41 PM   #22
Pro Bowl
 
skinsguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Greensboro, North Carolina
Posts: 6,520
Re: Campbell or Brunell in 2006?

Quote:
Originally Posted by onlydarksets
Yeah, he didn't do that with Schroeder and Rypien

Haha....good point! Of course, he didn't have a choice with Schroeder, but Doug Williams - a veteran - won us the Super Bowl!
__________________
Not the same Skinsguy that posts on ES.
skinsguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2006, 03:41 PM   #23
Special Teams
 
skindogger47's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Age: 32
Posts: 262
Re: Campbell or Brunell in 2006?

Start with Brunell, finish with Campbell. When exactly Campbell comes in will be entirely up to Brunell's performance, but the over/under is 10 games. By then, I feel like Brunell will have enough nagging injuries to make the move to Campbell prudent.
skindogger47 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2006, 03:43 PM   #24
Uncle Phil
 
SmootSmack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 44,636
Re: Campbell or Brunell in 2006?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattyk72
Big difference though, Campbell has 1 year under his belt, Ryp and Schroeder were stashed on the Skins roster for alot longer than that before they saw action.
Well I think Schroeder was just a rookie when he was thrust into action, but that was out of necessity when Joey T when down.
__________________
You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You
SmootSmack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2006, 03:44 PM   #25
Playmaker
 
onlydarksets's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: all up in your business
Posts: 2,693
Re: Campbell or Brunell in 2006?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattyk72
Big difference though, Campbell has 1 year under his belt, Ryp and Schroeder were stashed on the Skins roster for alot longer than that before they saw action.
Schroeder's first year in the NFL was 1985. He was the starter in 1986.
http://www.pro-football-reference.co...s/SchrJa00.htm

Rypien's first year in the NFL was 1988. He was the starter for most of 1989.
http://www.pro-football-reference.co...s/RypiMa00.htm

Now, granted, they were 24 and 26 respectively, and I have no clue what they were doing before then. However, I don't think that makes a difference in proving the point - there is no arguing this shows that Gibbs has demonstrated he isn't afraid to start inexperienced QBs that he believes in.
onlydarksets is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2006, 03:47 PM   #26
‎\m/
 
Mattyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 41
Posts: 81,297
Re: Campbell or Brunell in 2006?

Brunell still has some gas left, they'll look to surround him with a few more weapons and with an upgraded scheme with Saunders now aboard I see Brunell starting off the year as the starter again.
Mattyk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2006, 03:52 PM   #27
‎\m/
 
Mattyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 41
Posts: 81,297
Re: Campbell or Brunell in 2006?

Quote:
Originally Posted by onlydarksets
Schroeder's first year in the NFL was 1985. He was the starter in 1986.
http://www.pro-football-reference.co...s/SchrJa00.htm

Rypien's first year in the NFL was 1988. He was the starter for most of 1989.
http://www.pro-football-reference.co...s/RypiMa00.htm

Now, granted, they were 24 and 26 respectively, and I have no clue what they were doing before then. However, I don't think that makes a difference in proving the point - there is no arguing this shows that Gibbs has demonstrated he isn't afraid to start inexperienced QBs that he believes in.
I believe Rypien was stashed on IR in 1987, technically his first year in the league.

http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/1064

Same deal with Schroeder, stashed on IR in 1984. He was taken in the 3rd round in '84.

http://www.nfl.com/draft/history/years/1984

Yeah I know we're splitting hairs here, point is they both still had more experience than Campbell would if he were to play next year.
Mattyk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2006, 03:53 PM   #28
Uncle Phil
 
SmootSmack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 44,636
Re: Campbell or Brunell in 2006?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattyk72
I believe Rypien was stashed on IR in 1987, technically his first year in the league.

http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/1064

Same deal with Schroeder, stashed on IR in 1984. He was taken in the 3rd round in '94.

http://www.nfl.com/draft/history/years/1984

Yeah I know we're splitting hairs here, point is they both still had more experience than Campbell would if he were to play next year.
Do you remember what the rules were on players being eligible to practice while on IR back then? I don't even know what they are now actually.
__________________
You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You
SmootSmack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2006, 03:55 PM   #29
‎\m/
 
Mattyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 41
Posts: 81,297
Re: Campbell or Brunell in 2006?

Quote:
Originally Posted by TAFKAS
Do you remember what the rules were on players being eligible to practice while on IR back then? I don't even know what they are now actually.
Good question. I'm really not sure.

All I know is that was a frequent trick of Gibbs back then, to stash a player on IR.

Ryp was actually hurt in '87 though, so he might have been on IR for a good reason.
Mattyk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2006, 04:30 PM   #30
Playmaker
 
celts32's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Hackettstown NJ
Age: 43
Posts: 2,656
Re: Campbell or Brunell in 2006?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ParkerGibbs
Well obviously we would want the best QB on the field. The thread is to debate whether you think Campbell will put in the offseason work and be mentally ready for the starting roll (to which I say yes).

Phenomenal point about the Bills though, I can easily see the same scenario playing out in DC, and that would really suck.
Well if Campbell is really ready then anyone who wouldn't play him is crazy. The fact is that most young QB's are not ready when they get on the field and teams squander seasons hoping to get them ready. I think that knowing how Gibbs is a veteran guy he will not put Campbell on the field unless he thinks he is ready to win games. So lets all hope Gibbs can get him ready in time, but if not another year with Brunell would not necessarily be a bad thing.
__________________
Section 115 Row 23

“Goal line, goal line. I-left, tight wing, 70 chip on white.”

http://victorybeer.com/
celts32 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:13 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site is not officially affiliated with the Washington Redskins or the NFL.
Page generated in 0.32485 seconds with 10 queries

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25