Warpath  

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




Go Back   Warpath > Redskins Forums > Redskins Locker Room


Contenders with QB questions

Redskins Locker Room


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-23-2006, 01:30 PM   #1
Playmaker
 
Paintrain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL
Age: 43
Posts: 4,910
Contenders with QB questions

Everything I read and hear about the Redskins and the upcoming season revolves around the play of Brunell.. Looking around the league at some of the other teams that are supposed to be in playoff contention I see at least 6 other teams that have QB questions as big or bigger than Brunell..

Miami & Cincinnati-Culpepper and Palmer are coming off of severe knee injuries and Culpepper has to learn a new system and players.
Baltimore-McNair has to learn a new system and players plus he hasn't been healthy over 16 games in years.
NYG-Manning was very inconsistent in the 2nd half and their schedule is much much tougher this year.
Arizona-Warner can't stay healthy and Leinhart is a rookie
SD-Rivers hasn't started a game yet the 'experts' still have the Chargers winning the AFC West. Let's see him play a month before annointing him as a playoff QB.
Minnesota-B. Johnson is older and more brittle than Brunell and who are the backups?
Chicago-Can Rex Grossman stay healthy for 8 straight quarters? Griese is a good backup but you don't want to count on him for long.

I like our situation with Brunell (and our OL) better than any of those situations going into camp.
__________________
Challenge Greatness! Be A Leader! Make A Difference!
Paintrain is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
Old 07-23-2006, 01:45 PM   #2
Pro Bowl
 
BigSKINBauer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Age: 26
Posts: 5,635
Re: Contenders with QB questions

Our situation isn't nearly as bad as any of those. Brunell has been our the QB for the greater part of two years and is healthy right now. I think the reason that the media brings up the QB situation here is because there is NOTHING else wrong with our offense. Top five running back, o-line, TE, and WR set along with a the best OC and Head coach in the league. Thinking if we had a top five QB to match it. There is only one flaw on this team but brunell is still an average to good QB. His knee was banged up late. He can produce with these players around him. Last yera he was playing great but it got rough in the last 3 games due to the absence of thomas and brunell's injury he suffered in the giants game.

The only other problem with our team(problem- meaning not top 10) is our run defense. It is weak. I hope carter can do more than bum rush the QB. The LBs have taken a big hit from 04 with pierce. He was an amazing player before the snap. Our DBs are top 5 in the league so if our running defense can hold up i see great things. In GW we trust.

To be great we need brunell to play slightly above average(which he can), our defense to stop the run and get pressure on the QB, and the o-line to stay healthy. I want to see carter at the scrimmage and at camp SO bad.
__________________
"For there is nothing half so glorious
As to see our team victorious"



BSB
BigSKINBauer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2006, 02:12 PM   #3
‎\m/
 
Mattyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 41
Posts: 80,556
Re: Contenders with QB questions

Certainly there are teams with more questionable QB situations.

Unfortunately the only way we're going to stop hearing the Brunell talk is for him to go out and perform at a high level.
__________________
Support The Warpath! | Warpath Shop
Mattyk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2006, 02:19 PM   #4
The Starter
 
steveo395's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 1,674
Re: Contenders with QB questions

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigSKINBauer
Our situation isn't nearly as bad as any of those. Brunell has been our the QB for the greater part of two years and is healthy right now. I think the reason that the media brings up the QB situation here is because there is NOTHING else wrong with our offense. Top five running back, o-line, TE, and WR set along with a the best OC and Head coach in the league. Thinking if we had a top five QB to match it. There is only one flaw on this team but brunell is still an average to good QB. His knee was banged up late. He can produce with these players around him. Last yera he was playing great but it got rough in the last 3 games due to the absence of thomas and brunell's injury he suffered in the giants game.

The only other problem with our team(problem- meaning not top 10) is our run defense. It is weak. I hope carter can do more than bum rush the QB. The LBs have taken a big hit from 04 with pierce. He was an amazing player before the snap. Our DBs are top 5 in the league so if our running defense can hold up i see great things. In GW we trust.

To be great we need brunell to play slightly above average(which he can), our defense to stop the run and get pressure on the QB, and the o-line to stay healthy. I want to see carter at the scrimmage and at camp SO bad.
our run defense was still 13th last year...it was only bad like the first half of the year
__________________

steveo395 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2006, 03:50 PM   #5
The Starter
 
GoSkins!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Yorktown, Va
Age: 45
Posts: 1,587
Re: Contenders with QB questions

In the NFC East, we have Brunnel, McNabb, Bledsoe, and Manning.

My Thoughts,
  • Bledsoe is a little over the hill and can be managed with a strong rush and decent coverage.
  • McNabb is a big ??? If he is over the injury (which I think he will be) he can really beat you with his feet. His problem is that I have seen him confused by good defensive coordinaters (which we have).
  • Manning certainly has the biggest upside, but isn't there yet. He is a statue with a strong arm and great genetics but still reminds me of Ramsey at times.
  • Brunnel is also a little over the hill, but can still move around a little, has great chemistry with Cooley and Moss, and plays smarter than the other three guys listed above.
Futher, if you consider the backup situation, I think that we are ,hands down, in the best position of any of the other teams in our division.

I don't see QB as a weakness on our team, rather I see our team has been put together in such a way as to not require the QB to be a superstar. I think that has been and always will be the staple of a Joe Gibbs coached football team.
__________________
Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts. A. Einstien
GoSkins! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2006, 05:22 PM   #6
Camp Scrub
 
44_Riggins_44's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: alexandria, va
Age: 22
Posts: 73
Re: Contenders with QB questions

There is absolutely nothing to worry about, we have a great offensive cordinator in Saunders, Brunells a great vet, he'll learn the new system quick, Campbell is learning under Brunell, so either way if Brunell comes out on top we got a great vet, though Brunell is gettin up in years we have: a new offensive weapon in Randle El to take pressure off of Moss, Cooley has emerged as one of the elite tight ends, OL is improving, and a great back in Portis. If Campbell comes out on top, hes had a great mentor in Brunell, a top 10 offensive coordinator, and all those weapons, all Campbell has to do is get the ball to them, wich likely he will. so either way its a win win situation.

Hail to the Redskins
__________________
Failures are expected by losers, ignored by winners.
- Joe Gibbs
44_Riggins_44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2006, 06:10 PM   #7
Puppy Kicker
 
Daseal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Arlington, Virginia
Age: 31
Posts: 8,214
Re: Contenders with QB questions

Many of the other teams have much easier schedules than the skins do too.
__________________
Best. Player. Available.
Daseal is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2006, 03:06 AM   #8
Living Legend
 
GTripp0012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 26
Posts: 15,993
Re: Contenders with QB questions

Quote:
Originally Posted by GoSkins!
In the NFC East, we have Brunnel, McNabb, Bledsoe, and Manning.

My Thoughts,
  • Bledsoe is a little over the hill and can be managed with a strong rush and decent coverage.
  • McNabb is a big ??? If he is over the injury (which I think he will be) he can really beat you with his feet. His problem is that I have seen him confused by good defensive coordinaters (which we have).
  • Manning certainly has the biggest upside, but isn't there yet. He is a statue with a strong arm and great genetics but still reminds me of Ramsey at times.
  • Brunnel is also a little over the hill, but can still move around a little, has great chemistry with Cooley and Moss, and plays smarter than the other three guys listed above.
Futher, if you consider the backup situation, I think that we are ,hands down, in the best position of any of the other teams in our division.

I don't see QB as a weakness on our team, rather I see our team has been put together in such a way as to not require the QB to be a superstar. I think that has been and always will be the staple of a Joe Gibbs coached football team.
McNabb can frusterate D coordinators with his playmaking skills, moreso than the average QB. Luckily over the long run, he is very average, and I believe Gregg Williams will have no problem keeping him relatively in check. Manning will probably take another step foward this year, and the Giants will likely look very, very sharp in the early season. Of course they will lose a game they shouldnt sometime in November and fade on the back end like they always do. Bledsoe is the ol' reliable in this division, but that's not always a good thing. Brunell has a job in this offense, and unlike the other three, doesn't have to win games. He should get to throw on first down more this year, which should help his comp % a significant amount.

Few teams in the league are without a big question mark at this point; feel lucky that we are one of them. Also hope that in the month and a half between now and the season, a question mark doesnt develop.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation.
GTripp0012 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2006, 04:03 AM   #9
Living Legend
 
That Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Springfield, VA
Age: 31
Posts: 16,247
Re: Contenders with QB questions

we have two big question marks

: can brunell stay healthy?
: is our ROLB going to be any good this year?

and a smaller truth that our punter sucks and our kicker might still be hurt, and our OL backups are totally unproven.
__________________
Who says shameless self promotion is stupid? oh yeah, that was me... Click For Tunes!
That Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2006, 07:20 AM   #10
Playmaker
 
Giantone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 4,988
Re: Contenders with QB questions

Quote:
Originally Posted by Daseal
Many of the other teams have much easier schedules than the skins do too.
According to the NFL ,NY has the toughest schedule
Giantone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2006, 07:43 AM   #11
Playmaker
 
Paintrain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL
Age: 43
Posts: 4,910
Re: Contenders with QB questions

Quote:
Originally Posted by Giantone
According to the NFL ,NY has the toughest schedule
The Giants schedule is BRUTAL. They could easily be 2-5 out of the gate Colts, at Philly, at Seattle, bye, Redskins, at Falcons, at Cowboys, Bucs.. Then they still have to go to Jax, to Carolina and to the Redskins to close it out.. I'd rather have our schedule than theirs!!
__________________
Challenge Greatness! Be A Leader! Make A Difference!
Paintrain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2006, 09:58 AM   #12
Living Legend
 
That Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Springfield, VA
Age: 31
Posts: 16,247
Re: Contenders with QB questions

at least we'll get to see how good our D really is. the NFC east doesn't get to take the peyton manning test all that often.
__________________
Who says shameless self promotion is stupid? oh yeah, that was me... Click For Tunes!
That Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2006, 10:21 AM   #13
I like big (_|_)s.
 
TheMalcolmConnection's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Lexington, Virginia
Age: 32
Posts: 17,463
Re: Contenders with QB questions

BSB, thank Warrick Holdman for our run defense being so poor in the first half of the season. As soon as LaVar came back (not saying he was great, but better than Holdman) hardly anyone rushed for over 100 yards against us. Our run defense is actually VERY good provided we can get some production out of ROLB.
__________________
Regret nothing. At one time it was exactly what you wanted.
TheMalcolmConnection is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2006, 10:28 AM   #14
MVP
 
12thMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: washington, D.C.
Posts: 11,456
Re: Contenders with QB questions

Bottom line, even if Brunell is healthy we have to give him better starting field position than we did last year. That was one of the things that hurt us in the playoffs v. Seattle.

We can chalk that up to a number of things, poor special teams coverage, horrible punting, a few big runs were ripped off and put the other team deep in our territority on numerous occasions. But I ,for one, don't think that this offense will change drastically and morph into 'Air Corryell' overnight. We'll be more effecient offensively, but I think the special teams, of all the units, absolutely must have a stellar year for us to have a chance.
12thMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2006, 10:51 AM   #15
Registered User
 
firstdown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: chesapeake, va
Age: 50
Posts: 15,818
Re: Contenders with QB questions

Quote:
Originally Posted by 12thMan
Bottom line, even if Brunell is healthy we have to give him better starting field position than we did last year. That was one of the things that hurt us in the playoffs v. Seattle.

We can chalk that up to a number of things, poor special teams coverage, horrible punting, a few big runs were ripped off and put the other team deep in our territority on numerous occasions. But I ,for one, don't think that this offense will change drastically and morph into 'Air Corryell' overnight. We'll be more effecient offensively, but I think the special teams, of all the units, absolutely must have a stellar year for us to have a chance.
We did get bad field position in the Seattle game but the O did nothing to move the ball. Our punter played great that game with the position he was put into for the first 1/4 or more of the game and the D keept them out of the end zone.
firstdown 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 07:28 PM.


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 0.32521 seconds with 9 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