Quote:
|
Originally Posted by offiss
Talk about one giant contradiction.
There is a major difference between a great coach and a great GM, Gibbs still need's, and want's to prove he's the latter.
Brunell was never a great passer persay ala Marino, or Aikmen etc. Brunell was more of a playmaker, the problem with that is once your legs go so does most of your game and that's Brunell in a nut shell. A strong armed pocket passer can survive longer in the NFL if he has the protection he can still get the ball downfield, but if your legs were your primary weopon to create, your finished once they go, bottom line Brunell can't move like he used to, and he wont, and can't take the hit anymore.
|
There's a big, big difference between Aikman and Marino. Just like theres a difference between Peyton Manning and Brunell. Brunell's running ability has diminished over time, but his legs are hardly gone. Tire easily, maybe. Gone, no. Ask Dallas. He can break off 25 yard runs any time the defensive line gets upfield. Vick, he's done when his legs go. McNabb will have his game limited. But Brunell, Steve McNair, Trent Green, Rich Gannon these guys are all old, all could run, and all played very well rounded football late in their careers. Both running effectively and passing. Brunell is accurate. Few in the NFL are more accurate. He has a good arm. Stronger than league minimum. There is no great advantage to having an arm stronger than the one he has in the NFL. A strong armed pocket passer will last no longer than a savvy game manager of equal career success. At no point were MB's legs his primary weapon. Vick is the only QB in the NFL who boasts that.
To say that Mark Brunell won't and can't take the hit anymore is downright wrong. If you said that to him, he'd punch you. If you said that to his wife, she'd slap you. And you'd deserve it.
And yes I was talking about one giant contradiction. Not sure what you are talking about though.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by offiss
And yes I do believe Aikman knows a little about offense and the proper functioning of a QB, as well Aikman is one commentator who is about as fair with his analists as you will get, he alway's gives us unbiased coverage of our games, and that say's a lot from an X-cowboy.
|
Very true. Even in the 35-7 whooping we put on them last year, Aikman still broke down the game accurately giving props where they were due. Don't see how this is relevant, though.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by offiss
As for Marino, did Marino have the luxory of a top flight defense throughout his career? I think not, so Marino was very unlucky, the fact is if Gibbs had Marino for 10 years both Gibbs and Marino would probably be walking around with 5 rings on thier hand. Brunell had an opporunity to take advantage of maybe the best defense we have ever had over the last 2 years, and did nothing but jump on thier backs and make the defenses burden that much tougher. Let's face it there is a reason Gibbs get's ultra concervative late in the game, and I don't believe it's because he feels he can trust Brunell, Gibbs didn't coach that way his first time around.
Brunells another year older, can Saunders revitalize him for 1 more season, I actually think yes, I also believe we could do much more without Brunell, Saunders help make a stock boy an NFL MVP. Brunell will start off well I do believe but his next big hit will be his last.
|
Wasn't Gibbs always conservative late in the game? You tell me.
For the last time, 2004 is over. He sucked that year. Was probably seriously injured.
MB's next big hit his last? I guess it's possible. Peyton Manning's next big hit could be his last. And Tom Brady's. And McNabbs. God damn, being a QB in the NFL really sucks the big one...
I'll leave you all with this factoid. The last time Mark Brunell and Dan Marino met, Brunell won. By 63 points. In the playoffs. Irrelivant yes, but at least its a pretty cool way to end a rebuttal.