Quote:
Originally Posted by mike340
One of the things Brunell brings to the table is that he knows how to change a play at the line of scrimmage (based on the defensive set.) I have read that Saunders' system practically eliminates this possibility. Peyton was changing plays all night. Unfortunately, when Brunell sees that the defensive set is going to scr*w the play, he can't do anything to fix it (except for calling a time-out.) I think this greatly hinders the Redskins offense.
Also, a couple of games ago he was furious because the plays weren't coming in fast enough. How much of the season has this been going on. And in spite of all the short dump-offs, at the end of the first half he had 10 hurries in 15 attempts (with 10 completions.) Many on this board feel that Saunders calls few long passes because Brunell has a "noodle" arm. I wonder if he is more reticent because he knows the line can't protect him that long without holding. (Remember the beginning of the season? Weren't we on pace to set a new record for number of penalties, with offensive holding leading the way?)
I have a lot of respect for Brunell after 2004. Not for how he passed. (That was as painful to watch as I can remember.) But because he was injured (which he shared with the coaching staff), but never gave it as excuse for his poor performance in public.
I have seen Brunell explode once: when (as I mentioned before) the plays were coming in late this year. I think Gibbs has him talk because he won't badmouth anybody else. (And don't tell me there is no-one else to badmouth.) In general, the reaction of the people who talk to the press from the Redskins organization reminds me of a cartoon I saw in the foreign service journal. There were seven people holding down a furious man in a room. The room's only door was open a crack, and the person just inside the door was informing the one on the outside that "The ambassador has no comment at this time."
I think the reason you don't see explosions out of the Redskins organization is because public "disturbances" usually end up a negative. (Remember the Giants before their game with us?)
Do I feel Brunell is a great QB? No. He is a good solid QB. He will not lose games for you. Gibbs got him since he felt the rest of the team would hold up its end. It doesn't seem to be working out that way. Scoring: 20 pts/game. Defense: 26 pts/game.
Two years ago, 21 pts/game would have given them a record of 13-2-1.
I think the problems hang more on the D.
|
Well said. I believe one of the problems, that goes along with Matty's identity point, is that last year, Gibbs built his offense around Brunell's strength. You saw a lot more touch passes last year that took advantage of Brunell's unique strengths as a passer. This season, Brunell is being used in a more generic system. It's an OK fit, but not as good as last year. He's adapted about as well as one could have expected.