Take 70Chip's Mark Brunell Rorshock Test

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by illdefined

well i appreciate the civility but you've completely lost me now Tripp, this was my response to your first take on the game. you didn't start that excuse emporium by saying you were just being a devil's advocate.

expecting to lose and all that - i'll never be down for that argument, not as a fan and not even as an objective observer. you expected -4 pts with an offense that has Moss, Lloyd, Randle, Cooley and Portis and a healthy starting O-Line? sorry not buying it, not even close. just because you refuse to see the weak link here on the forums doesn't mean you don't know what it really is in your heart of hearts. even if those checkdowns you harp on were money, does that speak well of Brunell? if Betts is traded next season like has been proposed, then this 'efficient offense' you constantly defend will really be a shambles.

i never thought i'd hear rain, or the "shitty game allowance" excuse come from you, i expected some cold hard numbers. of course there won't be many for today, but please feel free to use the season's numbers, because that's what we're all talking about anyway. ask any 10 fans if they haven't been demoralized by Brunell all year, and you'll get at least 8 who'll tell what i'm telling you. the majority of the offensive yards this season are from Brunell to Betts, two players that shouldn't be on our team next year.

Well, I obviously didn't expect the offense to be this colossally horrible, but honestly 27-3, 27-26...what the hell's the difference? Emotional whatever? Emotion certainly plays a part, but the thing about the NFL is each week is a new week, and a close loss isn't going to help morale any more than a blowout. I think a win this week would have been wishful thinking and required a great deal of luck, something the Eagles certainly haven't been short on. What more can you say when a jarring hit on a 3rd and long play ends up creating a touchdown? ST did miss the tackle, but you eventually need things to break your way. Outside of the blocked FG against Dallas, this season has been lack of luck piled upon poor calls, upon bad defense. I had the Eagles winning this game preseason, and I was prepared to deal with a team coming off three losses following their bye week. They weren't going to lose. It's unfortuante we got them when we did. The Dawkins knockdown on the Randle El pass was my point in a nutshell. Would have been our play of the season if we had made it.

So with all that said, my season outlook hasn't changed from this morning to now. We are still a longshot to make the playoffs. Were this morning, are now.

My point here is subjective and cannot be completely backed by numbers...so either you have an open ear or you don't...no skin off my back.

Today, Brunell was ONE of our weak links. I don't think a road game at Phili should take away from what he's done simply because of some carried over frusteration.

I am with the rest of you when you say Campbell should get ready to play. But not NEXT week. That is all. The offense should be just as efficient under Campbell next season. He has a great statistical projection to the NFL. But performance in first start can not possibly ever be projected. If he doesn't ever get to play this season, we will probably be in the same boat as if he started the final 9 games and went 2-5.

There is NO rush with Jason Campbell. The #1 assumed opinion on this board is that Campbell has to play sometime this season or we sacrifice next year. It's wrong. Regardless of whether Campbell plays or not, we still have the offseason. He's not "going to develop a rhythym" that he keeps over 8 months.

[RedskinRat]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

There is NO rush with Jason Campbell. The #1 assumed opinion on this board is that Campbell has to play sometime this season or we sacrifice next year. It's wrong. Regardless of whether Campbell plays or not, we still have the offseason. He's not "going to develop a rhythym" that he keeps over 8 months.

Has there been a rush so far? No.

He needs to start his season so as to avoid the 'New QB' tag next season. He needs to get live-fire reps. He needs to get a feel for NFL game-play, not off-season/pre-season soft reps.

I see an immediate need.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Today, Brunell was ONE of our weak links. I don't think a road game at Phili should take away from what he's done simply because of some carried over frusteration.

What exactly has Brunell done? He's helped lead the team to a 3-6 record, a mediocre offense that can't score, and a sub-par passing attack that underutilizes its talent. He's had three decent games (against the Texans, Jags, and Cowboys) which, turned out to be our only wins, and 6 mediocre to horrible games. You make it sound like he's some stellar QB who just had an off-day.

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

There is NO rush with Jason Campbell. The #1 assumed opinion on this board is that Campbell has to play sometime this season or we sacrifice next year. It's wrong. Regardless of whether Campbell plays or not, we still have the offseason. He's not "going to develop a rhythym" that he keeps over 8 months.

You suggest that we should rely on the offseason to find a QB? Because last offseasons acquisitions have worked out so well. Moreover, people are not looking for Campbell to develop a "rhythym that he keeps over 8 months," they are looking for him to gain game experience and to see what he is made of BEFORE next season. We'd like to know whether we should try to find a quality starting QB in the offseason (via draft or free agency).

[skinsguy]

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

What exactly has Brunell done? He's helped lead the team to a 3-6 record, a mediocre offense that can't score, and a sub-par passing attack that underutilizes its talent. He's had three decent games (against the Texans, Jags, and Cowboys) which, turned out to be our only wins, and 6 mediocre to horrible games. You make it sound like he's some stellar QB who just had an off-day.

Brunell isn't the only one responsible for why we're 3-6. You're ignoring the other problems we have had that has resulted 3-6. I'm guessing you believe putting in another QB is going to fix all our problems?

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

You suggest that we should rely on the offseason to find a QB? Because last offseasons acquisitions have worked out so well. Moreover, people are not looking for Campbell to develop a "rhythym that he keeps over 8 months," they are looking for him to gain game experience and to see what he is made of BEFORE next season. We'd like to know whether we should try to find a quality starting QB in the offseason (via draft or free agency).

I think what Tripp was trying to say is that Campbell remaining on the bench this season doesn't necessarily hurt his chances at playing next season. While it is good to get some real game experience, look at guys like Phillp Rivers...and I believe Steve McNair sat on the bench for three seasons until he got a chance to play. Tripp wasn't saying to go out and find another QB.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

I am with the rest of you when you say Campbell should get ready to play. But not NEXT week. That is all. The offense should be just as efficient under Campbell next season. He has a great statistical projection to the NFL. But performance in first start can not possibly ever be projected. If he doesn't ever get to play this season, we will probably be in the same boat as if he started the final 9 games and went 2-5.

There is NO rush with Jason Campbell. The #1 assumed opinion on this board is that Campbell has to play sometime this season or we sacrifice next year. It's wrong. Regardless of whether Campbell plays or not, we still have the offseason. He's not "going to develop a rhythym" that he keeps over 8 months.

I totally agree.

I know some people are going to FREAK if Campbell doesn't start next week, but in the big picture how much playing time he gets this year is not going to make or break his development. Yes he does need some playing time and we do need to get a snapshot of him to see what we have to build on for next year, but at the same time Gibbs clearly has a long term plan for Campbell that isn't totally dependent on how much he plays this year.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

I totally agree.

I know some people are going to FREAK if Campbell doesn't start next week, but in the big picture how much playing time he gets this year is not going to make or break his development. Yes he does need some playing time and we do need to get a snapshot of him to see what we have to build on for next year, but at the same time Gibbs clearly has a long term plan for Campbell that isn't totally dependent on how much he plays this year.

I agree with you. The problem is that the majority of people don't want to know about big picture. They don't want to think that Rivers sat for two years, or Romo for three. All that matters is the here and now.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by TAFKAS

I agree with you. The problem is that the majority of people don't want to know about big picture. They don't want to think that Rivers sat for two years, or Romo for three. All that matters is the here and now.

I agree with Gibbs' decision to start Brunell in the Eagles game and I think Campbell will benefit from sitting on the sidelines, but I would not agree with a decision to start Brunell next week. The only reason to continue to start Brunell and not get Campbell experience is to hold out hope that we can make the playoffs. I do not think that we have any chance of making the playoffs, I cannot see a 7-0 run, and so I think Campbell should be given the nod.

We'd probably win more games with Brunell than Campbell this season, but I'd prefer to give Campbell experience. To me, starting Brunell just brings us a lower draft pick next year and gives Campbell less experience. So, I think that Campbell should start, but I am not thinking about the here and now. I am focused solely on the future.

[Pocket$ $traight]

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

I agree with Gibbs' decision to start Brunell in the Eagles game and I think Campbell will benefit from sitting on the sidelines, but I would not agree with a decision to start Brunell next week. The only reason to continue to start Brunell and not get Campbell experience is to hold out hope that we can make the playoffs. I do not think that we have any chance of making the playoffs, I cannot see a 7-0 run, and so I think Campbell should be given the nod.

We'd probably win more games with Brunell than Campbell this season, but I'd prefer to give Campbell experience. To me, starting Brunell just brings us a lower draft pick next year and gives Campbell less experience. So, I think that Campbell should start, but I am not thinking about the here and now. I am focused solely on the future.

If Gibbs starts Brunell next week, he believes that this team can run the table. If that is true, he needs to leave on the same bus as the bum that has been shoved down our throat the last 3 years.

I am more worried about the regression of Sean Taylor. He looked terrible yesterday. Sean needs to start studying film because there was no excuse for the bite on Stallworth.

[illdefined]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

I know some people are going to FREAK if Campbell doesn't start next week, but in the big picture how much playing time he gets this year is not going to make or break his development. Yes he does need some playing time and we do need to get a snapshot of him to see what we have to build on for next year, but at the same time Gibbs clearly has a long term plan for Campbell that isn't totally dependent on how much he plays this year.

ok, and whats the benefit of letting Brunell start next week? whats the plan there, to run the table?

[MTK]

Originally Posted by illdefined

ok, and whats the benefit of letting Brunell start next week? whats the plan there, to run the table?

The message is the team is going to fight through until the season is officially out of reach.

[Pocket$ $traight]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

The message is the team is going to fight through until the season is officially out of reach.

That makes a lot of sense. We moved up to draft a kid in the first round but we need to show that we are going to fight by keeping the washed up injured bum in.

Do I need to break this down so you can understand?

LOL

[illdefined]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

The message is the team is going to fight through until the season is officially out of reach.

the message to who? certainly not the fans, and i personally think the team is thinking the same thing as the fans....help, throw us a lifesaver.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by illdefined

the message to who? certainly not the fans, and i personally think the team is thinking the same thing as the fans....help, throw us a lifesaver.

LOL I'm sure you don't think that Campbell is a lifesaver.

The message to the team is to fight to the bitter end. The coaches will learn alot about these guys over the next few weeks and will probably go a long way in shaping the team next year.

[Pocket$ $traight]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

LOL I'm sure you don't think that Campbell is a lifesaver.

The message to the team is to fight to the bitter end. The coaches will learn alot about these guys over the next few weeks and will probably go a long way in shaping the team next year.

Well we don't know do we? Why not? Because they keep suiting up the guy who has proven that he cannot get it done.

We know that Brunell cannot get the job done. Anyone who argues that he can needs to be in a padded cell.

So let's see if one of the other two can win before we ruin the 2007 season.

[illdefined]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

LOL I'm sure you don't think that Campbell is a lifesaver.

The message to the team is to fight to the bitter end. The coaches will learn alot about these guys over the next few weeks and will probably go a long way in shaping the team next year.

oh i know he isn't a lifesaver, he won't fix the defense. he may be able to score some more or keep them off the field a bit more, but he won't fix it.

JC still represents hope though, something the fans and the team have simply lost to this point. Everything JC would do, would be a step for the future. Brunell inspires nothing but frustration to everybody, and i don't know why the team would want to fight and risk injury on a lame duck quarterback who's helped put them in this position.

i noticed you only agreed to one of Tripp's paragraphs, what did you think about the rest? do you think we OWE Brunell a better departure than that?