Starting Campbell Now Makes Cap Sense

[skinsguy]

If we end up 7-9 or worse, then the latter that you have mentioned would be the obvious best choice, however I believe Brunell would probably stick around next year, regardless as to who starts. I doubt we'd see Campbell next week, although stranger things have happened (take today's loss for example.)

I really don't see this coaching staff throwing in the towel at this point. Maybe after 6 losses though.

[Gmanc711]

Its a good point about the muinty of Fed Ex.... I wonder how much the crowd impacts decision making.. I know everyone will be quick to say "not at all"...but if you really think about it, just looking at the Brunell/Ramsey 04' debacle...I'd think that they impact it somewhat, seriously.

[JWsleep]

Good post, Schneed. And I agree--if Campbell is really NFL QB material, he should be able to play. He looked like he has the tools in preseason. Maybe he WONT be worse than MB.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Regardless of how Brunell plays, he'll never be good enough to lead this team to the Super Bowl, so I can let's cut our losses now. I mean, we go out, get the receiving talent, and he still can't hit the open man. He's done.

[jdlea]

Originally Posted by TheMalcolmConnection

Regardless of how Brunell plays, he'll never be good enough to lead this team to the Super Bowl, so I can let's cut our losses now. I mean, we go out, get the receiving talent, and he still can't hit the open man. He's done.

That's the point! Under Brunell they're not going to win a Super Bowl. A lot of us have been saying that since he got here, but that's beside the point. Super Bowl teams don't start out 2 - 4 with losses to no win teams. The Redskins are not a great team. I don't even think they're a particularly good team. I don't care if the loss was Brunell's fault. He won't lead us anywhere with the team that's around him. I don't think putting in Campbell is going to turn the season around. The season is pretty much over. Why not play Campbell? Why keep him sitting on the bench? Eating up cap room with whatever cap number he has. He's supposed to be the future of the team, well it's time for them to find out.

If everyone wants to wait for 2 more losses then I guess I could deal with that. But they're gonna lose to Indy and they'll be lucky to beat Dallas, then what? I say the latest Jason should start is against Dallas. He'd have the bye week to prepare and then be fine.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by jdlea

That's the point! Under Brunell they're not going to win a Super Bowl. A lot of us have been saying that since he got here, but that's beside the point. Super Bowl teams don't start out 2 - 4 with losses to no win teams. The Redskins are not a great team. I don't even think they're a particularly good team. I don't care if the loss was Brunell's fault. He won't lead us anywhere with the team that's around him. I don't think putting in Campbell is going to turn the season around. The season is pretty much over. Why not play Campbell? Why keep him sitting on the bench? Eating up cap room with whatever cap number he has. He's supposed to be the future of the team, well it's time for them to find out.

If everyone wants to wait for 2 more losses then I guess I could deal with that. But they're gonna lose to Indy and they'll be lucky to beat Dallas, then what? I say the latest Jason should start is against Dallas. He'd have the bye week to prepare and then be fine.

Well, the key to the rest of the season lies beyond the bye week. Looking at the schedule, the toughest post-bye game is @ Phili, and every other game is winnable. If they play like the team they were supposed to be preseason, why not?

The Colts game means almost nothing. Think about it. If you lose the game, and ended up winning out (all but the road Phili game), you would likely hold the tiebreaker at 10-6. If you won the game, you still have the same conference record, meaning that you would likely not have the tiebreaker (If the Eagles or Cowboys or whoever also went 11-5). Either way, the only way they get back in this thing is to get hot AFTER the bye. Savior is a bad role to put Jason Campbell in. The defense has to step up or its not happening.

EDIT-That doesnt matter statement is only from a divisional perspective. From a Wild Card perspective, we need all the wins we can get.

[jdlea]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Well, the key to the rest of the season lies beyond the bye week. Looking at the schedule, the toughest post-bye game is @ Phili, and every other game is winnable. If they play like the team they were supposed to be preseason, why not?

The Colts game means almost nothing. Think about it. If you lose the game, and ended up winning out (all but the road Phili game), you would likely hold the tiebreaker at 10-6. If you won the game, you still have the same conference record, meaning that you would likely not have the tiebreaker (If the Eagles or Cowboys or whoever also went 11-5). Either way, the only way they get back in this thing is to get hot AFTER the bye. Savior is a bad role to put Jason Campbell in. The defense has to step up or its not happening.

I've said over and over Jason Campbell does not equate to wins. It means that the kid will learn how to play in this league. If they win out? They'll just reel off 9 straight wins? That's insane! They have:

@Indy
Dallas
@ Eagles
@ Bucs
Panthers
Falcons
Eagles
@ Saints
@ Rams
Giants

I could see them beating maybe the Bucs and Falcons. The rest of those teams can throw. The Skins will get torched by them. I don't care who the receivers are, Brunell isn't gonna magically start winning shootouts.

[Southpaw]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

The Colts game means almost nothing. Think about it. If you lose the game, and ended up winning out (all but the road Phili game), you would likely hold the tiebreaker at 10-6. If you won the game, you still have the same conference record, meaning that you would likely not have the tiebreaker (If the Eagles or Cowboys or whoever also went 11-5).

How can you still be so homerish? Win out after the bye? What team have you been watching for the last 14 years? They will absolutely not win eight out of the next ten. They'll be LUCKY to win four of the next ten with Brunell running the show.

And earlier you made a comment about Brunell completeing 60% of his passes and only have three int's all season. Great, but when 85% of your completions are dumpoff's you're not scaring anyone. Just look how well the Titans defended the dink and dunks yesterday. It's because everyone know's it's coming.

And yes, three interceptions is nice, but what about five touchdowns threw six games? That puts him on pace for about 14 for the season. Niiiice... That's with a group of receivers(Moss, Lloyd, Cooley, Randle El, Sellers) who had 29 combined touchdown catches last season.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

This is a Campbell vs Brunell discussion, like so many others already on this board. But I wanted to take a salary cap angle at this situation, which I felt may be deserving of it's own thread.

With the team 2-4 and needing to go 8-2 from here on in order to make the playoffs, it doesn't make sense to let Mark Brunell continue to run the team.

Brunell will count $6.6 million against the cap if he's on the roster in 2007. If we cut him before June 1, he'll have a dead cap hit of 4.3 million in 2007, representing a savings of $2.3 million. If we cut him after June 1, he'll count only $1.5 million (approx) in 2007, a savings of about $5 million compared to the $6.6 million he'd count if on the roster.

Given the opportunity to gain cap space next season, and given his inability to lead the offense to victories, the Redskins would be wise to turn to Jason Campbell and allow him to learn the offense in the 10 remaining games this season. He'd hopefully be more prepared to run a more cohesive unit next year that can consistently threaten the deep and center seam portions of the field.

Brunell's career as a Redskin should end now. I'm officially off the Brunell bandwagon. Give me JC. And use Brunell's cap space for a CB who can cover worth a darn.

You make a good point here. I think that barring a deep playoff run, we should hand the reins to Campbell next year, and Brunell should either restructure or be let go. The one part I don't agree with is saying that because of this, Campbell should play now. Whats wrong with giving him an extra training camp with a team that is going to win some games down the stretch. Once we are mathematically eliminated, might as well make the change, but until then go with what brought the high expectations in the first place.

2-4 isn't the end of the world. It's 2-4. The division leader is 4-2. We play them twice. Rather than give up, let's see if we can turn this thing around. Our best football is still ahead of us.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

But the question now is, can Brunell make the plays to get us out of this hole? I think Campbell might make more bad decisions that Brunell, but I bet he'll make more PLAYS than Brunell too.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by TheMalcolmConnection

But the question now is, can Brunell make the plays to get us out of this hole? I think Campbell might make more bad decisions that Brunell, but I bet he'll make more PLAYS than Brunell too.

Of course he's capable. I really don't think he's a problem. I guess it depends on the indiviuduals defination of problem, but I'll take a guy who is completing 60% on the year for 6+ yards an attempt and 3 INTs in 6 games any day of the week to be my QB. I watched him(Brunell) consistently keep drives alive in the first half yesterday. I remember Santana dropping a first down catch on 3rd and medium in the 2nd half, so I guess he's a problem too...

The Redskins offense isn't great just yet, but its really not that far from it. I think the solution is time, not a QB change.

It's an absolute crime that the defense can play this horribly and the only thing we can talk about is a QB change.

[jdlea]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Of course he's capable. I really don't think he's a problem. I guess it depends on the indiviuduals defination of problem, but I'll take a guy who is completing 60% on the year for 6+ yards an attempt and 3 INTs in 6 games any day of the week to be my QB. I watched him(Brunell) consistently keep drives alive in the first half yesterday. I remember Santana dropping a first down catch on 3rd and medium in the 2nd half, so I guess he's a problem too...

The Redskins offense isn't great just yet, but its really not that far from it. I think the solution is time, not a QB change.

It's an absolute crime that the defense can play this horribly and the only thing we can talk about is a QB change.

What makes you think he's capable? His great success in Super Bowls past? He doesn't make plays. Period. He threw one ball deep yesterday. There was a pick dropped by a linebacker yesterday and I sent a text to my brother saying "wtf did he read?" You try to act like all this talk is ridiculous...based on what? I've acknowledged 1 million times that the defense is bad, but guess what? They're gonna be bad all year. You can't replace all of them. Brunell is playing poorly, you can replace 1 guy.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Of course he's capable. I really don't think he's a problem. I guess it depends on the indiviuduals defination of problem, but I'll take a guy who is completing 60% on the year for 6+ yards an attempt and 3 INTs in 6 games any day of the week to be my QB. I watched him(Brunell) consistently keep drives alive in the first half yesterday. I remember Santana dropping a first down catch on 3rd and medium in the 2nd half, so I guess he's a problem too...

The Redskins offense isn't great just yet, but its really not that far from it. I think the solution is time, not a QB change.

It's an absolute crime that the defense can play this horribly and the only thing we can talk about is a QB change.

Oh, I'm not absolving the defense by any means, but I think with the defense fully healthy again (hoepfully next week), things will improve because players can play in their natural positions.

I'm just saying that the odds of us turning this season around are just about done, and it's time to look at the future. Should Brunell REALLY be our QB next season? I mean we could back in time, get Rice in his prime at WR and he'd still look for Moss or Cooley. We need someone who MAKES PLAYS at QB and doesn't play not to lose. I mean really, it's like Moss or Cooley are the only people who catch passes for the Skins.

[#56fanatic]

if they make the change to Campbell at somepoint this year, they have to let Brunell go! you saw what happened with Ramsey. the moment Joe had a reason to put him in, he stuck with him. Watching that chicago game last year Ramsey looked sharp (aside from the one pick) He was delivering the ball nicely. If we keep Brunell, Gibbs will be searching for reasons to put him in. CUT THE OLD GUY!! We go and sign a vet back up or keep Collins. Brunell is not going to be doing anything but hurting the develpment of our supposed future. I have a hard time thinking that if we start out 2-5, that brunell will stay the starter. Like I said in another thread, QB is the only position change that could light a spark in the team.

Did anyone watch the locker room video on Redskins.com? Lloyd said a couple things 1) we aren't worried about the Redskin fans right now, we are worried about ourselves?? not a good thing to say at this point. 2) someone asked a question about playcalling and he said ask the coaches. we do what ever we are told to do. I think he too is questioning some of the play calls coming frm Mr Saunders.

[BDBohnzie]

if any changes will be made, it'll most likely be after the Indy game, during the bye week. That would give Campbell or Collins (Lord help us) 2 solid weeks of practice to get ready.

No matter if Brunell is the man or not, something has to be done to reenergize the offense. They aren't pressing downfield, and that hurts the run attack. If defenses know that Brunell won't go deep, they can push up.

Although, our woes can't be squarely put on the shoulders of Brunell. There is no way in hell that Travis Henry should have had the type of day he had.