Re: Take 70Chip's Mark Brunell Rorshock Test
 

i'm still waiting for a response to this.

[QUOTE=illdefined;244202]I saw McNabb and Randle El throw tight long passes in that same weather. should Brunell take any responsibility at all for 'trailing early'? and as for 'defensive scheme that attacks'...well that sounds like all NFL defenses, technically so does ours.

i think it's an utterly ridiculous case. especially the part where we OWE Brunell another chance, when his whole career as a Redskin has been exactly that. you don't bring in a QB when the team is struggling? when do you bring them in exactly? when they're doing great? ask Parcells about that, he knows a bit about coaching i hear.

you have more than another thing coming if you think Brunell is going to win out this season. hasn't he demoralized the fans and the team enough?[/QUOTE]

Re: Take 70Chip's Mark Brunell Rorshock Test
 

[QUOTE=GTripp0012;244226]I REALLY can't begin to explain to you why the check downs to Betts aren't the problem. A decent percentage of them are successful. Those that are futile would have been throwaways with last year's philosophy. Those are the basic points, I may just go in depth in this week's Weekly Tripp.[/QUOTE]

I don't think that the checkdowns themselves are a problem. What is a problem is that 3/4 passing plays are check downs to backs in the flats or throwaways. You simply can't have an effective offense without an intermediate to deep passing attack. Our team is simply unbalanced, opposing defenses know it, and they are attacking.

Re: Take 70Chip's Mark Brunell Rorshock Test
 

I'm a solid 2 bordering on a 1.. Let's take an objective look at Brunell.. In the past 4 years he's been benched twice by 2 different franchises, in his last 7 seasons his record is 7-9, 6-10, 6-10, 0-4, 3-6, 9-6, 3-6. Other than last year he hasn't been a successful NFL QB THIS DECADE!!!!! In his Redskin career (40 games) he has thrown for 3 or more TD 4 times. He has thrown for less than 250 yds 17 times since the beginning of last season. Someone please convince me how he gives us the best chance to win..

Re: Take 70Chip's Mark Brunell Rorshock Test
 

[quote=70Chip;244225]I think the difference between myself and GTripp is that he does not believe the season is lost and I now do. I didn't think that it was before today, and I didn't think they had to win every game to salvage it, but I thought they needed to use the emotion of the Dallas win to propel them to win a few in a row. They don't seem to have a run in them.

I would say further that regardless of what happens with Brunell, at the end of the season, they should thank Saunders for all his hard work and send him on his way.[/quote]Good...neh great point. Most of the difference in opinion is that the season is over.

But this game was a disaster going in. Phili is money coming off the bye, had homefield on us, and that was when we HAD Portis. Expecting us, much less anyone, to win in these conditions would have been wishful thinking.

That said, if the season wasn't over BEFORE this game, why is it now? We did get crushed...but it's not something I was unprepared for. I don't think it's going to linger with us, theres no evidence to support the argument that it will. It's just one more in the L column, nothing more.

Re: Take 70Chip's Mark Brunell Rorshock Test
 

[quote=skinsfan69;244227]Let's take to diapers off JC and frickin play the guy. Enough is enough.[/quote]lol. You sound like Dick Vermeil.

Not that theres anything wrong with that.

Re: Take 70Chip's Mark Brunell Rorshock Test
 

[QUOTE=Paintrain;244231]In the past 4 years he's been benched twice by 2 different franchises, in his last 7 seasons his record is 7-9, 6-10, 6-10, 0-4, 3-6, 9-6, 3-6. Other than last year he hasn't been a successful NFL QB THIS DECADE!!!!! In his Redskin career (40 games) he has thrown for 3 or more TD 4 times. He has thrown for less than 250 yds 17 times since the beginning of last season. Someone please convince me how he gives us the best chance to win..[/QUOTE]

Jesus those are bad numbers. A record of 44-56 is awful and, excluding last season, a record of 34-50 is downright pathetic.

Re: Take 70Chip's Mark Brunell Rorshock Test
 

[QUOTE=GTripp0012;244232]Good...neh great point. Most of the difference in opinion is that the season is over.

But this game was a disaster going in. Phili is money coming off the bye, had homefield on us, and that was when we HAD Portis. Expecting us, much less anyone, to win in these conditions would have been wishful thinking.

That said, if the season wasn't over BEFORE this game, why is it now? We did get crushed...but it's not something I was unprepared for. I don't think it's going to linger with us, theres no evidence to support the argument that it will. It's just one more in the L column, nothing more.[/QUOTE]

I think when the season started most would have said this would be a tough win, even if all units played well. Unfortunately, when you lose an "easy" win like the Titans game suddenly a tough win becomes a must win. Losing the games we're "expected" to lose would, I think, be easier to deal with if we won the games we're supposed to win.

Re: Take 70Chip's Mark Brunell Rorshock Test
 

[quote=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;244229]I don't think that the checkdowns themselves are a problem. What is a problem is that 3/4 passing plays are check downs to backs in the flats or throwaways. You simply can't have an effective offense without an intermediate to deep passing attack. Our team is simply unbalanced, opposing defenses know it, and they are attacking.[/quote]


Just for the record, that swing pass to Betts where Brunell backpedals from center is not a checkdown. That play is designed for Betts all the way. They ran it at least three times today. There were other times when he did check down to Betts, Sellers, etc., but the really annoying play has Betts as the first and only option. They ran it on third down against Dallas in the Red Zone last week (knocked out at the 4) and I looked at it about fifty times to see if anyone else was running a real route and it looked as though they were all just clearing out for the swing route. Not Brunell's choice.

Re: Take 70Chip's Mark Brunell Rorshock Test
 

[QUOTE=GTripp0012;244226]I REALLY can't begin to explain to you why the check downs to Betts aren't the problem. A decent percentage of them are successful. Those that are futile would have been throwaways with last year's philosophy. Those are the basic points, I may just go in depth in this week's Weekly Tripp.

And what's with this talking down to me? I didn't do that to you last week when you were WAY off.[/QUOTE]

decent percentage of check downs are successful?, is that what our QB should be aiming for? is that the measure of a good offense? how are the stats of Moss, Lloyd, ARE, Cooley and Portis this year? does Brunell factor at all in that?

you certainly did talk down to me last week, calling all my arguments subjective and not backed by numbers (just like weather conditions, playing away, and division games aren't a stat). i started last week giving big props to Brunell for that game, check again - but i was looking at the season as a whole when we started arguing about how well Brunell leads this offense.

Re: Take 70Chip's Mark Brunell Rorshock Test
 

[QUOTE=70Chip;244241]Just for the record, that swing pass to Betts where Brunell backpedals from center is not a checkdown. That play is designed for Betts all the way. They ran it at least three times today. There were other times when he did check down to Betts, Sellers, etc., but the really annoying play has Betts as the first and only option. They ran it on third down against Dallas in the Red Zone last week (knocked out at the 4) and I looked at it about fifty times to see if anyone else was running a real route and it looked as though they were all just clearing out for the swing route. Not Brunell's choice.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, I realize that Saunders' calls Betts' number on some plays, but there are still a ton of check-downs to Betts.

Re: Take 70Chip's Mark Brunell Rorshock Test
 

[quote=illdefined;244202]I saw McNabb and Randle El throw tight long passes in that same weather. should Brunell take any responsibility at all for 'trailing early'? and as for 'defensive scheme that attacks'...well that sounds like all NFL defenses, technically so does ours.

i think it's an utterly ridiculous case. especially the part where we OWE Brunell another chance, when his whole career as a Redskin has been exactly that. you don't bring in a QB when the team is struggling? when do you bring them in exactly? when they're doing great? ask Parcells about that, he knows a bit about coaching i hear.

you have more than another thing coming if you think Brunell is going to win out this season. hasn't he demoralized the fans and the team enough?[/quote]You WANT your response? Damn, you are confident in your arguement.

And why not, it's a sound arguement. It's too bad I completely agree with you about this game, and was just presenting the opposing viewpoint.

Except in the last point. Do I THINK Brunell will win out this season? Absolutely not. It falls in the improbable category. But you are too easily swayed. Nothing happened in this game that surprised me. Brunell has shitty games every once in awhile. The Eagles REALLY had something to prove, and really we were just a victim of that. They were by far the better team, but we knew that going in.

No, he hasn't done anything to demoralize the fans. The TEAM has. If we were 6 and 2 and Phili had just beat the daylights out of us to drop us to 6-3 and Brunell had this kind of day, we would just move on. Like we should now. It was a massacre. Let's get ready for Tampa Bay.

After all, what's the penalty for playing to win the game when you still have a chance?

Re: Take 70Chip's Mark Brunell Rorshock Test
 

[quote=illdefined;244244]you certainly did talk down to me last week, calling all my arguments subjective and not backed by numbers (just like weather conditions, playing away, and division games aren't a stat). i started last week giving big props to Brunell for that game, check again - but i was looking at the season as a whole when we started arguing about how well Brunell leads this offense.[/quote]If it came off like talking down to you, I apoligize. But if you found comfort in the loss because you were planning to take it to me on the boards...that's another thing. I'm not accusing you of doing that, but thats how you are coming off.

I'm not going to give stats to disprove you when the STATS (and I) AGREE WITH YOU. Brunell had a shitty day. You can either ask why, or you can sit there and call for his head. I choose to investigate and overanalyze. Sorry.

There was a huge contrast between his average performance from the season and today's performance. That's what I want you to take from this. It was out of character bad. If you can't see that on your own, then I need to bring stats up.

My curiosity doesn't stop at "Brunell was bad today". Again, I apoligize.

Re: Take 70Chip's Mark Brunell Rorshock Test
 

i'm in the #2 camp as of now. I know there are a lot of problems on this team, but Brunell is one problem that can be fixed. I know Campbell probably isn't gonna do any better then Brunell, but he needs the practice for next season.

Re: Take 70Chip's Mark Brunell Rorshock Test
 

[quote=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;244236]Jesus those are bad numbers. A record of 44-56 is awful and, excluding last season, a record of 34-50 is downright pathetic.[/quote]Take into account just how bad those early decade Jacksonville teams and our 2004 team were. Pretty awful.

Re: Take 70Chip's Mark Brunell Rorshock Test
 

I'm just tired of all these Brunell threads. And the same tired arguments over and over and over again. Both for and against.

Re: Take 70Chip's Mark Brunell Rorshock Test
 

[quote=TAFKAS;244259]I'm just tired of all these Brunell threads. And the same tired arguments over and over and over again. Both for and against.[/quote]


I just wanted to find out where people were after the game today. I didn't mean for it to be a debate. But, I guess it's unavoidable.

Re: Take 70Chip's Mark Brunell Rorshock Test
 

[QUOTE=70Chip;244260]I just wanted to find out where people were after the game today. I didn't mean for it to be a debate. But, I guess it's unavoidable.[/QUOTE]

Sorry, I didn't mean for it to come across as putting the blame on you. I have no problem with your thread. I just get tired of all the "analysis" and more so the assumptions.

Re: Take 70Chip's Mark Brunell Rorshock Test
 

[QUOTE=GTripp0012;244246]You WANT your response? Damn, you are confident in your arguement.

And why not, it's a sound arguement. It's too bad I completely agree with you about this game, and was just presenting the opposing viewpoint.

Except in the last point. Do I THINK Brunell will win out this season? Absolutely not. It falls in the improbable category. But you are too easily swayed. Nothing happened in this game that surprised me. Brunell has shitty games every once in awhile. The Eagles REALLY had something to prove, and really we were just a victim of that. They were by far the better team, but we knew that going in.

No, he hasn't done anything to demoralize the fans. The TEAM has. If we were 6 and 2 and Phili had just beat the daylights out of us to drop us to 6-3 and Brunell had this kind of day, we would just move on. Like we should now. It was a massacre. Let's get ready for Tampa Bay.

After all, what's the penalty for playing to win the game when you still have a chance?[/QUOTE]

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.

Re: Take 70Chip's Mark Brunell Rorshock Test
 

[QUOTE=GTripp0012;244255]If it came off like talking down to you, I apoligize. But if you found comfort in the loss because you were planning to take it to me on the boards...that's another thing. I'm not accusing you of doing that, but thats how you are coming off.

My curiosity doesn't stop at "Brunell was bad today". Again, I apoligize.[/QUOTE]

no need to apol[B]o[/B]gize Tripp, it was a spirited but civil debate as i expect from most Warpathers.

taking it to the boards? you must be joking if you think i relish anything about today, i live deep in hostile territory (ugh work tomorrow...), the Redskins are the last connection I have to where i grew up - i don't need forum victories more than I need victories from my hometown heroes. thats why i'm so passionate about this, because i see Brunell HURTING MY TEAM.

you're the one who assured me we'd disagree about Brunell's performance this week btw - and all my arguments have been about Brunell over the span of the season. [B]not just today[/B]. even when i gave him props last week.

Re: Take 70Chip's Mark Brunell Rorshock Test
 

[quote=illdefined;244266]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.[/quote]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 [U]great[/U] 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.

Re: Take 70Chip's Mark Brunell Rorshock Test
 

1.9

This should be made into a poll so we can have the official Warpath Stance. We will just average out the votes after a few days.

Re: Take 70Chip's Mark Brunell Rorshock Test
 

[quote=GTripp0012;244275]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.[/quote]

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.

Re: Take 70Chip's Mark Brunell Rorshock Test
 

[QUOTE=GTripp0012;244275]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 [U]great[/U] 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.[/QUOTE]



whoa. all this 'Luck' talk and a Randle El pass as the sole potential highlight coming from our in-house Brunell defender/statistician. who'dathunkit.

no worries Tripp, you've heard our subjective, observational 'baseless' statements all season, we'll hear yours. welcome to the club.

and why would you assume people expected a closer loss? some of us actually expected a win, as improbable as it may have been. its why we watched the game.

Re: Take 70Chip's Mark Brunell Rorshock Test
 

[quote=drew54;244277]1.9

This should be made into a poll so we can have the official Warpath Stance. We will just average out the votes after a few days.[/quote]

I was just about to suggest a poll. We should have the options of being inbetween the numbers as well.

Do it Matty!

Re: Take 70Chip's Mark Brunell Rorshock Test
 

[QUOTE=GTripp0012;244275]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.[/QUOTE]

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.

[QUOTE=GTripp0012;244275]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.[/QUOTE]

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).

Re: Take 70Chip's Mark Brunell Rorshock Test
 

It serves absolutely no purpose to continue playing MB. I am on the fence between 1 and 2 now.

Re: Take 70Chip's Mark Brunell Rorshock Test
 

where's the poll?

Re: Take 70Chip's Mark Brunell Rorshock Test
 

3 at the begining of the season, 2 after the giants game and i will become a 1 if he starts next game.

Re: Take 70Chip's Mark Brunell Rorshock Test
 

[QUOTE=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;244288]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.
[/quote]

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?


[QUOTE=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;244288]
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).[/QUOTE]

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.

Re: Take 70Chip's Mark Brunell Rorshock Test
 

If I had to choose I guess I'm in the #2 category.

A few weeks ago I was probably #3.

#1 is just ridiculous and anyone that considers themselves to be a #1 has no clue and is beyond repair as a Redskins fan.

Re: Take 70Chip's Mark Brunell Rorshock Test
 

[quote=Mattyk72;244454]If I had to choose I guess I'm in the #2 category.

A few weeks ago I was probably #3.

#1 is just ridiculous and anyone that considers themselves to be a #1 has no clue and is beyond repair as a Redskins fan.[/quote]


Matty. You need to stop defending Brunell. Did you watch the game yesterday? How can you continue to defend him? That was pathetic. Absolutely pathetic. The guy is hurt and cannot get the job done more than 1 out of 3 games. Bottom line. No ifs ands or buts.

We would be at least .500 with a mediocre QB. We would have beaten Minnesota and the Titans.

We have a ton of problems on defense but I only see one on offense.

Re: Take 70Chip's Mark Brunell Rorshock Test
 

[quote=GTripp0012;244275]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 [U]great[/U] 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.[/quote]

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.

Re: Take 70Chip's Mark Brunell Rorshock Test
 

[quote=Grim21Reaper;244461]Matty. You need to stop defending Brunell. Did you watch the game yesterday? How can you continue to defend him? That was pathetic. Absolutely pathetic. The guy is hurt and cannot get the job done more than 1 out of 3 games. Bottom line. No ifs ands or buts.

We would be at least .500 with a mediocre QB. We would have beaten Minnesota and the Titans.

We have a ton of problems on defense but I only see one on offense.[/quote]

How am I defending him??

Re: Take 70Chip's Mark Brunell Rorshock Test
 

[QUOTE=Grim21Reaper;244461]Matty. You need to stop defending Brunell. Did you watch the game yesterday? How can you continue to defend him? That was pathetic. Absolutely pathetic. The guy is hurt and cannot get the job done more than 1 out of 3 games. Bottom line. No ifs ands or buts.

We would be at least .500 with a mediocre QB. We would have beaten Minnesota and the Titans.

We have a ton of problems on defense but I only see one on offense.[/QUOTE]

Nope...disagree. We have a medicore QB playing for us now and we're 3-6. Don't even give the defense a free pass to suck this year.

Re: Take 70Chip's Mark Brunell Rorshock Test
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72;244463]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.[/QUOTE]

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.

Re: Take 70Chip's Mark Brunell Rorshock Test
 

[quote=skinsguy;244468]Nope...disagree. We have a medicore QB playing for us now and we're 3-6. Don't even give the defense a free pass to suck this year.[/quote]

He isn't mediocre. He is the worst starting QB in the NFL.

Andrew Walter is 10 times better than him.

Re: Take 70Chip's Mark Brunell Rorshock Test
 

[quote=Mattyk72;244454]If I had to choose I guess I'm in the #2 category.

A few weeks ago I was probably #3.

#1 is just ridiculous and anyone that considers themselves to be a #1 has no clue and is beyond repair as a Redskins fan.[/quote]

What is rediculous about #1? I didn't see anything in there that was rediculous.

Re: Take 70Chip's Mark Brunell Rorshock Test
 

[QUOTE=TAFKAS;244472]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.[/QUOTE]

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.

Re: Take 70Chip's Mark Brunell Rorshock Test
 

[QUOTE=Grim21Reaper;244476]He isn't mediocre. He is the worst starting QB in the NFL.

Andrew Walter is 10 times better than him.[/QUOTE]

I think that's a bit of an overstatement and I want Brunell benched.

Re: Take 70Chip's Mark Brunell Rorshock Test
 

[quote=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;244489]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.[/quote]

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.