Re: How Will Cambell Be Handled?
 

Quote:
I'd just like to state the right now [B]Jason Campbell is an unknown[/B]. This is all squabbling over hypotheticals based off rampant (and varying) assumptions of a complete unknown.
[quote=huddle]
He isn't an unknown to Joe Gibbs. Our discussion has been speculation based on Joe's glowing report on Campbell. If you don't want to participate, that's okay.[/quote]

[B]Please tell me where i said i didn't want to participate. I said we should be aware of the fact that most of this thread is speculation. Its a valid point.

Once again, I DO NOT NEED YOUR F'ing permission to write posts. Stop acting like i do.
[/B]
Quote:
can't it be both? we won 5 straight games towards the end, so obviously we had the lead and started running more. brunell wore out at the end, but its not like we averaged 2.0ypc and decided to run anyways. It was working, so we continued to rely on it. I don't see why you'd abandon what's working without a good reason.

[quote=huddle]We ran early in the game. At times, we continued to run even when it wasn't working. The committment to the run was our staffs' adjustment after the Oakland loss and after even the Rams and Cards defenses held down our passing game.[/quote]

[B]You didn't answer the question, and if it wasn't working, how come portis went on a tear of 100+ yard games and we came out of that stretch 5-0?

We had 257 rushing yards against the Rams, why would we bother passing?
[/B]
Quote:
Coincidently, that drop off is also attributeable to the loss of patten. If you can blame it all on brunell, I'll go ahead and blame it all on losing patten.

[quote] You're up to your old tricks: putting words in my mouth. Even after I underlined the words in my post saying that there were several causes for the drop-off, you come up with this strawman.[/quote]

[b]First of all, If you read the entire point instead of the out of context bit you replied to, you'd see that i blamed a lot of things besides just patten.[/b]

[B]Second, what tricks? This whole thread is about how you don't think the offseason acquisitions are enough to make BRUNELL successful. not to mention your trick of [SIZE=4]MISQUOTING PEOPLE OUT OF CONTEXT.[SIZE=2] If you weren't implying that brunell was the reason for our losses, then why did you make this thread? if brunell was fine, why should ANY of us care about campbell and whether he starts? You're backtracking.
[/SIZE][/SIZE][/B]
Quote:
I don't see how this year with better WR depth, better WR talent, and better scheme that we'll somehow be worse off.


[quote=huddle]Another strawman? Who said we'd be worse off?[/quote]

[B]Its not a strawman, its simply an opinion (unless you totally lack reading comprehension), but apparently I'm not allowed to have an opinion. Why the F**k do you keep acting like i can't post without you're express permission and approval of my opinions. Stop being a twat.

Let's simplify:
I think the upgrades will make us better next year. Whether YOU said anything or not doesn't matter as I didn't make ANY reference to you.
[/B]
Quote:
the very fact that you think people should take your word (without ANY proof) over that of a collective group of experts is either hubris or stupidity. Either way, statements like this are why your credibility is dead.

[quote=huddle] And now the personal attack?[/quote]
[B]
How is that a personal attack and not a fact? please PLEASE [SIZE=3]PLEASE[SIZE=2] explain why you're smarter than the collective whole of NFL coaches regarding personnel decisions with something concrete. You can't and you're not.

This is you deflecting the attention away from rebutting the statement with a childish "i'm being oppressed" routine.

Please rebut the actual statement instead. or are you going to pull "he didn't ask nicely" routine?

Your methods are tired and played out, and its obvious you've never been part of any real debate because you refuse to argue the merits of the case and instead rely on hoping everyone else has the intelligence of a 5 year and can't see that you never actually respond to valid criticism.
[/SIZE][/SIZE][/B]
Quote:
and yet in that same thread you were proven wrong on every point, and two days later you post an article about how great (DVOA) stats are (which, by the way, are still stats). So its nice that you think you're smarter than everyone else, except [B]it's not true[/B]. And you ended up disagreeing with the very post that you thought was so well reasoned :P

[quote=huddle]Horse puckey.[/quote]
[B]See, again, valid criticism is ignored because you don't have an answer besides stating that YOU WERE WRONG.

That post is fact. You said stats were almost worthless, and days later you said that DVOA was a good stat and posted an article about it and how it might be useful. THOSE ARE FACTS.

You backtracked, you got caught, so now you refuse to even attempt a rebuttal.
[/B]
Quote:
do i even need to comment? with no experience as an NFL coach, the fact that you'd think you know more than them about any point of their job (as a collective whole) is insane.

and more irony from the unwitting master :P.


[quote=huddle] Correct me if I'm wrong. I'm getting the distinct feeling that you don't appreciate my posts.[/quote]

[B]And here's the 3rd time in one post where you refused a rebuttal of valid criticism. What makes you smarter than the collective whole of NFL coaches? you have yet to answer that question.
[/B]

[b]What i don't like is your hypocrisy, you're inability to defend your statements against valid criticim, you're convenient backtracking, you're attempts to sidetrack issues when you can't defend them, you're proclamations about the rules of debate that change whenever they don't favor you, and you're absolute refusal even possibly consider you might be wrong. Other than that, we're fine.[/b]

Re: How Will Cambell Be Handled?
 

[quote=Huddle]Just a rough guess? About the same age as Malcolm.[/quote]

you'd be off by quite a bit.

Re: How Will Cambell Be Handled?
 

Anybody want to have a pissing contest?

Re: How Will Cambell Be Handled?
 

[quote=Huddle]I suggested the shotgun to Joe in 2004 and he almost threw me out of the room.

So, assistant C should maybe wait a bit and bring it up again. The blinking is a good sign by the way.[/quote]

That's what I like about you, Huddle. You're actually a very good sport. A hopeless antagonist but still a good sport!
:goodjob: :food-smil

Re: How Will Cambell Be Handled?
 

[quote=Huddle]When you were talking about "learning the offense," I read that to mean ...learning the playbook and the scheme. I didn't think you were talking about execution as well, so we were talking about different things.[/quote]

When I'm talking about learning the offense, I'm talking about the bottom line, how their play will affect the games. You don't just learn an offense just to know the plays, what the heck good does that do anybody?? What coach in their right mind just wants to create a QB who can recite the playbook by heart?? The entire point of learning an offense is to execute it seamlessly, and you can't execute what you've studied in class without countless repetition with the starting WRs. I didn't think I needed to iterate that, but given your propensity to mince words when you feel the need to save face, perhaps I did.

Re: How Will Cambell Be Handled?
 

[url]http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/29/AR2006032901059.html[/url]

here is an article that states that Coach Gibbs is giving Campbell the chance to win the No. 2 spot this coming training camp and pre-season.

Re: How Will Cambell Be Handled?
 

[quote=724Skinsfan]That's what I like about you, Huddle. You're actually a very good sport. A hopeless antagonist but still a good sport!
:goodjob: :food-smil[/quote]

Thanks

Re: How Will Cambell Be Handled?
 

[quote=dcweldon][URL="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/29/AR2006032901059.html"]http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/29/AR2006032901059.html[/URL]

here is an article that states that Coach Gibbs is giving Campbell the chance to win the No. 2 spot this coming training camp and pre-season.[/quote]

That our first round QB is ready, after a year of no action, to compete for the back-up job hardly fills me with confidence about his potential. At the very least, it tells us that the coaches don't see him as the next Carson Palmer.

The other interesting thing in this article is the mention that Collins already knows Al Saunders offense. I think we can take that as a definite clue that those who have been speculating that Al came here only to tweak Joe Gibbs' offense from last season are wrong.

Re: How Will Cambell Be Handled?
 

[quote=Huddle]That our first round QB is ready, after a year of no action, to compete for the back-up job hardly fills me with confidence about his potential. At the very least, it tells us that the coaches don't see him as the next Carson Palmer.

The other interesting thing in this article is the mention that Collins already knows Al Saunders offense. I think we can take that as a definite clue that those who have been speculating that Al came here only to tweak Joe Gibbs' offense from last season are wrong.[/quote]

except that saunders said in his interview he was going to tweak it to make it more point productive.

The bigger clue of what he's doing comes from the fact that he only brought over 1 assistant coach with him (his son) and not an entire staff like GW has done. 1 assistant and 1 player ;) Maybe wholesale changes will come, but i don't think we'll see a total morph in one year, especially since the main ideas are there and the biggest change is verbage and playcalling.

also, carson palmer was #1 overall in the draft (and not a projected 2nd rounder), sat his first year, and led his team to an 8-8 record his second year. when we're thinking SB, 8-8 isn't going to be good enough.

Re: How Will Cambell Be Handled?
 

[quote=That Guy]also, carson palmer was #1 overall in the draft (and not a projected 2nd rounder), sat his first year, and led his team to an 8-8 record his second year. when we're thinking SB, 8-8 isn't going to be good enough.[/quote]

Not to mention the fact that Carson Palmer didn't exactly replace the most consistent QB. Kitna had an outstanding year before that but despite that he still is not highly regarded as a perennial overachiever. Carson had the tools, no sense prolonging the inevitable. Brunell is one of the better overall career QB's in the league. His injuries in recent years, of course, cast a shadow of doubt but he at least has proven performance. We made it to the second round of the playoffs when he was [U][B]not[/B][/U] 100% effective (maybe not even 50%). Let's think about what will happen if/when he is.

Re: How Will Cambell Be Handled?
 

I don't mean to be a pessimist, but I have my doubts about this. I AM relieved that Gibbs asked Brunell to add a flexibility program to his workout regimen.

Re: How Will Cambell Be Handled?
 

Gibbs is bringing Campbell along slowly, and having a capable veteran in front of him affords him that luxury. I don't think it speaks to Campbell's inability at all.

As I've said many times already, this team is loading up for a championship run. We have a veteran QB who just led us to the playoffs, obviously it makes perfect sense to stick with the veteran, take a shot at winning it all, and in the meantime you give your young QB another year to soak things up on the sideline and be better prepared to take over in 2007.

Two years on the bench is not the end of the world for a QB. More teams would probably do it too if it wasn't for the tremendous investment that is made in first round QBs. In today's win now or else NFL, teams are almost forced to play young QBs before they are truly ready. We should feel lucky that we can allow Campbell to sit and learn.

All that being said, this entire debate can boil down to this for me. Gibbs knows QBs. He knows how to handle them, he's won with multiple guys, and if we can't trust him, who can we?

Re: How Will Campbell Be Handled?
 

Precisely. I doubt Gibbs is somewhere in a cold, dank basement corner self-hugging himself in a fetal position wondering what should he do regarding the QB situation. He knows people and he knows who the best available man for the job is.

Re: How Will Campbell Be Handled?
 

Very true. I'm fine as long as Brunell plays like he did at the beginning of the season. And with all the weapons he'll have now, I have no reason to believe he won't. My ONLY thing is that if he gets hurt and knows it's affecting his game, I just wish he would bring that up with Gibbs.

I know Portis can carry the team on his back, but I don't think my heart can take any more of those type of close games.

Re: How Will Campbell Be Handled?
 

[quote=TheMalcolmConnection]I know Portis can carry the team on his back, but I don't think my heart can take any more of those type of close games.[/quote]

I should've bought stock in Tums for the amount I chew on watching 'Skins games dating back to 1992. Winning by 8 points or more is/was considered a blowout for me.

Re: How Will Campbell Be Handled?
 

Haha! I know the feeling. I think I got an ulcer from the first Dallas game alone.

Re: How Will Campbell Be Handled?
 

[QUOTE]TheMalcolmConnection

My ONLY thing is that if he gets hurt and knows it's affecting his game, I just wish he would bring that up with Gibbs.[/QUOTE]

Mark Brunell said that the hamstring injury in 2004 wasn't that much of a factor in his lackluster performance that year. My sense is that his strong supporters make the injury theory more of a factor than it really is when assessing Mark's performance. I regard it as a minor factor.

The major factor is his age and the accumulated wear and tear on his body.

In his prime, Brunell's game might be compared to Michael Vick's, a threat to run or pass especially when rolling left. He's not that much of a threat anymore even when he's 100%.

Re: How Will Campbell Be Handled?
 

[quote=Huddle]Mark Brunell said that the hamstring injury in 2004 wasn't that much of a factor in his lackluster performance that year. My sense is that his strong supporters make the injury theory more of a factor than it really is when assessing Mark's performance. I regard it as a minor factor.

The major factor is his age and the accumulated wear and tear on his body.

In his prime, Brunell's game might be compared to Michael Vick's, a threat to run or pass especially when rolling left. He's not that much of a threat anymore even when he's 100%.[/quote]

Brunell talked down his hamstring injury in 2004, but I don't think anyone can deny something was drastically hurting his play that year. The Mark Brunell from 2004 was not the Brunell of 2005, or compared to any other year in his career.

After the second Giants game in 2005 he was once again very clearly hampered by his injury. His play dropped off drastically and we saw shades of the 2004 Brunell.

This quote from Gibbs is an indicator that Brunell's leg injuries are a concern:

[quote]"Mark's in good shape for his age, [but] his legs are a concern. [We want to] add some things to the offseason program for him from a flexibility standpoint."[/quote]

Brunell isn't the same QB when his legs are bothering him. He's never had a rocket arm, so much like a finese pitcher in baseball, take away his legs and you have a QB that loses his accuracy and velocity.

Re: How Will Campbell Be Handled?
 

[quote=Huddle]The major factor is his age and the accumulated wear and tear on his body.[/quote]

Then how do you account for the drastic difference in his performance early in the season compared to late in the season? If it was just age related, I'd expect his performance to be pretty consistent throughout the season. But it wasn't, he was much better early on than he was in the last few games and in the playoffs.

Re: How Will Campbell Be Handled?
 

Exactly. After the Giants game, his play very obviously dropped off. It wasn't like his body said, "OK, it's this far in the season, time for me to give out."

Re: How Will Campbell Be Handled?
 

Wear and tear you notice over the course of the season, you can't turn it on and off like a switch.

Re: How Will Campbell Be Handled?
 

Mattyk72

[QUOTE]Brunell talked down his hamstring injury in 2004, but I don't think anyone can deny something was drastically hurting his play that year. The Mark Brunell from 2004 was not the Brunell of 2005, or compared to any other year in his career.[/QUOTE]

The 2004 Gibbs offensive scheme was the major problem. By the time Ramsey took over, it was improved, particularly with the running game. Ramsey was lucky he didn't win the starting job at the beginning of the year.

[QUOTE] After the second Giants game in 2005 he was once again very clearly hampered by his injury. His play dropped off drastically and we saw shades of the 2004 Brunell.[/QUOTE]

After the SF game, defenses adjusted. They doubled Santana and limited Brunell's effectiveness on his rollouts. These, I think, were the primary factors in the drop off (Didn't you say earlier the dropoff didn't happen?).

[QUOTE] This quote from Gibbs is an indicator that Brunell's leg injuries are a concern: Brunell isn't the same QB when his legs are bothering him. He's never had a rocket arm, so much like a finese pitcher in baseball, take away his legs and you have a QB that loses his accuracy and velocity.[/QUOTE]

As I said, Brunell's strong supporters make it more of a factor than Mark does. Maybe Mark just doesn't want to make excuses but I doubt it. Besides, if the injuries were that restrictive, why was he playing?

Re: How Will Campbell Be Handled?
 

I really don't think Mark wants to make excuses. And I feel that he was playing simply because he could manage the game better than Ramsey or Campbell. He knew that he could make simple throws and let Portis win the game simply by managing the game well.

But you SERIOUSLY think that the length of the season just hit him like a ton of bricks after the second Giants game? I find that a little hard to believe that he just stopped throwing well because the season was long. Matty is correct in saying that when you have a leg injury, your throwing is obviously hampered.

Re: How Will Campbell Be Handled?
 

[quote=Huddle]After the SF game, defenses adjusted. They doubled Santana and limited Brunell's effectiveness on his rollouts. These, I think, were the primary factors in the drop off (Didn't you say earlier the dropoff didn't happen?).[/quote]

Wait a second dude. You just got done telling me that Brunell's performance was mainly driven by age and wear and tear on the body. Now you're saying that his effectiveness was limited because they doubled Moss.

First off, doubling Moss has nothing to do with Brunell's skill. Defenses doubled Moss because they knew we had no threatening WR opposite him once Patten went down. If Brunell's effectiveness was limited by that defensive adjustment, it's not an indictment of his skill. By providing enough WR threats to Brunell, we make it tough for defenses to double Moss without getting burned by Lloyd or Randle-El, or a healthy David Patten for that matter. And if defenses can't make that same adjustment that they did last year, Brunell's effectiveness shouldn't be limited.

You're having trouble separating the cause of Brunell's decline in performance from the effects.

Re: How Will Campbell Be Handled?
 

TheMalcolmConnection

[QUOTE] But you SERIOUSLY think that the length of the season just hit him like a ton of bricks after the second Giants game? [/QUOTE]

Nope. I never said that.

From the Seattle game through the SF blowout, Brunell & Co. put up some really gaudy stats. The offense looked like it couldn't be stopped.

The problem was that most of the production could be accounted for by the Brunell to Santana connection and Brunell's rolling left and throwing into the short zone. Beginning with the first Giants game, defenses adjusted and reduced the effectiveness of both options.

Brunell's age and the injuries were minor factors in the slump in my opinion.

Re: How Will Campbell Be Handled?
 

[quote=Huddle]Brunell's age and the injuries were minor factors in the slump in my opinion.[/quote]

OK so what I'm hearing from you is that you don't think it was the injuries, you don't think it was the age, you just think defenses adjusted to him. So the sense I'm getting from you is that you think Brunell just wasn't skilled enough to threaten the defense with his arms and legs like maybe a Donovan McNabb could, or a Drew Brees could, or a Carson Palmer could.

I'm actually somewhat alright with that opinion. Brunell is definitely not the kind of QB that can make tons of amazing plays with his arm alone. He's not the kind of QB that can be a hero, like Tom Brady can be. But I think you have to appreciate Brunell for what he is: he is GREAT at taking care of the ball. When something's not there, he knows he shouldn't be trying to be a hero, he throws it away and punts it. That's why his interception numbers were so low. That should not go overlooked here.

Maybe Campbell can come in and be the next hero type QB, making plays with his arm when nothing is there, and at the same time avoiding picks. But he's going to have to show me A LOT in training camp for me to believe that.

Given that the Skins have a GREAT defense and a strong running game, I don't think it makes much sense to risk throwing INTs to make a big play. Most of the time the team is best off by punting and putting it on the defense. Especially considering the way the defense was coming up with INTs and fumbles at the end of last season.

Game management is the most important thing for the Redskins at QB.

Re: How Will Campbell Be Handled?
 

Does anyone else feel like this?

:banghead:

Re: How Will Campbell Be Handled?
 

[quote=Mattyk72]Does anyone else feel like this?

:banghead:[/quote]

My sentiments exactly. Just [I]reading [/I]this thread I feel like I've run a marathon. I think the thread has run it's course & is now just getting repetitive and personal.

Re: How Will Campbell Be Handled?
 

[quote=Mattyk72]Does anyone else feel like this?

:banghead:[/quote]

Yeah. I do.

Why don't you lock this puppy?

Re: How Will Campbell Be Handled?
 

nah, let's torture ourselves some more shall we?

Re: How Will Campbell Be Handled?
 

[quote=Mattyk72]Does anyone else feel like this?

:banghead:[/quote]

Speaking of repetitive, I'll say this again:

Feeling like this :banghead: is a theme when Huddle is involved.

Re: How Will Campbell Be Handled?
 

I think we should now shift the focus of this thread to How Will Campbell Be Handled....Khary Campbell!!

Should they start him at OLB? Bring him along slowly on certain situations? Keep him at MLB for depth? Move Marshall to the outside, start Campbell on the inside?

Discuss

Re: How Will Campbell Be Handled?
 

[quote=TAFKAS]I think we should now shift the focus of this thread to How Will Campbell Be Handled....Khary Campbell!!

Should they start him at OLB? Bring him along slowly on certain situations? Keep him at MLB for depth? Move Marshall to the outside, start Campbell on the inside?

Discuss[/quote]

I like the mutliple uses of the name of the thread, TAF.

Very clever!!

Re: How Will Campbell Be Handled?
 

[I][B]For those of you wondering who will start at QB for the 'Skins this season, here is your answer.[/B][/I]


[I]By Mark Maske
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, March 30, 2006; Page E03[/I]

ORLANDO, March 29 -- Washington Redskins Coach Joe Gibbs said Wednesday that Jason Campbell, a first-round draft pick last year, will be given a chance in training camp and during the preseason to win the No. 2 quarterback job behind starter Mark Brunell.

Campbell was third on the depth chart last season behind Brunell and Patrick Ramsey. But with Ramsey having been traded to the New York Jets, Gibbs said that Campbell will compete with free agent newcomer Todd Collins for the job as next season's primary backup.

Gibbs said that he and his assistant coaches will make the decision based on the play of Campbell and Collins during the preseason games.

"He'll play a lot in the preseason," Gibbs said during the NFC coaches' breakfast on the final day of the annual league meeting. "You'll probably get a good feel for that coming out of the preseason. We'll see how they play, and everyone will have an opinion."

Collins previously was with Al Saunders, the Redskins' new offensive boss, in Kansas City, and Gibbs said that Campbell's preseason playing time can be increased because Collins doesn't have to learn the offense. He also said he will try to limit Brunell's practice-field snaps, both during training camp and the season, in an effort to keep the veteran healthy.

Gibbs acknowledged that Brunell's leg injuries during his two-year Redskins tenure make for an ongoing concern, and he's spoken to the quarterback about adding a flexibility program to his training regimen.

"He can probably take a little less work during the week, too. . . . Some guys want all the reps, but I think Mark is real comfortable," Gibbs said.

Gibbs said the Redskins continue to look for help at linebacker and are anxiously awaiting the outcome of safety Sean Taylor's trial on felony assault charges. "It would be a real struggle for us" to replace Taylor, Gibbs said.

Gibbs indicated that he's pleased with the Redskins' offseason additions but thinks every other team in the NFC East also will be improved. The Dallas Cowboys have done their best to match the Redskins, bold move for bold move, this offseason, signing wide receiver Terrell Owens to a three-year, $25 million contract following his release from the Eagles, which ended his troubled stay in Philadelphia.

"I think that makes good sense for them," Gibbs said. "If I had to say, I'd guess he'll play his guts out because he's kind of up against it. If I had to say, I'd say he'll play great. . . . I don't think there's anyone in our division who hasn't improved themselves. That's going to be six tough [games] there."

Gibbs said he feels healthy two seasons into his five-year contract and that the Redskins' success this past season -- when they went 10-6 and reached an NFC semifinal after going 6-10 when Gibbs returned to coaching in 2004 -- has given a dose of confidence to everyone in the organization.

"We had a miserable first year," he said. "That's real hard on you. You go into the second year knowing you need to get something done to get some confidence in everyone.

"Last year was good for us because it builds some confidence. . . . It's where you think you're supposed to be. I signed a five-year deal and I plan on living up to it. . . . Health-wise and everything, I don't think there's a problem."

Redskins Note: Washington will open the preseason with a game at Cincinnati on Aug. 13 at 8 p.m. that will be televised nationally by NBC.

The Redskins' other preseason opponents will be the Jets, New England Patriots and Baltimore Ravens. They'll host the Jets sometime between Aug. 17 and 21, play at New England between Aug. 24 and 28 and host the Ravens between Aug. 31 and Sept. 2.

Re: How Will Campbell Be Handled?
 

Yeah, I read that earlier. I'm perfectly fine with Brunell being the starter. Not only that, this will give Campbell something to challenge himself with.

Re: How Will Campbell Be Handled?
 

[quote=Mattyk72]Does anyone else feel like this?

:banghead:[/quote]

It's very hard to shoot a moving target.

Re: How Will Campbell Be Handled?
 

[quote=TheMalcolmConnection]Yeah, I read that earlier. I'm perfectly fine with Brunell being the starter. Not only that, this will give Campbell something to challenge himself with.[/quote]

Right. What QB wouldn't get all fired up about trying to beat out Todd Collins?

Re: How Will Campbell Be Handled?
 

Ha. Funny. Consider he has experience in Saunder's offense while Campbell does not.

Re: How Will Campbell Be Handled?
 

Campbell should be fired up about beating out any other QB on the roster, regardless of that player's name, experience, knowledge of the offense, etc.

Re: How Will Campbell Be Handled?
 

[quote=Huddle][quote=TheMalcolmConnection]

My ONLY thing is that if he gets hurt and knows it's affecting his game, I just wish he would bring that up with Gibbs.[/quote]

Mark Brunell said that the hamstring injury in 2004 wasn't that much of a factor in his lackluster performance that year. My sense is that his strong supporters make the injury theory more of a factor than it really is when assessing Mark's performance. I regard it as a minor factor.

The major factor is his age and the accumulated wear and tear on his body.

In his prime, Brunell's game might be compared to Michael Vick's, a threat to run or pass especially when rolling left. He's not that much of a threat anymore even when he's 100%.
[/quote]

they mentioned it in the WP that brunell was seriously bothered by leg injuries in 2004 (black and blue all over etc) but refused to make excuses. If you've seen his post games and interviews, that's very in line with his character. I just wish he could tell gibbs when he's hurt too bad to be useful.

I gotta smirk when i see that you say injuries are a minor factor, yet "wear and tear" (which includes injuries) are a major factor in a single post.