Re: Give Props to Brunell
 

[quote=dmek25;240735]thats all that should matter to ant redskin fan. there are no so called style points[/quote]


agreed. We are 3-5.

Re: Give Props to Brunell
 

[quote=illdefined;240738]Tripp, it's been explained ad infinitum. it's YAC - that's a stat, so start doing some serious subtraction. maybe if Distance Thrown was a stat, you would pay attention. maybe if stats only applied when In Contention (and not garbage time) you would stop basing Brunell's HOF application based on his 'stellar' numbers.

beware the number crunchers.[/quote]


not only that, when i looked at the deep throw chart TAFKAS threw up, guys like peyton threw 50% more deep passes and completed 50% more as well as having a lower int % on deep balls. if you go through the play by plays, they keep track of deep passes and shorter passes that go for big gains.

sometimes it seems like GTripp doesn't even bother watching the games, and just looks at the stat lines instead.

and GT, you're arguement that the lack of possessions is what's making the offense look bad is crap. brunell has more attempts this year (in 8 games) than he had in 9 in 2004 (with a great defense), and he's on track to have more than he had in 2005 (with a good defense), and he'll be sacked less too.

and before you project out how this year's stats will be better than last years - they won't. brunell fades down the stretch, and when we started winning last year, it was in part because we took the ball out of his hands and ran it more...


first 8 starts in 2005: 34.8 passes per game, 4-4 record
-------------------- 320+ yards twice, 220+ 5 times
next 8 starts: 22.4 passes per game, 6-2 record
---------------- under 200 yards EIGHT times (under 160 6 times)

when brunell throws 27 times or less per game: 11-2
otherwise: 5-14

and no shit it's somewhat self-serving, but that doesn't seem to bother you (that whole correlation != causation thing).

Re: Give Props to Brunell
 

Poor Brunell! lol .... ya gotta love him!
It's humorous to watch when he tries to "run the ball." He's the only player I know who looks as if he's running a marathon yet, only ends up moving .00012of a yard.
Why can't they make an exception and allow Mark the right's to a motorized scooter? lol

Re: Give Props to Brunell
 

[QUOTE=rotahe39;240670]Brunell did his job - plain and simple. Didn't play outstanding but better than past weeks.

Key is that we won, that's all that matters to me.[/QUOTE]




Ever heard the saying "It's not always whether you win or loose, it's how you play the game" We won (seems like everybody's happy, including me) The coaches are not happy with the way we played the game.

Re: Give Props to Brunell
 

[quote=Longtimefan;240854]Ever heard the saying "It's not always whether you win or loose, it's how you play the game" We won (seems like everybody's happy, including me) The coaches are not happy with the way we played the game.[/quote]

Coaches at any level are Never happy with the game.

Re: Give Props to Brunell
 

[QUOTE=Hog1;240858]Coaches at any level are Never happy with the game.[/QUOTE]



Which means there's a lot of work left to be done, and a short time to do it.

Re: Give Props to Brunell
 

True. I was lookig at our D standings (in some thread). Holy shit, what the hell happened? I mean, yah, we have some injuries.................but we are like last or close in several major categories. I am not a real stat geek as it does not encompass much of what it takes to win,,,,,,,,,,,,,,but HELL

Re: Give Props to Brunell
 

[quote=That Guy;240771]

first 8 starts in 2005: 34.8 passes per game, 4-4 record
-------------------- 320+ yards twice, 220+ 5 times
next 8 starts: 22.4 passes per game, 6-2 record
---------------- under 200 yards EIGHT times (under 160 6 times)

when brunell throws 27 times or less per game: 11-2
otherwise: 5-14
.[/quote]

Interesting stat i like it

Re: Give Props to Brunell
 

[quote=That Guy;240771]not only that, when i looked at the deep throw chart TAFKAS threw up, guys like peyton threw 50% more deep passes and completed 50% more as well as having a lower int % on deep balls. if you go through the play by plays, they keep track of deep passes and shorter passes that go for big gains.

sometimes it seems like GTripp doesn't even bother watching the games, and just looks at the stat lines instead.

and GT, you're arguement that the lack of possessions is what's making the offense look bad is crap. brunell has more attempts this year (in 8 games) than he had in 9 in 2004 (with a great defense), and he's on track to have more than he had in 2005 (with a good defense), and he'll be sacked less too.

and before you project out how this year's stats will be better than last years - they won't. brunell fades down the stretch, and when we started winning last year, it was in part because we took the ball out of his hands and ran it more...


first 8 starts in 2005: 34.8 passes per game, 4-4 record
-------------------- 320+ yards twice, 220+ 5 times
next 8 starts: 22.4 passes per game, 6-2 record
---------------- under 200 yards EIGHT times (under 160 6 times)

when brunell throws 27 times or less per game: 11-2
otherwise: 5-14

and no shit it's somewhat self-serving, but that doesn't seem to bother you (that whole correlation != causation thing).[/quote]
the running game also got a lot better at the end of the year

Re: Give Props to Brunell
 

[quote=That Guy;240771]
when brunell throws 27 times or less per game: 11-2
otherwise: 5-14
[/quote]

Honestly I'm not sure how much information you can derive from that stat. It's kind of stating the obvious.

When teams are losing (and therefore more likely to lose the game) they pass more. When a team is winning (and therefore more likely to win the game) they run more.

If you averaged all the games played by all the teams in the past 10 years, you'd find a similar stat.

Not trying to be a naysayer, just thought I'd make that point. It really doesn't say anything about Brunell in particular, just that we pass more when we're down, and we usually lose games in which we were down.

Re: Give Props to Brunell
 

right, and you throw more when you're behind, which doesn't happen when you're running and playing good defense. that's what the disclaimer is there for, but it's just showing that stats are a bit misleading on their own, since correlation == causation seems to be how the defense of brunell has been argued here, and it's just not logically sound when you can see the quality of the in game performances compared to the stat lines.

but it's still somewhat interesting how less is more, even before the end of the year, with regards to brunell.

Re: Give Props to Brunell
 

[quote=That Guy;241345]right, and you throw more when you're behind, which doesn't happen when you're running and playing good defense. that's what the disclaimer is there for, but it's just showing that stats are a bit misleading on their own, since correlation == [B]causation seems to be how the defense of brunell has been argued here, and it's just not logically sound when you can see the quality of the in game performances compared to the stat lines.[/B]

but it's still somewhat interesting how less is more, even before the end of the year, with regards to brunell.[/quote]
I agree with you about the stat line. I'm not one to jump on that bandwagon and I don't usually defend Brunell with stats, and when I do a disclaimer is attached. I just think we all need to back off Brunell this week, because IMO he's our best chance to win one game at a time.

I think we'll win the majority of our games when utilizing our running game to its max. potential. Look at how effective the play-action was against a very good cowboy defense. It just goes without saying the impact Portis and co. has on this team, both in the running and passing game.

Re: Give Props to Brunell
 

yeah, our run blocking has to be better than it was vs dallas though. 1 yard here, 2 yards there. I mean, portis made a couple wrong cuts, but the OL (and pulling guards) blocked the wrong guy a lot of times from re-watching the game.

Re: Give Props to Brunell
 

[quote=That Guy;241367]yeah, our run blocking has to be better than it was vs dallas though. 1 yard here, 2 yards there. I mean, portis made a couple wrong cuts, but the OL (and pulling guards) blocked the wrong guy a lot of times from re-watching the game.[/quote]
Totally agree, but at least it keeps the defense loyal to the run, and thus opening up some play action.

When saunders was just busting pass pass pass out of his rear end, kind of made little/no sense... you set the pass up w/ the run, not vice versa.

Re: Give Props to Brunell
 

[quote=RobH4413;240660]I think the assumption that he doesn't throw deep has some legitimacy towards it. I think it was my homie tafkas that released the deep ball spread sheet, I'll look for it in a second.

He is however looking better as of late. That extra weak of rest definitly helped him out. He doesn't play well injured ever, and I think he's looking pretty sharp now.[/quote]Theres a difference between not throwing deep and not throwing deep as often as so and so. If you make a comparison, then you may have a point. But if you say "doesn't throw deep", then all I have to do is show one example and said person is wrong.

It's nitpicky I know, but if you use qualifiers and comparisions, we have a discussion. If you don't, I use stats...and then we have whiny baseless rebuttles.

I hate to be stingy like this (I really do), but if people don't back up their posts with evidence, they shouldn't be able to dismiss stats.

Remember, I don't think the way I do because of the stats, I only use them to reinforce my opinion.

Re: Give Props to Brunell
 

well i showed the not as often and it was a VERY stark contrast. i only used him and peyton cause of the large time investment it takes to go over the game logs and ensure accuracy, but brunell's stats were VERY bad (% deep, attempts deep, completions deep, deep int % etc) when compared, even taking into account that peyton is simply better than anyone else.

Re: Give Props to Brunell
 

[quote=GTripp0012;241373]Theres a difference between not throwing deep and not throwing deep as often as so and so. If you make a comparison, then you may have a point. But if you say "doesn't throw deep", then all I have to do is show one example and said person is wrong.

It's nitpicky I know, but if you use qualifiers and comparisions, we have a discussion. If you don't, I use stats...and then we have whiny baseless rebuttles.

I hate to be stingy like this (I really do), but if people don't back up their posts with evidence, they shouldn't be able to dismiss stats.

Remember, I don't think the way I do because of the stats, I only use them to reinforce my opinion.[/quote]
I had remembered off the top of my head that there was something in the spread sheet that proved the point.

Im probably totally wrong, but I couldn't find the spread sheet to respond further soooo yeah. You may be 100% correct... I looked for it and couldn't find it.

Anyone have the link?

Re: Give Props to Brunell
 

and I prefer someone being nit-picky then for me to walk around ignorant...

so no beef there.

Re: Give Props to Brunell
 

[quote=BrunellMVP?;240728]while i am aware that Brunell's completion percentage is up yoy, I admit to not knowing the exact numbers associated with an increase in Yards per attempt. I would love to see them. I would suspect that if you were to look at his passes, most would be in the under 10 yards range- with significant yards coming from his recievers gaining YAC. [B]I would not take anything away from Brunell for such plays- as getting the ball to the open man 5 yards away who runs for 20 there after is just as important as tossing for 25.[/B] I cannot however, agree that Mark Brunell's numbers have been stellar. What is the basis for comparison? I would argue that you should compare him to other QBs in the league (more specifically- those that aren't in danger of losing their jobs- ie winning). (i have a feeling some will tout the numbers of plummer and mcnair as comparisions- fair enough- but we don't have anyhting close to Broncos or Raven's D). That said, it is entirely possible that we just disagree on the definition of stellar.[/quote]The part I have bolded is a very important part of the equation. Your statement is 100% correct. As the leader of the offense, Mark Brunell should not be penalized for finding his best player in open space, simply because the pass was short. Simple logic says that if he throws the ball underneath and the back gets 10 yards yac, there [I]probably[/I] (as in not every time) was not a better throw to make. The 7.24 yards/attempt figure ranks 7th in the NFL. Rivers, Brees, Huard, Bulger, Peyton Manning, and McNabb are the only QBs who rank ahead of him. Does Brunell have better run after catch recievers than every other QB in the NFL? I'm guessing no. For every Moss and Randle El, There's an Owens and Glenn, or a Walker and Rod Smith (and David Kircus!), or an Ocho Cinco and a Championship. But are passing game out produces those, because we get more yards per attempt then they do which last time I looked was the goal of passing.

I don't remember saying stellar and if I did I was surely refering to THIS game only on his measly 23 attempts. To put it in perspective, in each of the 8 games this year, the opposing QB has thrown 25 or more passes against us despite the 3-5 record. In fact only once were we thrown on less than 29 times. 23 attempts is nothing, and with little YAC help and a lot of drops, Brunell threw for nearly 200 yards. But thats why you use Y/A instead of yards. Even the dudes who developed the weak QB Rating formula figured that one out.

Re: Give Props to Brunell
 

I really really really want that spread sheet link... comon... someone has it..

I know they do...

why am I too dumb to find it.

I'm web savy, but not warpath savy.

Re: Give Props to Brunell
 

unk hrujifd rhgl regiuywgrcgc jh;egp cgi; y4 pytc;ewu.rnhj rhurehut hw4ehjrhgk hrgjrngjrhuiebitchtuwl7654kjnbgrjfkhbg rhugh rugbhekjwasslbhljrhguhf u h h uhjnralj hruhgjuboyhujbnj rlh

Re: Give Props to Brunell
 

[quote=Skins4Eva;241389]unk hrujifd rhgl regiuywgrcgc jh;egp cgi; y4 pytc;ewu.rnhj rhurehut hw4ehjrhgk hrgjrngjrhuiebitchtuwl7654kjnbgrjfkhbg rhugh rugbhekjwasslbhljrhguhf u h h uhjnralj hruhgjuboyhujbnj rlh[/quote]

how useful.

Re: Give Props to Brunell
 

[quote=illdefined;240738]Tripp, it's been explained ad infinitum. it's YAC - that's a stat, so start doing some serious subtraction. maybe if Distance Thrown was a stat, you would pay attention. maybe if stats only applied when In Contention (and not garbage time) you would stop basing Brunell's HOF application based on his 'stellar' numbers.

beware the number crunchers.[/quote]So you want all QB yardage to be calculated by how far the ball traveled? Figures as much. Then you'd have all the West Coast QBs with really shitty Y/A stats simply because of the system. Then you wouldn't really know anything about the guy except what kind of system he plays in. It would not go in any way toward getting you closer to the "why do teams win/lose?" answer (the ONLY reason for statistical analysis). But it'd make Brunell's stats look like what you think they should be, so thats cool I guess.

You could cut the stats at the point when garbage time starts, and it would make the numbers [I]ever so slightly[/I] more accurate, or you could just leave EVERYONES garbage time in and understand that what you are given is a [B]general representation of how well a player has performed.[/B] So you can say Brunell sucks, I can show you his stats, you can make any dann excuse you want to, and I'll say fair enough, but in [B]general[/B] Brunell has played well. Someone who is doing poorer than him in all major categories is not playing as well. Obviously. QB Rating puts him at #8 in the NFL. You will never hear me refer to him as the 8th best QB. That's not general enough. Conventional stats aren't that accurate.

QBing is all about doing your role in the offense. Some QBs have bigger roles than others. Brunell's is actually quite small, and he does it well. Stats are not what made me come to this conclusion, its what allows me to make an arguement thats actually something and not nothing.

Back to your YAC point, stats aren't going to seperate the QB from the offense (FO's stats [I]try[/I] to but that seems a bit advanced for you), but even if you change the QB he still won't be seperated from the offense. So you accept the YAC as part of the offense, and you move on. You don't worry about it skewing the stats. We aren't talking about Brunell moving to another team here.

Which brings me back to my main point. There is no present reason good enough to replace Mark Brunell. People who agree with me: Joe Gibbs, Al Saunders, among others. People who (at least seem to) disagree: Illdefined, RedskinRat, among others.

Here's what's been explained ad infinitum. I've given countless reasons why MB SHOULDN't be benched. You've given baseless reasoning to why he SHOULD, and then have given at least relevant reasoning to why my stats are not all they are cracked up to be. They are what they are. A [B]general representation of how well a player has performed.[/B]

Re: Give Props to Brunell
 

[quote=Skins4Eva;241389]unk hrujifd rhgl regiuywgrcgc jh;egp cgi; y4 pytc;ewu.rnhj rhurehut hw4ehjrhgk hrgjrngjrhuiebitchtuwl7654kjnbgrjfkhbg rhugh rugbhekjwasslbhljrhguhf u h h uhjnralj hruhgjuboyhujbnj rlh[/quote]
fuck you

Re: Give Props to Brunell
 

as for why to bench him - he's not going to get better and we're probably not going to the playoffs, so seeing if campbell can play and giving him experience is in the best long term interests of the franchise.

brunell has been nothing but average. when we needed him in the playoffs, he was MIA. when we had a great defense he was terrible, now that we have a terrible defense, and he's just not good enough to overcome that. his W-L record (which is a valid stat) isn't good, and when we need a play to win, he often takes the sack/inc instead (TB, DEN, KC, etc). he has the worst record BY FAR in 4th quarter comebacks (something on the order of 8-43 - beyond horrible) and that's WITH very favorable conditions (down by less than 7 entering the 4th and failing to win = loss, but coming back from ANY number = win). I've never said he's the ONLY problem, or that he's the BIGGEST problem, just that he's a bottleneck (spending too much time watching the rush vs looking downfield) and we have possibly have the longterm solution in house, but it's important to know whether JC is truly the guy or if we're still looking. before building a team, it's important to be sure that the trigger man is more than just average, and capable of a clutch play more often than what we've seen lately.

14-13 was great, but for brunell, those kinds of plays have been very few and far between across his entire career. it's not a big shocker that he is what he is, only slower now.

Re: Give Props to Brunell
 

that said, this year he hasn't been helped AT ALL by the play calling. he NEEDS shotgun, he NEEDS max protect, he NEEDS a couple audibles. that's WHY he looked good last year, and without them, it looks like he's playing with an arm behind his back.

he played well this week, he played well vs JAC, but I haven't thought much of any of his other games this year, and i've been even more unimpressed with saunders, who's calling plays like he has HoF O linemen and no need to call anything besides screens. gibbs/musgrave 05 was a much better system for this talent.


the chemistry on the defense and a bad offseason by the FO, and what appears to be injured or just under-performing OL (jansen, thomas, dockery) are also big concerns. punter/kicker are pretty shaky too, and while we don't have the pick to fix kicker, we'll be more than able to get sep or fields with one of our 2nd day picks. fields has lechler like leg strength. I mean, there's plenty of blame to go around. but if we're not going all the way, we should do everything possible to get there as soon as possible, which includes getting the young guys ready and evaluating current and future talent as closely as possible.

Re: Give Props to Brunell
 

[quote=That Guy;241398]as for why to bench him - he's not going to get better and we're probably not going to the playoffs, so seeing if campbell can play and giving him experience is in the best long term interests of the franchise.

brunell has been nothing but average. when we needed him in the playoffs, he was MIA. when we had a great defense he was terrible, now that we have a terrible defense, and he's just not good enough to overcome that. his W-L record (which is a valid stat) isn't good, and when we need a play to win, he often takes the sack/inc instead (TB, DEN, KC, etc). he has the worst record BY FAR in 4th quarter comebacks (something on the order of 8-43 - beyond horrible) and that's WITH very favorable conditions (down by less than 7 entering the 4th and failing to win = loss, but coming back from ANY number = win). I've never said he's the ONLY problem, or that he's the BIGGEST problem, just that he's a bottleneck (spending too much time watching the rush vs looking downfield) and we have possibly have the longterm solution in house, but it's important to know whether JC is truly the guy or if we're still looking. before building a team, it's important to be sure that the trigger man is more than just average, and capable of a clutch play more often than what we've seen lately.

14-13 was great, but for brunell, those kinds of plays have been very few and far between across his entire career. it's not a big shocker that he is what he is, only slower now.[/quote]
Philisophically speaking.... you play the guy that wins your next game. One game at a time. We're one game behind in the wild race. Theres no need to go "big picture" on us right now.

We put Campbell in, he throws picks (that happends to young QB's) and with our defense we can't afford that. We'll lose games with a young QB making mistakes. In-experience usually means turnovers, and our defense cannot win with that at stake. Brunell has not been playing badly as of recent, and if your a coach, your going to put your smart game manager in at QB. You cannot think long term in the middle of the season, and it's just not going to happen.

There really is no debate... JC will not start. We can all look at this when the season is over and say this and that, but right here, right now, we're making the only decision we can, and IMO it's the right one.

Re: Give Props to Brunell
 

that's nice, but unless we go 7-1, it's over for real, and the chances aren't great. right now brunell might be the best choice, but through the first 8 games, i'm not sure he was.

and yeah, campbell is going to throw ints, but if he's throwing more TDs and taking less sacks, it might not be as bad as predicted.

i can't possibly seeing us go 3-0 or 4-0 in the playoffs with this defense... hopefully they shore it up, and i know gibbs wins more late, but for the cost and hype, i need to see a lot more progress real fast.

Re: Give Props to Brunell
 

[QUOTE=Skins4Eva;241389]unk hrujifd rhgl regiuywgrcgc jh;egp cgi; y4 pytc;ewu.rnhj rhurehut hw4ehjrhgk hrgjrngjrhuiebitchtuwl7654kjnbgrjfkhbg rhugh rugbhekjwasslbhljrhguhf u h h uhjnralj hruhgjuboyhujbnj rlh[/QUOTE]

what????

Re: Give Props to Brunell
 

i voted 'great'

oh well

Re: Give Props to Brunell
 

[QUOTE=GTripp0012;241391]So you want all QB yardage to be calculated by how far the ball traveled? Figures as much. Then you'd have all the West Coast QBs with really shitty Y/A stats simply because of the system. Then you wouldn't really know anything about the guy except what kind of system he plays in. It would not go in any way toward getting you closer to the "why do teams win/lose?" answer (the ONLY reason for statistical analysis). But it'd make Brunell's stats look like what you think they should be, so thats cool I guess.[/QUOTE]

relying on stats, any stats, was your bag, not mine. i spoke about the KINDS of passes he throws, from frequent observation, something no official stat, including your FO stats keep track of.

so because its not a recognized stat it's not relevant? sacks weren't always a recognized stat, but they sure were relevant, and not at all subjective.


[QUOTE]You could cut the stats at the point when garbage time starts, and it would make the numbers [I]ever so slightly[/I] more accurate, or you could just leave EVERYONES garbage time in and understand that what you are given is a [B]general representation of how well a player has performed.[/B] So you can say Brunell sucks, I can show you his stats, you can make any dann excuse you want to, and I'll say fair enough, but in [B]general[/B] Brunell has played well. Someone who is doing poorer than him in all major categories is not playing as well. Obviously. QB Rating puts him at #8 in the NFL. You will never hear me refer to him as the 8th best QB. That's not general enough. Conventional stats aren't that accurate. [/QUOTE]

then i could argue everyone's garbage time is alot less than Brunells. regardless that wasn't a serious point, when you often refer to your stats, you very frequently refer to our offense as the x number league in efficiency. you do this very often.

[QUOTE]QBing is all about doing your role in the offense. Some QBs have bigger roles than others. Brunell's is actually quite small, and he does it well. Stats are not what made me come to this conclusion, its what allows me to make an arguement thats actually something and not nothing.[/QUOTE]

thats all our points, that Brunell's limitations are what MAKE him a small role-player in this offense, which simply isn't cutting it this season in the position we're in.

[QUOTE]Back to your YAC point, stats aren't going to seperate the QB from the offense (FO's stats [I]try[/I] to but that seems a bit advanced for you), but even if you change the QB he still won't be seperated from the offense. So you accept the YAC as part of the offense, and you move on. You don't worry about it skewing the stats. We aren't talking about Brunell moving to another team here.

Which brings me back to my main point. There is no present reason good enough to replace Mark Brunell. People who agree with me: Joe Gibbs, Al Saunders, among others. People who (at least seem to) disagree: Illdefined, RedskinRat, among others.

Here's what's been explained ad infinitum. I've given countless reasons why MB SHOULDN't be benched. You've given baseless reasoning to why he SHOULD, and then have given at least relevant reasoning to why my stats are not all they are cracked up to be. They are what they are. A [B]general representation of how well a player has performed.[/B][/QUOTE]

YOU asked why Brunell's YPA was up so we answered you. because we have two of the best punt returners in the game - which make a career of YAC - for wide recievers. whether screens are the best use of them is another matter, but we answered your question.

again, you call our arguments baseless because Passes Thrown Outside The Numbers doesn't happen to be a stat. nor Passes Thrown Before the Marker. etc. etc.

just because they aren't doesn't make them irrelevant or even subjective (Aikman had a nice graphic and everything). don't you think the KINDS of passes Brunell makes effects other parts of the offense? don't you think how defenses react to Brunell's tendencies affects our running game? (how are Portis's numbers this year btw). how many times has the 'Gibbs wins every time when they get 100yds rushing' stats been debunked as near meaningless?

yes, stats are a REPRESENTATION of performance, but they aren't the whole picture (that many people in the NFL say they see - not just Rat and i) which you dismiss complelety simply because it's not numerical.

Re: Give Props to Brunell
 

Isn't this debate tired yet? We're at 270 posts and counting.

Re: Give Props to Brunell
 

[quote=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;241916]Isn't this debate tired yet? We're at 270 posts and counting.[/quote]
Yeah seriously....


But atleast it's civil.

Personally, I stopped reading them once they got too long for my ADD.

Re: Give Props to Brunell
 

I feel partially responsible somehow




















:D

Re: Give Props to Brunell
 

and my first post in this thread was giving Brunell PROPS!

Re: Give Props to Brunell
 

i just think we should bring back ramsey:D

Re: Give Props to Brunell
 

[quote=GoSkins!;241932]i just think we should bring back ramsey:D[/quote]


hahaha...ur a sick puppy...he cant beat out Pennigton for a job...what a jerk-off.....

Re: Give Props to Brunell
 

[QUOTE=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;241916]Isn't this debate tired yet? We're at 270 posts and counting.[/QUOTE]


I agree! Let's just be happy we won against Dallas and hope for more wins regardless as how we get them.

Re: Give Props to Brunell
 

[quote=GoSkins!;241932]i just think we should bring back ramsey:D[/quote]
I could go for that.

Re: Give Props to Brunell
 

[QUOTE=JGisLordOfTheRings;241936]hahaha...ur a sick puppy...he cant beat out Pennigton for a job...what a jerk-off.....[/QUOTE]

Neither would Brunell.