Re: Brunell
 

[QUOTE=offiss]No, that was my question for you, you stated that Portis should be motivated to play his old team, insinuating that with extra motivation he will be a real force to deal with. And my reply was if anyone should be motivated it should be Denver, Portis is the one who initiated the contract problems with Denver, not the other way around. Portis shouldn't need his old team to be motivated to run, I stated whether he is motivated or not is irrelevant, because so long as there's 7,8,9, men in the box he's going no where, regardless of his motivation, so to answer your question yes I think he's motivated, but no as far as extra motivation regarding Denver, he will run as well as the blocking will allow.[/QUOTE]

Your post make no sense. However, if you think running backs and their success are tied strictly to the effectiveness of their respective lines, your wrong.

Re: Brunell
 

[QUOTE=offiss]What does that have to do with the price of eggs in china?

What does Ray Rhodes getting worked up have anything to do with his ignorance as a coach?

I would imagine he would be very worked up, if I had no clue how to diagnois and stop offenses I would be worked up to, that doesn't mean he will be any better, our fire power is like a nucleur missle without a lauch sequence, it looks pretty powerful if you could get it off the ground.

[b]My biggest point[/b] about this is that we have been fortunate to play teams who are less talented than us, and in seattle's case not as well coached. With denver we are in agreement, we have to go into an opposing teams stadium, against a good team, it's great we are 3-0 but be carefull of falling in love with that because we haven't faced real playoff caliber teams, which Denver is one of. If we beat Denver then we will have something to really hang our hats on, I just don't think we will, I believe they will bottle up our offense this week, and denver will do just enough on offense to beat us, but I hope I am wrong.[/QUOTE]

Let's just take it from "[b]My biggest point[/b]....". I would agree this will be our most difficult asssignment to date. However, I agree with some others that have said, "this is the third time a good team, got bad, after we beat them". This is not to say we kicked the sh.. out of the Patriots, etc. That does not diminish the wins they have achieved. This is a team on the rise-dramatic rise. Each week, by leaps and bounds has their performance improved as has the opponents talent. Can they beat the Broncos-HELL YEA!
Lastly, I am in no danger of falling in love with a Superbowl holographic imposter of the skins. Since George Allen, and the many who have followed have I passionately carried the torch for the Redskins! At times, like a "tough love" child have I defended them. It is for these reasons I, like many of my brothers and sisters am I REALLY enjoying their rise to fame once again.
[b]Gimme a hallelujah[/b]

Re: Brunell
 

how does a thread that starts out about brunell, then talks about what ramsey might've done, switch to being a thread about denver. :D

Re: Brunell
 

well, it started during seattle week and didn't die off fast enough i'd guess...

Re: Brunell
 

[QUOTE=Hog1]Let's just take it from "[b]My biggest point[/b]....". I would agree this will be our most difficult asssignment to date. However, I agree with some others that have said, "this is the third time a good team, got bad, after we beat them". This is not to say we kicked the sh.. out of the Patriots, etc. That does not diminish the wins they have achieved. This is a team on the rise-dramatic rise. Each week, by leaps and bounds has their performance improved as has the opponents talent. Can they beat the Broncos-HELL YEA!
Lastly, I am in no danger of falling in love with a Superbowl holographic imposter of the skins. Since George Allen, and the many who have followed have I passionately carried the torch for the Redskins! At times, like a "tough love" child have I defended them. It is for these reasons I, like many of my brothers and sisters am I REALLY enjoying their rise to fame once again.
[b]Gimme a hallelujah[/b][/QUOTE]


Really what I am trying to say is this, I don't expect much out of us on offense, I am not looking at our offense as progressing, I look at what we did against Seattle, and know they are a stupid defense, that's why we scored a whopping 20 points, which I know for us is an onslaught, 2 TD's that's it, that's all we needed against Seattle, which is fine, but I want to be realistic on our chances against a real defense, and don't expect 11-15 on third down this week.

Will I be routing for them to win? Absofreakinlutly! But that doesn't mean I can't be objective as well, and I think that's the typical problem here, some of us don't want to just sit back and say we are going to just beat everyone we play, regardless if we are overmatched or not. Bottom line we can't move the ball against mediocre defenses, and so many here know we will do it against a defense as aggressive as denver's? I wouldn't be betting money on that.

Re: Brunell
 

Brunell is doing the job. Check the standings: 3-0.
I've seen more outta Brunell this season than I've seen outta any QB since Brad Johnson body slamming Robert Porcher in the home wildcard game!!! Let's enjoy the fact that we're winning close games. Brunell makes smart decisions. This team reminds me alot of the 80's teams. All heart and alot of Jesus luck. 4th and 3 and Riggins runs 41 yds for a TD against Miami??? That's story book. Well so far this season has written like a cheezy unbelievable made for tv movie. We're 3-0 and I still believe in Gibbs. Check my posts from last season and read my brother's sign on game day.
"In Gibbs We Trust"

Re: Brunell
 

[QUOTE=offiss]Really what I am trying to say is this, I don't expect much out of us on offense, I am not looking at our offense as progressing, I look at what we did against Seattle, and know they are a stupid defense, that's why we scored a whopping 20 points, which I know for us is an onslaught, 2 TD's that's it, that's all we needed against Seattle, which is fine, but I want to be realistic on our chances against a real defense, and don't expect 11-15 on third down this week.

Will I be routing for them to win? Absofreakinlutly! But that doesn't mean I can't be objective as well, and I think that's the typical problem here, some of us don't want to just sit back and say we are going to just beat everyone we play, regardless if we are overmatched or not. Bottom line we can't move the ball against mediocre defenses, and so many here know we will do it against a defense as aggressive as denver's? I wouldn't be betting money on that.[/QUOTE]

I do not challenge your loyalty as a fan, nor your right to challenge any and all opinions. That is part of the fun of the board! I do challenge your implication that there is something meritorious, or innovative regarding the stance YOU take. It is an opinion, nothing more.
It is your choice to take a defeatest attitude, and call it something else if you like. There are those of us who choose not to.

I would hardly characterize Seattle as a stupid defense as the Seahawks have had a couple of good wins against decent, if not good teams. Ray Rhodes remains highly sought after defensive coach. He is considered visionary by many, and assembled the first REAL defense the skins had since the original post Gibbs apocalypse. Our offense is gaining momentum rapidly. To suggest otherwise, would be absurd. A win, or loss in Dever this weekend won't change that. I have niether read or observed anything that convinces me the SKins won't win this game. A TEST, Hell yes! A defeat, HELL NO!!!!!!!!!
Don't forget to smell the roses today!

Re: Brunell
 

I believe Brunell is doing what we paid him all that money for. Smart football. not turning the ball over, giving our defense the chance to win field position. Thats what we are going to be and I believe Brunell understands that better than Ramsey. Brunell wont force bad throws, get out of bad plays at the line, even if its just a 1 or 2 yard gain. Lets face it Skins fans, this is who we are. We aren't the teams that put 30 pts a game back in Joes hayday. We are a defensive team with an offense that just needs to put 17 points up a game. If we put up 17 a game we can win maybe 12 games.

Re: Brunell
 

[QUOTE=#56fanatic]I believe Brunell is doing what we paid him all that money for. Smart football. not turning the ball over, giving our defense the chance to win field position. Thats what we are going to be and I believe Brunell understands that better than Ramsey. Brunell wont force bad throws, get out of bad plays at the line, even if its just a 1 or 2 yard gain. Lets face it Skins fans, this is who we are. [b]We aren't the teams that put 30 pts a game back in Joes[/b] hayday. We are a defensive team with an offense that just needs to put 17 points up a game. If we put up 17 a game we can win maybe 12 games.[/QUOTE]

[b]YET![/b]

Re: Brunell
 

[QUOTE=Hog1]I do not challenge your loyalty as a fan, nor your right to challenge any and all opinions. That is part of the fun of the board! I do challenge your implication that there is something meritorious, or innovative regarding the stance YOU take. It is an opinion, nothing more.
It is your choice to take a defeatest attitude, and call it something else if you like. There are those of us who choose not to.

I would hardly characterize Seattle as a stupid defense as the Seahawks have had a couple of good wins against decent, if not good teams. Ray Rhodes remains highly sought after defensive coach. He is considered visionary by many, and assembled the first REAL defense the skins had since the original post Gibbs apocalypse. Our offense is gaining momentum rapidly. To suggest otherwise, would be absurd. A win, or loss in Dever this weekend won't change that. I have niether read or observed anything that convinces me the SKins won't win this game. A TEST, Hell yes! A defeat, HELL NO!!!!!!!!!
Don't forget to smell the roses today![/QUOTE]

Really what it will come down to is actions on the field, once that happens sunday you will see that I am right.

Our rapid growing offense? RAPID?????????

Ray Rhodes a VISIONAIRY? :laughing2 By many, Did he invent the wheel?

[QUOTE]hog1-Your post make no sense. However, if you think running backs and their success are tied strictly to the effectiveness of their respective lines, your wrong[/QUOTE]

Really? So what you are saying is Portis stinks? Because I do believe he has the lowest yards per carry of any legitamate starting back last year. There is no back who doesn't need good blocking, you have power backs who can run people over and get yards that way, or you can be Barry Sanders, out of which Portis is neither, the fact is a great line, or great blocking schemes can make any back look good, [see denver] bottom line no back does anything without good blocking, did you ever hear the saying it all starts up front? Why is that? It's what a back does with that good blocking that seperates him from the rest of the backs!

Re: Brunell
 

[QUOTE=offiss]Really what it will come down to is actions on the field, once that happens sunday you will see that I am right.

Our rapid growing offense? RAPID?????????

Ray Rhodes a VISIONAIRY? :laughing2 By many, Did he invent the wheel?



Really? So what you are saying is Portis stinks? Because I do believe he has the lowest yards per carry of any legitamate starting back last year. There is no back who doesn't need good blocking, you have power backs who can run people over and get yards that way, or you can be Barry Sanders, out of which Portis is neither, the fact is a great line, or great blocking schemes can make any back look good, [see denver] bottom line no back does anything without good blocking, did you ever hear the saying it all starts up front? Why is that? It's what a back does with that good blocking that seperates him from the rest of the backs![/QUOTE]

Hmmmmmmm..................Ray Rhodes, stupid defense? SF D coach 1994 Super bowl champ, took Green Bay D to #2, Took Skins D to # 4. Is that your definition of "Stupid defense"? What does #1 D get on your scale? Moderately effective?
Maybe you could point out in what part of any of my posts I stated "Portis stinks"? My statement was, a higher level of motivation could increase his effectiveness, as it does in all competitors. Maybe you have heard the expression "getting up for a game"? Do you know what that refers to? And that is all I have to say on the matter

Re: Brunell
 

[QUOTE=Hog1]Hmmmmmmm..................Ray Rhodes, stupid defense? SF D coach 1994 Super bowl champ, took Green Bay D to #2, Took Skins D to # 4. Is that your definition of "Stupid defense"? What does #1 D get on your scale? Moderately effective?
Maybe you could point out in what part of any of my posts I stated "Portis stinks"? My statement was, a higher level of motivation could increase his effectiveness, as it does in all competitors. Maybe you have heard the expression "getting up for a game"? Do you know what that refers to? And that is all I have to say on the matter[/QUOTE]

I agree with you Hog1.
I am not sure who the brilliant defensive analists on this sight that are putting down Ray Rhodes, nor do I care, but Ray Rhodes is ONE of the top defensive coaches in the NFL. He turned our shitty defense around in one year just like Williams did last year. Where ever he goes he improves a teams D.

Re: Brunell
 

[QUOTE=Hog1]Hmmmmmmm..................Ray Rhodes, stupid defense? SF D coach 1994 Super bowl champ, took Green Bay D to #2, Took Skins D to # 4. Is that your definition of "Stupid defense"? What does #1 D get on your scale? Moderately effective?
Maybe you could point out in what part of any of my posts I stated "Portis stinks"? My statement was, a higher level of motivation could increase his effectiveness, as it does in all competitors. Maybe you have heard the expression "getting up for a game"? Do you know what that refers to? And that is all I have to say on the matter[/QUOTE]


Nonesense, Seifert was the defensive mind in san fran, and green bay was an offensive team, he's been miserable anytime he's been the man, stats are sometimes very misleading, the fact was we couldn't stop anyone when it counted, just like last week when he couldn't stop us when it counted. I wouldn't hire Rhodes if offered to pay me to coach, and please don't make comparisons to the impact on our defense between Rhodes, and Williams, there's no comparison, NONE!

Re: Brunell
 

[QUOTE=Defensewins]I agree with you Hog1.
I am not sure who the brilliant defensive analists on this sight that are putting down Ray Rhodes, nor do I care, but Ray Rhodes is ONE of the top defensive coaches in the NFL. He turned our shitty defense around in one year just like Williams did last year. Where ever he goes he improves a teams D.[/QUOTE]


How quickly do we forget, eh?

Re: Brunell
 

Skins always play Denver tough,as one who attended ''SUPERBOWL XX11'' I do have the attitude that we'll kick out some horse teeth on SUNDAY