Brunell
 

Well, now that [I]that[/I] is over with, what the hell are we going to do with Brunell? He's making insane money, playing like a third sting high school powder puff quarterback and still thinks he can be a starter in the NFL. I know Crazy Canuck is the resident expert, but, is there anything we can do to get rid of that ridiculous salary and it's disastrous effect on our cap? Can we just take the hit all at once and get it over with? I'd prefer that as opposed to stretching it out over 2 or 3 years. If we trade his sorry ass (I'm thinking some chicken selects from McDonalds and 3 nickels) do we also trade his cap hit? I need education on this...

Bleedburgundy, from what I heard on Gibbs press conference today it doesn't look like Brunell is going anywhere. Sucks..

The Brunell fiasco ranks right behind the Herschel Walker trade and Detroit's Scott Mitchell signing.

How could Gibbs be so wrong about this guy? Hell, Kerry Collins would have been a better aquisition.

Looks like he'd cost $7,167,000 if we release him before June 1 and $3,433,000(2005) and $5,733,000(2006) after June 1. he isn't going anywhere next year guys...just not affordable to do.

Drunk Kerry Collins would have been better, I know.

I honestly believe that Gibbs has two very important abilities as concerned with player acquisition: Talent and Character evaluation. Brunell has handled his demotion well, a testament to the leadership and character which Gibbs wanted, but I believe that the time off effected Gibb's talent evaluation skills. That's a very tricky business and I believe that Brunell was just a mistake, plain and simple, attributed to rust.

Brunell needs to take a pay cut commensurate with his diminished status on the team. IF that happens, then I am fine with him on the team, but not as a rapidly diminishing 43 million dollar quarterback.

I think it makes most sense to cut Brunell after June 1, 2006. That way we can eat the bulk of his signing bonus in 2007.

As for restructuring I don't see it happening. Just to clarify, many guys restructure, but very few if any take less money. In most cases restructuring means rearranging the terms of payment, not decreasing the amount of those payments.

A restructure usually involves replacing the player's upcoming salary with a signing bonus. This way the money gets spread over a few years instead of eating it all at once.

Since Brunell's 2005 salary is only $1.5M, a restructure will have minimal effect.

Thanks Canuck, for the record, I was thinking pay cut. BIG PAY CUT. Hell, I was thinking pay back, as in please return your salary and signing bonus and apologize for killing weeks 1-10 or whenever he finally got benched.

Why cut Brunnell? He may not be any where near worth the money we are paying for him right now, but imagine both the cap hit and the money it would take t sign a new backup quarterback. It would be ridiculous. Besides, who knows, he might still have a little bit of gas in the tank

You need two QBs in the NFL, and given that we've already got him, we may as well keep him on the bench. Sure, he's not great (and that's being generous) but he knows the offense now, provides so-called "locker room leadership," and can back up Ramsey. *shrug*

[QUOTE=Beemnseven]The Brunell fiasco ranks right behind the Herschel Walker trade and Detroit's Scott Mitchell signing.

How could Gibbs be so wrong about this guy? Hell, Kerry Collins would have been a better aquisition.[/QUOTE]

That move and the Portis trade were made on stat's alone, nobody bothered to evaluate the player and see if they would fit in to what we do, Brunell was signed on his playmaking abilities of year's past, nobody figured out that he was never a conventional QB to begin with once his leg's are gone he's done, he cannot beat you standing in the pocket, same thing with Portis nobody checked to see that most of his yard's and TD's came against KC and their pourous defense, denver's running system is a wide open attack designed to produce big play's and take advantage of a back's flat line speed, Mike Anderson, and Olandis Gary, are these guy's great back's? Come on now, yet they were 1500yd runner's, look at what R. Drouns has done so far this year, these point's were not factored in these decision's, it is also why Shanahan was willing to give up a 1500 yard a year runner he new it was his system and Portis was nothing special. As for Brunell there was a reason he was about to be released until we came along everyone else worth their salt in talent evaluation knew he was done, if he wasen't the Jag's would have had plenty of trade offer's for a seasoned starting QB.

Brunell will be back as Ramsey's backup, a high priced one at that.

Hopefully he can help mentor Ramsey for a season and we can let him go after that.

I said easy big fella
 

[QUOTE=Beemnseven]The Brunell fiasco ranks right behind the Herschel Walker trade QUOTE]

Dude, the Walker trade led to the Cowboys winning 3 super bowls.....don't see Jax doing that anytime soon, it was a bad trade, but at the time it made sense, alot of sense....

Brunnel is going to stay in Washington. Maybe they can get him to restructure so that we don't have a big cap hit until we release him in 2007. He is a smart guy and a proven QB. As a second string QB, I think he is an asset. (But not worth 43 M)!

I say we demand that he take a big pay-cut. I'm sure Brunell knows that he wouldn't be wanted by ANY NFL team after seeing his horrible performance. I think League minimum for a veteran sounds about right.

If I were Gibbs & I'm not. I would let things be as they are, but I would let Brunell know that he's only going to be our #2 or #3 from this point forward & if he sees another opportunity where he's gonna have a shot at starting restructuring & reducing his salary will be his only option he's got.

I'd leave the ball in his backfield.

Ramsey has proved that he's pregressing & Hasselbeck is going to serve great as our 2nd string. I'd look to draft a late rd QB or just leave Brunell as a solid #2/3.

The Skins are moving in the right direction regardless of the cap & Brunell.

GO SKINS '05!
:grouphug:

Actually it would be great for the Skins if Brunell and Samuels offered to restructure and I've heard hints to that effect. I don't know much about Samuels but I've always been told that Brunell is a class act, and if that's true he should be willing to restructure his contract to better match his contribution to the team.

Kevikazi:

OK, so you DEMAND that he take a pay cut to the league minimum - which for a vet of his standing is about $800K. If he agrees, you save about $700K in cap space which is almost enough to sign two special team rookies.

HOWEVER, what is your plan if Brunell tells you to stick it up your butt?

If you cut him because he won't take the cut, it will cost you $7M in cap space next year. Hell, if you are in a postion to eat that number, what difference will a $700K savings make?

If you tell him to take a pay cut or else and he refuses and you do nothing, how are you going to get some of the Meatheads on the team to follow the team rules. Your DEMANDS have to have consequences if they are not met.

So, in order to save about $700K you are willing to risk a $7M cap hit this year or having the rest of the team see that sometimes you talk big but don't back it up with actions? Not a good strategy...

[QUOTE=offiss]That move and the Portis trade were made on stat's alone, nobody bothered to evaluate the player and see if they would fit in to what we do, Brunell was signed on his playmaking abilities of year's past, nobody figured out that he was never a conventional QB to begin with once his leg's are gone he's done, he cannot beat you standing in the pocket, same thing with Portis nobody checked to see that most of his yard's and TD's came against KC and their pourous defense, denver's running system is a wide open attack designed to produce big play's and take advantage of a back's flat line speed, Mike Anderson, and Olandis Gary, are these guy's great back's? Come on now, yet they were 1500yd runner's, look at what R. Drouns has done so far this year, these point's were not factored in these decision's, it is also why Shanahan was willing to give up a 1500 yard a year runner he new it was his system and Portis was nothing special. As for Brunell there was a reason he was about to be released until we came along everyone else worth their salt in talent evaluation knew he was done, if he wasen't the Jag's would have had plenty of trade offer's for a seasoned starting QB.[/QUOTE]

I couldnt agree with you more,when we signed Brunell I called in and talked to Howard Balzer of USA Today and asked him if we even gave Brunell a workout or if we just signed him,he said no workout,just signed,I thought that was a pretty stupid move then,especially for a guy coming off shoulder surgery and you give him a huge signing bonus without working him out? How fuckin stupid can you get?

In the WP today Brunell is saying he's not sure if he wants to be a backup next year, it's kinda funny how the roles have been reversed from when Ramsey was pouting about being a backup and there were rumors he wanted a trade.

Brunell thinks he can still start, problem for him is who would want him as their starter?? If he demands a trade, do you think anybody would be willing to take on his salary?

So if Brunell refuses to restructure and can't be traded...what options do we have? Just pay his enormous salary and have him sit on the bench? That's one expensive backup...and I'm sure Ramsey would be irritated that his backup is making more money than he is.

Chances of him taking a pay cut are slim to none. Unless he's an absolute saint of a guy why would he??

If he demands a trade unless there's a taker I'd guess we would just wait until after June 1 and cut him and eat the loss. It's inevitable we're going to have to take a hit for him eventually. Hopefully it's later rather than sooner so the hit won't be as bad.

No matter how you cut it, because we gave Brunnell such a HUGE signing bonus, there is simply no way he is going anywhere. No amount of restructuring will save us signicant cap space on Brunell this year because the pro-rating of SB's takes into account money ALREADY paid - It is merely a bookkeeping mechanism to allow a team to spread out the hit over several years.

If we cut him, we eat a huge cap hit - Either now or in '06
If we trade him his bonus is accelerated and we eat the same cap hit we would if he was cut.



Cry about it all you want, but he is here next year and probably '06-07 as well.

As for his comments about wanting to be a starter, Brunnell handicapped himself as much as the Skins when he took such a huge bonus. He accepted a situation which, if he did not play well enough to start, he would HAVE to remain as back-up because of the financial handcuffs he placed on the team.

So curse him, hate him, moan about what a horrible signing it was, but face the ugly, ugly fact that Brunnell is here for the next two seasons.

Re: Brunell
 

I think you guys are all wrong! I think Brunell still has some football in him and will lead us to the playoffs.

Re: Brunell
 

[QUOTE=offiss]That move and the Portis trade were made on stat's alone, nobody bothered to evaluate the player and see if they would fit in to what we do, Brunell was signed on his playmaking abilities of year's past, nobody figured out that he was never a conventional QB to begin with once his leg's are gone he's done, he cannot beat you standing in the pocket, same thing with Portis nobody checked to see that most of his yard's and TD's came against KC and their pourous defense, denver's running system is a wide open attack designed to produce big play's and take advantage of a back's flat line speed, Mike Anderson, and Olandis Gary, are these guy's great back's? Come on now, yet they were 1500yd runner's, look at what R. Drouns has done so far this year, these point's were not factored in these decision's, it is also why Shanahan was willing to give up a 1500 yard a year runner he new it was his system and Portis was nothing special. As for Brunell there was a reason he was about to be released until we came along everyone else worth their salt in talent evaluation knew he was done, if he wasen't the Jag's would have had plenty of trade offer's for a seasoned starting QB.[/QUOTE]

Wow, someone's probably wishing this post had just disappeared... :hitfan:

Re: Brunell
 

Oh man these old threads are good. i was ready to pouch after seeing the first post. man even the dates look in place with this one :)

Re: Brunell
 

I don't think Brunell is the greatest by any stretch, but many of us were arguing along with the media that he got stiffed on the Pro Bowl, just a couple weeks ago. He has been the QB all year and put up career numbers in TD's and Int Ratio and over 3000 yards and us to the divisional round of the playoffs. There are a number of QB's out their that are making more money than him, Vick for one that just sucked this year and missed the playoffs. The fan in us loves you one week and hang you the next is funny as can be. Every QB I have ever seen has good games and Bad games. P. Manning at the beginning of the year and the Colts offense looked not so exciting putting up 13 points a game. You have to look at a season as a whole and he has had a pretty decent season. The offense struggling has been a number of factors. Just the other week we were arguing that he threw the ball away, this week he pushed it and it got picked and we say Brunell sucks he should have thrown it away. It cracks me up, but there is not doubt he was overpayed and handled wrong, but he has along with the rest of the team which they are playing as has gotten us where we are today. The D has bailed us out of games, Moss has won us games, Portis has won us games, and Brunell has won us games. At times each of them have let us down also, the offense looked great put up 35 points in the 1st Tampa game and the D lost us the game.

Re: Brunell
 

I read this thread and almost posted something terrible until I noticed it was an old thread. I was thinking...can't believe everybody is giving Brunell crap for last week alone.

Re: Brunell
 

Myself, I ws preparing a Pro-Brunell flame thrower, then..............OH

Re: Brunell
 

brunell aint going nowhere soon here. he can,t afford another miserable game like the tampa game on saturday.
i,m hoping he gets in gear for this saturdays game.
case in point another player earning way too much than he truly deserves.

Re: Brunell
 

[QUOTE=sportscurmudgeon]Kevikazi:

OK, so you DEMAND that he take a pay cut to the league minimum - which for a vet of his standing is about $800K. If he agrees, you save about $700K in cap space which is almost enough to sign two special team rookies.

HOWEVER, what is your plan if Brunell tells you to stick it up your butt?

If you cut him because he won't take the cut, it will cost you $7M in cap space next year. Hell, if you are in a postion to eat that number, what difference will a $700K savings make?

If you tell him to take a pay cut or else and he refuses and you do nothing, how are you going to get some of the Meatheads on the team to follow the team rules. Your DEMANDS have to have consequences if they are not met.

So, in order to save about $700K you are willing to risk a $7M cap hit this year or having the rest of the team see that sometimes you talk big but don't back it up with actions? Not a good strategy...[/QUOTE]

Gotta love SC!

Money Talk! Sounds just like LDS!

Re: Brunell
 

You are all going to fall back in love with Brunell this w/end.

IF the Skins lose it won't be because of Brunell.

Re: Brunell
 

backrow:

I can guarantee you that if LDS reads that you think he and I "sound alike", you will NEVER be invited to spend a moment in his owner's box. I'm not exactly on his "A List"...

Re: Brunell
 

What really disturbs me about some of your criticisms concerning Brunell's play sounds like the baseless commentary I read everyday in the New York newspapers. Brunell is too old. Brunell has no arm. So what he injured his knee, blah , blah. If the game has passed Brunell by, where is the game in Favre's world? It's gone bye, bye.

If our record says who we are, what in the hell is the problem? Oh, I know the pre-Madonna Patrick Ramsey isn't responsible for the success of this season. Just an old washed-up Jacksonville reject who happened to throw 23 TDs and 10 INTs. In the process restored the pride and glory of winning 5-1 in our division after a 1-5 record last year. And this one is even more horrific, he actually gave us a measly 10-6 record after a decent 6-10 record last year.

I don't know about you, but I would go to war with this man anyday of the week because he believes he can do it even when his body doesn't agree. In the playoffs a QB is not required to put up 250 -350 yds. It's about a successful running attack and an awesome defense who can force turnovers. Try 19+ turnovers and when Brunell is called on to score in the redzone he has been more successful than anyother NFC team in the playoffs. Don't get caught up in the 125 yds in offense. Look at the 31 point average we had going into that game. Brunell has reached his peak and is on the verge of taking this team to the big dance. I'll see you in Detroit.

Re: Brunell
 

Please don't take this thread at face value! I revived it somewhat mischeviously as a way of pointing out what a difference a year makes. At the time the thread was started the opinions expressed were somewhat understated compared to the conventional wisdom heard on talk radio, etc. No one could have foreseen Brunell's dramatic turnaround. No one except Joe Gibbs that is.

Re: Brunell
 

remember what 5rings says you are what you are.that right now is two games away from super bowl 40

Re: Brunell
 

unlike you guys i dont think every qb can be a peyton, u got to roll with what u got and right now were paying the salary for 2 starting qb's Brunell's performance is not as bad as u make out he doesent throw picks for one thing and thats somehting everyone should appreciate

Re: Brunell
 

[QUOTE=SUNRA]What really disturbs me about some of your criticisms concerning Brunell's play sounds like the baseless commentary I read everyday in the New York newspapers. Brunell is too old. Brunell has no arm. So what he injured his knee, blah , blah. If the game has passed Brunell by, where is the game in Favre's world? It's gone bye, bye.

If our record says who we are, what in the hell is the problem? Oh, I know the pre-Madonna Patrick Ramsey isn't responsible for the success of this season. Just an old washed-up Jacksonville reject who happened to throw 23 TDs and 10 INTs. In the process restored the pride and glory of winning 5-1 in our division after a 1-5 record last year. And this one is even more horrific, he actually gave us a measly 10-6 record after a decent 6-10 record last year.

I don't know about you, but I would go to war with this man anyday of the week because he believes he can do it even when his body doesn't agree. In the playoffs a QB is not required to put up 250 -350 yds. It's about a successful running attack and an awesome defense who can force turnovers. Try 19+ turnovers and when Brunell is called on to score in the redzone he has been more successful than anyother NFC team in the playoffs. Don't get caught up in the 125 yds in offense. Look at the 31 point average we had going into that game. Brunell has reached his peak and is on the verge of taking this team to the big dance. I'll see you in Detroit.[/QUOTE]

THAT is the end of THAT! Nice post

Re: Brunell
 

Did Sunra know this was an old post?

Re: Brunell
 

[QUOTE=NM Redskin]Did Sunra know this was an old post?[/QUOTE]

I'm guessing no

Re: Brunell
 

Everything old is new again!