Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha
GTripp,
I just wanted to say that, although we differ in our evaluations of the offense, you make some good points. It's also nice to see someone actually articulate reasonable bases for their opinions instead of simply saying, "you're an idiot," "you're ignorant," or "I'm right and you're wrong."
I do not think that Brunell is a bad QB; he's pretty accurate in his short-game, he doesn't throw a lot of picks, he's smart, he's classy, and he's done relatively well considering the constant turnover in the coaching staff and offensive personnel. So, unlike some others, I do not believe that Brunell is the worst quarterback we've seen or the cause of all of our offensive struggles. Moreover, I also agree that our defense is playing worse than our offense and shares a lot of the blame for our record.
If we had a reasonable chance of making the playoffs, I would say that we should stick with Brunell as he gives us a better chance of winning than Campbell. However, because our post-season hopes are all but mathematically over and Brunell isn't getting any younger, it's time for JC to see the field. Campbell will probably throw more picks, make poor drive-killing plays, and struggle more than Brunell, but he's our future and now's a good time to start working towards next season.
|
First off, thanks for the kind words. After two days of the me vs the world treatment (which I knew I was getting into), it means a lot.
The basis of my desire to argue my point over and over stems from the fact that the Redskins have a QB who should have been a probowler in 2005, that's tough to dispute without defending disappointing seasons from both Delhomme and Vick. This man came under scrutiny in the offseason for seemingly no reason, and played average out of the gate, prompting the world to fall on his shoulders. Since then, hidden game's and FO's stats show that Al Saunders and Mark Brunell are doing their part for the Redskins to be a much better than 2-5 team.
I continue to press the arguement for this reason: We trail the first place Giants by 2.5 games. We have 9 games left. They have 10. One in FedEX. Not only are we not as out of it as we have been led to believe, but I think the Redskins have a better chance to catch the G Men than the Cowboys do, and maybe even Phili who still has to play that string of three road divisional games in a row which will be brutal. I don't expect the Giants to encounter clear sailing, so I believe the Redskins should start trying to accumulate victories with Dallas, and see if they can't string something toghether. Get back to 5-6 or even 6-5. They have a tough schedule, but all of the difficult games (save Phili) are at home. When was the last time they weren't at least
IN a game at home. Maybe once or twice in 2004, maybe. We are competitive at home vs anyone. So why not string a few games toghether and make a playoff push? Winning will fix all of our problems, the key is to get the first one.
So I guess that's the ONLY place where I disagree with you Sheriff. You see it as Campbell time, and I see it as do or die time for this team. If the offense keeps doing what its doing, and the defense improves and gets healthy, why not the Skins in 2006?