Brunell is Bad

That Guy · 02-28-2006, 10:23 AM

rabach was fine and i don't see any need to upgrade there, but he's not an elite center by any means. there's an arguement that samuels is the #5 LT (no way in #$%% he's #4 or above), but i'd prefer more consistant guys. sometimes samuels just decides to quit on a play and let someone go right by him or something equally boneheaded (i believe the greenish football stat site did a super intensive analysis of the 2004 OL and that outlined that).

and the pro bowl means nothing. vick made the pro bowl after a terrible year (even brunell's stats were much better :P). cooley missed the pro bowl when his stats were WAY beyond the alt that got in ahead of him.

02-28-2006, 10:23 AM	#31
That Guy Living Legend Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: VA Age: 43 Posts: 17,620	Re: Brunell is Bad rabach was fine and i don't see any need to upgrade there, but he's not an elite center by any means. there's an arguement that samuels is the #5 LT (no way in #$%% he's #4 or above), but i'd prefer more consistant guys. sometimes samuels just decides to quit on a play and let someone go right by him or something equally boneheaded (i believe the greenish football stat site did a super intensive analysis of the 2004 OL and that outlined that). and the pro bowl means nothing. vick made the pro bowl after a terrible year (even brunell's stats were much better :P). cooley missed the pro bowl when his stats were WAY beyond the alt that got in ahead of him.

Brunell is Bad

Locker Room Main Forum