Poll: Starting QB 2006

[onlydarksets]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Last year was a wash for Brunell, Gibbs was trying to adjust his scheme, he didn't have the weapons he does now, he was playing hurt and it's no secret that the offense as a whole struggled.

This year we saw some flashes of what Brunell and this offense is capable of. I just think it's premature to say MB's time is over already. I don't see Ramsey getting another shot as the starter unless he really outperforms Brunell during the offseason, and I think we can forget about seeing Campbell until 2007.

I don't think your and his positions are mutually exclusive. I think NFLeurope's point was that making the playoffs will be the ultimate determinative factor in gauging his success. Yours (and the point I tried to make) seems to be that we can't know whether he's successful or not till after next year.

I think those two points are correct. MB has, through his improved performance this season, earned the right to start next year (IMO). We'll see what he does with it...

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by onlydarksets

I don't think your and his positions are mutually exclusive. I think NFLeurope's point was that making the playoffs will be the ultimate determinative factor in gauging his success. Yours (and the point I tried to make) seems to be that we can't know whether he's successful or not till after next year.

I think those two points are correct. MB has, through his improved performance this season, earned the right to start next year (IMO). We'll see what he does with it...

It would be nothing short of asinine to judge Mark Brunell primarily based on whether or not the Redskins make the playoffs. Last I checked it was a team game. Mark Brunell has held up his end of the bargain, he is running the offense efficiently and effectively. If we do indeed fall short of the playoffs, the blame can be placed:

1) Injuries to the defensive line (Griffin and Salavea'a make the defense great when they're healthy).
2) Lack of ability to power run the ball when needed.
3) Lack of a viable #2 WR.
4) Inconsistent play at the #2 CB spot.

You can't blame Mark Brunell, it's hard to ask for more from a QB than he has given us.

[onlydarksets]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

It would be nothing short of asinine to judge Mark Brunell primarily based on whether or not the Redskins make the playoffs. Last I checked it was a team game. Mark Brunell has held up his end of the bargain, he is running the offense efficiently and effectively. If we do indeed fall short of the playoffs, the blame can be placed:

1) Injuries to the defensive line (Griffin and Salavea'a make the defense great when they're healthy).
2) Lack of ability to power run the ball when needed.
3) Lack of a viable #2 WR.
4) Inconsistent play at the #2 CB spot.

You can't blame Mark Brunell, it's hard to ask for more from a QB than he has given us.

Nobody said it was fair - it's just the way it is. QBs, however, are held to different standards. Nobody talks about how many games a RB or WR has won. If we don't make the playoffs, people will look back and ask why we brought in an aging QB instead of grooming younger talent.

Keep in mind - this isn't about MB or his talent. He is a winner and he has proved himself more or less on an increasing basis since he has been here. What willl be judged is the hindsight wisdom of the front office in bringing him here if the team does not make the playoffs.

[NFLeurope]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

It would be nothing short of asinine to judge Mark Brunell primarily based on whether or not the Redskins make the playoffs. Last I checked it was a team game. Mark Brunell has held up his end of the bargain, he is running the offense efficiently and effectively. If we do indeed fall short of the playoffs, the blame can be placed:

1) Injuries to the defensive line (Griffin and Salavea'a make the defense great when they're healthy).
2) Lack of ability to power run the ball when needed.
3) Lack of a viable #2 WR.
4) Inconsistent play at the #2 CB spot.

You can't blame Mark Brunell, it's hard to ask for more from a QB than he has given us.

Hey, im not sure whether or not this is a response to my post. But in case it is...perhaps i was not clear....what i said/meant to say was that I will judge the value of the BRUNELL SIGNING based on whether or not the skins make the playoffs. That i believe is a reasonable thing to do. The point is even if Brunell played pretty well...but not quite good enough to get us into playoffs...regardless of the multitude of other reasons there may have been for us not making playoffs...then ultimately his time with the skins was unsuccessful.

If you accept that much...then all im saying is if it had to be done again i would have rathered seen what Ramsey could do and hence chosen not to sign Brunell. Maybe Ramsey would have done better...maybe worse. But either way we wouldnt have been risking anything since the last two years...(if we dont make playoffs this year) will have been failures anyway. It should also be noted...that if Ramsey had started all of last season then our playoff drout may well have ended last year...since the NFC was so weak last year that 8-8 would have gotten us in.

In the end last year is last year and this year is this year...but all im saying is if they havnt found success in two years with the guy at the helm...then the decision to sign him was a mistake and it would have been much better for the organization to see what they had in Ramsey...and not sacrifice so much to get Brunell...

In terms of my stating that if the skins dont make the playoffs this year they ought to replace Brunell...well i guess that is just a gut feeling.

Because if we play Brunell next year and still dont make the playoffs...it will cast a huge shadow of doubt on this coaching staff and the moves they have made...

At least if we are playing a younger guy next year...whether or not we make the playoffs it will work toward developing someone for the future.

Just imagine if you start brunell...he doesnt get you to the playoffs...you wasted Ramsey completely, and Cambpell is still a rookie in terms of playing experience...cause he hasnt gotten any game time...that is just a situation that i would not be willing to risk...and is pretty much the worst case scenario i can imaigine... That is why i think the move should be made after this season...if we do not make the playoffs...to make Brunell the backup...a position i belive he will be perfectly suited to assume on a Gibbs team.

[onlydarksets]

Originally Posted by NFLeurope

Hey, im not sure whether or not this is a response to my post. But in case it is...perhaps i was not clear....what i said/meant to say was that I will judge the value of the BRUNELL SIGNING based on whether or not the skins make the playoffs. That i believe is a reasonable thing to do.

It was in response to my post on the previous page, where I tried to reconcile your and Matty's viewpoints. I assume he mistook my post to say that MB himself would be judged. I clarified it:

Originally Posted by onlydarksets

What willl be judged is the hindsight wisdom of the front office in bringing him here if the team does not make the playoffs.

[skinsguy]

Originally Posted by NFLeurope

Hey, im not sure whether or not this is a response to my post. But in case it is...perhaps i was not clear....what i said/meant to say was that I will judge the value of the BRUNELL SIGNING based on whether or not the skins make the playoffs. That i believe is a reasonable thing to do. The point is even if Brunell played pretty well...but not quite good enough to get us into playoffs...regardless of the multitude of other reasons there may have been for us not making playoffs...then ultimately his time with the skins was unsuccessful.

That's kind of playing a game of semantics though. By those standards, then Barry Sanders should have been on the bench. Obviously, it would have been foolish to have benched Sanders.

Remember, this is a team sport. Should we bench every starter because the team doesn't make the playoffs?

[onlydarksets]

Originally Posted by skinsguy

That's kind of playing a game of semantics though. By those standards, then Barry Sanders should have been on the bench. Obviously, it would have been foolish to have benched Sanders.

Remember, this is a team sport. Should we bench every starter because the team doesn't make the playoffs?

I don't think so. QBs are held to different standards. Nobody talks about how many games a RB or WR has won. If we don't make the playoffs, people will look back and ask why we brought in an aging QB instead of grooming younger talent.

Certainly, a QB surrounded by ZERO talent will get some slack, but that's not the case here. We DEFINITELY need some help, but this team is not completely devoid of talent.

[skinsguy]

Originally Posted by onlydarksets

I don't think so. QBs are held to different standards. Nobody talks about how many games a RB or WR has won. If we don't make the playoffs, people will look back and ask why we brought in an aging QB instead of grooming younger talent.

Certainly, a QB surrounded by ZERO talent will get some slack, but that's not the case here. We DEFINITELY need some help, but this team is not completely devoid of talent.

So then, the question has to be asked: why should the quarterback be held at a different standard? If the quaterback is doing his job, which I believe Mark Brunell is doing, then why should the talent around him get a free get out of jail pass if the team as a whole is not winning?

[onlydarksets]

Originally Posted by skinsguy

So then, the question has to be asked: why should the quarterback be held at a different standard? If the quaterback is doing his job, which I believe Mark Brunell is doing, then why should the talent around him get a free get out of jail pass if the team as a whole is not winning?

Sorry - I was typing when you posted this. I don't claim that it's fair, but it just seems to be the way it is. Am I wrong? Are QBs judged the same?