Any update on Campbell?

[MTK]

Brunell made plenty of big plays during the course of the year, saying he only made big plays during the first Dallas game is really understating things.

Other than the season Rypien had in '91, Gibbs has never had a really big time QB. Even in '91 the offense was still heavily centered around the ground game.

Personally I don't think we need a Favre type of QB to win games, Gibbs' formula calls for a QB to play smart and efficient above all, and that's what MB did this year.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Brunell made plenty of big plays during the course of the year, saying he only made big plays during the first Dallas game is really understating things.

Other than the season Rypien had in '91, Gibbs has never had a really big time QB. Even in '91 the offense was still heavily centered around the ground game.

Personally I don't think we need a Favre type of QB to win games, Gibbs' formula calls for a QB to play smart and efficient above all, and that's what MB did this year.

Exactly. I'd also like to ask, what did Mark Rypien and Doug Williams ever accomplish when they weren't playing for Gibbs? Friggin nothing. Gibbs has shown that he doesn't need a Joe Montana. He does need a Posse though. There were always several good receivers in his offense, a good line, and a good RB. We have the line and the RB. We need the WRs.

If Campbell can come in and be better than Brunell, then that's all the better. But I think Brunell has what it takes right now.

Turnovers are the key to winning games. We can talk QB rating and all these other stats all we want. But he only threw 10 picks all year. That's great.

[Southpaw]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Brunell made plenty of big plays during the course of the year, saying he only made big plays during the first Dallas game is really understating things.

My point was, that was the only game where the big plays were needed to win, and he was actually responsible for them. Scrambling for a first down, to keep a clock eating drive alive doesn't fall into the same category as throwing two touchdowns with eight minutes left in the game.

And I agree that Gibbs doesn't need an MVP quarterback, but he does need one who can make the throws when the chips are down, and Brunell hasn't done that since the first Dallas game.

[offiss]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Brunell made plenty of big plays during the course of the year, saying he only made big plays during the first Dallas game is really understating things.

Other than the season Rypien had in '91, Gibbs has never had a really big time QB. Even in '91 the offense was still heavily centered around the ground game.

Personally I don't think we need a Favre type of QB to win games, Gibbs' formula calls for a QB to play smart and efficient above all, and that's what MB did this year.

????????????????????????

Did you ever hear of a QB named Joe Theisman??????????

The QB who manned the helm when we set the all time scoring record in 83????????????

91' was a well balanced attack, Rypien was throwing the ball all over the place that year.

Did you ever hear of a player named Dan Fouts? He was the QB for the chargers when Gibbs was their offensive coordinator I do beleive they knew a thing or 2 about throwing the ball downfield, Gibbs knows how to use a good QB, problem was Rypien, Williams, Scroeder, were not good QB's, which was a testement to his ability to build and run an offense that didn't need a good QB, just a QB who could get by.

In case anyone didn't notice, if your 1 dimensional your probably going to lose, as we saw against Seattle, they keyed on our running game, and dared Brunell to beat us in the air, just like Philli, and Tampa did, and guess what Brunell failed miserably. I ask this question, who won those last 2 games? That's right not Brunell, our defense won both games. What happened when our defense couldn't put it in the end zone? We lost, even though our defense and special teams handed Brunell 3 turnovers. We were lucky to get into the playoffs, and because Brunell couldn't win any close games ALA, Denver, Kansas city, San Diego, we had to play every game on the road, without a week off to rest up, yet he had a great season, give me a break, he's a week link on a team that is outplaying him.

I am also tired of hearing he need's another WR excuse, he had arguably the best WR in the league this year, and the same in his TE/HB, he also had a proven winner and game breaker in Patten, yes I said PROVEN! And he could do nothing with him, funny Carolina seems to be able to get the ball to Smith and he probably has less help in the passing game than Moss, so what is it? I guess Smith has a QB who can get the ball to him, and obviously does it when it counts.

Brunell doesn't need more WR's who can get open, our WR's need a QB who can get them the ball!

[MTK]

Originally Posted by offiss

????????????????????????

Did you ever hear of a QB named Joe Theisman??????????

The QB who manned the helm when we set the all time scoring record in 83????????????

91' was a well balanced attack, Rypien was throwing the ball all over the place that year.

Did you ever hear of a player named Dan Fouts? He was the QB for the chargers when Gibbs was their offensive coordinator I do beleive they knew a thing or 2 about throwing the ball downfield, Gibbs knows how to use a good QB, problem was Rypien, Williams, Scroeder, were not good QB's, which was a testement to his ability to build and run an offense that didn't need a good QB, just a QB who could get by.

In case anyone didn't notice, if your 1 dimensional your probably going to lose, as we saw against Seattle, they keyed on our running game, and dared Brunell to beat us in the air, just like Philli, and Tampa did, and guess what Brunell failed miserably. I ask this question, who won those last 2 games? That's right not Brunell, our defense won both games. What happened when our defense couldn't put it in the end zone? We lost, even though our defense and special teams handed Brunell 3 turnovers. We were lucky to get into the playoffs, and because Brunell couldn't win any close games ALA, Denver, Kansas city, San Diego, we had to play every game on the road, without a week off to rest up, yet he had a great season, give me a break, he's a week link on a team that is outplaying him.

I am also tired of hearing he need's another WR excuse, he had arguably the best WR in the league this year, and the same in his TE/HB, he also had a proven winner and game breaker in Patten, yes I said PROVEN! And he could do nothing with him, funny Carolina seems to be able to get the ball to Smith and he probably has less help in the passing game than Moss, so what is it? I guess Smith has a QB who can get the ball to him, and obviously does it when it counts.

Brunell doesn't need more WR's who can get open, our WR's need a QB who can get them the ball!

So are you willing to stand pat with Patten/Jacobs/Thrash??

My point regarding the QB is Gibbs wants balance, his offense will always be centered around the running game and basically as the running game goes so does the entire offense. Theismann did have a huge season in '83, but it's kinda funny that his '84 numbers look very similar to Brunell's of '05.

[Southpaw]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

So are you willing to stand pat with Patten/Jacobs/Thrash??

Jacobs is a wet marshmallow and Thrash is getting old. When you were only average in your prime, old age is not your friend.

Patten on the other hand, is a nine year veteran. He was a very good #2 in New England and never had problems catching passes from Tom Brady. He was also play opposite Troy Brown, who doesn't have anywhere close to Santana Moss' ability. If he can catch 35-50 balls a year, and average 600-700 yards there, I'm sure he could duplicate that here if Brunell could get him the ball.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Southpaw

Jacobs is a wet marshmallow and Thrash is getting old. When you were only average in your prime, old age is not your friend.

Patten on the other hand, is a nine year veteran. He was a very good #2 in New England and never had problems catching passes from Tom Brady. He was also play opposite Troy Brown, who doesn't have anywhere close to Santana Moss' ability. If he can catch 35-50 balls a year, and average 600-700 yards there, I'm sure he could duplicate that here if Brunell could get him the ball.

So you're saying you'd feel fine going into next season with Patten as the #2 again?

Just because he was productive with one team doesn't mean he will necessarily be productive with another team. Different systems, different circumstances, different cast around him.

I like Patten but I'd like him more as the #3.

[Southpaw]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

So you're saying you'd feel fine going into next season with Patten as the #2 again?

I don't think they will be able to get a receiver that's better than Patten, that also has a cap friendly contract. If it's possible, then of course they should get another #2, but seeing how much rope Gibbs gives to people that he hand picks, I doubt they will pick anyone up next year, other than depth receivers.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by Southpaw

Jacobs is a wet marshmallow and Thrash is getting old. When you were only average in your prime, old age is not your friend.

Patten on the other hand, is a nine year veteran. He was a very good #2 in New England and never had problems catching passes from Tom Brady. He was also play opposite Troy Brown, who doesn't have anywhere close to Santana Moss' ability. If he can catch 35-50 balls a year, and average 600-700 yards there, I'm sure he could duplicate that here if Brunell could get him the ball.

Last year a lot of people were saying what a waste Brunell was, and how it showed that Gibbs didn't know what he was doing, the game passed him by, etc. This year, there are considerably fewer people saying Brunell was a waste.

I get the feeling we'll see the same with Patten. The problem with Patten was not so much lack of receptions. He had 22 after 8 games, on pace for 44 during the season. That's not too far off from his average of 52 a year with NE. The big concern with Patten is receiving yards. But you know what, maybe that's not the role he's going to be asked to play here. I'd still like to see another receiver here. But I'm not worried about Moss and a healthy Patten as 1 and 2.

[offiss]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

So are you willing to stand pat with Patten/Jacobs/Thrash??

My point regarding the QB is Gibbs wants balance, his offense will always be centered around the running game and basically as the running game goes so does the entire offense. Theismann did have a huge season in '83, but it's kinda funny that his '84 numbers look very similar to Brunell's of '05.

Those numbers are also why peolple started to wonder about Theisman, and yes it was the beggining of his decline as a QB. I also believe he was around the same age as Brunell at that point.

I am not a big Thrash guy, I would like to see what jacobs can do if he had another QB throwing him the ball, I do not believe Brunell really looked at him all season, but I can't really argue at this point with the anti Jacobs guy's either, I would hang on to him for now. Patten? Why wouldn't we hang on to him, is anyone here going to make a case that Patten is not a good WR? Is his 4.2 speed not enough to seperate from defenders, Patten is the biggest case I can make for Jacobs, Patten is proven, so who's fault is it that he didn't really get any balls before his injury? That is the same reason I do not want to give up on Jacobs, for all we know Jacobs is another David Givens. If Patten had never played for the Pats, and just for us everyone would be saying what a dog he is, and he can't play, his speed is a waste, but we know from his history that's not true, well same goes for Jacobs at this point, just because he hasen't blossomed yet doesn't mean he can't, or wont.

With that said I would replace Thrash with a big reciever, I would like to get a guy who can go up and get a jump ball, we don't have that right now.

[Eriwar]

Originally Posted by offiss

????????????????????????

Did you ever hear of a QB named Joe Theisman??????????

The QB who manned the helm when we set the all time scoring record in 83????????????

91' was a well balanced attack, Rypien was throwing the ball all over the place that year.

Did you ever hear of a player named Dan Fouts? He was the QB for the chargers when Gibbs was their offensive coordinator I do beleive they knew a thing or 2 about throwing the ball downfield, Gibbs knows how to use a good QB, problem was Rypien, Williams, Scroeder, were not good QB's, which was a testement to his ability to build and run an offense that didn't need a good QB, just a QB who could get by.

In case anyone didn't notice, if your 1 dimensional your probably going to lose, as we saw against Seattle, they keyed on our running game, and dared Brunell to beat us in the air, just like Philli, and Tampa did, and guess what Brunell failed miserably. I ask this question, who won those last 2 games? That's right not Brunell, our defense won both games. What happened when our defense couldn't put it in the end zone? We lost, even though our defense and special teams handed Brunell 3 turnovers. We were lucky to get into the playoffs, and because Brunell couldn't win any close games ALA, Denver, Kansas city, San Diego, we had to play every game on the road, without a week off to rest up, yet he had a great season, give me a break, he's a week link on a team that is outplaying him.

I am also tired of hearing he need's another WR excuse, he had arguably the best WR in the league this year, and the same in his TE/HB, he also had a proven winner and game breaker in Patten, yes I said PROVEN! And he could do nothing with him, funny Carolina seems to be able to get the ball to Smith and he probably has less help in the passing game than Moss, so what is it? I guess Smith has a QB who can get the ball to him, and obviously does it when it counts.

Brunell doesn't need more WR's who can get open, our WR's need a QB who can get them the ball!

PREACH MAN we need a guy who can make the throws. Its obvious Brunell cant. Our defense was really good but we were not the Ravens defense lets be honest. Im sorry but I really feel like Brunell will be a good backup QB for us. Let Campbell fight for the spot this summer.

[CrazyCanuck]

Originally Posted by offiss

We were lucky to get into the playoffs, and because Brunell couldn't win any close games ALA, Denver, Kansas city, San Diego, we had to play every game on the road, without a week off to rest up, yet he had a great season, give me a break, he's a week link on a team that is outplaying him.

Wow. Is this for real?

Look if you want to make the case that Brunell is getting older, can't take us to the next level, this is probably the best we can expect from him, etc., I can live with that.

But let's be fair about this season. The guy ran the offense admirably, made key plays on his own, and pretty much had a pro bowl season. Brunell couldn't win any close games? What about the first Dallas game? What about the Seattle game? What about the first Philly game? And ironically the close games you mention that he lost might have been his best games of the year. Our offense rolled all over Denver and KC in their home parks, and Brunell threw for over 300 yards in each. It was turnovers and our defense that cost us those games, not Brunell.

You want to make the case for Ramsey or Campbell to start next year that's fine. But if you're talking about this season, let's be realistic and give Brunell his due.

[offiss]

Originally Posted by CrazyCanuck

Wow. Is this for real?

Look if you want to make the case that Brunell is getting older, can't take us to the next level, this is probably the best we can expect from him, etc., I can live with that.

But let's be fair about this season. The guy ran the offense admirably, made key plays on his own, and pretty much had a pro bowl season. Brunell couldn't win any close games? What about the first Dallas game? What about the Seattle game? What about the first Philly game? And ironically the close games you mention that he lost might have been his best games of the year. Our offense rolled all over Denver and KC in their home parks, and Brunell threw for over 300 yards in each. It was turnovers and our defense that cost us those games, not Brunell.

You want to make the case for Ramsey or Campbell to start next year that's fine. But if you're talking about this season, let's be realistic and give Brunell his due.

Did we win those close games because of Brunells attributes, or were they close because of his inabilities at QB? That is the question.

The 1st cowboy game, lets take a closer look, the fact is we shouldn't have been in a position for him to have to throw to miracle TD passes, those passes had to happen because Brunell was about as bad as a QB can be for the first 56 minutes, only when desperation sat in did he take the chance and throw a high risk deep pass in which he connected, it was the least he could do.

The Seattle game didn't he basically hand seattle the ball in field goal range with under 1 minute to go, and only because their field goal kicker hit the upright did we survive that game.

Realistically with our defense this team should have been 12-4 at the very least. If it's not Brunell then who? Is it Moss who set a team record for recieving yards? NO! Is it Portis who set a team record for rushing yards? No! Is it Cooley who I believe [but not positive] set a record for most catches by a TE in franchise history? NO!

I am not a real big stat guy and understand that stats can be very misleading, you might say well if Brunell was that bad how did we set so many records in the passing game? In a dink and dunk offense you can expect your TE to see a lot of balls, and I would like to know how many yards Moss accumulated after the catch? But those were also his only 2 options Brunell didn't consider spreading the ball around, so it's reasonable that they would set team records. What we didn't see a lot of was the deep ball, and that's the pass that will stretch the defense not dink and dunk. Perhaps Brunell is afraid to throw deep because Gibbs has everyone paranoid about ball control, or maybe he just can't, either way something has to change.

In all honesty this past saturday is the first game that I could say we were up against a team that is better, but even with that said we still could have beat them without needing a miracle to do it.

Take a hard look at the last 3 games we played becaue those are the teams we will have to beat if we are to become super bowl champions, after watching Brunell perform against them does anyone really believe he's the QB to take us to that next level?

I would love to make a case for Campbell starting next season, but there's not one point I could bring up to help his cause, and more than I care to think about against it.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by offiss

Realistically with our defense this team should have been 12-4 at the very least. If it's not Brunell then who? Is it Moss who set a team record for recieving yards? NO! Is it Portis who set a team record for rushing yards? No! Is it Cooley who I believe [but not positive] set a record for most catches by a TE in franchise history? NO!

Brunell didn't give up two long touchdown runs to Tatum Bell against Denver. Brunell didn't fumble the ball away on 3rd down against KC. Brunell didn't allow 3 TD passes by Chris Simms and 36 points to the Bucs. Brunell didn't knock Hall out of field goal range by blatantly holding a Chargers defenseman as time ran out.

But hey, if it's easy for you to pin the blame on Brunell, be my guest.

[offiss]

Originally Posted by TAFKAS

Brunell didn't give up two long touchdown runs to Tatum Bell against Denver. Brunell didn't fumble the ball away on 3rd down against KC. Brunell didn't allow 3 TD passes by Chris Simms and 36 points to the Bucs. Brunell didn't knock Hall out of field goal range by blatantly holding a Chargers defenseman as time ran out.

But hey, if it's easy for you to pin the blame on Brunell, be my guest.

I will, the fact is if we didn't play perfect football we lost, how many times this year did the defense bail Brunell out and kept him in games? Like I said kansas city shouldn't have even been in that game PERIOD!

Yea the defense should shut everyone out, if they don't it's there fault, not Brunells inability to put a team away.

How bout getting us a simple first down to ice the game against the Bucs? It wasen't like our defense was strapped with injuries or anything in that game.

How bout scoring some points so our defense doesn't have to play hero every week.

Yea there was a holding penalty, but there was plenty of time to put us back into field goal range and he failed.

It's funny it seems everyone on the team has to pick up Brunell, yet when is he going to return the favor? How many turnovers did our defense overcome by Brunell? Our defense all by themselves were responsible for our last 2 victories. So on saturday when we needed him most, all I hear is if only Rogers made that INT, well I say if only Brunell could play like half a QB we would have won!

How bad can an offensive output be before people get it? We set a record, A RECORD, in futility on offense and still won the game against the Bucs, so I ask, who is carrying who? And just for the record Brunell was handed 3 turnovers on saturday! Lot of good it did him!