![]() |
|
|||||||
| Locker Room Main Forum Commanders Football & NFL discussion |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
|
#1 |
|
Puppy Kicker
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Arlington, Virginia
Age: 43
Posts: 8,341
|
Re: Brunell is Bad
Paintrain, read my post and I explain how. Ramsey would have given us a better TOP, more passing yards, more TDs, and more INTs. However he'd have far fewer fumbles than Brunell. Ramsey did more in slightly over one quarter in the first game than Brunell was able to pull out in the remainder of it. This was a good defense he was playing very well against.
I think the total amount of turnovers would have been similar, but Ramsey would have had more, yet we would have scored more and had more players worked into the mix. Easily the best season since 1999, big deal, this was "Easily the best season" for every Redskin since 1999, we made the playoffs. Little of that, in my opinion, had to do with the great play of Mark Brunell. I guess I'm wrong about his contract, I thought the restructure last year made him even easier to cut this year. I could definitely be wrong here.
__________________
Best. Player. Available. |
|
|
|
|
#2 | |
|
Pro Bowl
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL
Age: 55
Posts: 5,006
|
Re: Brunell is Bad
Quote:
I'm clearly on record as saying that the Redskins are better with Ramsey not under center.. I believe he is what he has shown, flashes of brilliance, great physical tools, very inconsistent, holds onto the ball too long, makes poor decisions with the football.. In short, Gus Frerotte II.. No he didn't, yeah I went there.
__________________
Paintrain's Redskins Fandom 1981-2014 I'm not dead but this team is dead to me...but now that McCloughan is here they may have new life! Jay Gruden = Zorny McSpurrier Kirk Cousins = Next Grossman |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 | |
|
Living Legend
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: VA
Age: 43
Posts: 17,620
|
Re: Brunell is Bad
Quote:
brunell threw deep fine. see dallas, see 49ers, etc... moss was in the top 3 in 40+ yard passes. most of his screen stuff went for 10-20 yards, not 40+. brunell does have the running qb menality where he looks 1,2 and tosses it or runs or dump it off where (good) pocket passers tend to get an extra read in. he's actually good at what he does, but lossing patten really hurt and at the end of the year he was obviously banged up and playing very poorly. that' a far cry from saying he's just outright bad though. The protection wasn't remarkable though, it was average to slightly above average... which would be appaling if we actually did have 4/5 Olinemen that were top5 at their positions. |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
MVP
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: lancaster,pa
Age: 64
Posts: 10,672
|
Re: Brunell is Bad
offiss, i think that brunell gives the redskins the best chance at winning,BUT im with you thinking that p ramsey has never gotten a fair shake with the skins since coach gibbs has come back.its probably better for all parties involved that he move on.im not really sure why the skins braintrust thinks about ramsey the way they do,but they have been constant in their thinking so he might as well go somewhere he has a chance to play
__________________
"It's better to be quiet and thought a fool than to open ones mouth and remove all doubt." courtesy of 53fan |
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Living Legend
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: VA
Age: 43
Posts: 17,620
|
Re: Brunell is Bad
if he performs well in 2006 and has a starting role then thats the downside of not signing him now. campbell will still be cheap and brunell being cut would still save money. If the skins can't afford a good QB (which would be cheap the first 3 years) then they've got bigger problems.
|
|
|
|
|
#6 | |
|
Special Teams
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 352
|
Re: Brunell is Bad
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 | |
|
Living Legend
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: VA
Age: 43
Posts: 17,620
|
Re: Brunell is Bad
Quote:
you were discussing the possibility of keeping him, i was following that with the hypothetical that brunell would be easy to toss (cap wise) and campbell would be cheap enough that taking on a good QB contract would still be possible... SO if ramsey did well, the other QBs' contracts would be a non factor is whether you keep him or not. as far as reality, he's gone regardless of cap sense, cause gibbs likes brunell and campbell, and its impossible to like 3 QBs and keep them all happy (and he's obviously made his choice). |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Pro Bowl
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Greensboro, North Carolina
Posts: 6,766
|
Re: Brunell is Bad
Yeh, yet another Brunell/Ramsey thread! Gee, haven't seen that lately! :/
__________________
"Fire Up That Diesel!" |
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Special Teams
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: damascus, maryland
Age: 38
Posts: 161
|
Re: Brunell is Bad
first of all some1 shoulda closed this thread when it started......2nd u guys are saying that when a qb relys on his arm and tries to squeeze to make big plays is bad? the only way to make a big play like that is to take the gamble of throwing it up.......LOOK AT FAVRE he threw way more ints than td's i think most in his career.......would u take brunell b/c he doesnt go for the big play and doesnt throw ints, or would u take favre whos known for big plays in tight situations but throws ints too? ok then.....bottom line is ramsey didnt get his fair shot and thats bs! i respect brunell for taking us to the playoffs, but u act like ramseys an idiot and hasnt grown and wont grow anymore..........when he played releif for brunells old broken ass he did great he threw a thouchdown pass to santana and he "managed the game" i think better than brunelll he looked fine to me.......if we lose ramsey im really gnna miss him we havent seen ANYTHING in campbell absolutley nothing, he had great offensive supporting cast in aubrn, he threw a couple good balls in a mediocre ass defense in the pre-season......i say stick with ramsey and make big plays
__________________
"meet sean taylor" |
|
|
|
|
#10 | |
|
Impact Rookie
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 922
|
Re: Brunell is Bad
Quote:
__________________
Run or Pass and Score ..We Want Alot More!!!! |
|
|
|
|
|
#11 | |
|
Special Teams
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Saint Augustine, Florida
Age: 64
Posts: 130
|
Re: Brunell is Bad
Quote:
__________________
"Home Field Advantage Throughout the '06 Playoffs" |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 68
|
Re: Brunell is Bad
Quote:
This is my first day actually posting on one of these sites so I am not joining any bandwagon. How are my claims ridiculous? Great you go to the games, so do I. And without santana moss there is no deep threat because Brunell can barely get it down there. You say he made the most of what he was given to work with. The 4th ranked RB, a line with top 5 people at each position except for LG. Moss. Cooley. Dream coaching staff and solid team concept. Shhhh! I don't want to hear from you people any more. He has a tremendous amount of talent around him and he underacheived this year. Period. |
|
|
|
|
|
#13 | |
|
Living Legend
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: VA
Age: 43
Posts: 17,620
|
Re: Brunell is Bad
Quote:
and again, propagating the rumour that we have top 5 offensive linemen at any position besides RG is a vicious vicious lie. and then you decide to go with the i'm right causes i said so so shut up line :P that's really a great way to sell your opinion. |
|
|
|
|
|
#14 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 68
|
Re: Brunell is Bad
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
#15 | |
|
Hail Raiser
![]() Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 53
Posts: 100,050
|
Re: Brunell is Bad
Quote:
The OL is still a work in progress. |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|