Brunell is Bad

[Sean Taylor is God]

Originally Posted by That Guy

you don't get 40+ yard pass plays with a noodle arm. its not george or farve, but its not as bad as you seem to think.

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.

I can throw an NFL football 40 yds. So can a bunch of people on this message board. Samuels is a top 5 LT, Jansen?, Rabach, and you think randy thomas is the only good one? Brunell has a offensive line, that I might ad is run by one of the best line coaches of all time, Joe Bugel.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Sean Taylor is God

I can throw an NFL football 40 yds. So can a bunch of people on this message board. Samuels is a top 5 LT, Jansen?, Rabach, and you think randy thomas is the only good one? Brunell has a offensive line, that I might ad is run by one of the best line coaches of all time, Joe Bugel.

Our OL gave up 35 sacks last year, not really a great number for a top unit as you say.

The OL is still a work in progress.

[Sean Taylor is God]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Our OL gave up 35 sacks last year, not really a great number for a top unit as you say.

The OL is still a work in progress.

Actually, you are proving my point. We had an excellent OL but Brunell's indeciciveness and lack of awareness were the cause of those sacks. A lineman can only be expected to block for so long.

[Sean Taylor is God]

I really can't believe that many of you disagree that Mark Brunell had an excellent supporting cast. It boggles the mind.

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by Sean Taylor is God

Actually, you are proving my point. We had an excellent OL but Brunell's indeciciveness and lack of awareness were the cause of those sacks. A lineman can only be expected to block for so long.

you think brunell is indecisive yet you want ramsey in there? once patten left the supporting cast wasn't as great anymore. he had the best numbers of his career (and its been a good career), so i don't get what the knock is (besides him playing terribly when injured and fading down the stretch). Brunells pocket awareness wasn't one of his weaknesses, it was one of his stonger points (knowing when to run etc).

he's a mobile guy and was willing to throw the ball away, he avoided more sacks than he caused. you know the skins run max protect a lot right? that means a lot of 1 and 2 man routes where you either have to wait for a receiver to get open or throw it away.

[Sean Taylor is God]

Originally Posted by That Guy

you think brunell is indecisive yet you want ramsey in there? once patten left the supporting cast wasn't as great anymore. he had the best numbers of his career (and its been a good career), so i don't get what the knock is (besides him playing terribly when injured and fading down the stretch). Brunells pocket awareness wasn't one of his weaknesses, it was one of his stonger points (knowing when to run etc).

he's a mobile guy and was willing to throw the ball away, he avoided more sacks than he caused. you know the skins run max protect a lot right? that means a lot of 1 and 2 man routes where you either have to wait for a receiver to get open or throw it away.

i never said i wanted ramsey

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Sean Taylor is God

Actually, you are proving my point. We had an excellent OL but Brunell's indeciciveness and lack of awareness were the cause of those sacks. A lineman can only be expected to block for so long.

LOL spin it any way you want I guess.

That's what the Brunell haters will do... spin it any way to take credit away from the guy.

It actually sounds like you are describing Ramsey with use of the words indecisive and lack of awareness.

Brunell did exactly what was asked of him, he threw the ball away when something wasn't there and he didn't force his throws and cause INT's.

[Sean Taylor is God]

mattyk, here are a list of QB's that I believe with one year of learning the offense could step in a do the job brunell did this year. I would like to know which one's you disagree with and if there are any i'm missing.

Manning, Palmer, McNabb, Roethlisberger, Brady, Mcnair, Leftwich, Plummer, Green, Brees, Bledsoe, Lil Manning, Favre, Culpepper, Delhomme, Simms, Brooks, Bulger, Hasselbeck, Frye, Campbell, Brad Johnson.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Originally Posted by Sean Taylor is God

mattyk, here are a list of QB's that I believe with one year of learning the offense could step in a do the job brunell did this year. I would like to know which one's you disagree with and if there are any i'm missing.

Manning, Palmer, McNabb, Roethlisberger, Brady, Mcnair, Leftwich, Plummer, Green, Brees, Bledsoe, Lil Manning, Favre, Culpepper, Delhomme, Simms, Brooks, Bulger, Hasselbeck, Frye, Campbell, Brad Johnson.

But isn't your point that Brunell is bad? I wouldn't put ANY of these quarterbacks in the category of bad.

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by Sean Taylor is God

mattyk, here are a list of QB's that I believe with one year of learning the offense could step in a do the job brunell did this year. I would like to know which one's you disagree with and if there are any i'm missing.

Manning, Palmer, McNabb, Roethlisberger, Brady, Mcnair, Leftwich, Plummer, Green, Brees, Bledsoe, Lil Manning, Favre, Culpepper, Delhomme, Simms, Brooks, Bulger, Hasselbeck, Frye, Campbell, Brad Johnson.

i'd argue with plummer brooks and farve cause they historically can't do what's asked of them, and i don't think frye bledsoe or eli are as good, we haven't sseen campbell and johnson wouldn't work well with moss cause his arm is totally dead.

that said, we don't have any of the above QBs nor will we next year so that question is completely bogus. no one is saying brunell is a top 5 QB, just that he got the job done. we're not getting brady, so however good he may be, its pointless conjecture cause he's not an actual realistic or viable option for the skins for either the 2005 or 2006 season.

I have no idea what you're trying to prove here.

[Sean Taylor is God]

Originally Posted by That Guy

i'd argue with plummer brooks and farve cause they historically can't do what's asked of them, and i don't think frye bledsoe or eli are as good, we haven't sseen campbell and johnson wouldn't work well with moss cause his arm is totally dead.

that said, we don't have any of the above QBs nor will we next year so that question is completely bogus. no one is saying brunell is a top 5 QB, just that he got the job done. we're not getting brady, so however good he may be, its pointless conjecture cause he's not an actual realistic or viable option for the skins for either the 2005 or 2006 season.

I have no idea what you're trying to prove here.

The only thing I am doing is trying to get people to realize that Brunell's success last year does not warrant the praise you throw upon him. The one phrase that seems to keep popping up is, "he got it done." I am not arguing against a 10-6 record. I am arguing that Brunell played a miniscule role in getting it done.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Sean Taylor is God

mattyk, here are a list of QB's that I believe with one year of learning the offense could step in a do the job brunell did this year. I would like to know which one's you disagree with and if there are any i'm missing.

Manning, Palmer, McNabb, Roethlisberger, Brady, Mcnair, Leftwich, Plummer, Green, Brees, Bledsoe, Lil Manning, Favre, Culpepper, Delhomme, Simms, Brooks, Bulger, Hasselbeck, Frye, Campbell, Brad Johnson.

Yeah that's great.

What's your point?

None of those guys are in a Redskins uniform so who cares?

Nobody has ever said Brunell is the best QB in the league... why don't you mail this list to Gibbs because I'm sure he could use such valuable info.

[Sean Taylor is God]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Yeah that's great.

What's your point?

None of those guys are in a Redskins uniform so who cares?

Nobody has ever said Brunell is the best QB in the league... why don't you mail this list to Gibbs because I'm sure he could use such valuable info.

My point is that Brunell and his statistics are easily replaced.

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by Sean Taylor is God

I can throw an NFL football 40 yds. So can a bunch of people on this message board. Samuels is a top 5 LT, Jansen?, Rabach, and you think randy thomas is the only good one? Brunell has a offensive line, that I might ad is run by one of the best line coaches of all time, Joe Bugel.

do you watch other teams games regularly? rabach is average, not near top 5. he just looks great cause raymer may very well have been the worst starting center in 2004. Samuels has top 5 talent, but he's wildly inconsistant. Just cause bugle is coaching them doesn't automatically make them superstars. I didn't say they weren't good, but only thomas is head and shoulders with the league's best, and after reviewing some video, jansen may be as well :P

at LT: jones, ogden, pace, roaf, McKinnie and you could argue light, thomas, glenn and possibly clifton or the guy from the titans... so top 10-12 somewhere, but not top 5.

RT: there's a legit arguement for jansen here, everybody is pretty close. gallery will be better in a year or two and runyan is better, but gross, mckenzie and anderson are all around the same level.

at RG: shields, posibly rivera and then there's no one else... both those guys are 33 too, so thomas is top 3 without much question.

c: Kruetz, mawae, birk, nalen, weigmann, bentley, saturday, flanagan, newberry, possibly meester... he'd be in the average class there... otherwise why would the ravens let him go after he started 15 games in one season for them? they had a guy (that was on IR i believe) who they liked more.

and at LG we're probably mid 20s, there's ample room to upgrade there (spencer will be available, 350+ lbs (heaviest at combine) and ran a 5.28... dockery was 347 and ran a 5.58, so bigger and much more athletic with great drill work).

[Sean Taylor is God]

Originally Posted by That Guy

do you watch other teams games regularly? rabach is average, not near top 5. he just looks great cause raymer may very well have been the worst starting center in 2004. Samuels has top 5 talent, but he's wildly inconsistant. Just cause bugle is coaching them doesn't automatically make them superstars. I didn't say they weren't good, but only thomas is head and shoulders with the league's best, and after reviewing some video, jansen may be as well :P

at LT: jones, ogden, pace, roaf, McKinnie and you could argue light, thomas, glenn and possibly clifton or the guy from the titans... so top 10-12 somewhere, but not top 5.

RT: there's a legit arguement for jansen here, everybody is pretty close. gallery will be better in a year or two and runyan is better, but gross, mckenzie and anderson are all around the same level.

at RG: shields, posibly rivera and then there's no one else... both those guys are 33 too, so thomas is top 3 without much question.

c: Kruetz, mawae, birk, nalen, weigmann, bentley, saturday, flanagan, newberry, possibly meester... he'd be in the average class there... otherwise why would the ravens let him go after he started 15 games in one season for them? they had a guy (that was on IR i believe) who they liked more.

and at LG we're probably mid 20s, there's ample room to upgrade there (spencer will be available, 250+ lbs and ran a 5.28... dockery was 347 and ran a 5.58, so bigger and much more athletic with great drill work).

i like the way you have outlined the positions and it makes me realize how subjective OL positions can be. The only statistic's are pancake blocks and sacks allowed and those are not always good measures. perhaps you are right about rabach but i thought he did a great job all year. as for samuels, he had one bad year two years ago. he is better than mckinnie, light, clifton and i think is definitely top five. he made it to the pro-bowl.