Brunell is Bad

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by Sean Taylor is God

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.

I'm sorry, but brunell iss clearly above average. if we had harrington or orton, we would have tanked horribly, so he played his part and (until the last weeks) did well.

career stats:
total reg season: 74 wins - 64 losses
total post season: 5-5

84.1 rating, 3 pro bowls (1 MVP) 189 TDs, 129 Turnovers (Fumbles lost + Ints)

average QBs TD-TO ratio is below 1, his is almost 1.5... he's not peyton, but he's clearly not bad. in 2005 he had 23 TDs, 16 TOs an a 11-7 record. i'm sure peyton or brady would have had better numbers, but we don't have (nor will we have) either, so that arguement is stupid. finding above average QBs is hard, and by definition, at least 15 teams would like to have had the production of ours last season. He won't be above average much longer, but bashing him for 2005 isn't really logical.

he brought in campbell because brunell is 35 and his legs aren't going to get faster and his arm isn't going to get stronger... and on rypien and williams, maybe those guys weren't that bad either, since they did win super bowls and the did alright on the TD-TO ratio.