Al Saunders: was he necessary?

TheMalcolmConnection · 09-18-2006, 08:29 AM

Yes, I'm all done with Brunell. Saunders wasn't necessary by any means, but Brunell is the one who has to make the plays. He's TOO GODDAMN CAREFUL. I know he doesn't want to throw picks, but how about letting your playmakers make a play every now and then? Last year, he'd heave it up there if he thought the receivers had a decent shot of coming down with it.

rickmmrr · 09-18-2006, 08:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMalcolmConnection

Yes, I'm all done with Brunell. Saunders wasn't necessary by any means, but Brunell is the one who has to make the plays. He's TOO GODDAMN CAREFUL. I know he doesn't want to throw picks, but how about letting your playmakers make a play every now and then? Last year, he'd heave it up there if he thought the receivers had a decent shot of coming down with it.

That is axactly right. And it's never been as obvious to see then in last nights game.

09-18-2006, 08:29 AM	#1
TheMalcolmConnection I like big (_\|_)s. Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Charlottesville, Virginia Age: 44 Posts: 19,264	Re: Al Saunders: was he necessary? Yes, I'm all done with Brunell. Saunders wasn't necessary by any means, but Brunell is the one who has to make the plays. He's TOO GODDAMN CAREFUL. I know he doesn't want to throw picks, but how about letting your playmakers make a play every now and then? Last year, he'd heave it up there if he thought the receivers had a decent shot of coming down with it. __________________ Regret nothing. At one time it was exactly what you wanted.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Al Saunders: was he necessary?

Locker Room Main Forum