![]() |
|
|||||||
| Locker Room Main Forum Commanders Football & NFL discussion |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
#10 | |
|
Living Legend
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 38
Posts: 15,994
|
Re: Sports Junkies talking about a Campbell rumor
Quote:
Guys who don't see the field throw a lot of interceptions and miss a lot of throws. Brunell has done neither. Also its pretty baseless to say that a guy who has seen the field well his whole career all of a sudden isn't doing it anymore, and to not have any reasoning for it. Here's everything you need to know: If he wasn't seeing the field, Gibbs and Saunders would be looking to replace him. He hasn't been, so the problem lies elsewhere. Like on the other side of the ball. Look, no one is criticizing your credentials. I aspire to be a football coach one day. I've played. But I don't claim to be able to diagnose problems within an offense that I don't completely understand. We, as fans, don't have all the information the coaching staff has. All we are given is production numbers, or statistics. In 2004, Brunell got benched because he wasn't getting it done. In 2006, he's having his best season in the last 7 years. But the fans are frusterated because it hasn't translated into wins. That's understandable. I, at least, am happy that Gibbs feels strongly that what he is doing is correct, because, any luck willing, his patience should translate into a winning streak. According to our estimated wins stat (3.8, FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Football analysis and NFL stats for the Moneyball era - Authors of Pro Football Prospectus 2006 and 2005) We have played .500+ football even with all the defensive injuries and struggles. I'm as pissed off as the rest of you that we are 2-5. It sucks, I get it. But give some credit to Al Saunders for getting us those two wins. The only sure, solid evidence we have are statistics, and they say Brunell and the offense is doing fairly well. I don't expect these to override your observations, but just to force you (the warpath collective) to question your reasoning a tad more. I say this because my observations of Brunell's play are generally positive, but like the rest of you, he doesn't exactly inspire confidence in me. That's why we have stats, they support what I think of him, letting me know that my observations are correct. Without stats, my pro-Brunell banter would be just as baseless as the anti-Brunell banter that I combat, seemingly anytime I'm on. I would still feel strongly about it because those are what my observations tell me, but it would be baseless. Ask yourself this, are you actually pissed because our offense, which is a vast improvement over the last two seasons, has a tendency to get conservative on third down? Or are you pissed because the team is 2-5, like I am?
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation. |
|
|
|
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|