Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse?

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by TheMalcolmConnection

Here is my question... does anyone think that with TO, Randy Moss, Jerry Rice in his prime, etc, that they would have put up better stats than Lloyd and Randle El in this offense?

Yes they would. Of course, the entire offense would have been very different so that everyones stats would be different. For better or worse, we would be doing things much differently.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by illdefined

all the receivers are REALLY going to try and get separation now, because they know Campbell has the arm to really get it to them. even out of the pocket. the whole character of this team has changed. watch and see.

If I can go back to this tired point for one second. Great, thanks.

Wasn't it you who said yesterday that Brunell's stats were so great because of "supreme efforts from great players"?

If so, how supreme are the efforts going to be now that Campbell is in? Can they get to a level of such supremity that we will never lose again? If so what do we have to do to bring out this sort of effort in them?

What we could do is get some high school scrub to play QB and then Randle El and Lloyd will try so damn hard that no one this side of the Atlantic could tackle them!

Of course I'm being ridiculous...but at least I'm not contradicting myself.

[Southpaw]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Of course I'm being ridiculous...but at least I'm
not contradicting myself.

No, you're just blaming everyone but Brunell. Shocker...

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Southpaw

No, you're just blaming everyone but Brunell. Shocker...

Actually, the only place I put the blame was on our 30TH RANKED DEFENSE! And our OLine for getting really untimely penalties.

Randle El and Lloyd don't often affect the outcome of the game because they are recievers and don't touch the ball that often. They don't win and lose games for us unless they break a punt return or make a critical fumble.

Our D has lost 6 games for us.

[Southpaw]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Our D has lost 6 games for us.

The only games that the defense is directly responsible for losing was the opener against the Vikings, and the Titans game. We'll throw in the Colts game too, but Peyton Manning and the best offensive team in the league are going to score points no matter what. Let's look at the three divisional losses.

Week 2 @ Dallas 10-27 - Three offensive points. Seven special teams points. Brunell's rating 61.6. Yeah. the sure offense did it's part that day...

Week 5 @ New York 3-19 - Three offensive points. Defense only gave up 19. Brunell's rating 68.2. See above.

Week 10 @ Philly 3-27 - Defense gave up a couple big plays, but again... three offensive points(notice a pattern?). Brunell's rating 49.4.

So by you're logic, the defense should have given up less than 10 points to the Cowboys, and less than THREE points to the Giants and Eagles. Those losses have nothing to do with the fact that Brunell played like shit, right? But please, keep arguing how "above average" Brunell's season has been.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Southpaw

The only games that the defense is directly responsible for losing was the opener against the Vikings, and the Titans game. We'll throw in the Colts game too, but Peyton Manning and the best offensive team in the league are going to score points no matter what. Let's look at the three divisional losses.

Week 2 @ Dallas 10-27 - Three offensive points. Seven special teams points. Brunell's rating 61.6. Yeah. the sure offense did it's part that day...

Week 5 @ New York 3-19 - Three offensive points. Defense only gave up 19. Brunell's rating 68.2. See above.

Week 10 @ Philly 3-27 - Defense gave up a couple big plays, but again... three offensive points(notice a pattern?). Brunell's rating 49.4.

So by you're logic, the defense should have given up less than 10 points to the Cowboys, and less than THREE points to the Giants and Eagles. Those losses have nothing to do with the fact that Brunell played like shit, right? But please, keep arguing how "above average" Brunell's season has been.

If you watched the Giants game, you would know that our offense didn't ever have the football because the Giants did nothing but convert third downs, control the clock and get field goals. 3 points yeah, in something like 6 possessions. The Giants would have scored much more than 19 but ran out of time. Anyone who watched would tell you that was our worst defensive game so far.

The other two games were total team losses. The offense played bad, and the D played even worse. Your logic that the D would have to give less then three points in those games for us to win is an incredibly jaded view because if they did they would be UTTERLY AND COMPLETELY WINNING THE GAME FOR US. They do have to keep us competitive, which they haven't done, evidenced by our 30th ranking in the league.

Notice that all three divisional losses are on the road. Theres a school of thought in NFL circle that says regardless of record and talent, when it comes to division games, the home team should always be favored. This is because the teams know each other so well that most of it comes down to who can gameplan the best, and the home team has the one advantage. This is completely ignoring the fact that the Giants and Eagles are two of the league's three best teams (by DVOA).

Your carefully selected three game sample size (out of 9 I might add), is stirring but really paints the picture that you want to see. Doesn't look on the season as a whole.

[Southpaw]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Your carefully selected three game sample size (out of 9 I might add), is stirring but really paints the picture that you want to see. Doesn't look on the season as a whole.

I picked the three divisional games because they were the most important. If you want to get technical, I blamed the defense for the Titans loss, even though Brunell's rating for that game was around 69. And how is it that when the defense performs exceptionally bad, it's entirely the defense's fault that Washington lost, but when Brunell looks like a frail old man and puts up three points in a game, it's a team loss?

[illdefined]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

If I can go back to this tired point for one second. Great, thanks.

Wasn't it you who said yesterday that Brunell's stats were so great because of "supreme efforts from great players"?

If so, how supreme are the efforts going to be now that Campbell is in? Can they get to a level of such supremity that we will never lose again? If so what do we have to do to bring out this sort of effort in them?

What we could do is get some high school scrub to play QB and then Randle El and Lloyd will try so damn hard that no one this side of the Atlantic could tackle them!

Of course I'm being ridiculous...but at least I'm not contradicting myself.

i said that? nah i don't think so. i surmised the WR's were starting to give up hope on no.8. i said no.8's stats were great because of BETTS. get your detractors straight.