Brunell

[Hog1]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Let's also remember that Brunell didn't get much work in the offseason with the starters, so he's still working on getting his timing down with those guys.

Best post in this thread. The focus on a mis-thrown pass, which did not effect the outcome of the game, in what otherwise was an incredible outing, is ridiculous. The numbers for the QB are formidable. The best part is this offense is still a toddler. It is growing up FAST!!!!!!!!!!
And we stil have a few more weeks til' we play another division rival.
at the moment THEISMAN IS A GENIUS

[skinsguy]

Overall, Brunell had a great day! That one INT was crucial and it definitely wasn't Portis' fault.

Not sure why people are complaining about the playcalling. I thought Gibbs called a great game today. Nice ball controlled offense that kept the number 2 offense off the field. If anything, think about our defense allowing the Seahawks to go 90+ yards down the field to tie the game.

[wolfeskins]

Originally Posted by skinsguy

Overall, Brunell had a great day! That one INT was crucial and it definitely wasn't Portis' fault.

Not sure why people are complaining about the playcalling. I thought Gibbs called a great game today. Nice ball controlled offense that kept the number 2 offense off the field. If anything, think about our defense allowing the Seahawks to go 90+ yards down the field to tie the game.

i agree with you 100%, the only reason the game was close is because the defense had a few breakdowns today.

[SUNRA]

Originally Posted by skinsguy

Overall, Brunell had a great day! That one INT was crucial and it definitely wasn't Portis' fault.

Not sure why people are complaining about the playcalling. I thought Gibbs called a great game today. Nice ball controlled offense that kept the number 2 offense off the field. If anything, think about our defense allowing the Seahawks to go 90+ yards down the field to tie the game.

12 of 17 first downs is outrageously good! The majority were on third downs and notice the penalties were at a minimum. The play calling is fine, the execution has to keep getting better. The pass to Portis would have picked up the first down. That's just the risk you take to win. We didn't play to not lose, we clearly played to win and that has been the difference this year.

[hurrykaine]

Brunell was efficient. Play calling certainly deteriorated in the 4th Q.

That INT was neither Portis' nor Brunell's fault. It wasn't a good throw, but it was a freak INT - good alertness and reflex by the defender.

It's hard to sit an hypothesize about how well we would've done in this game with Ramsey, but I highly doubt that Ramsey would've made the scramble on 3rd and 9 to get us into hawks territory - he would've tried to force a throw in that situation and had it batted down or picked.

Must say Gibbs' move to start Brunell is looking good as of now.

[illdefined]

Originally Posted by hurrykaine

Must say Gibbs' move to start Brunell is looking good as of now.

^^^^^^^^^

ok, ok i got it. only Brunell's name can be mentioned here. understood

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by illdefined

^^^^^^^^^

ok, ok i got it. only Brunell's name can be mentioned here. understood

[illdefined]

gotta love these admins and moderators

[MTK]

Originally Posted by illdefined

gotta love these admins and moderators

So should I not have an opinion??

There are no rules as to what you can and can't discuss, if there are please point them out I'd love to see them.

All I was saying is why can't we be happy about Brunell and discuss his performance without it always going back to Ramsey??

[jacobyfan]

I can't believe people are pissing in the punch here. Brunnell played WAAAAAY better than I thought he would (or maybe even could). Blaming him for that int to try to justify why Ramsey should still be in there is just childish. Brunnell got the job done. He was great on third downs. I don't understand why people can't take off their blinders and be happy that we're playing well. For now, I was wrong about Brunnell and Gibbs decision to put him in. So were a lot of others. However, I'm happy I was wrong.

[illdefined]

no telling what Ramsey would've done with the time and protection we had today. we may not have had the scramble, but i bet we would've gotten deeper completions and consequentially more Portis yds..

[wolfeskins]

Originally Posted by illdefined

no telling what Ramsey would've done with the time and protection we had today. we may not have had the scramble, but i bet we would've gotten deeper completions and consequentially more Portis yds..

you can't say that because if ramsey was the starter the hawks defense would have problably blitzed a whole lot more, putting more pressure on the qb and forcing him to make bad decisions.

[SUNRA]

Originally Posted by illdefined

no telling what Ramsey would've done with the time and protection we had today. we may not have had the scramble, but i bet we would've gotten deeper completions and consequentially more Portis yds..

Stop dreaming and the woulda, coulda, shoulda stuff. Ramsey is not the QB. Brunell has proven with his head, arm and legs why he is running this team, so please stop wasting time on a mute point.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by SUNRA

Stop dreaming and the woulda, coulda, shoulda stuff. Ramsey is not the QB. Brunell has proven with his head, arm and legs why he is running this team, so please stop wasting time on a mute point.

Agreed, but I'm pretty sure it's "moot" not "mute" point, or as Joey Tribianni would call it- a "moo point-like a cow's opinion, just doesn't matter"

[SUNRA]

Originally Posted by TAFKAS

Agreed, but I'm pretty sure it's "moot" not "mute" point, or as Joey Tribianni would call it- a "moo point-like a cow's opinion, just doesn't matter"

Moot as is in Smoot? By the way Smoot isn't looking too good up there in Minnesota. He's still my dude, but I'm sure he's paying close attention at what's going on down here.