Will Saunders Affect Our QB Situation?

[railcon56]

Originally Posted by chuckmcco

If Mark Brunell is our starting QB next season i will not watch the games. I refuse to watch an offense that has to call certain plays because our QB has a diminished skill. Until Jason Campbell is named our starter i am boycotting.

Welcome I was thinking the exact same thing i couldnt stomach watching that Brunell for another year.... But I want a Ramsey Campbell combo.......

[railcon56]

Originally Posted by celts32

I think if Patrick just did "nothing" in his bad games he probably would have been the starter...but Patrick turns the ball over more which leads to losses. Brunell had only 11 ints in 18 games...

Yeah He had 11 INT's But he led The NFL in fumbles Lost too!!!! Oh but that's not a turnover is it?

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by railcon56@comcast.net

Yeah He had 11 INT's But he led The NFL in fumbles Lost too!!!! Oh but that's not a turnover is it?

Yeah, I really couldn't stomach another 3,000 yd, 23 TD, top QB rating season, and the second round of the playoffs either.

[firstdown]

We have a hall of fame coach, now we Saunders who has had a top five O in his last five seasons, and other very talented O coaches. I will have no problem with which ever QB they sellect to run our O. For the people who say they will not watch the Skins if Brunell starts we will see how long you last when we are winning games.I just do not understand those types of comment when we have a coaching staff that just about any other team would love to have standing on their sidelines. I'm not a Brunell lover I just feel we have the right people in place to make the best decisions for this team whoever our QB.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by firstdown

We have a hall of fame coach, now we Saunders who has had a top five O in his last five seasons, and other very talented O coaches. I will have no problem with which ever QB they sellect to run our O. For the people who say they will not watch the Skins if Brunell starts we will see how long you last when we are winning games.I just do not understand those types of comment when we have a coaching staff that just about any other team would love to have standing on their sidelines. I'm not a Brunell lover I just feel we have the right people in place to make the best decisions for this team whoever our QB.

Some people just hate Brunell that much I guess. Why I don't know, perhaps they just can't get '04 outta their minds despite him having a Pro Bowl caliber '05 season. Yeah I know, what about the last 3 games? Well, what about looking at the entire season, I know it's hard to think back that far but if you can still remember '04 I'm sure you can handle it.

If someone is seriously not going to watch games if Brunell plays I say fine, just one less fair weather fan we don't need.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by railcon56@comcast.net

Yeah He had 11 INT's But he led The NFL in fumbles Lost too!!!! Oh but that's not a turnover is it?

Brunell lost 6 fumbles in 2005. Your boy Ramsey lost 3 fumbles in 2004, and he only played half a season. Meaning their fumble rates are equal. But Ramsey throws way more interceptions than Brunell.

Brunell is way better at managing a game. And if you don't like that, then you don't like winning.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Brunell lost 6 fumbles in 2005. Your boy Ramsey lost 3 fumbles in 2004, and he only played half a season. Meaning their fumble rates are equal. But Ramsey throws way more interceptions than Brunell.

Brunell is way better at managing a game. And if you don't like that, then you don't like winning.

That really must be it. After a decade of mediocrity some people just like losing and winning 10 games and a playoff game is just too foreign. Something must be wrong with this equation, yeah it's that guy from '04 that struggled so much. There's no way he had anything to do with the 11 wins, he only contributed to the 7 losses.

[Hog1]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Some people just hate Brunell that much I guess. Why I don't know, perhaps they just can't get '04 outta their minds despite him having a Pro Bowl caliber '05 season. Yeah I know, what about the last 3 games? Well, what about looking at the entire season, I know it's hard to think back that far but if you can still remember '04 I'm sure you can handle it.

If someone is seriously not going to watch games if Brunell plays I say fine, just one less fair weather fan we don't need.

Pro bowl caliber 05' season????????????????......................offiss just went rigid all over........a tremor in the "Ramsey force"

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by Hog1

Pro bowl caliber 05' season????????????????......................offiss just went rigid all over........a tremor in the "Ramsey force"

LOL!

[offiss]

PRO BOWL CALIBER SEASON?????

[offiss]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Brunell lost 6 fumbles in 2005. Your boy Ramsey lost 3 fumbles in 2004, and he only played half a season. Meaning their fumble rates are equal. But Ramsey throws way more interceptions than Brunell.

Brunell is way better at managing a game. And if you don't like that, then you don't like winning.

Brunell averaged well over 1 TO a game, 12 TO's in 9 games, and he's supposed to be the veteran, you can couple that with his opportunity to play and get most of the reps in practice for most of the year, Ramsey didn't have the benefit of Brunells experience or a decieded advantage in reps in practice, as well Ramsey had the pleasure of coming into games in spot duty to try and bail us out of the hole Brunell left us in.

Irregardless of all that, don't try and make a case for TO's being the decieding factor between the 2 when Brunell has 12 TO's in 9 games in 2004!

[MTK]

Let's look at the 2005 Pro Bowl roster and compare the QBs that were named for the NFC.

Matt Hasselbeck: 3459 yards, 24 TDs, 9 INT. 98.2 rating, led his team to 13 wins. Highest rated passer in the NFC.

Jake Delhomme: 3421 yards, 24 TDs, 16 INT. 88.1 rating, led his team to 11 wins. 4th rated passer in the NFC.

Michael Vick: 2412 yards, 15 TDs, 13 INT. 73.1 rating, led his team to 8 wins. 12th rated passer in the NFC.

And now Brunell: 3050 yards, 23 TDs, 10 INT. 85.9 rating, led his team to 10 wins. 5th rated passer in the NFC.

Now draw your own conclusions. I don't see how Brunell isn't at least in the discussion when you talk about who had Pro Bowl caliber seasons in the NFC.

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Let's look at the 2005 Pro Bowl roster and compare the QBs that were named for the NFC.

Matt Hasselbeck: 3459 yards, 24 TDs, 9 INT. 98.2 rating, led his team to 13 wins. Highest rated passer in the NFC.

Jake Delhomme: 3421 yards, 24 TDs, 16 INT. 88.1 rating, led his team to 11 wins. 4th rated passer in the NFC.

Michael Vick: 2412 yards, 15 TDs, 13 INT. 73.1 rating, led his team to 8 wins. 12th rated passer in the NFC.

And now Brunell: 3050 yards, 23 TDs, 10 INT. 85.9 rating, led his team to 10 wins. 5th rated passer in the NFC.

Now draw your own conclusions. I don't see how Brunell isn't at least in the discussion when you talk about who had Pro Bowl caliber seasons in the NFC.

Pretty much sums it up!

[Redskins_P]

I still can't believe Vick made it to the Pro Bowl. Total BS.

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by offiss

Brunell averaged well over 1 TO a game, 12 TO's in 9 games, and he's supposed to be the veteran, you can couple that with his opportunity to play and get most of the reps in practice for most of the year, Ramsey didn't have the benefit of Brunells experience or a decieded advantage in reps in practice, as well Ramsey had the pleasure of coming into games in spot duty to try and bail us out of the hole Brunell left us in.

Irregardless of all that, don't try and make a case for TO's being the decieding factor between the 2 when Brunell has 12 TO's in 9 games in 2004!

So what's your excuse for the preseason and the 1st game of the season, 4 possessions, 2 turnovers?