It's not Brunell's fault!

Sheriff Gonna Getcha · 10-23-2006, 06:30 PM

To put some perspective on things, our offense scored a TOTAL of 37 points against the Giants, Cowboys, Colts, and Vikings. That's about 9 points per game. ANYONE who thinks that an offense that scores 9 points per game is good is on some ridiculously good crack.

GTripp0012 · 10-23-2006, 06:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

To put some perspective on things, our offense scored a TOTAL of 37 points against the Giants, Cowboys, Colts, and Vikings. That's about 9 points per game. ANYONE who thinks that an offense that scores 9 points per game is good is on some ridiculously good crack.

It's pretty shitty. But that doesn't mean the offense isn't efficient. The inablity to score points is a seperate problem. Either the kickers aren't making kicks (they've been inconsistent), we aren't getting TDs in the red zone (i don't have the stats on this), we consistently have terrible field position (again, don't know), or you have a ridiculously low TOP because the defense can never get off the field on third down (bingo!).

Sheriff Gonna Getcha · 10-23-2006, 06:39 PM

Good point re: TOP GTripp. I just think our team's record is a collaborative effort between the defense and the offense.

SOME of the blame for the offense's inability to score points has to be laid at Brunell's feet. He is, after all, the quarterback.

GTripp0012 · 10-23-2006, 06:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

Good point re: TOP GTripp. I just think our team's record is a collaborative effort between the defense and the offense.

SOME of the blame for the offense's inability to score points has to be laid at Brunell's feet. He is, after all, the quarterback.

My goal is not to absolve him of all blame. The great ones have the ability to rise to the next level, and make sure the team wins. At 2-5, Brunell has not won the games. I guess we've learned that Brunell is not great. But considering the conditions that he plays in, the guy, IMO, has played admiribly. I would not expect such production from a guy who is on the hot seat. He's good, not great.

It is beyond obvious to me that he gives this team it's best chance to win and that's all I'm saying. At the point where winning now becomes secondary to winning in the future, he will probably glady relinquish the job upon Gibbs request. He's a classy guy. We are still a loss within the division away from that point.

And thats the final word on Brunell from me...for today at least.

illdefined · 10-23-2006, 07:03 PM

anyone want to explain to me how the 'efficiency' of consistently connecting on the 5yd completion on 3rd and 9, is better than potentially making a 50yd bomb?

even an interception 50yds down the field would be better than a surefire 4th and 4. no chance of scoring on a punt, and its almost the same field position!

drew54 · 10-23-2006, 07:11 PM

Dog ate his playbook.

itvnetop · 10-23-2006, 08:12 PM

I think we're forgetting that we tend to abandon the run fairly quickly... i think i remember a stat during the first half where the pass-run ratio was like 14 to 8 at one point (I may be off a little bit).

We've played two of the worst run defenses the past two weeks and yet, we're passing all the time. OK, Portis was stuffed his first 6 carries for like 1 yard- but even bad rush defenses can start a game on fire. You have to keep plugging away at it, and in the Skins' offense that means b/t the tackles instead of these wide tosses.

Our O-line shines in run blocking and the coordinator just has to keep faith in the line until Portis starts getting those 4, 5, 6 yard clips. This also helps with the TOP. Abandoning the run early with our offense sets up for limited pass plays with the QB we have.

I'm far from Brunell's biggest fan... in fact, I want to see Campbell in there just to spark something. But MB has shown the ability to throw the long ball this season when it's there. I'm also still a Saunders supporter... but I think his playcalling has been suspect the past few weeks, considering the rush defenses played.

SmootSmack · 10-23-2006, 08:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Southpaw

If you've heard any of Saunders' comments, he's constantly talking about limiting his play calling. He doesn't directly say that Brunell can't handle it, but he says things like "Mark is good at shorter passes and quick drops" i.e. he can't throw deep. I'm positive that a lot of it is play calling, but it's directly related to Brunell's ability. I don't think Saunders would refrain from calling long passes with Campbell in the lineup.

What's interesting though is if you look at the Chiefs from last year Green didn't have that many deep completions really. What I don't know is how many deep attempts he had

MTK · 10-23-2006, 08:25 PM

We have no identity on offense right now, that's been our main problem all year. If we have any hope of salvaging the season, finding an identity is the key.

jdlea · 10-23-2006, 08:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

We have no identity on offense right now, that's been our main problem all year. If we have any hope of salvaging the season, finding an identity is the key.

That's a very good point. However, I would contend that they do have an identity and it's that of an inconsistent football team. Be it running or throwing, they do niether consistently. It's getting a little late in the season to try to establish one or the other as the crux of the offense. Everyone knows they're an inside running team. Wear em down on the inside then try to break em on the edges. And throw deep or at least intermediate then. I think Saunders is trying to put his stamp on the team, but he needs to adjust to Portis.

mike340 · 10-23-2006, 08:57 PM

One of the things Brunell brings to the table is that he knows how to change a play at the line of scrimmage (based on the defensive set.) I have read that Saunders' system practically eliminates this possibility. Peyton was changing plays all night. Unfortunately, when Brunell sees that the defensive set is going to scr*w the play, he can't do anything to fix it (except for calling a time-out.) I think this greatly hinders the Redskins offense.

Also, a couple of games ago he was furious because the plays weren't coming in fast enough. How much of the season has this been going on. And in spite of all the short dump-offs, at the end of the first half he had 10 hurries in 15 attempts (with 10 completions.) Many on this board feel that Saunders calls few long passes because Brunell has a "noodle" arm. I wonder if he is more reticent because he knows the line can't protect him that long without holding. (Remember the beginning of the season? Weren't we on pace to set a new record for number of penalties, with offensive holding leading the way?)

I have a lot of respect for Brunell after 2004. Not for how he passed. (That was as painful to watch as I can remember.) But because he was injured (which he shared with the coaching staff), but never gave it as excuse for his poor performance in public.

I have seen Brunell explode once: when (as I mentioned before) the plays were coming in late this year. I think Gibbs has him talk because he won't badmouth anybody else. (And don't tell me there is no-one else to badmouth.) In general, the reaction of the people who talk to the press from the Redskins organization reminds me of a cartoon I saw in the foreign service journal. There were seven people holding down a furious man in a room. The room's only door was open a crack, and the person just inside the door was informing the one on the outside that "The ambassador has no comment at this time."

I think the reason you don't see explosions out of the Redskins organization is because public "disturbances" usually end up a negative. (Remember the Giants before their game with us?)

Do I feel Brunell is a great QB? No. He is a good solid QB. He will not lose games for you. Gibbs got him since he felt the rest of the team would hold up its end. It doesn't seem to be working out that way. Scoring: 20 pts/game. Defense: 26 pts/game.
Two years ago, 21 pts/game would have given them a record of 13-2-1.
I think the problems hang more on the D.

EternalEnigma21 · 10-23-2006, 09:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

What 6th rated offense?

You didn't know?

Were sixth in the NFC East!!!!

Beemnseven · 10-23-2006, 09:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

To put some perspective on things, our offense scored a TOTAL of 37 points against the Giants, Cowboys, Colts, and Vikings. That's about 9 points per game. ANYONE who thinks that an offense that scores 9 points per game is good is on some ridiculously good crack.

Against the NFC East, we've been outscored 46-13, and have not scored an offensive touchdown.

How's that for efficiency?

hooskins · 10-23-2006, 09:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by drew54

Dog ate his playbook.

Or maybe Dog the Bounty Hunter arrested his playbook brah!

YouTube - South Park Dawg the Hallway Monitor 2

Go with Christ!

skinsguy · 10-23-2006, 09:42 PM

As much as people ripped our offense last year for being too simple, it sure seems like we had much more of an identity than what we have this year. We used our strengths! I am thinking if we had just added the two WRs and kept the same exact offense from a year ago...we would've been okay....offensively at least...

10-23-2006, 06:30 PM	#166
Sheriff Gonna Getcha Franchise Player Join Date: Feb 2004 Age: 45 Posts: 8,317	Re: It's not Brunell's fault! To put some perspective on things, our offense scored a TOTAL of 37 points against the Giants, Cowboys, Colts, and Vikings. That's about 9 points per game. ANYONE who thinks that an offense that scores 9 points per game is good is on some ridiculously good crack.

10-23-2006, 06:39 PM	#168
Sheriff Gonna Getcha Franchise Player Join Date: Feb 2004 Age: 45 Posts: 8,317	Re: It's not Brunell's fault! Good point re: TOP GTripp. I just think our team's record is a collaborative effort between the defense and the offense. SOME of the blame for the offense's inability to score points has to be laid at Brunell's feet. He is, after all, the quarterback.

10-23-2006, 07:03 PM	#170
illdefined Playmaker Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: nyc Age: 48 Posts: 2,631	Re: It's not Brunell's fault! anyone want to explain to me how the 'efficiency' of consistently connecting on the 5yd completion on 3rd and 9, is better than potentially making a 50yd bomb? even an interception 50yds down the field would be better than a surefire 4th and 4. no chance of scoring on a punt, and its almost the same field position! __________________ a fan. not a cheerleader.

10-23-2006, 07:11 PM	#171
drew54 The Starter Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: IOWA Age: 42 Posts: 1,324	Re: It's not Brunell's fault! Dog ate his playbook. __________________ No pressure, no diamonds.

10-23-2006, 08:12 PM	#172
itvnetop Playmaker Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Los Angeles, CA Age: 47 Posts: 3,007	Re: It's not Brunell's fault! I think we're forgetting that we tend to abandon the run fairly quickly... i think i remember a stat during the first half where the pass-run ratio was like 14 to 8 at one point (I may be off a little bit). We've played two of the worst run defenses the past two weeks and yet, we're passing all the time. OK, Portis was stuffed his first 6 carries for like 1 yard- but even bad rush defenses can start a game on fire. You have to keep plugging away at it, and in the Skins' offense that means b/t the tackles instead of these wide tosses. Our O-line shines in run blocking and the coordinator just has to keep faith in the line until Portis starts getting those 4, 5, 6 yard clips. This also helps with the TOP. Abandoning the run early with our offense sets up for limited pass plays with the QB we have. I'm far from Brunell's biggest fan... in fact, I want to see Campbell in there just to spark something. But MB has shown the ability to throw the long ball this season when it's there. I'm also still a Saunders supporter... but I think his playcalling has been suspect the past few weeks, considering the rush defenses played.

10-23-2006, 08:25 PM	#174
MTK \m/ Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: NY Age: 52 Posts: 99,518	Re: It's not Brunell's fault! We have no identity on offense right now, that's been our main problem all year. If we have any hope of salvaging the season, finding an identity is the key. __________________ Support The Warpath! \| Warpath Shop

10-23-2006, 08:57 PM	#176
mike340 Special Teams Join Date: Jun 2006 Age: 68 Posts: 322	Re: It's not Brunell's fault! One of the things Brunell brings to the table is that he knows how to change a play at the line of scrimmage (based on the defensive set.) I have read that Saunders' system practically eliminates this possibility. Peyton was changing plays all night. Unfortunately, when Brunell sees that the defensive set is going to scr*w the play, he can't do anything to fix it (except for calling a time-out.) I think this greatly hinders the Redskins offense. Also, a couple of games ago he was furious because the plays weren't coming in fast enough. How much of the season has this been going on. And in spite of all the short dump-offs, at the end of the first half he had 10 hurries in 15 attempts (with 10 completions.) Many on this board feel that Saunders calls few long passes because Brunell has a "noodle" arm. I wonder if he is more reticent because he knows the line can't protect him that long without holding. (Remember the beginning of the season? Weren't we on pace to set a new record for number of penalties, with offensive holding leading the way?) I have a lot of respect for Brunell after 2004. Not for how he passed. (That was as painful to watch as I can remember.) But because he was injured (which he shared with the coaching staff), but never gave it as excuse for his poor performance in public. I have seen Brunell explode once: when (as I mentioned before) the plays were coming in late this year. I think Gibbs has him talk because he won't badmouth anybody else. (And don't tell me there is no-one else to badmouth.) In general, the reaction of the people who talk to the press from the Redskins organization reminds me of a cartoon I saw in the foreign service journal. There were seven people holding down a furious man in a room. The room's only door was open a crack, and the person just inside the door was informing the one on the outside that "The ambassador has no comment at this time." I think the reason you don't see explosions out of the Redskins organization is because public "disturbances" usually end up a negative. (Remember the Giants before their game with us?) Do I feel Brunell is a great QB? No. He is a good solid QB. He will not lose games for you. Gibbs got him since he felt the rest of the team would hold up its end. It doesn't seem to be working out that way. Scoring: 20 pts/game. Defense: 26 pts/game. Two years ago, 21 pts/game would have given them a record of 13-2-1. I think the problems hang more on the D.

10-23-2006, 09:42 PM	#180
skinsguy Pro Bowl Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Greensboro, North Carolina Posts: 6,766	Re: It's not Brunell's fault! As much as people ripped our offense last year for being too simple, it sure seems like we had much more of an identity than what we have this year. We used our strengths! I am thinking if we had just added the two WRs and kept the same exact offense from a year ago...we would've been okay....offensively at least... __________________ "Fire Up That Diesel!"

It's not Brunell's fault!

Locker Room Main Forum