Gibbs defends Brunell

SUNRA · 10-17-2004, 06:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by joecrisp

I don't buy that at all. This has nothing to do with Ramsey's performance in practice or otherwise, and everything to do with Gibbs presenting a consistent message of confidence in Brunell. He has stated repeatedly-- ad nauseum-- that he doesn't believe Brunell is the problem, and that the inefficacy of the offense is a product of poor team play and poor coaching. Making a quarterback change would have been totally inconsistent with that message of team accountability.

While I understand and respect that team-oriented approach-- Gibbs knows a hell of a lot more about coaching than I do-- I totally disagree with his assertion that replacing Brunell wouldn't improve the offense, and I feel his heartfelt loyalty to Brunell is blinding him to the cold truth about Brunell's glaring deficiencies.

If Gibb's message is consistentcy and confidence in a QB then I will defend him to the end because that's something we didn't have for the last two years. If the Redskins win the next 3 games, (Packers, Lions and Bengals)
with Brunell, there should be some kind of an apology thread to Gibbs for accusing him of being blind to the obvious facts. And what are the obvious facts? A young talented QB who threw 3 INTS in his only game appearance. 2 sacks in the same. Seems incapable of moving in the pocket. On the other hand, an injured veteran with a proven record, whose skills have deminished, but still able to lead his team with a weak O line. Now loyalty to Brunell has nothing to do with Ramsey on the bench. Ramsey had his chance and blew it. If Rasmey won the game against the Giants, do you think Gibbs would have benched him anyway?

wolfeskins · 10-17-2004, 06:50 PM

yes,gibbs still would have put ramsey back on the bench even if ramsey would have led the skins to victory over the giants.gibbs would have said "nice job by ramsey but brunell is the starter,wer lucky to have such a good backup qb".
thats just my opinion.

monk81 · 10-17-2004, 06:50 PM

I think the ineffectiveness of the offense can't be totally laid at Burnell's feet. I think the loss of Jon Jansen was a huge blow to our offensive line and protection he would have afforded, as well as blocking for Portis. I've read article after article that said although Samuels was focused on playing back to his pro-bowl level, he has yet to show the determination he did during camp and sometimes takes plays off. So Burnell has a make shift line he's working with. Gibbs doesn't have all the players with the skills he needs to make his offense hum. We are working with so-so tight ends, our only stellar wide receiver with speed is Coles, the rest are so-so. After losing games to turnovers and mistakes it looks like Gibbs has scaled back the offense and gone back to basics to get some wins and work with the talent the Redskins have on offense. In other words, our defense is being counted on to win games, and our offense is supposed to just be good enough not to lose the game. I think we need another draft (too bad we gave up a 2nd round pick for Bailey cause we could've used that pick...SIGH!) Anyway, Joe can't perform miracles with talent he lacks on offense! He's tinkering and trying but the team just isn't there yet. I've heard Theismann say and I've heard Gibbs say as well that he would prefer to have a QB throw the ball away then try to force something that isn't there. Burnell is doing what he can, with what he has. Yes, Ramsey is younger, and had a nice drive when he came in, BUT he also threw several picks........Gibbs isn't going to yield the team to a young gun...I think he feels a younger QB would make even more costly mistakes, something this offense can ill afford. And that's my humble opinion for what it's worth.........Joe needs more time folks, we waited 13 so what's one or two more......SIGH

MTK · 10-17-2004, 07:07 PM

I'll stand behind Gibbs with whatever decision he makes, but right now I don't think Brunell should be starting. I hope he proves us all wrong.

joecrisp · 10-17-2004, 07:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SUNRA

If the Redskins win the next 3 games, (Packers, Lions and Bengals) with Brunell, there should be some kind of an apology thread to Gibbs for accusing him of being blind to the obvious facts. And what are the obvious facts? A young talented QB who threw 3 INTS in his only game appearance. 2 sacks in the same. Seems incapable of moving in the pocket.

To be fair, SUNRA, Brunell was responsible for two turnovers himself in that game (1 interception, 1 fumble lost on a sack), and was ineffective once the Giants unleashed their pass rush and started blitzing. Ramsey came in with very little practice and forced passes, trying to lead the team from behind. He also scrambled for 17 yards on one play, despite his alleged immobility.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SUNRA

On the other hand, an injured veteran with a proven record, whose skills have deminished, but still able to lead his team with a weak O line. Now loyalty to Brunell has nothing to do with Ramsey on the bench. Ramsey had his chance and blew it. If Ramsey won the game against the Giants, do you think Gibbs would have benched him anyway?

Brunell has "led" this team to 2 victories over very weak teams, and 4 losses that could have been avoided, had the offense shown any signs of life prior to the 4th quarter in those games. If Ramsey had won the game against the Giants, it wouldn't have mattered. Gibbs would have put Brunell back in there, because that's the guy who "earned" the starting job in the preseason.

Ramsey would've had to go in and throw 5 touchdowns and won the game for Gibbs to have even considered benching Brunell. That's not a fair expectation, either. On the other hand, Brunell has 5 touchdowns in a little over five and a half games, and there have been no signs of improvement.

That Guy · 10-17-2004, 07:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SUNRA

If he can heal and run to make the short 20 to 30 yd passes he will be successful. The timing is still not there for Brunell and Jacobs on the long pass.

I'm not sure that Ramsey is approaching his secondary role to Brunell in good favor.

you realize he's only completed 3 long passes the entire season and hasn't been remotely close on any of the others right? its not the timing as much as a jelly arm...
and wtf do you keep pulling this crap about ramsey not doing sh*t right??? did you catch him talking crap or something? seriously, unless you have some kind of proof or source, you need to cut that...

Quote:

Originally Posted by SUNRA

If Gibb's message is consistentcy and confidence in a QB then I will defend him to the end because that's something we didn't have for the last two years. If the Redskins win the next 3 games, (Packers, Lions and Bengals)
with Brunell, there should be some kind of an apology thread to Gibbs for accusing him of being blind to the obvious facts. And what are the obvious facts? A young talented QB who threw 3 INTS in his only game appearance. 2 sacks in the same. Seems incapable of moving in the pocket. On the other hand, an injured veteran with a proven record, whose skills have deminished, but still able to lead his team with a weak O line. Now loyalty to Brunell has nothing to do with Ramsey on the bench. Ramsey had his chance and blew it. If Rasmey won the game against the Giants, do you think Gibbs would have benched him anyway?

history lesson: Gibbs sticks with crappy QBs, always has... even when they're REALLY REALLY stinking it up, check the records. you mention ramsey had 2 sacks, but forgot to mention that BRUNELL HAD 3, and MB gave up points and couldn't drive down the field, unlike ramsey. Not to mention that ramsey didn't have a full week with the 1st team, and was thrown in 14 points down... he got seven... brunell hasn't even been able to come back for 3.

In five games brunell has proven he's old and tired, give ramsey a full game... IT CAN'T BE ANY WORSE. under 100 yards?? in two games?? five turnovers taken back for touchdowns??? come on...

Daseal · 10-17-2004, 08:34 PM

Brunell was 8/22 with 95 yards.

Let's break down the stats a bit farther.

5 rushes were throw plays he botched. 8/27.
He got sacked once, so that was another pass play: 8/28. 8/28 with an Int. That is absolutely pathetic. 29% of his throws actually get caught. Sometimes this year dropped balls have been a problem. His play has been absolutely pathetic. Maybe Joe needs to take a step back and realize what ever fan, writter, and commentator for miles sees!

ZackMills · 10-17-2004, 09:11 PM

attaboy gibbs, finally a smart move sticking with mark

offiss · 10-17-2004, 09:15 PM

I really am tired of hearing about how Ramsey isn't any good, while Brunell stink's the place up every week, worse than any game I have ever seen Ramsey play, Ramsey is still a kid, and the bottom line, he showed more potential than either Carr, or Harrington, who by the way have seen far more playing time than Ramsey, anyone who say's this kid has proven he can't play, has very little understanding of the game.

SUNRA · 10-17-2004, 09:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by That Guy

you realize he's only completed 3 long passes the entire season and hasn't been remotely close on any of the others right? its not the timing as much as a jelly arm...
and wtf do you keep pulling this crap about ramsey not doing sh*t right??? did you catch him talking crap or something? seriously, unless you have some kind of proof or source, you need to cut that...

history lesson: Gibbs sticks with crappy QBs, always has... even when they're REALLY REALLY stinking it up, check the records. you mention ramsey had 2 sacks, but forgot to mention that BRUNELL HAD 3, and MB gave up points and couldn't drive down the field, unlike ramsey. Not to mention that ramsey didn't have a full week with the 1st team, and was thrown in 14 points down... he got seven... brunell hasn't even been able to come back for 3.

In five games brunell has proven he's old and tired, give ramsey a full game... IT CAN'T BE ANY WORSE. under 100 yards?? in two games?? five turnovers taken back for touchdowns??? come on...

First of all, I'm gonna keep sh@$ting on Ramsey as long you keep pulling him out of your a@#$. The most illlogical statement you made was play Ramsey for a full game, it can't be any worse . Oh you don't mine losing with him because at least he put up good numbers right? I think passing yard stats mean more to you than wins.

You're beating a dead horse and the fact still remains that Brunell is starting in two weeks. So take a deep breath and cheer for the Redskins to win with Brunell rather than hoping Brunell loses his job.

skinsguy · 10-17-2004, 09:36 PM

History lessons for you guys:

Gibbs won Super Bowls with Joe Theismann, Doug Williams, and Mark Rypien. Out of those three names, the only one that I felt was a "franchise" player was joe Theismann. Doug Williams was a flash in the pan as well as Rypien yet Gibbs was successful with them. When this offense is gelled completely, it really won't matter who the QB is. Now, certainly I haven't been too impressed by Brunell, but I still don't think Ramsey at this point can do a better job...but that isn't to say that Brunell is doing an outstanding job because he's not...bottom line:

I really can care less who the QB is as long as the Redskins win! Heck, bring back Doug Williams or Mark Rypien...heck I'll play...just let the Redskins win!

Hogskin · 10-17-2004, 09:57 PM

Well, if you guys recall, *I* put a history lesson in a couple threads last week. It was related to what I saw as Gibbs' one an only MAJOR flaw as a head coach. That is his stubborn refusal to replace a QB that is stinking up the joint. And you Brunell fans can say what you like, there was no excuse for some of those horrible, horrible passes. He is awful at this point in his career.

Theismann was at the same point in HIS career (per my "history lesson" from last week), and the only thing that got him out of there and transformed a team headed under .500 to 10-6 was LT breaking his leg. I hope Gibbs realizes by tomorrow that he can go nowhere with this guy at the helm the rest of the season. If not, I will have to revise my 9-7 projection that is clearly still attainable with someone that can complete a downfield pass and can move a PRO offense.

Brunell is washed up. Period.

SKINSnCANES · 10-17-2004, 10:00 PM

lol, sunra has been leading an argument in the last two threads i checked

SUNRA · 10-17-2004, 10:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SKINSnCANES

lol, sunra has been leading an argument in the last two threads i checked

I'm glad you checked. Thank you Eyewitness News for your report.

SKINSnCANES · 10-17-2004, 10:06 PM

as a sided note sunra. let me ask you. I see you are from jersey city. Is that anywhere near Dover NJ. I have to move there for work in six months and have been trying to find out about jersey and that area specifically.

10-17-2004, 09:57 PM	#27
Hogskin Impact Rookie Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Hartselle, Alabama Age: 83 Posts: 659	Well, if you guys recall, I put a history lesson in a couple threads last week. It was related to what I saw as Gibbs' one an only MAJOR flaw as a head coach. That is his stubborn refusal to replace a QB that is stinking up the joint. And you Brunell fans can say what you like, there was no excuse for some of those horrible, horrible passes. He is awful at this point in his career. Theismann was at the same point in HIS career (per my "history lesson" from last week), and the only thing that got him out of there and transformed a team headed under .500 to 10-6 was LT breaking his leg. I hope Gibbs realizes by tomorrow that he can go nowhere with this guy at the helm the rest of the season. If not, I will have to revise my 9-7 projection that is clearly still attainable with someone that can complete a downfield pass and can move a PRO offense. Brunell is washed up. Period. __________________ John Shaffer National Fantasy Sports Leagues, Inc. Home of "The BEST Game In Town" since 1990

10-17-2004, 10:00 PM	#28
SKINSnCANES Pro Bowl Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: New Jersey Age: 42 Posts: 5,454	lol, sunra has been leading an argument in the last two threads i checked __________________ "I'm used to winning, coming from the University of Miami. " Clinton Portis

10-17-2004, 10:06 PM	#30
SKINSnCANES Pro Bowl Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: New Jersey Age: 42 Posts: 5,454	as a sided note sunra. let me ask you. I see you are from jersey city. Is that anywhere near Dover NJ. I have to move there for work in six months and have been trying to find out about jersey and that area specifically. __________________ "I'm used to winning, coming from the University of Miami. " Clinton Portis

10-17-2004, 06:50 PM	#17
wolfeskins The Starter Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: chesapeake,va. Posts: 2,160	yes,gibbs still would have put ramsey back on the bench even if ramsey would have led the skins to victory over the giants.gibbs would have said "nice job by ramsey but brunell is the starter,wer lucky to have such a good backup qb". thats just my opinion.

10-17-2004, 06:50 PM	#18
monk81 The Starter Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: TEXAS Posts: 2,029	I think the ineffectiveness of the offense can't be totally laid at Burnell's feet. I think the loss of Jon Jansen was a huge blow to our offensive line and protection he would have afforded, as well as blocking for Portis. I've read article after article that said although Samuels was focused on playing back to his pro-bowl level, he has yet to show the determination he did during camp and sometimes takes plays off. So Burnell has a make shift line he's working with. Gibbs doesn't have all the players with the skills he needs to make his offense hum. We are working with so-so tight ends, our only stellar wide receiver with speed is Coles, the rest are so-so. After losing games to turnovers and mistakes it looks like Gibbs has scaled back the offense and gone back to basics to get some wins and work with the talent the Redskins have on offense. In other words, our defense is being counted on to win games, and our offense is supposed to just be good enough not to lose the game. I think we need another draft (too bad we gave up a 2nd round pick for Bailey cause we could've used that pick...SIGH!) Anyway, Joe can't perform miracles with talent he lacks on offense! He's tinkering and trying but the team just isn't there yet. I've heard Theismann say and I've heard Gibbs say as well that he would prefer to have a QB throw the ball away then try to force something that isn't there. Burnell is doing what he can, with what he has. Yes, Ramsey is younger, and had a nice drive when he came in, BUT he also threw several picks........Gibbs isn't going to yield the team to a young gun...I think he feels a younger QB would make even more costly mistakes, something this offense can ill afford. And that's my humble opinion for what it's worth.........Joe needs more time folks, we waited 13 so what's one or two more......SIGH

10-17-2004, 07:07 PM	#19
MTK \m/ Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: NY Age: 52 Posts: 99,518	I'll stand behind Gibbs with whatever decision he makes, but right now I don't think Brunell should be starting. I hope he proves us all wrong.

10-17-2004, 08:34 PM	#22
Daseal Puppy Kicker Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Arlington, Virginia Age: 41 Posts: 8,341	Brunell was 8/22 with 95 yards. Let's break down the stats a bit farther. 5 rushes were throw plays he botched. 8/27. He got sacked once, so that was another pass play: 8/28. 8/28 with an Int. That is absolutely pathetic. 29% of his throws actually get caught. Sometimes this year dropped balls have been a problem. His play has been absolutely pathetic. Maybe Joe needs to take a step back and realize what ever fan, writter, and commentator for miles sees!

10-17-2004, 09:11 PM	#23
ZackMills Registered User Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 176	attaboy gibbs, finally a smart move sticking with mark

10-17-2004, 09:15 PM	#24
offiss Registered User Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: sparta, new jersey [ northern jersey ] Age: 60 Posts: 3,097	I really am tired of hearing about how Ramsey isn't any good, while Brunell stink's the place up every week, worse than any game I have ever seen Ramsey play, Ramsey is still a kid, and the bottom line, he showed more potential than either Carr, or Harrington, who by the way have seen far more playing time than Ramsey, anyone who say's this kid has proven he can't play, has very little understanding of the game.

10-17-2004, 09:36 PM	#26
skinsguy Pro Bowl Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Greensboro, North Carolina Posts: 6,766	History lessons for you guys: Gibbs won Super Bowls with Joe Theismann, Doug Williams, and Mark Rypien. Out of those three names, the only one that I felt was a "franchise" player was joe Theismann. Doug Williams was a flash in the pan as well as Rypien yet Gibbs was successful with them. When this offense is gelled completely, it really won't matter who the QB is. Now, certainly I haven't been too impressed by Brunell, but I still don't think Ramsey at this point can do a better job...but that isn't to say that Brunell is doing an outstanding job because he's not...bottom line: I really can care less who the QB is as long as the Redskins win! Heck, bring back Doug Williams or Mark Rypien...heck I'll play...just let the Redskins win!

Gibbs defends Brunell

Locker Room Main Forum