Time to bench Brunell? (Mega Man Merge)

Beemnseven · 09-18-2006, 11:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by illdefined

i assume Gibbs figured Brunell would've acclimated to Saunders offense more quickly than Campbell, but it clearly hasn't been that quick.

I just don't think that's the problem. Players today get so much more time to study and prepare in the offseason. They have more mini-camps, OTA's, it's much more involved than it used to be.

Brunell has had plenty of time to review and go over this offense. It's not like Gibbs and Saunders snuck into Brunell's bedroom early one August morning, hit him over the head with the 700 page playbook, and said "know this by September 11."

gibbsisgod · 09-18-2006, 11:13 PM

67.8% of the WARPATH cant be wrong!! Go with Campbell!!!!

twinskinsfan · 09-19-2006, 12:03 AM

Anybody thought that the offensive line sucks? I am not saying that it is them, but I am not saying it is Brunell. Yes, he looks weak, and somebody needs to sit him down and point that out to him, lets face it, our offense sucks. It is not the coach, it is not the Qb, it is not the play calling. It is the team, they look lost as hell(Cooley, Brunell, Offensive line, Cheerleaders) everyone looks lost. And they better fix damn fix it or we are the team that all the league wants us to be. SHITTY

itvnetop · 09-19-2006, 12:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by twinskinsfan

Anybody thought that the offensive line sucks? I am not saying that it is them, but I am not saying it is Brunell. Yes, he looks weak, and somebody needs to sit him down and point that out to him, lets face it, our offense sucks. It is not the coach, it is not the Qb, it is not the play calling. It is the team, they look lost as hell(Cooley, Brunell, Offensive line, Cheerleaders) everyone looks lost. And they better fix damn fix it or we are the team that all the league wants us to be. SHITTY

to be somewhat fair, let's remember the cowboys sent the house more than normal... and betts/duckett don't come close to picking up the blitz like portis. i still think the o-line is still adjusting to the new schemes (no doubt about that). dockery was getting comfortable last season, but this new system probably has him confused. rabach isn't looking like himself either.

twinskinsfan · 09-19-2006, 12:14 AM

Benching Brunell might make alot of people happy right now. But has anyone thought that maybe it is our team collectively that blows? Our offesive line sucks. Yes, Brunell at this very momemt, the obvious, SUCKS, and the coahes suck. I think everybody on the offensive side is lost as hell, nobldy has a clue where they are supposed to be at anytime. The defense, I think the rest of the league has figured us out. They know where we are coming from, and WAHT THE HELL, IF YOU WANT TO SCORE A TOUCHDOWN ON THE REDSKINS, THEN....THROW IT DEEP!!! easy as that.

RobH4413 · 09-19-2006, 12:40 AM

I wish I could say something wise and unconventional... and I really want to say "start Mark Brunell". I mean I wish I could say "Look at last year... he looked sooo bad... and then BOOM! He came out of no-where and showed up".. ..

I want to say Mark Brunell still has a few great years left. He had a career year last year. He threw for over 3000 yards. He was a Force.

But I forgot last year. I live in the present. I speak on raw emotion, and I have blind faith in a rookie quarterback that has never thrown a pass in the NFL. My Judgement far exceeds a 3 time superbowl winner. I'm educated... I watch sportscenter. I should be the coach. Joe Gibbs is a great guy and all but isn't he fed up with Mark? I am so bitter about losing to Dallas that something MUST change. I can't stand losing, so I'm going to change the guy that took us to the playoffs last year and threw for 25 touchdowns and 10 interceptions and put my eggs in a different basket. Ef you Mark Brunell, YOU SUCK.

SmootSmack · 09-19-2006, 01:03 AM

I hear what you're saying, twinskins. Though I don't know that it warranted a new thread. You're echoing the sentiments of several people who have said all the blame can't be Brunell's in several posts in several threads. The blame has to go all around, including but not only Brunell.

GMScud · 09-19-2006, 01:08 AM

I have mixed feelings on benching Brunell. He has looked awful, to say the least. But he can still put some zip on the ball, and is pretty good at not turning it over. I think we need to leave him in there until he gets some decent pass protection and #26 comes back to bolster the running game. I can say with conviction that we cannot put the ball in Brunell's hands and say, "hey Mark, go win the game." That just won't happen. If we can RUN the damn ball to set up the passing game, then I believe he can still be effecient. But with no Portis, no pass blocking, and only 16 friggin running plays a game, we're aren't going anywhere. Where is our vaunted O-line? Can't Buges get these "dirtbags" to knuckle up a bit? We made the Cowboys D-line look way better than they are.

And on that note, WHY THE HELL AREN'T WE RUNNING IT MORE???? Down the stretch last year when we ripped off the last 5 regular season games, we ran it 35-40 times per contest. That's what won Coach Gibbs three Super Bowls in his first stint, and that has been the biggest determinant of his success this time around. RUN RUN RUN, and the field will open up for the pass!!!!! Although you have to convert 3rd downs first I guess....

SmootSmack · 09-19-2006, 01:12 AM

I think there are several reasons we aren't running more. But the two main ones are that a.) the gap between Portis and Betts talentwise is a lot bigger than many perhaps originally thought, and b.) stupid penalties on 1st and 2nd down are forcing 3rd and longs. I think it's time for Duckett to move up a spot in the depth chart. I mean is Betts still hurt, because he doesn't look so great. No one does, but he especially just looks really slow

GMScud · 09-19-2006, 01:27 AM

Tafkas, I agree that Betts doesn't look as good as I've seen him in the past, but Duckett didn't look like he was exactly ramming it in there either. He (Ducektt) did have that one nice 15 yard run to the outside, but we've gotta get Portis back. As far as Duckett being #2 on the depth chart, I think he probably would be if he had been with the team for more than a few days of training camp.

But don't you agree that running the ball on first and second down sets the tempo and controls both the clock and the pace of the game?? We're trying to do too many things on offense. Apparently the cowboys were playing a cover 2 that involved a few d-backs staying way back in coverage to prevent any successful deep routes. Running consistently would bring more men in the box and open up the pass. Anyone knows that. I want to believe that Gibbs brought Saunders in large part becuase of his success pounding that rock (see Priest and Larry Johnson). I scream and yell at the TV to RUN THE DAMN BALL.

So do we give Brunell a game against a traditionally bad team to turn it around? With Portis likely back this week and the track record of the Texans, don't you think Brunell deserves to give it one more go??

SmootSmack · 09-19-2006, 01:32 AM

Yeah I was just saying that I think they put themselves in situations where they couldn't run especially on second downs. There's no question we need Portis back.

GMScud · 09-19-2006, 01:43 AM

I am really tired of having to deal with bitching about the quarterback position. We have a constant carousel year in and out, controversies year in year out, and discussions like one pretty much on a consistent basis. Never shoulda let Brad Johnson go....

EternalEnigma21 · 09-19-2006, 12:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GMScud

I am really tired of having to deal with bitching about the quarterback position. We have a constant carousel year in and out, controversies year in year out, and discussions like one pretty much on a consistent basis. Never shoulda let Brad Johnson go....

I'm tired of it too, and I think most people are. That's the main reason I think people are calling for the change. We have Blind Faith in Joe Gibbs' asessment of Jason Campbell, and the fact that we threw 2 first round picks at his feet and see him as our answer and the QB of our future. We're hoping that he can end all of the BS QB contraversey we've been seeing around here for so long now.

Rothlesburger got put into his situation in his first year and the second he took his team all the way.

I'm hoping J/C is on par with him as far as game management and utilizing the weapons he has around him, especially seeing what we gave up to get him.

skinsguy · 09-19-2006, 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by canthetuna

We have Blind Faith in Joe Gibbs' asessment of Jason Campbell, and the fact that we threw 2 first round picks at his feet and see him as our answer and the QB of our future.

Joe Gibbs has a pretty good track record at assessments of QBs. Although he doesn't find the Joe Montanas or the Brett Farves of the NFL, he finds the players who are willing to work within the system in order to win and it's worked for him -- 3 different Super Bowl quarterbacks. I think the only difference right now is that those quarterbacks were not afraid to throw it deep -- which is what truthly made Joe Gibbs' offense ultimately successful. We talk about his running game, but teams back in the day also had to worry about the posse' and a QB who wasn't afraid to throw it deep to Clark, Sanders, and Monk.

I've seen Mark throw and I believe he can throw it deep --- but for some reason, he doesn't have the confidence to do so. In garbage time, when it didn't matter either way, he was making those throws to Moss. I realize that the defense was playing prevent...but I still believe Mark can make those passes if he'd try. Probably what is frustrating for the WRs is that Mark probably does make those passes in practice, but wants to play too conservative in the game.

bigm29 · 09-19-2006, 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by canthetuna

I'm tired of it too, and I think most people are. That's the main reason I think people are calling for the change. We have Blind Faith in Joe Gibbs' asessment of Jason Campbell, and the fact that we threw 2 first round picks at his feet and see him as our answer and the QB of our future. We're hoping that he can end all of the BS QB contraversey we've been seeing around here for so long now.

Rothlesburger got put into his situation in his first year and the second he took his team all the way.

I'm hoping J/C is on par with him as far as game management and utilizing the weapons he has around him, especially seeing what we gave up to get him.

we gave up 1 1st round pick and like 3rd and 4th

View Poll Results: Is it time to bench Brunell?
Yes	141	61.84%
Give him another week	37	16.23%
Give him a few more weeks	35	15.35%
No	15	6.58%
Voters: 228. You may not vote on this poll

09-19-2006, 12:03 AM	#3
twinskinsfan Special Teams Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 141	Re: Time to bench Brunell? (Mega-merge) Anybody thought that the offensive line sucks? I am not saying that it is them, but I am not saying it is Brunell. Yes, he looks weak, and somebody needs to sit him down and point that out to him, lets face it, our offense sucks. It is not the coach, it is not the Qb, it is not the play calling. It is the team, they look lost as hell(Cooley, Brunell, Offensive line, Cheerleaders) everyone looks lost. And they better fix damn fix it or we are the team that all the league wants us to be. SHITTY

09-19-2006, 12:14 AM	#5
twinskinsfan Special Teams Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 141	Benching Brunell may not be the answer. Benching Brunell might make alot of people happy right now. But has anyone thought that maybe it is our team collectively that blows? Our offesive line sucks. Yes, Brunell at this very momemt, the obvious, SUCKS, and the coahes suck. I think everybody on the offensive side is lost as hell, nobldy has a clue where they are supposed to be at anytime. The defense, I think the rest of the league has figured us out. They know where we are coming from, and WAHT THE HELL, IF YOU WANT TO SCORE A TOUCHDOWN ON THE REDSKINS, THEN....THROW IT DEEP!!! easy as that.

09-19-2006, 12:40 AM	#6
RobH4413 Wildcard Bitches Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Bethesda, MD Age: 41 Posts: 2,638	Re: Benching Brunell may not be the answer. I wish I could say something wise and unconventional... and I really want to say "start Mark Brunell". I mean I wish I could say "Look at last year... he looked sooo bad... and then BOOM! He came out of no-where and showed up".. .. I want to say Mark Brunell still has a few great years left. He had a career year last year. He threw for over 3000 yards. He was a Force. But I forgot last year. I live in the present. I speak on raw emotion, and I have blind faith in a rookie quarterback that has never thrown a pass in the NFL. My Judgement far exceeds a 3 time superbowl winner. I'm educated... I watch sportscenter. I should be the coach. Joe Gibbs is a great guy and all but isn't he fed up with Mark? I am so bitter about losing to Dallas that something MUST change. I can't stand losing, so I'm going to change the guy that took us to the playoffs last year and threw for 25 touchdowns and 10 interceptions and put my eggs in a different basket. Ef you Mark Brunell, YOU SUCK. __________________ This is what happens when you find a stranger in the Alps!

09-19-2006, 01:03 AM	#7
SmootSmack Uncle Phil Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 45,256	Re: Benching Brunell may not be the answer. I hear what you're saying, twinskins. Though I don't know that it warranted a new thread. You're echoing the sentiments of several people who have said all the blame can't be Brunell's in several posts in several threads. The blame has to go all around, including but not only Brunell. __________________ You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You

09-18-2006, 11:13 PM	#2
gibbsisgod Playmaker Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: 129 W 81st street Age: 47 Posts: 3,503	Re: Time to bench Brunell? (Mega-merge) 67.8% of the WARPATH cant be wrong!! Go with Campbell!!!!

09-19-2006, 01:08 AM	#8
GMScud Swearinger Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Washington, DC Posts: 12,626	Re: Benching Brunell may not be the answer. I have mixed feelings on benching Brunell. He has looked awful, to say the least. But he can still put some zip on the ball, and is pretty good at not turning it over. I think we need to leave him in there until he gets some decent pass protection and #26 comes back to bolster the running game. I can say with conviction that we cannot put the ball in Brunell's hands and say, "hey Mark, go win the game." That just won't happen. If we can RUN the damn ball to set up the passing game, then I believe he can still be effecient. But with no Portis, no pass blocking, and only 16 friggin running plays a game, we're aren't going anywhere. Where is our vaunted O-line? Can't Buges get these "dirtbags" to knuckle up a bit? We made the Cowboys D-line look way better than they are. And on that note, WHY THE HELL AREN'T WE RUNNING IT MORE???? Down the stretch last year when we ripped off the last 5 regular season games, we ran it 35-40 times per contest. That's what won Coach Gibbs three Super Bowls in his first stint, and that has been the biggest determinant of his success this time around. RUN RUN RUN, and the field will open up for the pass!!!!! Although you have to convert 3rd downs first I guess....

09-19-2006, 01:12 AM	#9
SmootSmack Uncle Phil Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 45,256	Re: Benching Brunell may not be the answer. I think there are several reasons we aren't running more. But the two main ones are that a.) the gap between Portis and Betts talentwise is a lot bigger than many perhaps originally thought, and b.) stupid penalties on 1st and 2nd down are forcing 3rd and longs. I think it's time for Duckett to move up a spot in the depth chart. I mean is Betts still hurt, because he doesn't look so great. No one does, but he especially just looks really slow __________________ You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You

09-19-2006, 01:27 AM	#10
GMScud Swearinger Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Washington, DC Posts: 12,626	Re: Benching Brunell may not be the answer. Tafkas, I agree that Betts doesn't look as good as I've seen him in the past, but Duckett didn't look like he was exactly ramming it in there either. He (Ducektt) did have that one nice 15 yard run to the outside, but we've gotta get Portis back. As far as Duckett being #2 on the depth chart, I think he probably would be if he had been with the team for more than a few days of training camp. But don't you agree that running the ball on first and second down sets the tempo and controls both the clock and the pace of the game?? We're trying to do too many things on offense. Apparently the cowboys were playing a cover 2 that involved a few d-backs staying way back in coverage to prevent any successful deep routes. Running consistently would bring more men in the box and open up the pass. Anyone knows that. I want to believe that Gibbs brought Saunders in large part becuase of his success pounding that rock (see Priest and Larry Johnson). I scream and yell at the TV to RUN THE DAMN BALL. So do we give Brunell a game against a traditionally bad team to turn it around? With Portis likely back this week and the track record of the Texans, don't you think Brunell deserves to give it one more go??

09-19-2006, 01:32 AM	#11
SmootSmack Uncle Phil Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 45,256	Re: Benching Brunell may not be the answer. Yeah I was just saying that I think they put themselves in situations where they couldn't run especially on second downs. There's no question we need Portis back. __________________ You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You

09-19-2006, 01:43 AM	#12
GMScud Swearinger Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Washington, DC Posts: 12,626	Re: Benching Brunell may not be the answer. I am really tired of having to deal with bitching about the quarterback position. We have a constant carousel year in and out, controversies year in year out, and discussions like one pretty much on a consistent basis. Never shoulda let Brad Johnson go....

Time to bench Brunell? (Mega Man Merge)

Locker Room Main Forum