02-27-2006, 05:24 PM | #31 |
\m/
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NY
Age: 52
Posts: 99,518
|
Re: Brunell is Bad
I know the Parrot doesn't need a supporting cast, he's a one bird wrecking crew.
|
Advertisements |
02-27-2006, 05:24 PM | #32 | |
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: sparta, new jersey [ northern jersey ]
Age: 60
Posts: 3,097
|
Re: Brunell is Bad
Quote:
Reproduce? If he can't get better we are in trouble. If we don't put a very dominant defense on the field Brunell isn't going to win games, if we fielded an average defense, everyone hear would be calling for his head right now. There is nothing special about a QB who is out there just trying not to lose games, you can sign the trent Dilfers of the world at a very reasonable price to do that, good QB's win with average defenses, and they win super bowls with good defenses. |
|
02-27-2006, 05:26 PM | #33 |
Puppy Kicker
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Arlington, Virginia
Age: 41
Posts: 8,341
|
Re: Brunell is Bad
I've never felt comfortable with Brunell behind center. Never liked the way we acquired him and have a constant feeling of impending doom when he drops back and doesnt hand off to Portis. However, I will be the first to admit he made some spectacular plays this season. Especially in Dallas, and every now and then he'd throw a ball perfectly into coverage that made you say "wow." Even with that, I don't feel that's enough to keep him here and I really thought Ramsey could have done a much better job than Brunell this season. While he'll definitely turn the ball over more, he'll also put up a lot more yards and spread the ball around a lot more than Brunell.
I may be wrong in this, but I think we save a lot of money cutting Brunell, I'd feel much more confident cutting Brunell and keeping a cheap Ramsey to compete with Campbell for the starting job. Brunell's biggest downfall is when he gets at all hurt, he starts to make Ryan Leaf look like a good pickup. He won't pull himself out, Gibbs won't pull him out, and all he does is hurt the game. One play, in particular, made me nervous about Brunell last year. I think we can all remember Cooley trotting, wide open, along the back of the endzone. While Brunell stared at him the whole time before finally throwing the ball what seemed like hours later. During this time a defensive player locked onto Brunells eyes and was pretty close to Cooley by the time he caught it. After this he said he just had to make sure he was open. Granted he made that one, but how many potential plays did he miss. I simply don't feel confident with Brunell behind center, while he had few interceptions, like an above poster said, his fumbles were pretty bad. At least Ramsey throws INT's 40 yards up field near the receiver.
__________________
Best. Player. Available. |
02-27-2006, 05:27 PM | #34 |
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 68
|
Re: Brunell is Bad
There is no need to apologize. I wrote my comments to instigate people and it has worked. Before you can clean the rug you must agitate it to make the dirt rise. I had Brunell on my fantasy team and found him quite servicable. I think that his price and age are troublesome and I did not feel confident in his ability to lead us down the field with the game on the line.
|
02-27-2006, 05:30 PM | #35 | |
\m/
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NY
Age: 52
Posts: 99,518
|
Re: Brunell is Bad
Quote:
|
|
02-27-2006, 05:32 PM | #36 |
MVP
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: lancaster,pa
Age: 63
Posts: 10,672
|
Re: Brunell is Bad
alright stisgod we are going after jeff george this off season because according to you ,all you need to suceed is a cannon for an arm.we made the playoffs,,taking one step at a time i trust coach gibbs!do you?
__________________
"It's better to be quiet and thought a fool than to open ones mouth and remove all doubt." courtesy of 53fan |
02-27-2006, 05:33 PM | #37 | |
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: sparta, new jersey [ northern jersey ]
Age: 60
Posts: 3,097
|
Re: Brunell is Bad
Quote:
I also find it funny that the prevailing thought is that Ramsey won't continue to grow and get better as he gets more comfortable in Gibbs offense. |
|
02-27-2006, 05:38 PM | #38 | |
The Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Yorktown, Va
Age: 55
Posts: 1,587
|
Re: Brunell is Bad
Quote:
maybe Brunnel is better than you think AND maybe Ramsey is better than Gibbs thinks. To me, Brunnel looked good when he had to open up the offense ?(KC, Denver, Dallas...), but there is no doubt that defenses would have backed off if Ramsey was back there and the line could protect him. I'll be interested to see what Saunders thinks if Ramsey stays.
__________________
Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts. A. Einstien |
|
02-27-2006, 05:47 PM | #39 | |
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: sparta, new jersey [ northern jersey ]
Age: 60
Posts: 3,097
|
Re: Brunell is Bad
Quote:
I am very interested in Saunders evaluation of the situation will be as well, but I have a feeling Ramsey will be out of hear before he has a chance to do so, as we close in on draft day something is probably going to happen maybe even on draft day, right now things are up in the air on which direction teams with QB needs are going to go, once that straightens itself out Patrick will probably be on the move, to bad for us IMO. |
|
02-27-2006, 05:48 PM | #40 | |
Pro Bowl
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL
Age: 54
Posts: 5,006
|
Re: Brunell is Bad
Quote:
__________________
Paintrain's Redskins Fandom 1981-2014 I'm not dead but this team is dead to me...but now that McCloughan is here they may have new life! Jay Gruden = Zorny McSpurrier Kirk Cousins = Next Grossman |
|
02-27-2006, 05:58 PM | #41 | |
Living Legend
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: chesapeake, va
Age: 60
Posts: 15,817
|
Re: Brunell is Bad
Quote:
|
|
02-27-2006, 06:02 PM | #42 |
Puppy Kicker
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Arlington, Virginia
Age: 41
Posts: 8,341
|
Re: Brunell is Bad
Paintrain, read my post and I explain how. Ramsey would have given us a better TOP, more passing yards, more TDs, and more INTs. However he'd have far fewer fumbles than Brunell. Ramsey did more in slightly over one quarter in the first game than Brunell was able to pull out in the remainder of it. This was a good defense he was playing very well against.
I think the total amount of turnovers would have been similar, but Ramsey would have had more, yet we would have scored more and had more players worked into the mix. Easily the best season since 1999, big deal, this was "Easily the best season" for every Redskin since 1999, we made the playoffs. Little of that, in my opinion, had to do with the great play of Mark Brunell. I guess I'm wrong about his contract, I thought the restructure last year made him even easier to cut this year. I could definitely be wrong here.
__________________
Best. Player. Available. |
02-27-2006, 06:04 PM | #43 | |
Living Legend
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: chesapeake, va
Age: 60
Posts: 15,817
|
Re: Brunell is Bad
Quote:
|
|
02-27-2006, 06:13 PM | #44 | |
\m/
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NY
Age: 52
Posts: 99,518
|
Re: Brunell is Bad
Quote:
|
|
02-27-2006, 06:23 PM | #45 | |
Living Legend
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: VA
Age: 42
Posts: 17,553
|
Re: Brunell is Bad
Quote:
brunell threw deep fine. see dallas, see 49ers, etc... moss was in the top 3 in 40+ yard passes. most of his screen stuff went for 10-20 yards, not 40+. brunell does have the running qb menality where he looks 1,2 and tosses it or runs or dump it off where (good) pocket passers tend to get an extra read in. he's actually good at what he does, but lossing patten really hurt and at the end of the year he was obviously banged up and playing very poorly. that' a far cry from saying he's just outright bad though. The protection wasn't remarkable though, it was average to slightly above average... which would be appaling if we actually did have 4/5 Olinemen that were top5 at their positions. |
|
|
|