Take 70Chip's Mark Brunell Rorshock Test

[illdefined]

Originally Posted by 70Chip

You know who you are GTripp0012? You're Rumsfeld. 70Chip is a hopeless right-wing reactionary so take it for a compliment.

compliment? McNamara, Rumsfeld, take your pick. out of touch bean counting at its worst. 'it's all right there in the numbers'

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by illdefined

ot when a big majority of our yards come from our no.2 receiver Ladell Betts on futile 3rd down plays. Lloyd, ARE and Cooley haven't even broken 200 yards, and Portis was on a career low. does that sound right to you? and all that didn't happen from this game, nor was it caused by Kenny Wright, or some other excuse i'm sure you'll come up with.

Apparently Brunell is only expected to play well in the sunshine, at home, and against non-division opponents.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by illdefined

don't compare the bears with our Skins. not with the money we're paying, and not with the draft choices we've given up for these players.

your stats job won't work this time Tripp. not when a big majority of our yards come from our no.2 receiver Ladell Betts on futile 3rd down plays. Lloyd, ARE and Cooley haven't even broken 200 yards, and Portis was on a career low. does that sound right to you? and all that didn't happen from this game, nor was it caused by Kenny Wright, or some other excuse i'm sure you'll come up with.

So stark I couldnt begin to explain it.

I pretty much have the same opinion of Brunell's day as the rest of you. If you read my posts, you'd know that. My only point is its a bad situation to play Campbell next week on so many levels.

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

I'm still a #3 because absolutely no QB in the league would have won this game for us, but Brunell was dreadful today. He was put in the worst possible conditions (Bad weather, on the road, in the division, Portis out, trailing early, questionable playcalling, defensive scheme that attacks) and played exactly the way I would expect a guy put in those conditions to play. Ties the first Dallas game for ineptitude, although the deck was stacked heavily against him. The interception should never have been thrown.

I wouldn't make the switch this week for multiple reasons. Number 1, you don't want to break Jason Campbell in on the road when the team isn't playing well. Number 2, it would be a significant injustice to Mark Brunell to bench him after forcing him into the situation that the coaching staff and team did. Number 3, we will never play another game that is this difficult to win this season. So although we have next to nil chance to win the division, a wild card berth is a possibility if we win out against a schedule where we have all of our tough games at home, where weve been right in every contest over the last two seasons. It still would be a bad decision to try to have Campbell save the season.

The switch is certainly on the horizion though. If we as a team can't beat Tampa Bay, the switch should be made. I'm guessing this is the way Gibbs is thinking right now.

But if you are relying on a 2nd year inexpirenced player to save the franchise, you have another thing coming.

Give me a break! You sound like Gibbs. No one is asking Jason C. to save the franchise. Look at our pee-wee league offense? Any starting or back-up NFL QB could run our offense. Any college QB could throw screens and 5 yard slants. Take a look around the NFL. Rothlesburger, E. Manning, Leinart, Grossman, Frye, A Smith, Leftwich, Palmer, Carr and Lossman. All these QB's got to start in their 1st or 2nd years. Why is JC any different? Brunell struggles to throw for 150 yards. Pathetic stats for a NFL QB with three good WR's and a solid TE. This team should always have 200 - 250 yards passing. When was the last time Brunell had a 300 yard game? There is no reason to coddle Jason C. anymore. This guy played 4 years in the SEC in front 100,000 every week. He is use to pressure. oH, and bye the way. WE GAVE UP 2 FIRST ROUNDER TO GET HIM! I think he can handle an aging, slow TB defense. Plus TB is playing Gradkowski!!!!! This is just absurd. There is NO REASON that Campbell should not start next week.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

Give me a break! You sound like Gibbs.

Why is this a bad thing?

[illdefined]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

So stark I couldnt begin to explain it.

I pretty much have the same opinion of Brunell's day as the rest of you. If you read my posts, you'd know that. My only point is its a bad situation to play Campbell next week on so many levels.

nice dodge but those receiving stats for Lloyd, ARE and Cooley are for the season Tripp. not this game. the season. and don't tell me Saunder's offense wasn't built for TEs, nor no.2 and 3 recievers. they weren't paid to come here as decoys for Betts.

[illdefined]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Why is this a bad thing?

because thats public Gibbs when he's in press conferences grasping at any positive numbers to not demoralize his players any more than they just were on the field.

[70Chip]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

So stark I couldnt begin to explain it.

I pretty much have the same opinion of Brunell's day as the rest of you. If you read my posts, you'd know that. My only point is its a bad situation to play Campbell next week on so many levels.

I think the difference between myself and GTripp is that he does not believe the season is lost and I now do. I didn't think that it was before today, and I didn't think they had to win every game to salvage it, but I thought they needed to use the emotion of the Dallas win to propel them to win a few in a row. They don't seem to have a run in them.

I would say further that regardless of what happens with Brunell, at the end of the season, they should thank Saunders for all his hard work and send him on his way.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by illdefined

nice dodge but those receiving stats for Lloyd, ARE and Cooley are for the season Tripp. not this game. the season. and don't tell me Saunder's offense wasn't built for TEs, nor no.2 and 3 recievers. they weren't paid to come here as decoys for Betts.

I REALLY can't begin to explain to you why the check downs to Betts aren't the problem. A decent percentage of them are successful. Those that are futile would have been throwaways with last year's philosophy. Those are the basic points, I may just go in depth in this week's Weekly Tripp.

And what's with this talking down to me? I didn't do that to you last week when you were WAY off.

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Why is this a bad thing?

Let's take to diapers off JC and frickin play the guy. Enough is enough.

[illdefined]

i'm still waiting for a response to this.

Originally Posted by illdefined

I saw McNabb and Randle El throw tight long passes in that same weather. should Brunell take any responsibility at all for 'trailing early'? and as for 'defensive scheme that attacks'...well that sounds like all NFL defenses, technically so does ours.

i think it's an utterly ridiculous case. especially the part where we OWE Brunell another chance, when his whole career as a Redskin has been exactly that. you don't bring in a QB when the team is struggling? when do you bring them in exactly? when they're doing great? ask Parcells about that, he knows a bit about coaching i hear.

you have more than another thing coming if you think Brunell is going to win out this season. hasn't he demoralized the fans and the team enough?

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

I REALLY can't begin to explain to you why the check downs to Betts aren't the problem. A decent percentage of them are successful. Those that are futile would have been throwaways with last year's philosophy. Those are the basic points, I may just go in depth in this week's Weekly Tripp.

I don't think that the checkdowns themselves are a problem. What is a problem is that 3/4 passing plays are check downs to backs in the flats or throwaways. You simply can't have an effective offense without an intermediate to deep passing attack. Our team is simply unbalanced, opposing defenses know it, and they are attacking.

[Paintrain]

I'm a solid 2 bordering on a 1.. Let's take an objective look at Brunell.. In the past 4 years he's been benched twice by 2 different franchises, in his last 7 seasons his record is 7-9, 6-10, 6-10, 0-4, 3-6, 9-6, 3-6. Other than last year he hasn't been a successful NFL QB THIS DECADE!!!!! In his Redskin career (40 games) he has thrown for 3 or more TD 4 times. He has thrown for less than 250 yds 17 times since the beginning of last season. Someone please convince me how he gives us the best chance to win..

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by 70Chip

I think the difference between myself and GTripp is that he does not believe the season is lost and I now do. I didn't think that it was before today, and I didn't think they had to win every game to salvage it, but I thought they needed to use the emotion of the Dallas win to propel them to win a few in a row. They don't seem to have a run in them.

I would say further that regardless of what happens with Brunell, at the end of the season, they should thank Saunders for all his hard work and send him on his way.

Good...neh great point. Most of the difference in opinion is that the season is over.

But this game was a disaster going in. Phili is money coming off the bye, had homefield on us, and that was when we HAD Portis. Expecting us, much less anyone, to win in these conditions would have been wishful thinking.

That said, if the season wasn't over BEFORE this game, why is it now? We did get crushed...but it's not something I was unprepared for. I don't think it's going to linger with us, theres no evidence to support the argument that it will. It's just one more in the L column, nothing more.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

Let's take to diapers off JC and frickin play the guy. Enough is enough.

lol. You sound like Dick Vermeil.

Not that theres anything wrong with that.