![]() |
|
|
|
|
#1 |
|
Playmaker
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: nyc
Age: 50
Posts: 2,631
|
Re: Brunell
i thought everyone has a right to an opinion here. it's when you're told to stop expressing yours by admins and moderators that i begin to ask if there's 'rules'.
__________________
a fan. not a cheerleader. |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 | |
|
Hail Raiser
![]() Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 53
Posts: 100,050
|
Re: Brunell
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Pro Bowl
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Age: 38
Posts: 5,688
|
Re: Brunell
my honest opinion.... we are 0-3 with ramsey
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Pro Bowl
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Greensboro, North Carolina
Posts: 6,766
|
Re: Brunell
Regardless, we're 3-0 WITH Brunell playing quite well. If Ramsey comes into the game, I'll be pulling for Ramsey...but until that happens, I'll continue to support Brunell and the team as a whole, because our 3 wins so far have come from a team effort.
__________________
"Fire Up That Diesel!" |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Impact Rookie
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 519
|
Re: Brunell
I deserve my due, I called for the head of Ramsey......for Brunell, hell it worked:FIREdevil
__________________
SAY HELLO TO THE BAD GUY........ |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Special Teams
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: PHX,AZ ,HOT AS HE#@LL
Age: 66
Posts: 136
|
Brunell/Moss BRUNELL/MOSS has a good ring to it ..........and RAMSEY BACKIN HIM UP depth............
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Playmaker
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Germantown, Md.
Posts: 4,832
|
Re: Brunell
I agree with your analysis 100% Skinsguy and wish more of us could feel that way. It wasn't a perfect game, but none are, and I'm very pleased to be able to relish in the win. Maybe last year we would have lost today's game, so I do see progress, and that's all anyone can ask for.
On the Brunell Int. I thought it may have been wise for Portis to just make an attempt to knock the ball away since he didn't have much of a chance to catch it. It's possible that he wasn't thinking to do that, but when you tip the ball (espically up into the air) it's likely it just might fall into the hands of a defender. It seems now that even when we win games we somehow find little things to nit-pick about. It was a great win despite being a little nerve racking at the end. |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 | |
|
Playmaker
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: nyc
Age: 50
Posts: 2,631
|
Re: Brunell
Quote:
__________________
a fan. not a cheerleader. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: sparta, new jersey [ northern jersey ]
Age: 62
Posts: 3,097
|
Re: Brunell
No matter how good anyone say's Brunell played the Hawk's were in a position to beat us at home on the final play, personally I don't lay our offensive woe's on Brunell as much as Gibbs, it's Gibbs job to get it into Brunells head to hit recievers out of their cut's and so on.
IMO we are more talented than the Seahawks, and as talented as any team in the league, it is unacceptable to be in a position to lose at home on the final play to seattle, I don't care what their record was coming in, I have never been impressed with Ray Rhodes on defense, and Holgrum is nothing special, we wont get away with this kind of play against better teams, who IMO we haven't faced yet. Chicago- no QB Dallas- no nothing Seattle- poorly coached IMO going into Denver will be our first real test. |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 | |
|
MVP
Join Date: May 2005
Location: washington, D.C.
Posts: 11,460
|
Re: Brunell
Quote:
Every week we have "gotten away" with what some say would call mediocre play and came away with a win. If we happen to split on our next two week road trip, it shouldn't take anything away from our past three victories. Seems like we are a waiting for a loss to confirm our doubts about our team. (not you necessarily) IMO, whether we lose to Denver or beat the hell out of them, I still believe, as do you, that we can play with any team in the NFL. I don't think Jake Plummer is more effecient than Hasselback, and Denver certainly doesn't have the same running attack as Seattle does. Then on the other hand, Denver's D isn't as good as Chicago's, IMO. See where I'm going? We've already passed different tests along the way on some level this year, we'll just find out a little more about our team next week. Last edited by 12thMan; 10-03-2005 at 07:52 AM. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
I like big (_|_)s.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Charlottesville, Virginia
Age: 44
Posts: 19,264
|
Re: Brunell
I was at the game and as was mentioned earlier. He looks like a completely different QB. He made great reads and got the ball to the open guy.
Also, is it just me or does the playcalling seem much improved? Gibbs was running a trick play or two, AND the routes were run deeper this week, rather than those 5-6 yard routes we're used to.
__________________
Regret nothing. At one time it was exactly what you wanted. |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
I like big (_|_)s.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Charlottesville, Virginia
Age: 44
Posts: 19,264
|
Re: Brunell
Well put, 12th man.
__________________
Regret nothing. At one time it was exactly what you wanted. |
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Playmaker
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: nyc
Age: 50
Posts: 2,631
|
Re: Brunell
look back and see exactly what i wrote as a response to someone else. for that i get piled on by everybody, admins and moderators alike. even the hint of some opinions are 'officially' unwelcome here. seems like only one way of thinking is "mod-approved"
__________________
a fan. not a cheerleader. |
|
|
|
|
|
#14 | |
|
MVP
Join Date: May 2004
Age: 47
Posts: 10,164
|
Re: Brunell
Quote:
You got dumped on because you brought unwarranted negativity based completly on conjecture into a discussion about a different guy who had a good game. Matty and TAFKAS may be "mods and admins" but that doesn't mean they can't participate in a disucssion like the rest of us. If they think you are full of it then they can say so and that DOESN'T mean they are regulating you with some "rules". |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#15 | |
|
Playmaker
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: nyc
Age: 50
Posts: 2,631
|
Re: Brunell
Quote:
__________________
a fan. not a cheerleader. |
|
|
|
|
![]() |
|
|