Burnell makes very slow decision?

[REDEEMEDSKIN]

But Dallas did out play us in the trenches both on offense and defense. They had a better game plan for GW blitz packages and their jail break blitzs up the middle and Safety blitz did hurt us.

Keep in mind, though, that Gregg did not call many/any blitz packages, as Dallas expected, which, apparently threw off their game plan. Yes, they were ready for the blitz, but, when the blitz failed to show up, they had to resort to a trick play to beat our D.

Yes, it's THAT good.

[King Cali Skin 2]

Haha, yep well put.
Stupid Cowboys, we out smarted them again.

[welch]

And, further on the D, notice how devastating Julius Jones was not. No blitzes, one trick-play long pass, and no Dallas running. I don't have the game tape, but I suspect that dallas couldn't control the clock because they couldn't run.

[redskincity]

I hope this game wasn't a fluke.

I noticed watching this game over that Brunnel had to come off his feet to make that last throw.

We shall see that he doesn't throw his arm out trying to please.

[ArizonaHOG]

But Dallas did out play us in the trenches both on offense and defense. They had a better game plan for GW blitz packages and their jail break blitzs up the middle and Safety blitz did hurt us.

Keep in mind, though, that Gregg did not call many/any blitz packages, as Dallas expected, which, apparently threw off their game plan. Yes, they were ready for the blitz, but, when the blitz failed to show up, they had to resort to a trick play to beat our D.

Yes, it's THAT good.

I have to agree with you. I am wondering if there was a purpose before the game to put up a "smoke screen" regarding our defensive game plan. It seems everyone was expecting us to blitz every down to get at Bledsoe. I remember hearing a player (M Washington, I think) say they would send everyone, even the cheerleaders, on blitzes. If there was an intent to mislead I think this was masterful of the team and our coaches. It did throw off the cowboys offensive game plan. If this indeed happened.....Gibbs 1, Parcells 0.

Note to Puna: Save this one for the next time you have to take a car ride with your pukes fan friends and debate who is the better coach.

[RayNAustin]

As for Brunell's performance getting better as the week progresses, I'd say look at the stats...pretty impressive, and if that first half throw had just a touch more air under it, that would have been a TD also. And the long run he made was not too bad for an "old man", especially considering that he was smacked around pretty good by the Dallas D.

So many fans here on Friday were saying Brunell couldn't throw downfield.....well, I haven't seen any better long balls coming from our side for several years, and Brunell deserves a lot of credit for this long awaited win.

And, notice what a difference Moss made? You have to have a reciever that can get deep, and get open fast. We didn't have that type of speed last year. And look at the Vikings...absent Randy Moss, they are struggling big time.

[box8276]

boy,as the week goes on, brunnel's performance gets better and better. by the 'hawks game, he'll have played a perfect game.

i understand all of ramsey's faults and all, but why is it when he takes a sack it's because he's a statue, but when brunnel takes one, it's because the o-line screwed up?

* please note that i am not advocating for the return of ramsey here. despite the feeling that i would have liked to have seen once and for all what he can do over the span of 4 or 5 games, i believe continuity is best for this team, which is why brunnel should start. i'm just chuckling to myself at all the double standards that are floating around the board.

How bout, if Ramsey played he gets sacked 5 times but we LOSE! He loses Confidence, how many times does that get said about him?, and he surely doesnt throw for those 2 td's. See thats the prob. Its not a double standard. IF you WIN.

[skinsfan#33]

boy,as the week goes on, brunnel's performance gets better and better. by the 'hawks game, he'll have played a perfect game.

i understand all of ramsey's faults and all, but why is it when he takes a sack it's because he's a statue, but when brunnel takes one, it's because the o-line screwed up?

* please note that i am not advocating for the return of ramsey here. despite the feeling that i would have liked to have seen once and for all what he can do over the span of 4 or 5 games, i believe continuity is best for this team, which is why brunnel should start. i'm just chuckling to myself at all the double standards that are floating around the board.

How bout, if Ramsey played he gets sacked 5 times but we LOSE! He loses Confidence, how many times does that get said about him?, and he surely doesnt throw for those 2 td's. See thats the prob. Its not a double standard. IF you WIN.

Nostradumbass has spoken.

There is no way of knowing what would have happened in an alternate reality where Ramsey actually gets a chance to prove what kind of QB he is.

Maybe we would have been up by 3 TDs and we wouldn't have needed 2 last second TDs to win the game! (Before last Monday Ramsey was actually the last Redskins QB to beat Dallas!). But of course I could be wrong or you could be right. That is the great thing about speculating on things that didn't happen, because you can't be wrong. The only thing that is certain is we would not have been in the exact same situation because both the Skins and Cowgirls would have had different game plans.

[crazyhorse1]

...it was definitely a mistake not to just throw the ball away when that sack was coming.

And get flagged for intentional grounding??? We'd have still lost yardage, or, in his desperation, he might have thrown a pick.

Overall, Brunell "managed" the game well for 55 minutes (despite the INT), and "won the game for us in the final 5 minutes.

We can't overlook a couple of things, IMO:

1) On the plays where Brunell got sacked, very few featured a spread formation. Dallas was bringing the heat, and we had, at best 1-2 receivers for Brunell to throw to. It was reminiscent of last year. Once they spread the field out a bit in the second half, the results improved.

2) Our special teams could have been better. Groom was great during the preseason, but he is not the punter Tom Tupa is. While Dallas kept pinning us inside our 5 througout the night, on more than one occasion, Groom managed to keep them at or near the 20. Field position is key.

Hope springs eternal, but you guys have sprung beyond ever that. Brunell's terrible. He played a lousy game...so bad the pukes all crept to the line and closed off the running lane. We got held to 14 points, which will get us nowhere in the NFL and we got that 14 in circumstances the like of which none of us have ever seen before or will ever see again. One of the guys doing the power rankings said he tempted to rate the pukes above us even though we beat them.
I would have been more than tempted. We won that one by the grace of God. The pukes outplayed us and the pukes are no good. We're dead with Brunell in there.

[die cowboys die]

i watched my tape of the game last night, the first time i saw it since the live action when my emotions are running way too high to make an objective analysis. here is what i saw:

brunell made somewhere between 6 and 8 good throws the entire night, and that may be a bit generous. obviously two of them were spectacular! aside from those he made some shorter dink/dunk passes that he is good at. he missed 2 or 3 other deep TD passes earlier in the game by underthrowing by a yard or two.

the passes he was consistently missing were the midrange 10, 15, 20 yard routes. the kind that really keep the offense moving-- also the kind that ramsey seems to be most comfortable with (he hit several very good passes in that range during the bears game). so i do feel that had ramsey been in there, there's a good chance we make those throws and keep moving and score a couple times or so before the end of the game. of course, who knows, maybe he throws 9 picks and fumbles 17 times. no one will ever know.

the thing is, most of brunell's passes were not that far off. they were usually pretty close. it was very, very far from "good" but it wasn't hopeless. i'm going to hold onto hope at this point that it's just a matter of not practicing with the 1st team throughout the offseason. hopefully he can shake off some more rust. hopefully some of those misses were just timing issues, that will be resolved once he gets some better chemistry worked out with the WRs. 2 weeks of practice during the bye should be a good start.

if he plays well next week and can get this team moving, i'll make the entire crow species extinct by eating them all, i could care less, i'll be thrilled. but if he stinks it up the whole game, we can't sit around waiting to see if he can have another miracle night. we can't waste another season on that.

[joebagadonuts]

As for Brunell's performance getting better as the week progresses, I'd say look at the stats...pretty impressive, and if that first half throw had just a touch more air under it, that would have been a TD also. And the long run he made was not too bad for an "old man", especially considering that he was smacked around pretty good by the Dallas D.

see, that's what i mean. you can't tell me that after the third quarter you were saying, 'boy, brunell looks impressive'. stats mean nothing. if ramsey had those numbers and lost the game, he'd get blasted on this board. conversely, brunell's performance in the first half of the game was less than impressive, and yet because he won the game, all that is forgotten. and 'ifs' don't count. ramsey's tenure here has been a series of 'ifs'.

i'm not trying to be a party pooper, and i, like the rest of you, hope that the last four minutes will serve as a catalyst for this offense. but it irks me to see people misremembering (how's that for a bushism?) brunell's performance -- all 60 minutes of it. he won -- that's what matters, but to see people saying that he had an awesome game (not you ray) seems silly.

for the record, i was impressed with brunell's poise at the end of the game. while i have much more confidence in mark than patrick in those types of situations, i would have liked to see what ramsey would have done in that game, in that situation. those are the types of situations that define a quarterback. some of you have already made your decision about whether ramsey will get over the hump, and be a guy that his team can depend on when the game is on the line. i have not.

i'm hoping that at he 'hawks game we'll see brunnel and co. keep the momentum going and rack up points, and monday morning i can start a thread titled 'brunnel was awesome!'