Gibbs Promised Brunell a Star RB during meeting

oafusp · Post by **oafusp** » Mon Feb 23, 2004 4:27 pm

I have heard many times today that when Gibbs went down to meet Brunell that he told Brunell that the Redskins would be getting a star running back to compliment the passing game.

Have the Redskins been planning the Brunell/Bailey/Portis thing since early January???

Does anyone know where that info is coming from (Gibbs telling Brunell about getting a big time back). I have heard it on the radio, but cant find it in writing.

Jake???

DESkins · Post by **DESkins** » Mon Feb 23, 2004 4:39 pm

Don't know about the idea of thinking ahead ("Portis/Bailey"), but I can picture a conversation going along the lines of:

St. Joe: You know, Mark, I've always had a good running game, and while I don't have one right now, I can assure you that I'm going to have one before the start of the first mini-camp, you can take that to the bank.

MB: Gee, Coach, I sure will! Right about the same time as I take my wonderful signing bonus check!

All seriousness, my whole point is that Joe has always relied on a good running game (after the first 8 games of his coaching career, anyway) and has found a way to take some players and turn them into above average players, even if they never achieved true "marquis" player status (sorry, Riggo!). So it would not be a stretch to expect that he communicated it to Brunell as a way of reassuring him that he'd have some help on the offense.

ii7-V7 · Post by **ii7-V7** » Mon Feb 23, 2004 4:45 pm

oafusp wrote:Does anyone know where that info is coming from (Gibbs telling Brunell about getting a big time back). I have heard it on the radio, but cant find it in writing.

It came from the Len Pasquerelli (SP?) article on ESPN.com

Chad

oafusp · Post by **oafusp** » Mon Feb 23, 2004 4:46 pm

Everyone knew Gibbs was going to upgrade the RB...but this??????????

This is a shockwave, it is all over the league right now. The Skins need to hurry up and get this done (in principal). Too bad it leaked.

People were assuming Gibbs was going to get Dillon, Staley, even George...but it sounds like Gibbs knew the Skins were going to use Bailey as bait to get a top 5 RB that was already under contract...that is what I have heard on the radio..."They would have a STAR running back aquisition"

Jake · Post by **Jake** » Mon Feb 23, 2004 5:18 pm

I have no idea my man.

DESkins · Post by **DESkins** » Mon Feb 23, 2004 5:19 pm

If it does nothing else, it certainly ought to serve notice to the rest of the league that the Redskins aren't going to sit tight and accept the same old stuff that's been going on since 1993 (with the exception of the 1999 season, of course).

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Mon Feb 23, 2004 5:33 pm

DESkins wrote:If it does nothing else, it certainly ought to serve notice to the rest of the league that the Redskins aren't going to sit tight and accept the same old stuff that's been going on since 1993 (with the exception of the 1999 season, of course).

Don't you see? The same thing goes on every year. We get star-type players but don't win anyway.
I attribute it to bad coaches and lack of continuity, with the personnel and coaching staff alike.
This year promises to be different since we have Gibbs back, but Gibbs won't make a tackle or block all year. It's still the same old story from the Redskins. New players, new coaches.

Hail2DaRedskinz · Post by **Hail2DaRedskinz** » Mon Feb 23, 2004 5:34 pm

Anonymous wrote:
DESkins wrote:If it does nothing else, it certainly ought to serve notice to the rest of the league that the Redskins aren't going to sit tight and accept the same old stuff that's been going on since 1993 (with the exception of the 1999 season, of course).

Don't you see? The same thing goes on every year. We get star-type players but don't win anyway.
I attribute it to bad coaches and lack of continuity, with the personnel and coaching staff alike.
This year promises to be different since we have Gibbs back, but Gibbs won't make a tackle or block all year. It's still the same old story from the Redskins. New players, new coaches.

Ugh, i really need to get used to this logging in thing.

tcwest10 · Post by **tcwest10** » Mon Feb 23, 2004 5:38 pm

It came from the Len Pasquerelli (SP?) article on ESPN.com

Don't worry, Chad. We're here for ya ! It's Len Patmybelli.
You made an honest mistake. ROTFALMAO

Champsturf · Post by **Champsturf** » Mon Feb 23, 2004 5:45 pm

Not to pick on you, Hail2DaRedskinz, but why is logging in hard? Am I the only one that checked the box to log me in automatically when I enter this site? I know for a fact that you are not the first, nor the last to forget. I am just wondering if I am some kind of moron for logging in automatically. Somebody set me straight, please.

HTTR

Hail2DaRedskinz · Post by **Hail2DaRedskinz** » Mon Feb 23, 2004 5:56 pm

Champsturf wrote:Not to pick on you, Hail2DaRedskinz, but why is logging in hard? Am I the only one that checked the box to log me in automatically when I enter this site? I know for a fact that you are not the first, nor the last to forget. I am just wondering if I am some kind of moron for logging in automatically. Somebody set me straight, please.

LOL, well I'm not a fan of auto login since my friends often get drunk and use my computer, so all it takes is one trip to my favorites and a click on thehogs.net and... well that would look really bad.

ii7-V7 · Post by **ii7-V7** » Mon Feb 23, 2004 5:59 pm

Champsturf wrote:Not to pick on you, Hail2DaRedskinz, but why is logging in hard? Am I the only one that checked the box to log me in automatically when I enter this site? I know for a fact that you are not the first, nor the last to forget. I am just wondering if I am some kind of moron for logging in automatically. Somebody set me straight, please.

I checked that little box too, but I post from several different computers, and sometimes I forget to login...since most of the time I don't need to. Plus, my computer at work won't accept cookies so I can't get it to autologin.

Chad

Champsturf · Post by **Champsturf** » Mon Feb 23, 2004 6:00 pm

That makes perfect sense, both of you. Thank you both for opening my eyes.
HTTR

bigredskinfan63 · Post by **bigredskinfan63** » Mon Feb 23, 2004 6:49 pm

when you look at the redskins running game the last two years,are you suprised in the least that gibbs was going to upgrade the running back position?

ii7-V7 · Post by **ii7-V7** » Mon Feb 23, 2004 7:44 pm

Not even one bit! Everyone and thier brother questions our tailbacks.

Chad

bigredskinfan63 · Post by **bigredskinfan63** » Mon Feb 23, 2004 8:15 pm

and they all should.somebody should have told spurrier there are players called running backs.

tcwest10 · Post by **tcwest10** » Mon Feb 23, 2004 8:17 pm

Don't be ridiculous. Spurrier knew what a RB was.
Who do you think he always sent "running back" to the locker room to get him a new visor ?

The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

Gibbs Promised Brunell a Star RB during meeting

Gibbs Promised Brunell a Star RB during meeting

Re: Gibbs Promised Brunell a Star RB during meeting

Re: Gibbs Promised Brunell a Star RB during meeting