Brunell

[GibbsAcolyte]

I have a different point of view.

Gibbs and Saunders know more about football than all of us put together. They see what the players do in practice, and they know what each player should do during each play. I do not believe Gibbs would start Brunell IF he were the only reason why the team were losing, and I also believe that, if Gibbs thought Campbell gave the Redskins a better chance of winning, then he would start Campbell over Brunell. So I am going to defer to the coaching staff's superior knowledge and believe that Brunell must be the team's best chance of winning at this time.

[Mursilis]

:hmm: Did Eli get a new offense installed this year??? Just wondering.

Brad Johnson did. Got a new coach, new offensive staff, new scheme, new RB, two new guys on his line, etc. He's 2-0 though, and he's managed to put together more yards than Brunell and even has a TD pass! Heck, and Drew Brees is on an all-new team (with a weak line that lost its best player, LeCharles Bentley, in free agency), with a new coach, learning a new system, etc., and he's 2-0 with a better rating and better numbers than Brunell. And Steve McNair's learning a new system, and he's 2-0, with a better rating than Brunell. Heck, even Alex Smith, in only his second year on the sorry-@$$ Niners has managed to win a game, get more yards, toss more TDs, and get a higher passer rating than Brunell, and he did it with WRs inferior to what Brunell has here. Now do you want to argue Alex Smith's got a better O-line too?

Shame on you for bringing up good points. I have to admit, I usually just respond and use what is on the tip of my tongue, not necessarily research. I hate to admit it, but it's just not worth it to me, since there are people like you who do do the research that backs up what I've been saying all along. WELL SAID!

Thanks. I love football, and I love numbers, which makes for a dangerous obsession . . .

As far as arguing with redeemed, it's a waste of time even typing. I've tried, and he just never gets my point. I am trying not to even respond to him anymore. Some people on here still back Brunnel, and that's fine. They at least usually acknowledge some of what I say as being true. He's just too argumentative and that makes me even more mad. I'm far from perfect, but then again, I don't come here to preach the gospel either.

Ah, Redeemed's alright - heck, he seems to be taking 0-2 better than I am. Sometimes I wonder if he's not watching games beamed in from an alternate universe, where it looks a heck of a lot better than here, but he's still a fan, and I respect that about him and everyone here!!

[REDEEMEDSKIN]

As far as arguing with redeemed, it's a waste of time even typing. I've tried, and he just never gets my point. I am trying not to even respond to him anymore. Some people on here still back Brunnel, and that's fine. They at least usually acknowledge some of what I say as being true. He's just too argumentative and that makes me even more mad. I'm far from perfect, but then again, I don't come here to preach the gospel either.

Ah, Redeemed's alright - heck, he seems to be taking 0-2 better than I am. Sometimes I wonder if he's not watching games beamed in from an alternate universe, where it looks a heck of a lot better than here, but he's still a fan, and I respect that about him and everyone here!!

Enough of the niceties. We just lost to Dallas, and the O-line is to blame.

*Thanks for the dap.

[Mursilis]

I have a different point of view.

Gibbs and Saunders know more about football than all of us put together. They see what the players do in practice, and they know what each player should do during each play. I do not believe Gibbs would start Brunell IF he were the only reason why the team were losing, and I also believe that, if Gibbs thought Campbell gave the Redskins a better chance of winning, then he would start Campbell over Brunell. So I am going to defer to the coaching staff's superior knowledge and believe that Brunell must be the team's best chance of winning at this time.

Just because a coach (talking about all coaches in general) has more football knowledge than fans doesn't mean that coach still can't be flat out wrong. Consider a famous coach who won the Heisman trophy as a player, and over 12 seasons coached a college team to 6 SEC titles, 122 victories, and a National Championship. His teams appeared in 11 consecutive bowl games, and his season ending national rank averaged 6.8. Sounds like that guy knows football inside and out, right? Much more than a bunch of stupid fans. Well, that coach would be Steve Spurrier - tell me, how'd he work out in the pros?

[REDEEMEDSKIN]

I have a different point of view.

Gibbs and Saunders know more about football than all of us put together. They see what the players do in practice, and they know what each player should do during each play. I do not believe Gibbs would start Brunell IF he were the only reason why the team were losing, and I also believe that, if Gibbs thought Campbell gave the Redskins a better chance of winning, then he would start Campbell over Brunell. So I am going to defer to the coaching staff's superior knowledge and believe that Brunell must be the team's best chance of winning at this time.

Just because a coach (talking about all coaches in general) has more football knowledge than fans doesn't mean that coach still can't be flat out wrong. Consider a famous coach who won the Heisman trophy as a player, and over 12 seasons coached a college team to 6 SEC titles, 122 victories, and a National Championship. His teams appeared in 11 consecutive bowl games, and his season ending national rank averaged 6.8. Sounds like that guy knows football inside and out, right? Much more than a bunch of stupid fans. Well, that coach would be Steve Spurrier - tell me, how'd he work out in the pros?

Well, he certainly knows COLLEGE football, wouldn't you agree?


Apples and oranges, Mursilis. Appples and oranges.

[Mursilis]

*Thanks for the dap.

No prob. It's not right for 'skins fans to squabble (too much!) amongst themselves. I believe the only truly lost souls are Dallas fans.

[Mursilis]

I have a different point of view.

Gibbs and Saunders know more about football than all of us put together. They see what the players do in practice, and they know what each player should do during each play. I do not believe Gibbs would start Brunell IF he were the only reason why the team were losing, and I also believe that, if Gibbs thought Campbell gave the Redskins a better chance of winning, then he would start Campbell over Brunell. So I am going to defer to the coaching staff's superior knowledge and believe that Brunell must be the team's best chance of winning at this time.

Just because a coach (talking about all coaches in general) has more football knowledge than fans doesn't mean that coach still can't be flat out wrong. Consider a famous coach who won the Heisman trophy as a player, and over 12 seasons coached a college team to 6 SEC titles, 122 victories, and a National Championship. His teams appeared in 11 consecutive bowl games, and his season ending national rank averaged 6.8. Sounds like that guy knows football inside and out, right? Much more than a bunch of stupid fans. Well, that coach would be Steve Spurrier - tell me, how'd he work out in the pros?

Well, he certainly knows COLLEGE football, wouldn't you agree?


Apples and oranges, Mursilis. Appples and oranges.

Football's football, althought the college and pro games do have some slight differences. More like Granny Smith apples vs. Red Delicious!

Some coaches can make the transition - Jimmy Johnson did. I honestly think Spurrier would've done a lot better if he'd respected the pro game a lot more and his past success a lot less. He seemed to think he'd win just be showing up, and the pro game's not that easy, not by a long stretch. If he'd been more humble about it, he might still be here, with a lot better record. Spurrier was the victim of his own ego.

[Irn-Bru]

Well, he certainly knows COLLEGE football, wouldn't you agree?

He also knows 7-hour work days and golf games during the season. . .but apparently not his own players' names. Oh well, guess he's got the knack for the college game.

[KazooSkinsFan]

I have a different point of view.

Gibbs and Saunders know more about football than all of us put together. They see what the players do in practice, and they know what each player should do during each play. I do not believe Gibbs would start Brunell IF he were the only reason why the team were losing, and I also believe that, if Gibbs thought Campbell gave the Redskins a better chance of winning, then he would start Campbell over Brunell. So I am going to defer to the coaching staff's superior knowledge and believe that Brunell must be the team's best chance of winning at this time.

I agree, and actually I think most of us do. I've seen several threads address the question "would we overrule Gibbs" with our own views, and every one said "No!"

Keep in mind that we debate who should because we care. So we buy expensive tickets, sit in endless traffic, pay an arm and a leg for parking, buy Jerseys, watch on TV (bringing advertisers).

So we agree we would not overrule Gibbs.

Now, think from Gibbs side, would you want your fans to care enough to have an opinion? To debate?

Who buys more of the above stuff, people who care, or people who sit on their hands and just say Gibbs will provide?

[SkinsJock]

... I would start Campbell this week against the Texans... he couldn't possibly do any worse than Brunnell has in the past 2 weeks.

I'm sorry but you know this how?

[SkinsJock]

.. Mursilis, dlc, and myself, to name just a few, are NOT giving up on this team. We just don't think Brunnell has enough in the tank to get us anywhere. I, for one, think he would make a GREAT backup. He'd be much better than Collins.

I am just not convinced by anyone that we need to make a change at this time. I agree that Brunell has not looked that great but he is the QB that someone I respect and think knows a little more about football than some fans here, has chosen. It is my opinion that when Gibbs thinks it is time for Campbell to be the starter then Brunell will hopefully be healthy enough to be the back up. I completely agree that he will be a very good and as important, supportive back up

This is just not the time to change everything these guys have been working on for the last few months. If we were playing well in all other facets and Brunell was stiinking up the joint, as he has, then it would be time. Right now, the comments about our starting QB, at this time, with everyone else around him either playing badly or not playing, are just not the right time to be doing that IMO.

Also, I'm not against discussing or advocating a change at any position by anyone - what is pissing me off is calling my/our QB a piece of crap - that is BS!

Take it for what its worth - support our team, don't pull it down!

[GoSkins]

Didn't Gibbs state Collins would come in for Brunnel if he was hurt, and if he was still hurt Campbell would start the following game? If so, then Campbell could come in for Brunnel if he wasn't hurt. In any case I am pretty confident Campbell will be our starting QB by season's end. But not until Portis is back and our team is better settled.

[Dangerfield]

Does anyone here believe that Mark will be our starting QB next year?

If you answered NO, then consider the fact that ex players AND Saunders himself, as well as the actual evidnece from KC, St. Louis etc. say that it may take a year to get comfortable in this offense.

Now, combine those two very rational beliefs, and how does sitting Campbell help us this year?

Of course I want Portis to comeback healthy, Springs to come back ready etc and make a playoff run, but I would be willing to take all the chips stacked against a true Super Bowl run this year and invest them in a season for JC to learn on the job, Portis to get completely well, and the rest of the team to get familiar with the playbook and each other, because then, you'd have to be insane to believe we would not be a truly elite team next year.

[joebagadonuts]

I am just not convinced by anyone that we need to make a change at this time. I agree that Brunell has not looked that great but he is the QB that someone I respect and think knows a little more about football than some fans here, has chosen. It is my opinion that when Gibbs thinks it is time for Campbell to be the starter then Brunell will hopefully be healthy enough to be the back up. I completely agree that he will be a very good and as important, supportive back up

Y'know, this situation reminds me of a girl I dated for a couple of years in high school. While we were dating everything was okay, not wonderful, but it was comfortable, and that was enough. After we broke up, I remember looking back and saying 'What was I thinking?!?' We were incompatible, I wasn't really all that happy, and I wasted two years of my life. All because I had convinced myself, through comfort, that I was in the relationship for the right reasons.

I get the sense sometimes that Gibbs is comfortable having Grandma at QB, and can't see beyond the situation because he's too close to it. Just a thought. But I'm sure Joe knows best, and that's why he gets the big bucks to make those decisions while I make a living cleaning portable toilets.

[Steve Spurrier III]

Does anyone here believe that Mark will be our starting QB next year?

If you answered NO, then consider the fact that ex players AND Saunders himself, as well as the actual evidnece from KC, St. Louis etc. say that it may take a year to get comfortable in this offense.

Now, combine those two very rational beliefs, and how does sitting Campbell help us this year?

Bingo. The only reason to play Brunell was because we believed this could be a Super Bowl contender this season - long term, it probably hurts (or at the very least, doesn't help) the franchise.

Some of us had our doubts about Brunell's ability to stay healthy and effective for a full 21-week season, and the first two weeks certainly haven't done anything to change that.

But I'm not ready to pull the plug just yet. Again, we are just a game out of first with the Texans up next. If we lose to Houston, or beat Houston but lose to Jacksonville and New York, then we need to look at the big picture.

I may be the only person who thinks this, but Todd Collins might be the man to start against Houston. Brunell's big advantage is (was) his ability to not make the big mistake - but in this new offense, Collins might have the advantage in that category.

[KazooSkinsFan]

I am just not convinced by anyone that we need to make a change at this time. I agree that Brunell has not looked that great but he is the QB that someone I respect and think knows a little more about football than some fans here, has chosen. It is my opinion that when Gibbs thinks it is time for Campbell to be the starter then Brunell will hopefully be healthy enough to be the back up. I completely agree that he will be a very good and as important, supportive back up

Y'know, this situation reminds me of a girl I dated for a couple of years in high school. While we were dating everything was okay, not wonderful, but it was comfortable, and that was enough. After we broke up, I remember looking back and saying 'What was I thinking?!?' We were incompatible, I wasn't really all that happy, and I wasted two years of my life. All because I had convinced myself, through comfort, that I was in the relationship for the right reasons.

I get the sense sometimes that Gibbs is comfortable having Grandma at QB, and can't see beyond the situation because he's too close to it. Just a thought. But I'm sure Joe knows best, and that's why he gets the big bucks to make those decisions while I make a living cleaning portable toilets.

I see your point, but maybe the high school girlfriend would have been better than the other 2 if you only had 3 choices.

[GibbsAcolyte]

Does anyone here believe that Mark will be our starting QB next year?

If you answered NO, then consider the fact that ex players AND Saunders himself, as well as the actual evidnece from KC, St. Louis etc. say that it may take a year to get comfortable in this offense.

Now, combine those two very rational beliefs, and how does sitting Campbell help us this year?

Of course I want Portis to comeback healthy, Springs to come back ready etc and make a playoff run, but I would be willing to take all the chips stacked against a true Super Bowl run this year and invest them in a season for JC to learn on the job, Portis to get completely well, and the rest of the team to get familiar with the playbook and each other, because then, you'd have to be insane to believe we would not be a truly elite team next year.

You assume that, by sitting, Campbell is not getting comfortable or learning anything, that, in fact, he is just wasting his time. From what I gather, the reason Campbell sits is because he has a big hitch in his throwing motion. The coaching staff wisely wishes to iron that kink out before Campbell becomes the starter. Meanwhile, while they work on his mechanical problems, Campbell also is absorbing Saunders' system and playbook.

[Dangerfield]

I agree that he is learning something on the bench, but I am squarely in the camp of knowledgeable, lifelong NFL fans that believe PLAYING is the only way to truly learn and grow.

He has had a year + to get used to being a pro, and for the reasons I stated earlier, I feel now is the time to play him. It's always hard to plan for the future, but that's all I'm calling for here. Also, I remember Gibbs saying that they would not mess with his throwing motion, maybe that has changed...do you have any quotes from the coaches on this?

[GibbsAcolyte]

You're right; I misread. Bill Musgrave has been working on his footwork, not his throwing motion.

[dlc]

I have a different point of view.

Gibbs and Saunders know more about football than all of us put together. They see what the players do in practice, and they know what each player should do during each play. I do not believe Gibbs would start Brunell IF he were the only reason why the team were losing, and I also believe that, if Gibbs thought Campbell gave the Redskins a better chance of winning, then he would start Campbell over Brunell. So I am going to defer to the coaching staff's superior knowledge and believe that Brunell must be the team's best chance of winning at this time.

Well in the last few decades, Joe has been a resounding winner, but this does not mean he's never made mistakes. But this one is definitely a toughie here.

I very much doubt that Gibbs is so blind that he doesn't know that Brunell is the weakest link on this team. It doesn't matter if some fans don't acknowledge this truth, but for rest of the world, the truth is smacking us right in the face that we cannot help but argue otherwise.

You saw here first, I believe that Brunell has the physical capability to lead this team to be dominant. In the past two years, injuries have hampered this ability, causing mistakes which basically has messed with his head.

He knows even more than we do that he has been the weak link on this team for 3 years. He has to diffuse the blame for it, because acknowledging it and continuing to start, implies that he's going to fix it. I don't think he believes that he can. You can see it in his face. The look after every loss that he has let everyone down.

There's a reason when the game no longer matters, or someone else is carrying the load (CP) that he plays so well. The team, the coaches and the fans aren't relying on him. When his teammates do need him to pick them up, you get lame-duck Brunell who can't read a safety to save his life.

Which brings us to Gibbs. I think Gibbs thinks that he can put humpty-dumpty back together again. He thinks if he can establish a running attack and no-mistake O-line play, he can get the pressure off of Brunell's back. Once he gets some wins under his belt, his confidence will be back to a point where the team can turn to him.

But I think Gibbs mistake is that you can't hide your weakest link in this league anymore. Teams are going to shutdown the running game, and going to take many risks to get in Brunell's head. Also, our running game can go into a slump. Our defense can get some more injuries. Our strengths could falter more than previous years, and we'll have to turn to Brunell more and more.

All these unknowns are why the teams with the reliable QBs have been the most successful. A QB can make up for slumps, injuries, bad luck and mistakes. So really Gibbs is gambling on the rest of the team to prop Brunell up. And he might fear putting a green JC in might infect him with a cause of Brunell-itis.

[Dangerfield]

Which brings us to Gibbs. I think Gibbs thinks that he can put humpty-dumpty back together again. He thinks if he can establish a running attack and no-mistake O-line play, he can get the pressure off of Brunell's back. Once he gets some wins under his belt, his confidence will be back to a point where the team can turn to him.

But I think Gibbs mistake is that you can't hide your weakest link in this league anymore. Teams are going to shutdown the running game, and going to take many risks to get in Brunell's head. Also, our running game can go into a slump. Our defense can get some more injuries. Our strengths could falter more than previous years, and we'll have to turn to Brunell more and more.

dlc...EXCELLENT post. I'm sure this is exactly the plan, and I'm sure that with some luck we can do it and again be a top 8 team in the league. However, as I think you agree, a top 8 team is exactly what we were last year. This plan will not win a Super Bowl. As you imply, Great teams are diverse teams that can adapt and improvise when things go wrong. I don't see us getting to that point this year. As an impatient fan, it is VERY HARD to call for the investment in Campbell to begin now, but I firmly stand by the thought.

[theoneandonly#9]

You're right; I misread. Bill Musgrave has been working on his footwork, not his throwing motion.

I think you mean Bill Lazor, Musgrave is no longer with the Skins.

[SkinsJock]

...Also, I'm not against discussing or advocating a change at any position by anyone - what is pissing me off is calling my/our QB a piece of crap - that is BS!

Take it for what its worth - support our team, don't pull it down!

I was corrected here by the THN staff, and rightfully so, for using *** to not use the actual word that was used - my apologies.

But apparently the word itself can be used - it was used by one of our THN brothers, and let me make this point again - what was said that I took offense to was "Brunell is a turd" - to me that is just flat wrong. I really think that we need to support our team better. Yes, we have some problems! Yes we are 0-2 but in my opinion we should support the team and even if you think we have the wrong player at any position - this is your team!

You do not refer to a Redskin player as a "turd"

[die cowboys die]

You do not refer to a Redskin player as a "turd"

if it looks like a turd and smells like a turd, brother, it's a turd.
anyone who interferes with the redskins chances of victory is a turd. it doesn't matter if that's a dallas cowboy, a bad coach (spurrier), or mark brunell. the team is a million times more important than the player.

Well in the last few decades, Joe has been a resounding winner, but this does not mean he's never made mistakes. But this one is definitely a toughie here.

I very much doubt that Gibbs is so blind that he doesn't know that Brunell is the weakest link on this team. It doesn't matter if some fans don't acknowledge this truth, but for rest of the world, the truth is smacking us right in the face that we cannot help but argue otherwise.

You saw here first, I believe that Brunell has the physical capability to lead this team to be dominant. In the past two years, injuries have hampered this ability, causing mistakes which basically has messed with his head.

He knows even more than we do that he has been the weak link on this team for 3 years. He has to diffuse the blame for it, because acknowledging it and continuing to start, implies that he's going to fix it. I don't think he believes that he can. You can see it in his face. The look after every loss that he has let everyone down.

There's a reason when the game no longer matters, or someone else is carrying the load (CP) that he plays so well. The team, the coaches and the fans aren't relying on him. When his teammates do need him to pick them up, you get lame-duck Brunell who can't read a safety to save his life.

Which brings us to Gibbs. I think Gibbs thinks that he can put humpty-dumpty back together again. He thinks if he can establish a running attack and no-mistake O-line play, he can get the pressure off of Brunell's back. Once he gets some wins under his belt, his confidence will be back to a point where the team can turn to him.

But I think Gibbs mistake is that you can't hide your weakest link in this league anymore. Teams are going to shutdown the running game, and going to take many risks to get in Brunell's head. Also, our running game can go into a slump. Our defense can get some more injuries. Our strengths could falter more than previous years, and we'll have to turn to Brunell more and more.

All these unknowns are why the teams with the reliable QBs have been the most successful. A QB can make up for slumps, injuries, bad luck and mistakes. So really Gibbs is gambling on the rest of the team to prop Brunell up. And he might fear putting a green JC in might infect him with a cause of Brunell-itis.

i think many of our hogsnet brethren have made some very cogent points about brunell's fallibility- this thread has catalogued them expertly, so i heap praise upon all of you. after the game i was enraged, then watched the tape and settled down a bit, but after pondering what i saw a bit, i'm now back to the strong conclusion that brunell is essentially a bum and is wasting our time.

as dlc so insightfully described, the problem does seem to be primarily mental, as he DOES on occaison make a very strong throw right into a tight spot. i don't think it's worth it at this point to spend a season trying to rehab an old vet's pscyhe. better to concentrate that effort on the young kid and get him ready for the next 10-15 years.

[nnskinsfan]

Doesn't seem like Moss agrees:

"Mark is that dude, he knows how to win games. So regardless of what someone has to say about him, I'm always going to back him because when it all falls apart, I've seen him win games for us," Moss said. "That's what he's been showing. For anyone else to not see that, they haven't been watching the games we've been watching or playing in. That's our dude. I'm riding with him till his wheels fall off."

From the article here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 02024.html