Why is Gibbs sticking with Brunell?

[FiveWidez]

:lol: So know its Jesus's fault we're losing? Talk about grasping for straws. Gibbs got Brunell because he liked him as a QB and as a person. You dont have to be a Christian to be a good person and if Brunell wasn't a Christian he still would have gotten the job.

Gibbs believes and likes Brunell a lot and has a track record of sticking with his QB's till the bitter end. He'll show JC that same confidence when he struggles as a rookie QB. Dont bother mentioning Patrick because he sucks and continues to suck in NY.

Amen. No pun intended.

Everyone is saying this theory is not true. Then why is Brunell in. Don't give me that mess about Gibbs loving Veteran QBs because for me to accept that excuse in this instance, I will be admitting that Gibbs has lost it and needs to go b/c no one in their right mind thinks there should not be a change.

[FiveWidez]

The fact that you guys have give MB nicknames like MBO4 and MB05 proves his inconsistency has gone on long enough.

The fact that you fail to reply to the many points people have posted in rebuttle to your beliefs shows inconsistency in your ability to prove your point.

What points man. Make ONE other than "Gibbs likes Veteran QBs". Or that Brunell is...."A super smart guy" "toughest guy in the world" etc.etc

[FiveWidez]

19-22....wait for the end of the 2006 season to pass judgments? How many games do you need?

So what, look how long Cowher has been in Pitt. Look how long it took him to win a championship. Give it some time and hopefully our front office will learn to give it some time also in our selection process of players.

Again none of you people have a viable candidate to replace Gibbs?
What if the new coach whats to get rid of Williams and Saunders?
What if they dont like CP and ey because they dont fit their system?

So its going to take another 3-4 years for them to get their system in place and they still might not succeed.

You guys ask for stuff and dont even know what you're asking for.

CLL you must be having a bad day. Where did anyone say get rid of Gibbs?

[Mursilis]

Yet Gibbs yanked him the first chance he got.

Pat yanked himself by having a mediocre training camp. A horrible preseason. And looking bad in the opener.

You could easily write that same line about MB04 and MB06. Brunell was the lowest rated passer on the roster in preseason. Again, he's allowed to kill entire seasons. Ramsey got two quarters.

It doesn't matter that Brunell was OK last year;

Brunell did great last year considering he only had one viable WR. I stuck up for MB05 and I will continue to do so.

We've argued about MB05 before and don't agree, but ignoring that point, Gibbs didn't know any of that at the BEGINNING of 05. All he had to look at was MB04, and that was a disaster. Yet he still sat Ramsey.

[Irn-Bru]

As for personnel. Cmon man. Antonio Pierce? Smoot? Forget the players we gave money to that suck this year. What about the players we let go. Monumental mistakes.

I think letting Pierce go was a mistake, but Smoot wanted top-5 money and shouldn't have (in my opinion). It happens.

As for personnel, how about picking up Marcus Washington, Portis, Griffin, Rabach, Sellers, Moss, Lloyd, Thrash, ARE, Daniels, Sean Taylor, ey, Salave'a, and Springs? How about letting Coles, Arrington, Royal, Canidate, Upshaw, Jacobs, and Gardner walk or getting rid of them?

I see a lot of evidence that suggests that Gibbs (or whoever) has been generally solid on personnel. This year's acquisitions have yet to live up to their name, but that's been the team-wide story this year so we'll see if that changes, too.

[Chris Luva Luva]

What points man. Make ONE other than "Gibbs likes Veteran QBs". Or that Brunell is...."A super smart guy" "toughest guy in the world" etc.etc

Im not going to read post my points and FFA's.

CLL you must be having a bad day. Where did anyone say get rid of Gibbs?

Its clear that you have selective reading. That comment was accusing you of saying that but it has been said a lot.

[FiveWidez]

As for personnel. Cmon man. Antonio Pierce? Smoot? Forget the players we gave money to that suck this year. What about the players we let go. Monumental mistakes.

I think letting Pierce go was a mistake, but Smoot wanted top-5 money and shouldn't have (in my opinion). It happens.

As for personnel, how about picking up Marcus Washington, Portis, Griffin, Rabach, Sellers, Moss, Lloyd, Thrash, ARE, Daniels, Sean Taylor, ey, Salave'a, and Springs? How about letting Coles, Arrington, Royal, Canidate, Upshaw, Jacobs, and Gardner walk or getting rid of them?

I see a lot of evidence that suggests that Gibbs (or whoever) has been generally solid on personnel. This year's acquisitions have yet to live up to their name, but that's been the team-wide story this year so we'll see if that changes, too.

Good points but when it mattered most this offseason it was blown. Archuleta supposedly stopped by on his way to chicago to see what the skins had to say and they made him the highest paid safety in the league. You think S. Taylor's agent took note of that?

[Irn-Bru]

I think you want things both ways. Since Gibbs has been back, our personnel management has been great until a few of our moves this year (namely, AA and Carter, as well as a lack of bulking up the secondary).

I think you missed a few other examples. That whole Duckett affair has yet to play out, but it's not looking so smart so far. Not to mention Campbell - is he good? Bad? Who knows? Since we're not playing him, and he amounts to three picks, those picks are a waste until he actually does something on the field. Sure, he may be great in the future, but he could be a huge bust, and the cost would then be steep. Either way, since he's not been allowed to do anything so far, he might as well be a bust. Finally, there's the players we've allowed to leave - while I'm not sure about Smoot, it appears at least the losses of Pierce and Clark weren't so smart. It'll be interesting to see if we can keep some of our other stars, if we develop this reputation of caring more about other team's players than our own.

Like I say in my post above: Pierce was a mistake, and I'm feeling the same way about Clark. Do those two names, combined with our uncertainty about the future, really make for a guilty verdict on Gibbs as a personnel manager?

It makes me say that our personnel moves have not been perfect, but when I look at the big picture I see far more positives than negatives.

[FiveWidez]

What points man. Make ONE other than "Gibbs likes Veteran QBs". Or that Brunell is...."A super smart guy" "toughest guy in the world" etc.etc

Im not going to read post my points and FFA's.

CLL you must be having a bad day. Where did anyone say get rid of Gibbs?

Its clear that you have selective reading. That comment was accusing you of saying that but it has been said a lot.

I read your posts and didn't see any rebuttles. I will be glad to address any I see. Its time we all stop giving Gibbs a free pass for every decision. Every other coach gets criticized from high school to the pros. Gibbs' free pass is up and I am questioning every move made (or not made) this season.

[Irn-Bru]

FiveWidez, a few 'points':

(1) Gibbs starts Brunell because in the estimation of the Redskins' staff Brunell is our best chance to win next week.

(2) Brunell has been playing badly but isn't making the kinds of mistakes that Campbell is very likely to make (i.e. costly interceptions, bad decisions).

(3) A desperate switch at QB isn't the thing that is most likely to bring a win next Sunday. Improved play on the lines, a better defense, and better play from Brunell are our best bets for success in the next week of play.

[FiveWidez]

FiveWidez, a few 'points':

(1) Gibbs starts Brunell because in the estimation of the Redskins' staff Brunell is our best chance to win next week.

(2) Brunell has been playing badly but isn't making the kinds of mistakes that Campbell is very likely to make (i.e. costly interceptions, bad decisions).

(3) A desperate switch at QB isn't the thing that is most likely to bring a win next Sunday. Improved play on the lines, a better defense, and better play from Brunell are our best bets for success in the next week of play.

Good points, however.....1) I don't think the staff thinks Brunell is our best chance, as my original post theorizes, it is all Gibbs. 2) He isn't making the mistakes but he also isn't making the plays we need. 3) This would not be a desperate switch. It is a logical switch just like when the Jags replaced Brunnel.

[joebagadonuts]

FiveWidez, a few 'points':

(1) Gibbs starts Brunell because in the estimation of the Redskins' staff Brunell is our best chance to win next week.

(2) Brunell has been playing badly but isn't making the kinds of mistakes that Campbell is very likely to make (i.e. costly interceptions, bad decisions).

(3) A desperate switch at QB isn't the thing that is most likely to bring a win next Sunday. Improved play on the lines, a better defense, and better play from Brunell are our best bets for success in the next week of play.

Not that I'm disagreeing with anything here, IB, but don't these 3 points really go back to the initial signing of Brunell? If he hasn't been playing well since he got here (if you look at his performance generally), then you can conclude that it was a mistake to sign him in the first place. We should have signed a QB that gave us a BETTER chance to win every week.

As for number 3, if, given the conclusion that Brunell cannot play at a level to win the game for us (I realize that this may be my conclusion and not yours), but can only not lose the game, we're counting on the other parts of the team to support him and win the game for us. The same could be said for how a team would approach a game with a rookie Qb starting - the other areas of the team have to do a little more to help win the game. Thats where I feel we are with MB. He needs just as much support from the D and ST as a young QB would.

We know what we're getting with MB, and it's not working. Why not find out what we have in JC? In either case, if the running game is working and the defense plays well, we have a shot to win, no matter who is playing QB. If we need a QB to win the game for us, I'd like to see if JC can do it, because I'm now convinced that MB cannot.

[Mursilis]

I think you want things both ways. Since Gibbs has been back, our personnel management has been great until a few of our moves this year (namely, AA and Carter, as well as a lack of bulking up the secondary).

I think you missed a few other examples. That whole Duckett affair has yet to play out, but it's not looking so smart so far. Not to mention Campbell - is he good? Bad? Who knows? Since we're not playing him, and he amounts to three picks, those picks are a waste until he actually does something on the field. Sure, he may be great in the future, but he could be a huge bust, and the cost would then be steep. Either way, since he's not been allowed to do anything so far, he might as well be a bust. Finally, there's the players we've allowed to leave - while I'm not sure about Smoot, it appears at least the losses of Pierce and Clark weren't so smart. It'll be interesting to see if we can keep some of our other stars, if we develop this reputation of caring more about other team's players than our own.

Like I say in my post above: Pierce was a mistake, and I'm feeling the same way about Clark. Do those two names, combined with our uncertainty about the future, really make for a guilty verdict on Gibbs as a personnel manager?

It makes me say that our personnel moves have not been perfect, but when I look at the big picture I see far more positives than negatives.

Yes, but some of those players weren't 'finds' - they were already established stars. Any fan can look at a stat sheet or watch a game and confirm player X is a huge talent. And a personnel department must be evaluated not just on players obtained and players let go, but also on players they failed to get. Look at Arizona - was it smart to get Edge? Yes, he's a proven back. Was it smart to get Edge when your team had huge issues on the line, and you didn't plan on fixing those this year? Maybe not. How much has Edge helped them this year?

There's also the issue of cost. Indy has locked up most of thier stars on offense (Manning, Harrison, Wayne, etc.), but people allege the cost of doing so has prevented them from fielding a better defense. One could argue that point all day, but it's a reasonable argument. We seem to have depth issues; is this not a reflection of our personnel department?

[Chris Luva Luva]

CLL you must be having a bad day.

No, I just feel like debating and nitpicking.

Everyone is saying this theory is not true. Then why is Brunell in. Don't give me that mess about Gibbs loving Veteran QBs because for me to accept that excuse in this instance, I will be admitting that Gibbs has lost it and needs to go b/c no one in their right mind thinks there should not be a change.

You call your it a theory but you state it as fact...= total contradiction.

[FiveWidez]

CLL you must be having a bad day.

No, I just feel like debating and nitpicking.

Everyone is saying this theory is not true. Then why is Brunell in. Don't give me that mess about Gibbs loving Veteran QBs because for me to accept that excuse in this instance, I will be admitting that Gibbs has lost it and needs to go b/c no one in their right mind thinks there should not be a change.

You call your it a theory but you state it as fact...= total contradiction.

"...starting to believe"

"Maybe"

CLL...those aren't statement of facts but theories. Haha you even said you didn't read my links.

[old-timer]

FiveWidez, a few 'points':

(1) Gibbs starts Brunell because in the estimation of the Redskins' staff Brunell is our best chance to win next week.

(2) Brunell has been playing badly but isn't making the kinds of mistakes that Campbell is very likely to make (i.e. costly interceptions, bad decisions).

(3) A desperate switch at QB isn't the thing that is most likely to bring a win next Sunday. Improved play on the lines, a better defense, and better play from Brunell are our best bets for success in the next week of play.

I can't imagine that our coaching staff as a whole thinks Brunell offers us the best chance to win. I can't prove that, just an opinion. I have never seen such a bizarre offense as this, that plays the same ineffective short game whether they are ahead or behind massively. IMHO there's something seriously wrong with the offensive philosophy, right now I'm wondering if Gibbs' diabetes is affecting his decisionmaking.

I don't think poor play by the lines is the problem either. Brunell is unable to stretch the field and defenses know it. They stack the lines and cover up tight because Brunell doesn't have the deep ball anymore. This puts too much pressure on the o-line and makes it look worse than it actually is. Our poor performance on offense also puts too much pressure on our defense. I think the irrationally long loyalty to Brunell is cascading into an overall disaster for the team.

[SkinzCanes]

As for personnel, how about picking up Marcus Washington, Portis, Griffin, Rabach, Sellers, Moss, Lloyd, Thrash, ARE, Daniels, Sean Taylor, ey, Salave'a, and Springs? How about letting Coles, Arrington, Royal, Canidate, Upshaw, Jacobs, and Gardner walk or getting rid of them?

Gibbs' personnel moves in his second term have been mediocre for the most part. Gibbs should focus on being a coach and hire a real GM to oversee personnel and scouting. Most of the acquisitions that you list I agree with, but Griffin has been declining since 2004, Rabach was good last year but this season really seems to be struggling, and I don't think that an experienced GM would've given the Broncos a 2nd round pick along with Champ for Portis. I dont think that you can say yet that Lloyd was a good move. He did cost us 2 picks and really hasn't done very much.

Now the bad moves....
Trading for Brunell
Trading for Duckett
Signing AA and Carter
Not addressing the kicker situatin in the offseason
Letting Pierce go and not addressing the MLB spot bc Marshall is out of postion
IMO drafting Rogers was a big mistake
Letting Clarck go
Letting Smoot go (yes he wanted a lot of money but they said on the Sportstalk 980 postgame that we would've been able to sign him for less if we had negotiated with him during the season instead of waiting until after)
How many late round picks from the last 3 years have panned out? Where are McCune, Nemo, etc?
Letting Harris go and not adequately addressing CB depth
Overall wasting of draft picks

So not all the moves have been good and not al bad. However, I think that if Gibbs focused simply on coaching that this team would be better off. Bring in a real GM and let Gibbs do what he does best. I really think that he is stretched too thin right now. It's time to build through the draft.

[Steve Spurrier III]

So what, look how long Cowher has been in Pitt. Look how long it took him to win a championship. Give it some time and hopefully our front office will learn to give it some time also in our selection process of players.

I certainly agree with giving Gibbs time, but Cowher posted win totals of 11, 9, 12, 11 (AFC Championship), 10 and 11 in his first six seasons with the Steelers. I don't really see how he is a valid comparison to Gibbs.

[crazyhorse1]

You can get me to believe that Brunell was given additional consideration for being a Christian at the time of his signing... but you can't convince me his beliefs have anything to do with why he's still starting.

Do people realize that Mark B has completed 64.1% of his passes and has a 90.4 QB rating?

Those numbers are 5th and 11th in the league respectively. He's also got 7 TD's and 3 INT's.

He's not doing a bad job, but Joe Gibbs is right... the QB position is high profile and when the team fails people look at the QB to fix it.

Starting Campbell IMO would be giving up on the season... of course, maybe the season is already lost, or maybe it's worth it to get Campbell some reps, but Brunell is not the downfall of this team.

Brunell's stats are good largely because he lots of dinks and screens that pad his completion percentage. Most of the longer passing gains are from runs after short catches. I agree that he's not doing a bad job at what he's asked to do, but he's not asked to do enough for us to win in the NFL, especially with our weaknesses on defense.

The bottom line is that we'll keep right on losing with Brunell. He does not give us our best chance of winning now or winning in the future.

I've been sure since before game 1 that we were done for the season. I date that certainly back to the the playoffs last year, when Gibbs elected to play an injured QB instead of a superior backup. His deep sixing Ramsey for an obviously finished Brunell and an unproven Campbell was one of the dumbest moves I've ever seen in football.

[crazyhorse1]

:lol: So know its Jesus's fault we're losing? Talk about grasping for straws. Gibbs got Brunell because he liked him as a QB and as a person. You dont have to be a Christian to be a good person and if Brunell wasn't a Christian he still would have gotten the job.

Gibbs believes and likes Brunell a lot and has a track record of sticking with his QB's till the bitter end. He'll show JC that same confidence when he struggles as a rookie QB. Dont bother mentioning Patrick because he sucks and continues to suck in NY.

Please don't tell us Ramsey fans Gibbs sticks with QB's as a matter of principle. I have never seen a QB dealt with more unfairly than Gibbs dealt with Ramsey from day one.

[DieselFan]

This "Brunell saved his life" and both are "Christians" stuff is completely ridiculous. Gibbs is not some puppy dog. Stop the conspiracy theories already.

Gibbs feels Brunell gives us a better chance to win than Campbell.

We'll see campbell, once the playoffs are a distant memory and winning is not the only objective.

Think about how ridiculous this is! Ask yourself this question: If we had Peyton Manning...do you think Gibbs would still start Brunell because Brunell is a Christian and saved his life?

If your answer is Yes, you are kidding yourself.

If you answer No, then that tells you everything you need to know about whether Gibbs would start the best quarterback or not.

[nuskins]

Do people realize that Mark B has completed 64.1% of his passes and has a 90.4 QB rating?

Those numbers are 5th and 11th in the league respectively. He's also got 7 TD's and 3 INT's.

He's not doing a bad job, but Joe Gibbs is right... the QB position is high profile and when the team fails people look at the QB to fix it.

Starting Campbell IMO would be giving up on the season... of course, maybe the season is already lost, or maybe it's worth it to get Campbell some reps, but Brunell is not the downfall of this team.

Brunells stats are padded, not only are the majority of his throws behind the line of scrimmage but his stats are also padded by the fact that he gets the majority of his yards and TD's after the games are out of reach. Defenses soften up and play zone to limit the big play and the RB's and Santana get the YAC that pad his stats.

Mark Brunells stats are cosmetic, they look good on paper but you if you wipe away the dinks & dunks and the soft defenses at the end of the games your left with the ugliness that is reality.

How can anyone who has watched the last 3 years still think Brunell gives us the best chance to win?

The defense is deflated b/c not only b/c of suspect personel decisions but also b/c they are on the field the majority of the game and know that the QB cannot rally a come from behind drive. The fire is lost on the defensive side of the ball b/c the offense sucks week after week. Do you notice that the Defense has played pretty well in our 2 wins this year? It's b/c they see hope on the offensive side of the ball in those two games.

If one side fo the team is abysmal ( ie..offense) it doesn't take long for the other side (defense) to feel that whatever they do is a lost cause. Game after game of abysmal performance of the offense effects the defense too!

Also, if Redskin park was not locked down like Fort Knox you would hear protest from our weapons in the offense about the QB situation. It's starting to happen on the sidelines. The recievers are getting beat up, either they catch a ball in the backfield or 2-4 yards past the line of scrimmage and have to get the YAC against a stacked defense or Brunell hangs them up with highballs or hits their feet. Don't think for one second that Moss, Lloyd, Portis, ARE are content with Brunells performance. The only time Brunell can consistently get them the ball is if they are running short slants to the sideline or are near the line of scrimmage.

[Steve Spurrier III]

We do know that some players from his first run used to carry around Bibles in the lockerroom because they thought it might help their chances.

And if you read his autobiography, you can see that he takes his faith very seriously. A few excerpts:

I disagree with football players who believe in Christ and think that means they should be softer, less agressive. They're wrong. They're not taking their profession seriously enough. That makes me mad. The believer has more reason than anyone to be the best. Football is an agressive game and some of the most agressive people Ive ever met are Christian football players.

The life is not all there is. You're going to live forever. The question is where and with whom? Christ is the answer, and even if saying so sacrifices some sales of this book, it's the message I want you to get. I've shared my story so you might avoid my mistakes and do the one right thing I have done in my life: Turn it over to Jesus Christ...I pray you'll recieve Christ.

Now, if Gibbs had to choose between Manning and Brunell, I'm sure he would pick Manning. But in a closer decision, he very well might lean towards the Christian, because it's obvious he believes there is real value in being a believer.

But I think the bigger reason he is sticking with Brunell is because he doesn't want to give up on his veteran team this early in the season. In all probablity, he only has three seasons left, counting this one, and I'm sure he doesn't want to give up on one of those seasons until he absolutley has to.

[crazyhorse1]

Why not mention Ramsey?

He had a chance and blew it. Even though it was a short one.

Is he an NFL starter?

Exactly, he went somewhere else and he's on the bench again.

No, I'm not arguing that; at this point, I think the evidence is clear that he's not very good.

Exaclty.

Yet Gibbs yanked him the first chance he got.

Pat yanked himself by having a mediocre training camp. A horrible preseason. And looking bad in the opener.

It doesn't matter that Brunell was OK last year;

Brunell did great last year considering he only had one viable WR. I stuck up for MB05 and I will continue to do so.

If you were Campbell (a young QB), how much confidence in your coach would you have?

You're reaching. How about you ask him and we'll find out. But considering Gibbs drafted him specifically, Id assume he has faith in his coach.

As long as Brunell is on the roster, Gibbs is going to look for the first chance to put him in there.

Once Brunell is done, he's done imo but neither of us know the future.

You are totally resistant to any statistical data on Ramsey so I won't again inform you of how much better Ramsey's stats are with the skins than are
Brunell's but how in the world do you call Ramsey's opening game horrible. In the middle of the second quarter he had already thrown for over 100 yards and a TD (called back).
I also suppose you've forgotten that Brunell didn't do as well in two and a half quartes as Ramsey had in a quarter and a half, and that he continued to do absolutely zip for three and half quarters in the next game as well.
In retospect, the two miracles plays that followed (largely created by the genius of Moss, luck, and by two uncharacteristic throws, gave Brunell a credibily he should not have been given, which we have now learned to our grief.


Also, Ramsey did not have a poor preseason. He had a mediocre one, largely because the first string did a lot of sitting. As for your idea that Brunell did better in training camp than Ramsey, that's B.S. You weren't there. I read the same reports you did, and they did not indicate that was happening.

[cleg]

Why not mention Ramsey?

He had a chance and blew it. Even though it was a short one.

Is he an NFL starter?

Exactly, he went somewhere else and he's on the bench again.

No, I'm not arguing that; at this point, I think the evidence is clear that he's not very good.

Exaclty.

Yet Gibbs yanked him the first chance he got.

Pat yanked himself by having a mediocre training camp. A horrible preseason. And looking bad in the opener.

It doesn't matter that Brunell was OK last year;

Brunell did great last year considering he only had one viable WR. I stuck up for MB05 and I will continue to do so.

If you were Campbell (a young QB), how much confidence in your coach would you have?

You're reaching. How about you ask him and we'll find out. But considering Gibbs drafted him specifically, Id assume he has faith in his coach.

As long as Brunell is on the roster, Gibbs is going to look for the first chance to put him in there.

Once Brunell is done, he's done imo but neither of us know the future.

You are totally resistant to any statistical data on Ramsey so I won't again inform you of how much better Ramsey's stats are with the skins than are
Brunell's but how in the world do you call Ramsey's opening game horrible. In the middle of the second quarter he had already thrown for over 100 yards and a TD (called back).
I also suppose you've forgotten that Brunell didn't do as well in two and a half quartes as Ramsey had in a quarter and a half, and that he continued to do absolutely zip for three and half quarters in the next game as well.
In retospect, the two miracles plays that followed (largely created by the genius of Moss, luck, and by two uncharacteristic throws, gave Brunell a credibily he should not have been given, which we have now learned to our grief.


Also, Ramsey did not have a poor preseason. He had a mediocre one, largely because the first string did a lot of sitting. As for your idea that Brunell did better in training camp than Ramsey, that's B.S. You weren't there. I read the same reports you did, and they did not indicate that was happening.

I liked Ramsey and we should have kept him until JC was ready or not ready.