Mark Brunell Explained

Mursilis · Post by **Mursilis** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 9:17 am

Dan Daly has an interesting column in today's Washington Times explaining the Brunell conundrum - how can Brunell have such good numbers (a higher passer rating than Tom Brady!) and yet there are people calling for him to be benched:

http://www.washtimes.com/sports/20061026-122251-5349r.htm

(Note to mods: Sorry to start yet another Brunell thread, but I thought the article was different enough to warrant it.)

KazooSkinsFan · Post by **KazooSkinsFan** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 9:56 am

Mursilis wrote:Dan Daly has an interesting column in today's Washington Times explaining the Brunell conundrum - how can Brunell have such good numbers (a higher passer rating than Tom Brady!) and yet there are people calling for him to be benched:

http://www.washtimes.com/sports/20061026-122251-5349r.htm

(Note to mods: Sorry to start yet another Brunell thread, but I thought the article was different enough to warrant it.)

Good article and I agree that Brunell has been better early then when the end when the game is on the line. The other thing is that his continual dumpoffs lead to a high pass percentage and with Moss in particular turning some of them into long gains it looks like he has a deep ball (statistically) which he does not.

In the end, the stat is 2-5. While Brunell is certainly not the only cause of that, he has certainly played no better than a 2-5 quarterback.

Mursilis · Post by **Mursilis** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 10:10 am

KazooSkinsFan wrote:In the end, the stat is 2-5. While Brunell is certainly not the only cause of that, he has certainly played no better than a 2-5 quarterback.

Good way to sum it up. Mark Brunell is basically Brad Johnson, but in a worse situation. Johnson is another older QB who can manage a game when he doesn't have to carry the team, and he's doing it on a team which is 4-2 even though he hasn't put up gaudy All-Pro numbers. He's getting a lot of help from a defense which is currently ranked 7th, and a rush offense ranked 11th. Hence, Brad doesn't have to be the hero, he just has to avoid being the zero. Last year, it was enough for Brunell to play the same role, but with the rest of the team struggling as well, Brunell is exposed as the fair-to-average QB he is at this point in his career.

cleg · Post by **cleg** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 1:05 pm

Mursilis wrote:
KazooSkinsFan wrote:In the end, the stat is 2-5. While Brunell is certainly not the only cause of that, he has certainly played no better than a 2-5 quarterback.

Good way to sum it up. Mark Brunell is basically Brad Johnson, but in a worse situation. Johnson is another older QB who can manage a game when he doesn't have to carry the team, and he's doing it on a team which is 4-2 even though he hasn't put up qaudy All-Pro numbers. He's getting a lot of help from a defense which is currently ranked 7th, and a rush offense ranked 11th. Hence, Brad doesn't have to be the hero, he just has to avoid being the zero. Last year, it was enough for Brunell to play the same role, but with the rest of the team struggling as well, Brunell is exposed as the fair-to-average QB he is at this point in his career.

I wish Brunell was like Brad Johnson.

Philly is an Armpit · Post by **Philly is an Armpit** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 1:12 pm

I don't understand this allegiance to Brunell. Sure he's a great guy, but he can't put the ball downfield to exploit our speed guys. It's time for Campbell to come in and sink or swim.

NikiH · Post by **NikiH** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 1:13 pm

Philly is an Armpit wrote:I don't understand this allegiance to Brunell. Sure he's a great guy, but he can't put the ball downfield to exploit our speed guys. It's time for Campbell to come in and sink or swim.

I think some of us who have what you believe to be an allegiance to Brunnell are just supporting our coaches choices. We know we cannot do anything about who he plays. So we will support whichever QB he sends out there. ;-)

Just my 2 cents.

Philly is an Armpit · Post by **Philly is an Armpit** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 1:20 pm

NikiH wrote:
Philly is an Armpit wrote:I don't understand this allegiance to Brunell. Sure he's a great guy, but he can't put the ball downfield to exploit our speed guys. It's time for Campbell to come in and sink or swim.

I think some of us who have what you believe to be an allegiance to Brunnell are just supporting our coaches choices. We know we cannot do anything about who he plays. So we will support whichever QB he sends out there. Just my 2 cents.

I understand that absolutely. I love Gibbs just as much as the rest of you. We respect him and he shows respect to us in return. My only contention with Gibbs is that he tends to be a little too loyal to guys that he sees eye-to-eye with. In particular, we all know both Gibbs and Brunell are big time Christians. Brunell started a church in Jacksonville with Tony Boselli. I know Gibbs thinks the world of Brunell as a person, which I fear introduces a bias into his judgement regarding team management. What do you think of this theory?

TincoSkin · Post by **TincoSkin** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 1:28 pm

philly is an armpit; best monicker ever

NikiH · Post by **NikiH** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 1:39 pm

I would like more facts. I've heard this said yet I've never really seen it be a detriment in the past. Do you have other examples of how his loyalty didn't also end up paying off for the franchise?

I remember the good · Post by **I remember the good** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 1:41 pm

[/quote] I understand that absolutely. I love Gibbs just as much as the rest of you. We respect him and he shows respect to us in return. My only contention with Gibbs is that he tends to be a little too loyal to guys that he sees eye-to-eye with. In particular, we all know both Gibbs and Brunell are big time Christians. Brunell started a church in Jacksonville with Tony Boselli. I know Gibbs thinks the world of Brunell as a person, which I fear introduces a bias into his judgement regarding team management. What do you think of this theory?[/quote]

I do think that this argument is worth a closer look, I looked back at some information and if memory serves me correctly a main reason why Brunell was basically kicked out of Jacksonville was due to his "overwhelming" manner in which he was forcing religion on teammates. I think that being religious is a great thing but you can't force in on anyone. I think that Gibbs being a religious type and Mark being the same way, then you add in that medical issue Gibbs had when he went to talk to Brunell equals an undying loyalty to Brunell. Even though the medical issue was basically swept under the rug, I hear it was a serious incident and had Brunell not gotten Gibbs to the hospital as he did Gibbs might be dead right now. I don't know how much credibility to put into that theory but for me I have never EVER seen Gibbs so loyal to one player that has been AVERAGE at best. It's time for Gibbs and Brunell to admit he doesn't have it anymore and even though his mind might be quick, his physical tools are highly erroded to the point that he is handicapping this team. :feedback;

I remember the good · Post by **I remember the good** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 1:46 pm

NikiH wrote:I would like more facts. I've heard this said yet I've never really seen it be a detriment in the past. Do you have other examples of how his loyalty didn't also end up paying off for the franchise?

NikiH, do you think us getting to the playoffs last year was Brunell? or do you think that Brunell just didn't do enough to allow us to lose? I think last year the running game and the defense got us to the playoffs and I also think that LaVar had a lot to do with it as well, if you recall the final 5 games he was starting after Holdman was where he belonged all along THE BENCH.

In the Seattle game last year after the running game was nullified and it went back to Brunell as he has done since 2004 he couldn't deliver when it was put on HIS SHOULDERS. At least that is my opinion anyway. I would go further to say that I think Mark Brunell has not lived up to his 49 million dollar contract and he should have never been the starter or brought here in the first place.

NikiH · Post by **NikiH** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 1:53 pm

The funny thing about this debate is that I'm not sure I want Mark Brunnell to be the starting QB but I am sure that I will support the decision my franchise makes and cheer for whomever they believe belongs there. Maybe it's because I'm not as knowledgable as those of you who have actually played football but I don't see it as my place to decide who should start. For all we know Jason Campbell could get in there and be 10 times worse then Mark Brunnell. I'm not saying that is going to happen, I'm just saying that it is a distinct possibility that in 2 to 3 games people would start calling for his head as well.

I believe that our team did enough to get us to the play offs last year. Mark Brunnell is not the greatest QB in the league, I've never argued that point. As a matter of fact, I was angry as hell when they signed him. I got into a discussion with a Brunnell fan during the first training camp and told her that I wanted Ramsey to win the starting job. But either way he did contribute to our winning the games leading up to the playoffs. If Jason Campbell had been thrown in there we do not know if we would have made it that far or not. Joe Gibbs is the one who got us to the playoffs last year and for that simple fact and his other given history, I trust him to make the right decision for this team.

I thought Mark Brunnell was the wrong decision for this franchise when Gibbs went down there to talk to him. Last year I was proven wrong. He was a part of our playoff run whether he was the reason for us getting there or not.

Philly is an Armpit · Post by **Philly is an Armpit** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 2:03 pm

I didn't hear about the "health crisis" issue, but certainly that would endear and indebt Gibbs to Brunell. Gibbs has always stressed strong moral character development in his players, which sets him apart from most NFL head coaches. I like that we have a morally good leader for our guys. However, when freindship gets in the way of business, a step back needs to be taken to look at what effect the friendship is having on the franchise performance. Clearly we're lacking a deep threat and defenses can collapse on the line and sniff out our multitudinous screen plays. We need to look to the future now that we're 2-5. At least that's my opinion.

Niki - I can tell you that Charles Mann, Darrell Green and Gibbs were similarly linked religiously and it worked out well for the Skins, except Green should have retired a couple of years earlier. That didn't hurt the team, not nearly as much as the curent Brunell situation is.

I remember the good · Post by **I remember the good** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 2:03 pm

Point taken and those are valid points, however until we see Campbell or Collins for that matter in there with the starting unit we won't know. I also think that the end of the Indy game would have been a time to put either of the QB's in there, all I know is that MB doesn't look confident or comfortable there and me being a season ticket holder and going to all home games I see the errors that the TV doesn't show. I can also tell you for instance at the Titans game James Thrash and Lloyd were open multiple times and Brunell NEVER ever looked their way. It's like Brunell will only throw to Moss and sprinkle in a little Cool

ey and the RB's in the flat. I am sorry I simply can't root for poor coaching and all the accolades Gibbs has doesn't mean anything currently because for me, if you remove the first tenure he was here he isn't even 500. This team has many problems but just as he was so quick to bench Ramsey, he should have been benched Brunell, when the opponents coaches have interviews and admit that Brunell is inconsistent, and then teams like the Titans run off the field yelling THANK YOU MARK, sorry I can't hold back my frustration any longer.

cleg · Post by **cleg** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 2:05 pm

I don't get how Gibbs could have un-dying loyalty to Brunell this season because of the religous connections when he did actually bench Brunell in 2004 - if he did it then why no know?

NikiH · Post by **NikiH** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 2:08 pm

I agree completely about Lloyd (see the thread about his show). There are receivers open that Brunnell doesn't see or even attempt to connect with and I cannot tell why. I just know I'm not willing to disrespect a hall of fame coaches' decision because I 'think' I'm right. What I know about football would safely tuck under Joe Gibbs hat in comparison to his knowledge.

I'm also a season ticket holder though and I've been so disappointed by fans boo'ing the team. I just think we have to support the team and the coach until they're ready to make this change.

Oh and do me a favor, don't EVER say we need to put Collins in again. :-P

Just kidding of course but that has to be my biggest fear. I'm not confident in him at all.

I remember the good · Post by **I remember the good** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 2:10 pm

cleg wrote:I don't get how Gibbs could have un-dying loyalty to Brunell this season because of the religous connections when he did actually bench Brunell in 2004 - if he did it then why no know?

Yes he did bench Brunell but it was only because he was severely injured, his hamstring was bruised and you see how quick he was to pull Ramsey in the Bears game in 2005, and I remind you that Ramsey was moving the team.

Philly is an Armpit · Post by **Philly is an Armpit** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 2:11 pm

I think you're right Niki. Brunell was part of our run last year. However, it's his performance this year that's concerning me. He threw deep to Moss plentylast season, and now with two deep threats, he can't get the ball there any more. I'm afraid his arm is shot and noone's admitting it. Brunell's a good guy and I like him, but he's not a starting-caliber quarterback in the NFL anymore. We need to think about the future now and Cambell, for better or for worse, is our investment towards that end. We need to develop him and see if we can go with him or go out and get someone else. The sooner we figure that out, the sooner we can start hoping for another playoff run.

Mursilis · Post by **Mursilis** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 2:18 pm

NikiH wrote:The funny thing about this debate is that I'm not sure I want Mark Brunnell to be the starting QB but I am sure that I will support the decision my franchise makes and cheer for whomever they believe belongs there. Maybe it's because I'm not as knowledgable as those of you who have actually played football but I don't see it as my place to decide who should start. For all we know Jason Campbell could get in there and be 10 times worse then Mark Brunnell. I'm not saying that is going to happen, I'm just saying that it is a distinct possibility that in 2 to 3 games people would start calling for his head as well.

Not your place to decide who gets to start? Of course not; you're not the coach, but none of us are either, so you're welcome to jump right in. I've been calling for Campbell since training camp, and obviously that hasn't happened but so what. We've all just fans talking to (or shouting at) each other, but it's not like Gibbs is paying a bit of mind to any of this. You're taking it all too seriously.

I believe that our team did enough to get us to the play offs last year. Mark Brunnell is not the greatest QB in the league, I've never argued that point. As a matter of fact, I was angry as hell when they signed him. I got into a discussion with a Brunnell fan during the first training camp and told her that I wanted Ramsey to win the starting job. But either way he did contribute to our winning the games leading up to the playoffs. If Jason Campbell had been thrown in there we do not know if we would have made it that far or not. Joe Gibbs is the one who got us to the playoffs last year and for that simple fact and his other given history, I trust him to make the right decision for this team.

I thought Mark Brunnell was the wrong decision for this franchise when Gibbs went down there to talk to him. Last year I was proven wrong. He was a part of our playoff run whether he was the reason for us getting there or not.

Yes, but he also helped kill our hopes in 2004, so pretty much he's been a wash - one good year, and one bad year, and so far, this year is leaning toward the 'bad' cateogory.

Philly is an Armpit · Post by **Philly is an Armpit** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 2:22 pm

NikiH wrote:Oh and do me a favor, don't EVER say we need to put Collins in again. Just kidding of course but that has to be my biggest fear. I'm not confident in him at all.

Here, here NikiH. No Colins unless Campbell is down too. Brunell is definitely a better pick than Collins. Collins looks really awkward taking snaps.

Everyone, I don't know for sure if religion is the main reason for Gibbs' loyalty to Brunell, but I'm almost certain it is an important factor. They're both very open about their faith, like many atheletes and coaches these days. I think the two just really hit it off fromt he start and fell in love with each other ( in a Christian, brotherly way).

JansenFan · Post by **JansenFan** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 3:05 pm

Mursilis wrote:
NikiH wrote:The funny thing about this debate is that I'm not sure I want Mark Brunnell to be the starting QB but I am sure that I will support the decision my franchise makes and cheer for whomever they believe belongs there. Maybe it's because I'm not as knowledgable as those of you who have actually played football but I don't see it as my place to decide who should start. For all we know Jason Campbell could get in there and be 10 times worse then Mark Brunnell. I'm not saying that is going to happen, I'm just saying that it is a distinct possibility that in 2 to 3 games people would start calling for his head as well.

Not your place to decide who gets to start? Of course not; you're not the coach, but none of us are either, so you're welcome to jump right in. I've been calling for Campbell since training camp, and obviously that hasn't happened but so what. We've all just fans talking to (or shouting at) each other, but it's not like Gibbs is paying a bit of mind to any of this. You're taking it all too seriously.

I believe that our team did enough to get us to the play offs last year. Mark Brunnell is not the greatest QB in the league, I've never argued that point. As a matter of fact, I was angry as hell when they signed him. I got into a discussion with a Brunnell fan during the first training camp and told her that I wanted Ramsey to win the starting job. But either way he did contribute to our winning the games leading up to the playoffs. If Jason Campbell had been thrown in there we do not know if we would have made it that far or not. Joe Gibbs is the one who got us to the playoffs last year and for that simple fact and his other given history, I trust him to make the right decision for this team.

I thought Mark Brunnell was the wrong decision for this franchise when Gibbs went down there to talk to him. Last year I was proven wrong. He was a part of our playoff run whether he was the reason for us getting there or not.

Yes, but he also helped kill our hopes in 2004, so pretty much he's been a wash - one good year, and one bad year, and so far, this year is leaning toward the 'bad' cateogory.

Here's where I actually agree with you man. This message board is a place for fans to vent, to throw out scenarios, to criticise or laud the team. FedEx Field is the place where we should leave all of this petty stuff behind and actually cheer our team, rather than boo them, which is in effect, cheering for the opposing team.

skinsfan#33 · Post by **skinsfan#33** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 3:31 pm

cleg wrote:
Mursilis wrote:
KazooSkinsFan wrote:In the end, the stat is 2-5. While Brunell is certainly not the only cause of that, he has certainly played no better than a 2-5 quarterback.

Good way to sum it up. Mark Brunell is basically Brad Johnson, but in a worse situation. Johnson is another older QB who can manage a game when he doesn't have to carry the team, and he's doing it on a team which is 4-2 even though he hasn't put up qaudy All-Pro numbers. He's getting a lot of help from a defense which is currently ranked 7th, and a rush offense ranked 11th. Hence, Brad doesn't have to be the hero, he just has to avoid being the zero. Last year, it was enough for Brunell to play the same role, but with the rest of the team struggling as well, Brunell is exposed as the fair-to-average QB he is at this point in his career.
I wish Brunell was like Brad Johnson.

I'm with you! I wish #8 could play as well as BJ. Now BJ will toss a lot short too, but when the moment is rigth he knows how to and can take it deep.

Sunday after the game I went through all of the starting NFC QBs and I think that this team would be better off with all but 1 (Alex Smith and I thought long and hard about that) Now I said Sunday and that was before the Tony Homo switch. It is funny how the same media that has been calling for a change at our QB has said that Dalas is giving up the season by switching to Romo, when they were saying that the Skins swicthing is not giving up (maybe they ment the season is already toasted).

UK Skins Fan · Post by **UK Skins Fan** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 3:32 pm

Just one thought for the Brunell "haters" out there - perhaps Gibbs is holding on to Brunell until he can find a QB with even more experience to pick up in free agency?

There, that should keep a few of you awake tonight.

skinsfan#33 · Post by **skinsfan#33** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 3:49 pm

UK Skins Fan wrote:Just one thought for the Brunell "haters" out there - perhaps Gibbs is holding on to Brunell until he can find a QB with even more experience to pick up in free agency?

There, that should keep a few of you awake tonight.

I've already had nightmares about us giving up our 1st round pick to trade for Bleedsomuch or Favre, but some how the Broncos got the pick, because they have used more of our 1st day picks since Gibbs got here than the Skin's have!

The Hogster · Post by **The Hogster** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 3:53 pm

The article was a good read...he sounds like fan moreso than a journalist though...I agree about Brunell, but at the same time, our defense has to take the heat just like they took the praise two years ago.

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

Mark Brunell Explained

Mark Brunell Explained

Re: Mark Brunell Explained

Re: Mark Brunell Explained