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

Brunell is a real field general

He stinks up the field in general

Irn-Bru wrote:

Champsturf wrote:I didn't call anyone a name. That is not allowed...no personal attacks.

As far as opinion goes, he can keep it...to himself next time, I hope.

I didn't call you out on it (and wasn't going to), but since you seem to be in the mood for splitting hairs. . . .


The line that THN draws very clearly in our rules is as follows:

5. Agree to disagree. Everyone's opinion counts, is valued, and should be respected. If you can't respect someone's point of view -- ignore it! Personally attacking another poster by name-calling will not be tolerated. You may call someone's comments "stupid" without calling the person who made the post "stupid".

While it was clever to say "(no names)" it was clear that you were leveling an attack against a person(s). You could have called the idea inane, moronic, ridiculous, whatever. . .but the moment you personalize it, (e.g. the moment you say "a moron" rather than "a dumb idea"), it's a personal attack.

And, when it comes to personal attacks, please keep those in PMs or in Smack. Please and thanks.

YW
Those ideas that I have responded to are some of the dumbest things I have ever read. Please Dr. Seuss, where are you?? You make more sense than some of the IDEAS I have been reading.

Whatever....I'me done here...this is pointless....No one here can yank that worthless excuse for a QB, and no one that matter will.

Another year of misery with Brunella at the helm.

Why are posts about Brunell's future as our quarterback constantly being locked and referred backed to the game day thread. This is already after the game and is a serious issue no longer of any value to this game. I do not want to read through 130 pages of game day posts to see the discussion of Brunnel.

I agree. Why should I have to search for some Brunnell thread that is two years old. Ridiculous.

Anyhow, as I wrote during the offseason, I don't think it's very probable that Mark Brunnell can lead this team to the Superbowl. In fact it's now looking extremely unlikely. Those of you, and you know who you are, that were arguing that the Redskins should "stay the course" with Brunnell just because he was barely able to take the Redskins, along with their one-dimensional offense, into the second round of the playoffs were simply dillusional. Fools.

air_hog wrote:Yeah okay, let's just throw a rookie QB in there where he'll get no protection and lose all of his confidence.

Sure, Brunell did TERRIBLE tonight, but how do you think a ROOKIE would have done.

Chris Samules and Jon Jansen got out right dominated and your suggesting we should throw in a rookie QB who is the future of our team?

I am telling you right now, there is no way a rookie QB, learning a 700 page playbook would succeed in this situation.

Campbell's not a rookie. He's a talent rotting on the bench, losing faith in his coach and confidence in his ability.

REDEEMEDSKIN wrote:

Mursilis wrote:Where are all the "Brunell gives us the best chance to win now!!" apologists?!?!

Sorry. I couldn't log on during the game.


Right now I'm reading too much loser speak on this board. It's 2 games, and there are 14 remaining. I'll say it. Mark STILL gives us the best chance to win.

There were far more problems than at QB tonight, though it was great to see the defense rise to the occasion against Dallas (T.OWWW. did nothing against the Skins, but then again, what's new?)

THey just gotta get out there and keep working hard. Mark and the rest of the offense will get it right.

A lotta people jumpin' off the #8 car this early in the season???? I may have to revive my tailgate for #8 thread.

No, they won't.

Mursilis wrote:

Irn-Bru wrote:All these comparisons to Brady, Culpepper, and Rothlesbeger--all quarterbacks going in early and winning. . .yet I can't help but also think of the name Patrick Ramsey.

True - you just never know who's going to be a quality NFL QB until he plays in the NFL - being elite in college means nothing. There have been so many famous QB busts I'm not even going to bother listing them. I freely admit that I haven't the slightest idea if JC can really carry this team, either next week or long term. But I do know this:

1. Brunell isn't getting it done. He's actually 13-15 as a starter, so I don't get why some people are so strong on him. Sure, last year he was solid at times, but he also showed he can be maddeningly inconsistent. And he's only getting older.

2. We'll never know on Campbell until we play him. Benching a no. 1 pick for two years in a row is a waste of a draft pick, pure and simple. I can't think of a single player from the first round of '05 who's played less than JC has. Even Aaron Rogers has had some playtime.

No use bringing up Brunell's record to his apologists. They're impervious to any implication that Gibbs has made a major error.

SkinzCanes wrote:Randle El and Moss didn't look very happy with Boonell tonight. I wonder how long until that becomes an issue.

How about ey and Lloyd and Portis. It's already an issure.

SkinzCanes wrote:

If Campbell doesn't play for 3-4 years even (which we'd probably both agree won't happen), but still comes around with a solid 10 year career with the Skins, no one will ever think that he was a waste of a draft pick.

If he doesn't play for 3-4 years he wont be a Redskin. If Campbell doesn't go into camp next year as a starter then he is going to ask for a trade, make no mistake about it.

Totally correct. Game after game he watches a QB whom he thinks he can (undoubtaly) outplay. It does not endear him to Gibbs or the Skins. He will either lose confidence in himself, or in the coaches. Probably both. Either way, he'll end up worthless to us if he sits much longer while his competition stinks up the field.

Irn-Bru wrote:

skinsfanno9 wrote:

Irn-Bru wrote:[* I have little reason to think that Brunell has nothing left in the tank. That's a very broad generalization about a man who's proven the same accusation wrong in the past.

You wouldn't happen to know Brunell's record as a starter for the Redskins, would you? 'Cause if it was say, 13-15 or something like that, perhaps his "comebacks" haven't been all that terrific.

Usually I don't think 13-15 when I think of Brunell's record as a starter for the Redskins. I generally think of 10-6 + a playoff win.


Right now I might think of 0-2, but so what? With 14 games to go, a lot can still happen.

We won five of those games by going away from Brunell and putting the load on Portis' back.

As a Redskin, Ramsey has a much better record (passing and otherwise) than Brunell with far less talent around him. Check it out. In fact, Ramsey is far and away the Skins' yardage leader over the the last four year, in spite of actually playing only a season and a half. Also, his ratio of interceptions to TD's is comparable to other top NFL QB's.

Ramsey's ineptitude is a myth. I bring this up not to hawk Ramsey but to illustrate how easily perceptions can be distorted by a need to support an authority figure, in this case a coach.

Gibbs needs to look at Green Bay and consider their QB situation. Last season they decided to stay with Favre at all cost. The result was a horrible season, and a lost opportunity for Aaron Rodgers to gain valuable game experience. Rodgers is a year behind in his development, and Favre is at the helm again. This does not bode well for this year, or next.

While the Skins haven't blown the season, it is not looking good. We aren't seeing an offense after two games...we are seeing an offense after six. (I don't buy the "pre-season doesn't count" stuff. They did not perform...period.) Gibbs has a history of staying with a veteran QB, maybe too long. The NFC is going to be a tight division. Tie-breakers will be a factor before it is all over. The Skins have losses against one division and one conference opponent. Dallas, lost to an AFC team, and have a division win. Giants the same. Philly's lost was to a division team. The Skins can't afford to trail very far for very long.

The Skins have a great chance of being 2-5 after seven weeks. Jax, Giants, and Indy all coming during that time, plus Houston and Tennessee. By the bye-week, the QB question will be answered...will the staff do anything about it?

REDEEMEDSKIN wrote:Too much wallowing and "woe is us" statements on the board. It's not so muh in defense of Mark alone, but for the team in general.

Redeemed, I think the frustration here (at least for me) is not with your faith in Brunell, but your seemingly unwillingness to admit that he is not playing well, and further, your deflection of Brunell criticism onto other areas of the team (O-line, running game, defense, etc.).

Your unwavering faith in Mark may be due to your unwavering faith in Joe Gibbs' ability to decide who plays and who doesn't, or simply faith in Mark himself, or some combination. While it seems illogical to most, I can admire it. I only wonder where we are as a team when we begin to approach that fine line between faith and obstinateness (I was going to use the term 'stupidity', but I didn't want you to take it the wrong way. I only mean it as a way of describing a situation that is hopeless, but is continually pursued).

joebagadonuts wrote:

REDEEMEDSKIN wrote:Too much wallowing and "woe is us" statements on the board. It's not so muh in defense of Mark alone, but for the team in general.

Redeemed, I think the frustration here (at least for me) is not with your faith in Brunell, but your seemingly unwillingness to admit that he is not playing well, and further, your deflection of Brunell criticism onto other areas of the team (O-line, running game, defense, etc.).

JBD - at no point have I said that MB lit it up last night or played "well". Performance-wise, statistic wise, et. al, it was an awful performance. However, in a team setting, if someone isn't performing well, it's also a variety of factors. I firmly believe that it's the offense, as a whole that isn't clicking. Some think it hinges squarely on Brunell, I don't . Simple as that.

Your unwavering faith in Mark may be due to your unwavering faith in Joe Gibbs' ability to decide who plays and who doesn't, or simply faith in Mark himself, or some combination. While it seems illogical to most, I can admire it.

Thanks.

Now, yes, my faith in Gibbs is strong. He's coached 3 SB championship teams and in the HOF. At last count, combined, on this board, we account for 0 SB trophies, and 0 HOF busts. This may be a stretch to you, but I'm gonna go out on a limb and trust his expertise over the combined reactions of the THN board members. More than likely I would do that 365 days a year, 24 hrs a day, 7 days a week.... you get the point.

I empathize with your frustration, but I can't apologize for adding to it.

jbd wrote:I only wonder where we are as a team when we begin to approach that fine line between faith and obstinateness (I was going to use the term 'stupidity', but I didn't want you to take it the wrong way. I only mean it as a way of describing a situation that is hopeless, but is continually pursued).

I say, let's wait and see. Chances are, Mark IS injured, JC comes in under center, we end up 14-2, and leads the team to the SB victory, and yes, we'd ALL be elated!!! Of course, whining and complaining about it won't make a difference, particularly when none of us have a say in the personnel decisions over at RP.

You can choose to be gloom and doom about it all. I'm seeing it from the vantage point of the opportunity this team has to rise from the ashes (literally) and make this season one for the ages!!!

As for Mark, if he gets us there or not, he's a member of this team, and as the saying goes:

"On a championship team, everyone gets a ring."

If this is his last hurrah, his contributions will be duly noted and forever remembered.

Let's pray Joe and his staff figure it out and right this ship...SOON.

Performance-wise, statistic wise, et. al, it was an awful performance.

I think perhaps that admission was all I was looking for.

Now, yes, my faith in Gibbs is strong. He's coached 3 SB championship teams and in the HOF. At last count, combined, on this board, we account for 0 SB trophies, and 0 HOF busts. This may be a stretch to you, but I'm gonna go out on a limb and trust his expertise over the combined reactions of the THN board members

What?! Take the word of one coach over all these experts on this board?!? That's just silly.

Chances are, Mark IS injured

Do you think this is really the case? I've thought this to be a likely possibility myself, given the similarities in his play to 2004.

Why does this site keep closing up Brunell Threads? Do they not want to hear the truth? Thats all people want to talk about this morning because he is pitiful. Does SNyder own this site?

jbd wrote:

Chances are, Mark IS injured

Do you think this is really the case? I've thought this to be a likely possibility myself, given the similarities in his play to 2004.

I meant to start off that sentence by saying: "Okay, let's just say that..." instead of "Chances are".

Personally, I don't think he's hurt. Reading about the team's performance in training camp. It soudned like Brunell was doing well, and this team loked great. Now that they've been in game situations, the truths come to light.

Brunell is not playing well, and like CLL pointed out, he lacks confidence. I would too if I kept shooting blanks while trying to lead the team and not having any kind of rhythm in game situations.

I'm not gonna comment on arm strength, cuase I think it's a weak argument to mask all the other shortcomings of this offense. The reality is we're not adjusting well to the new scheme, and we have to make significant improvements.

The good thing is we have a veteran team that won't collapse during strife. We may be testing that right now, but I'm sure we'll get through it.

jru37726 wrote:Why does this site keep closing up Brunell Threads? Do they not want to hear the truth? Thats all people want to talk about this morning because he is pitiful. Does SNyder own this site?

sigh. http://www.the-hogs.net/forum/viewtopic. ... 772#272772

jru37726 wrote:Why does this site keep closing up Brunell Threads? Do they not want to hear the truth? Thats all people want to talk about this morning because he is pitiful. Does SNyder own this site?

No, Mark Brnuell owns this site, and he's instructed his minions to close all anti-Brunell threads. So watch your back.

joebagadonuts wrote:

Now, yes, my faith in Gibbs is strong. He's coached 3 SB championship teams and in the HOF. At last count, combined, on this board, we account for 0 SB trophies, and 0 HOF busts. This may be a stretch to you, but I'm gonna go out on a limb and trust his expertise over the combined reactions of the THN board members

What?! Take the word of one coach over all these experts on this board?!? That's just silly.

actually, yes, it IS silly. why? because 2004 left absolutely no doubt that we the FANS, the uneducated, ignorant fans, were WAY, WAY ahead of gibbs when it came to the QB situation. we wanted him gone long before gibbs finally grew a pair and yanked him. brunell was by far the worst QB in the league but JG refused to bench him.

so no, despite the superbowls and the overall respect he definitely deserves, this is one area of his coaching where we would be idiotic to just blindly agree with "well, gibbs says brunell should play so he must be ok". wrong, wrong, wrong!!!

joebagadonuts wrote:

jru37726 wrote:Why does this site keep closing up Brunell Threads? Do they not want to hear the truth? Thats all people want to talk about this morning because he is pitiful. Does SNyder own this site?

No, Mark Brnuell owns this site, and he's instructed his minions to close all anti-Brunell threads. So watch your back.

Yes, JBD was flogged for misspelling the name of He who owns this site and locks all threads critical of Him

Yea, we do these things to purposefully irritate you all. And yes, we do laugh at you behind your backs.

good one hooooolmes.......did i see someone try and compare Brett Favre to Mark Brunell?

You cant be serious. Brett Favre wasnt scared to throw the ball long in fear that he might throw his arm out.

die cowboys die wrote:actually, yes, it IS silly. why? because 2004 left absolutely no doubt that we the FANS, the uneducated, ignorant fans, were WAY, WAY ahead of gibbs when it came to the QB situation. we wanted him gone long before gibbs finally grew a pair and yanked him. brunell was by far the worst QB in the league but JG refused to bench him.

so no, despite the superbowls and the overall respect he definitely deserves, this is one area of his coaching where we would be idiotic to just blindly agree with "well, gibbs says brunell should play so he must be ok". wrong, wrong, wrong!!!

One of my favorite THN posts of all time was a 2004 poll that asked something to the effect of:

"When Mark Brunell throws a football it looks like:

A.) A full diaper

B.) A half full bottle of soda"

It was probably the funniest post I have read on the board.

Mark threw some passes that reminded me of that in yesterday's game.

Still, the whole point is... what can Campbell do that is better?

People on the board keep saying that he is a talent, wasting on the bench. That he is losing confidence in the coach and growing more frustrated.

This is nonsense IMO...

He's learning the game, grasping the system. Is two years too long to spend learning? Is one and a half?

Everything I've ever heard about Jason Campbell leads me to believe he is of solid character, takes responsibility for his mistakes and is very humble.

The assertion that he is brooding, frustrated and ready to give up completely clashes with my assessment of him.