Gibbs

[Fios]

Brandon Lloyd believes in Brunell and by his account, so does the rest of the team. Its only fans that don't have faith in Gibbs and company that don't believe.

This very well may be true.

But do you think that a current player would say in a public forum, something like, "Brunell is terrible, nobody on the team has any faith in him, and the whole team can't understand why Coach Gibbs is stiking with him."

Only somebody like T.O. or Shockey would specifically call out a coach or a team mate.

Perhaps not, but I talk to him before the show, during the breaks and after the show, completely off-the-record, and the story does not change or waiver. I have learned things that will never make the air waves, but the support for Brunell does not change.

So, if its off the record why are you posting about it here?

Actually, and this is my professional opinion, JF hasn't violated the spirt of an off-the-record discussion, saying someone's opinions are consistent on- and off-mike isn't considered a violation of that trust

[Irn-Bru]

Brandon Lloyd believes in Brunell and by his account, so does the rest of the team. Its only fans that don't have faith in Gibbs and company that don't believe.

This very well may be true.

But do you think that a current player would say in a public forum, something like, "Brunell is terrible, nobody on the team has any faith in him, and the whole team can't understand why Coach Gibbs is stiking with him."

Only somebody like T.O. or Shockey would specifically call out a coach or a team mate.

Perhaps not, but I talk to him before the show, during the breaks and after the show, completely off-the-record, and the story does not change or waiver. I have learned things that will never make the air waves, but the support for Brunell does not change.

So, if its off the record why are you posting about it here?

Actually, and this is my professional opinion, JF hasn't violated the spirt of an off-the-record discussion, saying someone's opinions are consistent on- and off-mike isn't considered a violation of that trust

Especially when Lloyd's motives are being attacked as they have been in this thread and others.

For example: Lloyd says on the show that he supports Brunell in his role 100%, and the reply on the boards is "Oh, he only says that because he has to--that's probably not how he actually feels. . ."

[cleg]

Brandon Lloyd believes in Brunell and by his account, so does the rest of the team. Its only fans that don't have faith in Gibbs and company that don't believe.

This very well may be true.

But do you think that a current player would say in a public forum, something like, "Brunell is terrible, nobody on the team has any faith in him, and the whole team can't understand why Coach Gibbs is stiking with him."

Only somebody like T.O. or Shockey would specifically call out a coach or a team mate.

Perhaps not, but I talk to him before the show, during the breaks and after the show, completely off-the-record, and the story does not change or waiver. I have learned things that will never make the air waves, but the support for Brunell does not change.

So, if its off the record why are you posting about it here?

Actually, and this is my professional opinion, JF hasn't violated the spirt of an off-the-record discussion, saying someone's opinions are consistent on- and off-mike isn't considered a violation of that trust

Just wondering.

[SkinsFreak]

Brandon Lloyd believes in Brunell and by his account, so does the rest of the team. Its only fans that don't have faith in Gibbs and company that don't believe.

This very well may be true.

But do you think that a current player would say in a public forum, something like, "Brunell is terrible, nobody on the team has any faith in him, and the whole team can't understand why Coach Gibbs is stiking with him."

Only somebody like T.O. or Shockey would specifically call out a coach or a team mate.

Perhaps not, but I talk to him before the show, during the breaks and after the show, completely off-the-record, and the story does not change or waiver. I have learned things that will never make the air waves, but the support for Brunell does not change.

Well... that's awesome, actually.

I appreciate your honesty and confidence. Your inside track offers credence and the benefit of the doubt. That's really great to hear.

However, with regard to players saying "politically correct" things to the media, I know that organizations actually teach and coach players on this, in every sport. And further, a man with quality character would not openly bash another man for personal gain or pleasure, even if he had a legitimate gripe. Therefore, sometimes you take what a player or coach says with a grain of salt, because you now they are merely projecting a politically correct answer or statement to the media.

Still, nice to hear that from you. Thanks for sharing your insight, as it is truly valued by this Skins fan.

[welch]

Does anyone seriously believe that Gibbs would start any player if he thought starting a different player would give the Redskins a better chance of winning?

It strikes me that the Redskins have lost games this year because (a) the defense has not played as well as in the past, and (b) the entire offense often seems off-key.

Does that make Brunell the problem? Hardly. If the entire offense can't quite make the Al Saunders system work (yet), then how is Brunell the sole defect, and why should switching to Campbell make much difference?

From my own selfish view, I wish Joe Gibbs was still running the offense. I wish Gibbs could coach the Redskins forever, but I know that he will retire someday and that he needs an offensive coordinator firmly settled for that someday.

OK. Makes sense.

If the year was lost and gone, hopelessly gone, then maybe Campbell should play. Yes, someday the team must play the Saunders offense, and someday Campbell will quarterback that team.

Meanwhile, the constant criticism of Brunell, and demands for Campbell, remind me of the never-ending "Play Patrick Ramsey or Fire Joe Gibbs" threads.

[Snout]

It strikes me that the Redskins have lost games this year because . . . . the entire offense often seems off-key. Does that make Brunell the problem? Hardly. If the entire offense can't quite make the Al Saunders system work (yet), then how is Brunell the sole defect, and why should switching to Campbell make much difference?

The problem with the (Gibbs) offense last year is that Brunell only threw to Moss, ey and Betts.

The problem with the (Saunders) offense this year is that Brunell only throws to Moss, ey and Betts -- and defenses are keying on Moss and ey, giving up the short stuff to Betts.

The reason for a switch is to put in a guy who has more physical gifts -- who can run and throw downfield. Changing the QB can change the whole rhythm, tempo and energy of the offense.

As I see it, the problem is not that Saunders offense is a whole new offense compared to last year. On the contrary, it looks a lot like last year's offense -- with the same shortcomings.

[welch]

Snout:

The problem with the (Gibbs) offense last year is that Brunell only threw to Moss, ey and Betts.

The problem with the (Saunders) offense this year is that Brunell only throws to Moss, ey and Betts -- and defenses are keying on Moss and ey, giving up the short stuff to Betts.

The problem last year was that Moss was the only WR who could shake is coverage. Patten got hurt, and Moss was it. That's why Moss was the number one target. ey is great at slipping away into uncovered space, but he is not someone who can fake a defender out of his shoes.

Remember that Portis is a superb receiver, also. If Betts gets more catches this year, it mostly shows that Saunders has used Betts as a receiver.

"Get the ball down the field" still sounds like an echo of Ramsey-Brunell.

If had a choice, I'd like to see more old-time grind-em-down offensive line work., and fewer end-around plays. But I'm just a fan.

Gibbs knows what he is doing. Of that I am absolutely sure.