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

REDEEMEDSKIN wrote: I'm an innovator and a born leader. What more can I say?

Yes, indeed! Humble too, quite a virtuous fan!

If only your views came along with the same subtlety

Redeemed, obviously we are not going to agree here. I was not questioning Gibbs putting Brunnell in, I was questioning Brunnell saying he was ready to go in. He lost his job in Jacksonville after a very similar situation when he stepped back because of injury. I was saying his motivation was selfish. If you don't agree that is fine but that's how I see it. This arguement gets put in the growing file I call "Fights I will never win"

Brunell seemed real horrible the first half and if he did not finish as strong as he did, this thread would not exist.

NikiH wrote:Redeemed, obviously we are not going to agree here. I was not questioning Gibbs putting Brunnell in, I was questioning Brunnell saying he was ready to go in. He lost his job in Jacksonville after a very similar situation when he stepped back because of injury. I was saying his motivation was selfish. If you don't agree that is fine but that's how I see it. This arguement gets put in the growing file I call "Fights I will never win"

Sorry NikiH, I missed your whole point. You hit on the head. Its just funny how Brunell does not want to lose his job, again no matter how he hurts the team. He called two timeouts that could have changed the game.

We have a young stud who is proven and needs the reps. I say we sit Brunell and bring in the "PRAM."

Brunell looked horrible in the first half. He probably would have looked just bad if the WRs would have caught some of the balls they should have. Although on Coles part, he dislocated his finger in the first quarter.

In the 2nd half, MB looked much better. Not great, but much improved. Luckily for him, Gardner played up and made some excellent grabs. Without those circus catches, MB goes 19-43 250 yards with 2 TDs. That's simply not good enough.

Yes, he showed he can get the ball downfield, but he can't pinpoint throws within 3 yards when he goes deep. You have got to hit receivers in stride more often then not. He did hit one pretty nicely though. If he throws 3 of those long balls in stride, that woulda been an easy 21 points. And for the season, he'd have about 5 more TDs.

As to the sacks. I understand that the Line was giving up pressure. Credit that to us being down two starters and the boys having a good blitz. BUT, MB is a scrambler. He still has pretty good feet and speed. He held the ball way too long at least twice and should have taken off thru gaping holes up the middle. He also could have avoided one or two of those other sacks by throwing the ball at the WRs feet.

Brunell is getting better, (less rusty?), but the thing I see is this. Gibbs whole game plan is made around the deep quick scores. That's where the points come from. He runs runs runs, and right when the defense is about to blitz, he goes long on them. Mark Rypien played this to perfection. You have to hit WRs in stride. Ramsey has that touch. MB doesn't. If we are going to go anywhere, Ramsey has got to be the guy.

I think I've figured out what Gibbs is doing though. He knows PRam will be the guy that takes him back to the show. He also knows PRam isn't quite there. MB is more consistent, and will make less mistakes. He's using this season as a learning span for the whole team AND especially PRam. He plays Brunell now, gets the teams confidence where it should be, teaches them to play solid mistake free football for the most part, and teaches PRam how to be an NFL QB at the same time. We finish this season 8-8 or a bit better, and next season it all comes together. That's gotta be it. Doesn't it?

I want PRam in there, but as always, I trust in Gibbs, and I don't care what our record is after this season, cause we look better than we have in years even though we are 1-2...

*edit*damn that was long, but as TC told me, get it in one post, quit trying to bulk up your post count

redskincity wrote:He called two timeouts that could have changed the game.

I'm not sure if you were at the stadium or watching from home, but, on TV, it was clear that Mark "burned" a timeout because #45 on our offense was out of position after having been given the play in the huddle. You could actually hear mark say "go over there" right before he called a time out to avoid the delay of game. He was visibly upset at that.

Joe also "burned" a timeout with the replay challenge, which he admitted (on Sportstalk 980) that it was gamble, since the replay was not available to his peeps in the replay booth. Joe, too, should be benched. Is Spurrier still on Speed dial?

Redskin in Canada wrote:

REDEEMEDSKIN wrote: I'm an innovator and a born leader. What more can I say?

Yes, indeed! Humble too, quite a virtuous fan!

If only your views came along with the same subtlety

Workin' on it. Thanks.

NikiH wrote:Redeemed, obviously we are not going to agree here. ...This [argument] gets put in the growing file I call "Fights I will never win".

I was not questioning Gibbs putting Brunnell in, I was questioning Brunnell saying he was ready to go in.

Cannot Ramsey's fitness to lead this offense also be questioned and/or deemed selfish when looked from only one side of the issue? Ramsey will be ready to lead this team in the future, in due time.

Gibbs has said he is here to win now. Add to that the pressure of fans (who after 3 games are looking to lynch somebody...anybody because of lofty expectations), the salary cap, the "new" NFL, and Patrick's shaky performances during TC, pre-season games, and the Giants debacle and one can begin to understand why Joe is unwilling to mortgage THE PRESENT on a player who's basically a rookie in an NFL System.

We can look at it this way... we are this year's edition of last year's Bengals. We're going with a veteran QB who'll hold the fort while the "future franchise QB" waits in the wings. Brunell is our kitna, and Ramsey our Carson Palmer. Brunell earned the job this year, next year Ramsey could(should?) start.

redskincity wrote:Brunell seemed real horrible the first half and if he did not finish as strong as he did, this thread would not exist.

I disagree totally. You have to give him some time. In the preseason and the last game Ramsey showed that he isn't near ready. You don't just go pulling QBs, it's a rediculous things to do and good coaches don't do it. Except for arm strength, Brunell is the superior QB in all aspects of the game. He showed he can throw the deep ball too and do you know what, HE DOESN'T THROW INTERCEPTIONS! I remember when people actually used to care about that.

I read the posts and have to side with few that Brunell did not look good. I was at the game and watched the WR patterns. The receivers were open (Cooley is consistently open, as is Portis out of the back field). His arm strength is not there but that has never been his strength. Two things about Brunnell, he seems to hold the ball a second or two too long before making his decisions. And he really locks onto receivers. I didn't see him check off to hot receivers when the rush started to come in on him. To his credit, He did seem to throw with some zip towards the end of the game. Lastly, the QB sneak at the one was one of the poorest attempts I have ever seen a ball carrier make to try to score a TD.

hkiss444 wrote:Two things about Brunnell, he seems to hold the ball a second or two too long before making his decisions.

Yeah, this is what started to change in the second half. In a new offense this is always what happens. That's why you keep him in. He has good arm strength, the reason he was throwing behind his recievers was because he just waited too long to pull the trigger, not because he lacks arm strength. The only way to right this is to let the guy play and get into the timing of the offense. He hasn't played a real game in almost a year. This week he started to look more natural, running around and making more decisive throws. He's only going to get better. You can say the same about Portis as well, it has taken him time to get used to running behind our line and picking his holes at game speed. On Monday he started doing better. Also, I thought that Gibbs called a better game plan but still was confused on the goal line in the first half. This offesnse will keep getting better as everyone gets up to speed and gets on the same page. Also, Brunell's QB sneak was fine if the O-line got a push. You don't want your QB jumping over the top of the line and getting nailed, it's a sneak, he should just go in behind his center. If we had gotten a push it would have been a score.

The sneak was pretty sad. One, the offensive line got stoned and Brunell was very lucky he didn't fumble. He stuck the ball out there and it could have been easily knocked out of his hands.

I'm very interested to see how we play next week. Hopefully, Gardner can keep it up, Coles plays like he can, and we know Portis is awesome. The thing to watch is how the plays are mixed up. The semi no huddle was interesting, but you have to keep Portis invloved.

My prediction is Gibbs will try to run on Cleveland to see how the OL matches up. If we can't move their DL early on, I think Joe will open it up, and mix it up.

One play I hope they can or at least run less. That is Brunell rolling (way back) to his right. It takes too long for Brunell to get square and it limits the play to a small portion of the field. He has almost thrown interceptions on that play a couple of times. I would just a soon see it be a straight boot leg run with maybe one reciever leaking to that side for an option pass. We do need something to keep the defense honest on that side, so Brunell can still do roll-outs to the left (that has been very successful).

The best scenario would be to get a lead so we can work on the run offense more.

Bottom line, neither Brunell nor Ramsey deserves a bashing. I think some people are still getting over the list of pathetic chumps we've called QB's for the past 10 years. Both of these guys are better than we've had for many years - and Hasselbeck would've beat out most of the past QB's. It's time to get better with the system, protection, play-calling and use of the clock.

I agree. You can be critical but not bash your own team. As disappointed as I was walking in the door at 3:15am I can't wait until Sunday to do it all again. Here's hoping for a huge win against Cleveland and get the team back to .500(2-2).

Hail to the Redskins!!

Yeah Scooter we've had a few chumps, but we let a couple slip through as well. Rich Gannon was cut by Norv (I think, maybe Pettitbone), Brad should have stayed longer, and Trent Green was no slouch, but I agree with you all the way, Brunell and Ramsey will be fine. I think Coach Gibbs is extremely loyal, he will stick with Mark until injury sends him to the sidelines, once that happens I figure Patrick will be ready.

Scooter wrote:Bottom line, neither Brunell nor Ramsey deserves a bashing. I think some people are still getting over the list of pathetic chumps we've called QB's for the past 10 years. Both of these guys are better than we've had for many years - and Hasselbeck would've beat out most of the past QB's. It's time to get better with the system, protection, play-calling and use of the clock.

Well said.

I can't believe anyone would bash Brunnell he played hard for us and made quite a few good decisions. But most of all he didn't give up. You gotta respect that.

I'll agree with Trent Green - that one was a tough loss. Gannon wasn't the player then that he is now - but I liked him in b & g. Brad? There's something about watching him that just pisses me off. Just the site of him, in any uniform...he ranks with Banks and George and Gussy to me. jmo

He did stink in the 1st half. In the 2nd, however, I thought he looked like the QB we all hoped he'd look like. I think the offense turned the corner in the 2nd half, though the running game wasn't hitting on much. If we can get more consistent performances from him like we saw from the 3rd quarter on, we'll be OK.

The reason we can not get short yardage is because Portis has no power. He is good, just not in short yardage situations. If the running back goes down on the first hit its his fault and that happens a lot with Portis. Brunell didn't have a good game he had a good half. The first half he looked like crap. After one half you are going to jump on the bandwagon.

John Manfreda wrote:The reason we can not get short yardage is because Portis has no power. He is good, just not in short yardage situations. If the running back goes down on the first hit its his fault and that happens a lot with Portis. Brunell didn't have a good game he had a good half. The first half he looked like crap. After one half you are going to jump on the bandwagon.

it doesn't matter how much power a back has if the defensive line is already in the backfield before the handoff occurs. our o-line gets NO push up front.

Ok HS, is that fixable? Is it just mechanics the O line has to work on, is it a matter of getting the guys there to gel because some are new, some are old? Or is it pretty much something we have to deal with until Samuels is 100% and Jansen is back?

i don't know, i thought it was. but they gave up 5 sacks i think. and 1st and goal on the one started a march in reverse. but i still trust buges. maybe its the line that still doesn't trust each other.

It is fixable. But goalline play has alot to do with desire. They need to start believing in themselves and each other. If anyone can get it done, though, Buges can. I still think our team looks a heck of alot better than last year.

Goal-line OL is both desire and precision. In addition to desire, the blockers have to hit exactly the right guy in exactly the right way, while the defense is moving, guessing the snap, trying to get a jump, and doing everything possible to penetrate.

A job for Bugel.