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

Oh, and I know Houston won this week, but did you see who they beat?

So you still act as if they aren't a real NFL team? I say that no win should be taken for granted in this league. Brunell's performance against Houston doesn't--in itself--prove his worth, but after the Jags game you can't pretend that Houston doesn't exist just because you think they're bad.

It may work both ways but the comments tend to be disproportionate against Brunell. When the team wins you don't see comments such as "Brunell was the best move by Gibbs ever!" or "Brunell--single handedly--got us this win!"

Yet when Brunell performs poorly we see the equivalents of the statements above going against Brunell. Statements such as "Gibbs is out of his mind" or "Gibbs is too stuborn to admit his mistake" or "Brunell is--at best--a backup QB in this league."

Look at the number of posts following the win compared to when we lose. I can assure you that people use this board to vent FAR MORE than they use it to celebrate. It's disproportionate.

So, are Brunell supporters quick to praise and slow to criticize? Yes. Are haters the same way? Yes.

Is it a mirror image? No. . .this board, anyway, tends to reflect anti-Brunell sentiments much more strongly and far more quickly than praise.

(Believe me, I've had to live through it and read each and every post. . .)

Mursilis wrote:The 49er's D is actually only allowing .2 yrds/play more than ours. They're significantly better than the Texans, who continued their lock-hold on the Worst Defense in the League title, both in yrds/game and yrds/play.

Are the 49ers in the top third of league defenses or the bottom third?

What does comparing them to our struggling defense prove?

Incidentally... the 49ers have allowed 126 points against this year... the Texans 113.

Point to stats all you want... nobody in the league has more points scotred against them than the 49ers... they ain't exactly scaring teams with their defense.

... just ask Damon Huard.

REDEEMEDSKIN wrote:

Mursilis wrote:But how aren't the pro-Brunell people mirror images of how you see me? When Brunell does poorly, it's "the team has struggled, WRs weren't getting open/dropping balls/running the wrong routes, the O-line wasn't giving him time, there was no running game", etc. When the team wins, it's all "Brunell played great, Brunell won it for us, we were right all along", etc. - not much different.

I can't speak for all the "Brunellmaniacs", but, for me, I get a kick outta the responses from peeps like you who complain that we give Brunell too much credit for a WIN. OF COURSE I know it's a team effort out there, and the WRs played lights out (except for lloyd ), but it's kinda fun to watch you all squirm when you're given a taste of your own medicine.

We're all winners cause our team wins, but some of you get outta line too far and end up putting your feet in your mouths. Some of us enjoy rounding you back into the flock.

BTW - It's rarely personal when we hand out crow to those who deserve it, but those who are called out (in the right forum) are guilty as charged and deserve the public flogging.

After the game yesterday, I kept saying to myself "Damn, it's going to be a riot on THN tomorrow". And, as I supsected, it is!!

Whatsa "rior"???

REDEEMEDSKIN wrote::hmm: Whatsa "rior"???

Hell if I know! Why do you ask?

Irn-Bru wrote:

Oh, and I know Houston won this week, but did you see who they beat?

So you still act as if they aren't a real NFL team? I say that no win should be taken for granted in this league. Brunell's performance against Houston doesn't--in itself--prove his worth, but after the Jags game you can't pretend that Houston doesn't exist just because you think they're bad.

It may work both ways but the comments tend to be disproportionate against Brunell. When the team wins you don't see comments such as "Brunell was the best move by Gibbs ever!" or "Brunell--single handedly--got us this win!"

Yet when Brunell performs poorly we see the equivalents of the statements above going against Brunell. Statements such as "Gibbs is out of his mind" or "Gibbs is too stuborn to admit his mistake" or "Brunell is--at best--a backup QB in this league."

Look at the number of posts following the win compared to when we lose. I can assure you that people use this board to vent FAR MORE than they use it to celebrate. It's disproportionate.

So, are Brunell supporters quick to praise and slow to criticize? Yes. Are haters the same way? Yes.

Is it a mirror image? No. . .this board, anyway, tends to reflect anti-Brunell sentiments much more strongly and far more quickly than praise.

(Believe me, I've had to live through it and read each and every post. . .)

Well, that's because losses are absolute pain, and there's been too many since the last time Gibbs was running this team. But I'm happy to take a beating for bashing Brunell if it means we're winning.

Irn-Bru wrote:"Brunell was the best move by Gibbs ever!"

Do you believe this? Better than Lachey-for-Schrader? Better than Moss-for-Coles? Better than drafting ey?

Irn-Bru wrote:"Brunell--single handedly--got us this win!"

Do you believe this? I saw Moss run away from a couple of what looked like sure tackles. It boggles the mind to think he's that much faster than defenders in the pros. He makes people look like they're glued to the ground sometimes.

Dishgeek wrote:

Irn-Bru wrote:"Brunell was the best move by Gibbs ever!"

Do you believe this? Better than Lachey-for-Schrader? Better than Moss-for-Coles? Better than drafting ey?

Irn-Bru wrote:"Brunell--single handedly--got us this win!"

Do you believe this? I saw Moss run away from a couple of what looked like sure tackles. It boggles the mind to think he's that much faster than defenders in the pros. He makes people look like they're glued to the ground sometimes.

Uh, did you read the rest of his post, or just what was in quotation marks?

About Brunnell, I'll just say life isn't fair, in a job when you do it right, it's the way you are supposed to, when you screw up, you get trashed or even fired....

cvillehog wrote:Uh, did you read the rest of his post, or just what was in quotation marks?

I did, did you? Here, I'll help you:

He's complaining no one ever says that about Brunell. He's using these as an example of some kind of unfair bias against him on this board.

My point is that no one ever says that about Brunell not because of bias, but just because those are ridiculous things to say.

Dishgeek wrote:

cvillehog wrote:Uh, did you read the rest of his post, or just what was in quotation marks?

I did, did you? Here, I'll help you:

He's complaining no one ever says that about Brunell. He's using these as an example of some kind of unfair bias against him on this board.

My point is that no one ever says that about Brunell not because of bias, but just because those are ridiculous things to say.

He was using hyperbole as a tool (which is clearly expressed in the post) not as an example of what he (or anyone else) feels.
Rather that was simply to illustrate that the tone of the comments on the board tend to be strongly and staunchly anti-Brunell (post loss) but that one rarely sees an equivalent pro-Brunell commentary (post win), i.e. plenty of "worst ever" but no "best ever."

Dishgeek wrote:

cvillehog wrote:Uh, did you read the rest of his post, or just what was in quotation marks?

I did, did you? Here, I'll help you:

He's complaining no one ever says that about Brunell. He's using these as an example of some kind of unfair bias against him on this board.

My point is that no one ever says that about Brunell not because of bias, but just because those are ridiculous things to say.

Fios had the better reading of what I wrote. I'm guessing that cville thought it too obvious to point out, but I apologize if what I originally wrote wasn't clear.

Fios wrote:He was using hyperbole as a tool...simply to illustrate that the tone of the comments on the board tend to be strongly and staunchly anti-Brunell (post loss) but that one rarely sees an equivalent pro-Brunell commentary (post win), i.e. plenty of "worst ever" but no "best ever."

And deservedly so. I agree that accusing Brunell of "worst ever" play is unfair, but I find questionable his claim that the absence of "best ever" comments shows unfair bias. No one credits him with "best ever" play not because they hate him, but because he hasn't shown "best ever" play (yet.)

Old Man Brunell returns. he was crap today. thank you for the giant turd you layed in NY, brunell. please find your seat on the bench now. i don't care if you can play a great game every now and then. you have to be good at least 75% of the time to be a decent NFL QB, and you sir, are not. go away.

yep, our O-line was horrible but come on, Brunell. Missing so many open recievers

die cowboys die wrote:Old Man Brunell returns. he was crap today. thank you for the giant turd you layed in NY, brunell. please find your seat on the bench now. i don't care if you can play a great game every now and then. you have to be good at least 75% of the time to be a decent NFL QB, and you sir, are not. go away.

Same thing can be said for this type of post. When the Skins are winning you don't see them but after every lost , they come fro everywhere. If Mark takes off like you guys want I sure hope he takes the lot of you with him

die cowboys die wrote:Old Man Brunell returns. he was crap today. thank you for the giant turd you layed in NY, brunell. please find your seat on the bench now. i don't care if you can play a great game every now and then. you have to be good at least 75% of the time to be a decent NFL QB, and you sir, are not. go away.

I'm not going to pin this one on Brunell, and I'm one of his most vocal critics. Sure, he wasn't the greatest by any stretch, but the O-line looked flat-out awful. Too many penalties, and not giving him much time (or the running game much room).

Mursilis wrote:

die cowboys die wrote:Old Man Brunell returns. he was crap today. thank you for the giant turd you layed in NY, brunell. please find your seat on the bench now. i don't care if you can play a great game every now and then. you have to be good at least 75% of the time to be a decent NFL QB, and you sir, are not. go away.

I'm not going to pin this one on Brunell, and I'm one of his most vocal critics. Sure, he wasn't the greatest by any stretch, but the O-line looked flat-out awful. Too many penalties, and not giving him much time (or the running game much room).

oh i totally agree-- don't get me wrong, this was by no means all brunell's fault. but i'm sick of having a QB who has to have everything around him going well in order to even not suck. that's just not acceptable for an NFL QB.

I hate on Brunell win or lose!

I'm not going to pin this one on Brunell, and I'm one of his most vocal critics. Sure, he wasn't the greatest by any stretch, but the O-line looked flat-out awful. Too many penalties, and not giving him much time (or the running game much room).

Agreed...Brunell did the best he could today.

thaiphoon wrote:

I'm not going to pin this one on Brunell, and I'm one of his most vocal critics. Sure, he wasn't the greatest by any stretch, but the O-line looked flat-out awful. Too many penalties, and not giving him much time (or the running game much room).

Agreed...Brunell did the best he could today.

yes, and it's not good enough to accomplish anything. that's my point exactly. a QB has to be able to "make something happen" at least one frickin' time in the whole game.

plus, there is no way to know if he took advantage of all that was there from what we see on TV. we can't see the deeper receivers in their routes. for all we know people were open all day.

DCD - VERY true...however, with our O-line not blocking well. It ain't gonna happen. Eli had all the time in the world to throw and picked us apart.

Simply put, our O-line and defense let us down today. Brunell is a decent veteran QB who can win us games if the game-plan is executed by the offensive players around him. At this point, we're better off keeping him in and making sure our O-line blocks better, our defense plays better and the coaches call a better game. The play calling was pathetic

It seems that games need to be too perfect for Brunell to be effective. If the offense is not clicking he wont be effective. I dont think thats a good thing.

I agree CLL - but thats who we have as our QB right now I guess. We either deal with it and get the O-line to play better and get the defense to actually show up or we play the youngster.

thaiphoon wrote:DCD - VERY true...however, with our O-line not blocking well. It ain't gonna happen. Eli had all the time in the world to throw and picked us apart.

Simply put, our O-line and defense let us down today. Brunell is a decent veteran QB who can win us games if the game-plan is executed by the offensive players around him. At this point, we're better off keeping him in and making sure our O-line blocks better, our defense plays better and the coaches call a better game. The play calling was pathetic

Brunell had plenty of Time in the first half.