Brunell Inaccuracy?

jaw32 · Post by **jaw32** » Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:20 pm

Many posters keep referring to Brunell's Monday night performance with the word inaccuracy. I'm having a tough time with those comments. He was 4-8 and I can only remember 3 incompletions (please remind me of the other).

1) The first one was the fade on 3rd and 2, with Coles one on one with Bailey. Bailey was squared up with Coles about 2 yards off the line, with the defense expecting run, so Bailey had no help. Coles could not run by Bailey (or even get side by side with him) even though Bailey had to turn after a minimal bump. Brunell made a perfect throw (right on the outside where it could not be picked), however Bailey ran in front of Coles and slowed his progress to the ball (I thought the "new" rules prohibited impeding the receiver, though Bailey had position). The bottom line was the throw was there, but Bailey was better than Coles on that play.

2) There was a deep out pattern where Brunell had to throw over the LB and in front of the corner. The ball was high and went out of bounds. The throw was off, it was a tough play. Also, there might have been a little confusion between QB and WR, Brunell was making hand gestures like he thought the receiver was going to be in a different spot. Hard to tell.

3) Brunell threw a ball away short (semi-dangerous though it was where only a Redskin had any shot at it) he was being pressured near or in the end zone and had to get rid of it while falling back. This play had no chance.

4) Can't remember 4th incompletion.

I do remember the nice out to Gardner when Brunell rolled to his right and had to pivot, and threw a perfect strike for a first down. Showed he has the arm strength that many are questioning. Some other completions did not amount to much, but I don't think much was there.

No fumbles, no interceptions and he showed command with a few check-offs at the line.

I'm am a biased huge Brunell fan, but seriously, I thought he played well on Monday. There was just not a lot of opportunities that I saw.

cvillehog · Post by **cvillehog** » Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:23 pm

Didn't he overthrow a reciever down the middle of the field?

Justice Hog · Post by **Justice Hog** » Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:52 pm

It's the 1st preseason game, folks! Geez! They'll get better.

redskincity · Post by **redskincity** » Wed Aug 11, 2004 4:43 pm

Justice Hog wrote:It's the 1st preseason game, folks! Geez! They'll get better.

LOL..... no doubt

VRIEL1 · Post by **VRIEL1** » Wed Aug 11, 2004 5:40 pm

Look both Brunell and Ramsey did not look good! chill... it was only the first game. This was a LET THE TEAM GET A FEEL FOR WHAT THE SYSTEM WILL BE LIKE. I on the other hand thought Hasselbech looked like he understood the system, but... he played against second string defense.

skin_to_the_bone · Post by **skin_to_the_bone** » Fri Aug 13, 2004 7:47 am

redskincity wrote:
Justice Hog wrote:It's the 1st preseason game, folks! Geez! They'll get better.

LOL..... no doubt

Yep

NC43Hog · Post by **NC43Hog** » Fri Aug 13, 2004 10:19 am

Not to repeat things too much but YES, they will get better and don't get too worked over the 1st preseason game. If by the 5th PS game we can't hit a receiver then you can worry . . . some!

hailskins666 · Post by **hailskins666** » Fri Aug 13, 2004 10:22 am

nah, were just gonna run it every play anyways.

no more pitchin and catchin.

cvillehog · Post by **cvillehog** » Fri Aug 13, 2004 11:16 am

Guys, I think you might have missed the point of this thread. jaw32 was basically saying that Brunell's performance Monday didn't warrant him being called inaccurate as a passer (as people have been writing about him on other threads, etc.). I think you guys took it the other way.

redskincity · Post by **redskincity** » Fri Aug 13, 2004 11:34 am

cvillehog wrote:Guys, I think you might have missed the point of this thread. jaw32 was basically saying that Brunell's performance Monday didn't warrant him being called inaccurate as a passer (as people have been writing about him on other threads, etc.). I think you guys took it the other way.

....He was inaccurate Monday and he did not look good on Monday He will do fine just you let him :wink:

BringThePain! · Post by **BringThePain!** » Fri Aug 13, 2004 11:41 am

redskincity wrote:
cvillehog wrote:Guys, I think you might have missed the point of this thread. jaw32 was basically saying that Brunell's performance Monday didn't warrant him being called inaccurate as a passer (as people have been writing about him on other threads, etc.). I think you guys took it the other way.

....He was inaccurate Monday and he did not look good on Monday He will do fine just you let him

I think their still taking it the other way cvillehog

jaw32 · Post by **jaw32** » Fri Aug 13, 2004 11:57 am

Yes my point was that Brunell did not play bad. There just wasn't much there.

By the way his other incompletion was a fade down the left side line, the WR was blanketed and Brunell threw it away. However, there may have been a player open down the middle that Brunell did not even look at.

People are just saying he played bad without substantiation. It is a team game, good plays must be called, players must execute, etc.

...And yes it is way early, so this is a big waste of time. Just don't dis my boy!

gambit187 · Post by **gambit187** » Fri Aug 13, 2004 12:33 pm

What if Brunnel doesn't beat out Ramsey. Does that bode well to have an over paid back up on the bench, because thats were i think he will be.

BringThePain! · Post by **BringThePain!** » Fri Aug 13, 2004 12:40 pm

gambit187 wrote:What if Brunnel doesn't beat out Ramsey. Does that bode well to have an over paid back up on the bench, because thats were i think he will be.

Yes, actually it will... because if Ramsey were to get hurt than we actually have someone behind him to save our season... where last year... we had Rob Johnson

NikiH · Post by **NikiH** » Fri Aug 13, 2004 12:43 pm

Gambit I don't have the time to do the research but I bet you were the same guy saying stuff about Rob Johnson and Gibran Hamdan being our back ups last year. There is no way to win apparently.
Last year we were blasted for having no solid back up. THis year our back up will be overqualifited. I think having them both is the best choice for the team!

gambit187 · Post by **gambit187** » Fri Aug 13, 2004 1:33 pm

NikiH wrote:Gambit I don't have the time to do the research but I bet you were the same guy saying stuff about Rob Johnson and Gibran Hamdan being our back ups last year. There is no way to win apparently.
Last year we were blasted for having no solid back up. THis year our back up will be overqualifited. I think having them both is the best choice for the team!

Well Rob Johnson is BUTT....I kinda like Hamden, dont know if he will ever be a starter, but with the right QB coach he can definatly be a back up QB.