Post Dallas Mark Brunell Thread

Washington Redskins' Game Day discussions for 2003, 2004, and 2005
Hog
User avatar
Posts: 1510
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 11:31 pm

Postby SkinzCanes » Tue Nov 07, 2006 6:53 pm

You should be a politician. He said that referring to the Offensive Line ( whom he was brought in to consult with) needing to protect the guy.


The question from Mitchell to Brown was something to the extent of, "When coaching the line do you tell that they need to make sure that they give Brunell 6 seconds to throw?" Brown responded by saying that while they dont tell the line that they have to block for a certain amount of time, they understand that they need to give Brunell as much time as possible because for him to be effective he can't have any pressure around him. He also mentioned that for Brunell to step up in the pocket he cant have any defenders down around his legs because tha makes him uncomfortable.
"Archuletta on the sidelines is a plus for Redskins fans" - Brian Mitchell

Hog
User avatar
Posts: 1510
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 11:31 pm

Postby SkinzCanes » Tue Nov 07, 2006 6:57 pm

What do you want him to do??


I want him to not run out of bounds or make a bad throw in key situations during a game when he could run for a first down. I want him to show some heart and take a hit to help his team win a game. You think that Portis, Moss, or Cooley would run of out bounds instead of picking up a first down because they dont want to get hit?
"Archuletta on the sidelines is a plus for Redskins fans" - Brian Mitchell

Fire in the Sky
Posts: 4730
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2005 7:31 am
Location: Surfside

Postby SkinsFreak » Tue Nov 07, 2006 7:22 pm

SkinzCanes wrote:
Chris Cooley "almost caught a 30 yarder down the middle which would have been another completion and another 30 yards to Brunell's total.

Brandon Lloyd had another 30 yarder called back on a penalty.


The throw that Brunell made to Lloyd was pathetic. He underthrew him by 4 yards and Lloyd made an amazing catch on that ball. I just don't quite understand how/why you are defeding Brunell when the guy almost threw 4 interceptions, 2 of which would've been in the endzone. Not only that but twice he could've run for first downs on 3rd down but instead ran out of bounds instead of taking a hit and picking up tough yardage. As Brian Mitchell said, the mistakes that he was making weren't indicative of a veteran qb. Romo was making better throws and better decisions than Brunell on Sunday. If anything, this game just reinforced my belief that Brunell needs to be replaced. You can't have a qb that lacks mobility and is afraid to take a hit and be succesful in the NFL. Romo made up for his lack of experience with his mobility on Sunday, and I think that Campbell could do the same thing.


yep

kazoo
Posts: 10280
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2004 3:00 pm
Location: Kazmania

Postby KazooSkinsFan » Tue Nov 07, 2006 9:12 pm

REDEEMEDSKIN wrote:
KazooSkinsFan wrote:If you still disagree, point to the plays he caused or any individual efforts that led to the win.


How bout the intangibles, like helping to keep the offense together despite all his "shortcomings" and playing from behind? Or how about (don't laugh), the GREAT play fake prior to the pitch to CP on his touchdown run.

The team executed the play flawlessly, and, one great B. Lloyd block later, CP was in for 6.

There are more intangibles in the game, but I don't wanna go back and forth on what he's done. I'll let the record speak for itself: 3-1 vs. the Pukes, since he "Reversed the Curse". Obviously, he's doing something right. Period.


That's classic. I ask what he did to win the game and you give me a list of "intangibles."

Given he's a QB, doesn't that make you concerned if you can't come up with tangible contributions.

Love the effort though, and thanks for cracking me up. :P

#######
Posts: 7225
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2005 9:13 pm
Location: Washington D.C.

Postby The Hogster » Tue Nov 07, 2006 9:14 pm

SkinzCanes wrote:
What do you want him to do??


I want him to not run out of bounds or make a bad throw in key situations during a game when he could run for a first down. I want him to show some heart and take a hit to help his team win a game. You think that Portis, Moss, or Cooley would run of out bounds instead of picking up a first down because they dont want to get hit?


Thats just plain silly. You want your 36 year old qb to run smack into Roy Williams, Bradie James, Greg Ellis and Demarcus Ware....risk fumbling, and/or killing himself.

Yeah, thats why you're the fan, and he's a long time veteran. :roll: :?
SPIT HAPPENS!!
___________________________

Hog
User avatar
Posts: 1510
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 11:31 pm

Postby SkinzCanes » Tue Nov 07, 2006 9:52 pm

Thats just plain silly. You want your 36 year old qb to run smack into Roy Williams, Bradie James, Greg Ellis and Demarcus Ware....risk fumbling, and/or killing himself.

Yeah, thats why you're the fan, and he's a long time veteran. Rolling Eyes Confused


Well if he's too old/fragile to take a hit then he shouldn't be playing anymore. I don't think that it's too much to ask of your starting qb to run for a first down with a game against a division rival on the line. Do you think that Brett Favre would've run out of bounds instead of trying to pick up those first downs? Call me crazy but I seriously doubt it.
"Archuletta on the sidelines is a plus for Redskins fans" - Brian Mitchell

---
User avatar
Posts: 18570
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 12:55 pm
Location: AJT

Postby Chris Luva Luva » Wed Nov 08, 2006 6:28 am

The Hogster wrote:
SkinzCanes wrote:
What do you want him to do??


I want him to not run out of bounds or make a bad throw in key situations during a game when he could run for a first down. I want him to show some heart and take a hit to help his team win a game. You think that Portis, Moss, or Cooley would run of out bounds instead of picking up a first down because they dont want to get hit?


Thats just plain silly. You want your 36 year old qb to run smack into Roy Williams, Bradie James, Greg Ellis and Demarcus Ware....risk fumbling, and/or killing himself.

Yeah, thats why you're the fan, and he's a long time veteran. :roll: :?


Didn't a QB hurdle a defender this week to get into the endzone? I think it was against the Giants.

Granted, Mark is 36 and I can't be too mad at him but aside from that play he is afraid to get hit. This stuff isn't being made up. His throws are short because he's not stepping up in the pocket. The stuff they said they'd work on during the bye is still somewhat of an issue.

Mark basically fell on the ground in the face of an impending sack. Im sorry but if he's scared to get hit then he needs to give it up. We're in a do or die situation. I believe that Mark has to go out there and make stuff happen. People complain that he's not helping nor is he going against but if we're going to win these games he's going to have to step up.
Fios - Arbiter of All Positive Knowledge

Kaz - "Was kinda obvious since we all know you're not a moron"

Mmmm...donuts
Posts: 2400
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2004 2:15 pm
Location: How much text will they let me fit in this 'Location' space? I mean, can I just keep writing and wr

Postby joebagadonuts » Wed Nov 08, 2006 8:23 am

The Hogster wrote:You want your 36 year old qb to run smack into Roy Williams, Bradie James, Greg Ellis and Demarcus Ware....risk fumbling, and/or killing himself.


I want my starting QB to do whatever it takes to win. If that means risking his health to get a key first down late in the game, then yes, I want him to run smack into Roy Williams. If he's afraid of getting hurt, then it's time to hang 'em up. Plus, think of what might happen if MB actually inspired his teammates with his play. If I were an O-lineman, and I saw him take a tough hit to get a first down, that might actually inspire me to play a bit harder for a guy who is willing to get hurt for the team. Some might even classify such an act as 'leadership'. But Brunell's the expert, right?
I'm a jack of all trades, the master of three
Rockin' the tables, rockin' the mikes, rockin' the young lay-dees.

and Jackson
Posts: 8384
Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2003 9:37 am
Location: Charles Town, WV

Postby JansenFan » Wed Nov 08, 2006 9:15 am

Let's not forget that Brunell was nursing a rib injury. I am of the camp that he should have run for the first instead of making the pass that showed B. Lloyd's CB skills, but I do understand the concept of self-preservation.
RIP 21

"Nah, I trust the laws of nature to stay constant. I don't pray that the sun will rise tomorrow, and I don't need to pray that someone will beat the Cowboys in the playoffs." - Irn-Bru

~~
User avatar
Posts: 8455
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2004 2:12 pm
Location: Northern Virginia

Postby REDEEMEDSKIN » Wed Nov 08, 2006 9:28 am

SkinzCanes wrote:...I can't respect an NFL player that is afraid of contact. Twice at crucial situations in the game Brunell chose to run out of bounds or make a bad throw instead of running for a first down. What kind of message does that send to the rest of the team?


Are you kidding?

The season is riding on Brunell's ability to lead the team to the playoffs/Super Bowl, and he's just getting over an injury that might have sidelined him, were it not for the extra week he got to rest, and you want him to go out there and potentially aggravate/worsen the injury???

Aside from just wanting to see JC in action, it makes no sense for Brunell to cut our season short by putting himself in harm's way, just so some fan can give him props on a message board.

Does it make sense to you?
Back and better than ever!

~~
User avatar
Posts: 8455
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2004 2:12 pm
Location: Northern Virginia

Postby REDEEMEDSKIN » Wed Nov 08, 2006 9:29 am

JansenFan wrote:Let's not forget that Brunell was nursing a rib injury. I am of the camp that he should have run for the first instead of making the pass that showed B. Lloyd's CB skills, but I do understand the concept of self-preservation.


My bad, I didn't read your post before I submitted mine. I wasn't jocking your style, JF. :oops:
Back and better than ever!

08 Champ
Posts: 13497
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2004 9:23 pm
Location: on the bandwagon

Postby SkinsJock » Wed Nov 08, 2006 11:00 am

SkinzCanes wrote:..Right but the throws that he made that were almost intercepted showed poor decision making and highlighted his physical limiatations. Brunell just looks nervous in the pocket and on atleast one of the near pics he could've run for a first down but that would've required taking a hit and I can't respect an NFL player that is afraid of contact. Twice at crucial situations in the game Brunell chose to run out of bounds or make a bad throw instead of running for a first down. What kind of message does that send to the rest of the team? You've got guys like Taylor and Marcus Washington throwing their bodies around trying to make plays and Burnell choses to run out of bounds instead of taking a hit at key points during the game? Brunell's former teammate and current coach, Ray Brown, even said in postgame that Brunell can't be succesful if there is any pressure on him and that he gets especially nervous in the pocket when there are defenders around his legs. Bring on Jason Campbell!


Jason Cambell will be starting for the Redskins soon. Gibbs and Saunders will decide or Brunell will be injured. BUT if Campbell starts and he does what you are advocating he will be benched immediately. Gibbs will never tolerate a QB putting himself at risk and especially when you consider the back-up is Collins if Brunell is injured.

That is a very very bad idea - you are really showing how much you know about how a QB plays for Gibbs.

Gibbs will prepare Campbell to be a great QB but one of the first things he will impress on him after making sure he knows the value of not turning the ball over is to make sure you are able to play effectively and being injured trying to make something happen is a mark of immaturity.

We do not need Brunell to be superman - we need this offense to not lose games by making stupid mistakes like so many offenses are doing and that is costing their team games. For example when a WR sees that Brunell has thrown a ball that can get intercepted it is his job to make sure that does not happen - in the Cincy game Johnson made no effort to catch a slightly overthrown ball - an interception in that case is the receiver's fault, unless your last name is Brunell :wink:




But thanks for demonstrating your knowledge of what Gibbs wants and expects from his QB
When you're dead you don't know you're dead, it's only difficult for others.
It's kind of the same as when you're stupid!

memo to Dan Snyder: Let the football people just do their jobs - you need to manage your own mess

Mmmm...donuts
Posts: 2400
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2004 2:15 pm
Location: How much text will they let me fit in this 'Location' space? I mean, can I just keep writing and wr

Postby joebagadonuts » Wed Nov 08, 2006 11:10 am

REDEEMEDSKIN wrote:
SkinzCanes wrote:...I can't respect an NFL player that is afraid of contact. Twice at crucial situations in the game Brunell chose to run out of bounds or make a bad throw instead of running for a first down. What kind of message does that send to the rest of the team?


Are you kidding?

The season is riding on Brunell's ability to lead the team to the playoffs/Super Bowl, and he's just getting over an injury that might have sidelined him, were it not for the extra week he got to rest, and you want him to go out there and potentially aggravate/worsen the injury???

Aside from just wanting to see JC in action, it makes no sense for Brunell to cut our season short by putting himself in harm's way, just so some fan can give him props on a message board.

Does it make sense to you?


If we lose because we can't move the ball and score points at critical points, doesn't THAT cut our season short? And don't give me 'But we won!', because that's avoiding the point. Had ST not bailed us out at the end (which had very little to do with MB), you wouldn't be able to use that argument.
I'm a jack of all trades, the master of three
Rockin' the tables, rockin' the mikes, rockin' the young lay-dees.

Hog
User avatar
Posts: 1510
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 11:31 pm

Postby SkinzCanes » Wed Nov 08, 2006 11:24 am

Jason Cambell will be starting for the Redskins soon. Gibbs and Saunders will decide or Brunell will be injured. BUT if Campbell starts and he does what you are advocating he will be benched immediately. Gibbs will never tolerate a QB putting himself at risk and especially when you consider the back-up is Collins if Brunell is injured.

That is a very very bad idea - you are really showing how much you know about how a QB plays for Gibbs.

Gibbs will prepare Campbell to be a great QB but one of the first things he will impress on him after making sure he knows the value of not turning the ball over is to make sure you are able to play effectively and being injured trying to make something happen is a mark of immaturity.

We do not need Brunell to be superman - we need this offense to not lose games by making stupid mistakes like so many offenses are doing and that is costing their team games. For example when a WR sees that Brunell has thrown a ball that can get intercepted it is his job to make sure that does not happen - in the Cincy game Johnson made no effort to catch a slightly overthrown ball - an interception in that case is the receiver's fault, unless your last name is Brunell Wink


Gibbs wont be the one preparing Campbell, Saunders will. It's very obvious that Gibbs and Saunders have a differnce of opinion when it comes to turnovers. Gibbs tries to avoid them at all costs, while Saunders is willing to tolerate them because of the way he has designed his passing plays. Go back and look at the types of throws that Trent Green made under Saunders and the number of interceptions that he threw. A qb in Saunders' system has to throw downfield, into tight coverage, and accross the middle. These types of throws naturally lend themselves to more interceptions. Saunders has tailored his offense this season to accomodate Brunell's shortcomings. Once he gets a strong-armed qb in there you will see him go back to calling passing plays the way he did in KC.
"Archuletta on the sidelines is a plus for Redskins fans" - Brian Mitchell

Hog
User avatar
Posts: 1510
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 11:31 pm

Postby SkinzCanes » Wed Nov 08, 2006 11:35 am

Are you kidding?

The season is riding on Brunell's ability to lead the team to the playoffs/Super Bowl, and he's just getting over an injury that might have sidelined him, were it not for the extra week he got to rest, and you want him to go out there and potentially aggravate/worsen the injury???

Aside from just wanting to see JC in action, it makes no sense for Brunell to cut our season short by putting himself in harm's way, just so some fan can give him props on a message board.

Does it make sense to you?


First of all, we aren't winning the Super Bowl this year.

Second of all, how do you expect to win games when you're qb isn't physically capable of making the plays necessary to win? We played a hard fought game on Sunday, but in the end we were lucky that Dallas had their field goal blocked. If Brunell had run for a first down in the first quarter instead of almost throwing a pick in the endzone we would've had a chace to put more points on the board and the game might not have even come down to the field goals late in the game. If Brunell isn't physically capable of running 3 or 4 yards for a first down then he shouldn't be in there. Like I said in another post, I doubt that Bret Favre would've been afraid to take a hit for a first down.
"Archuletta on the sidelines is a plus for Redskins fans" - Brian Mitchell

Return to Washington Redskins Game Day - 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006