Brunell's likely the key to next year's Commanders

[ghst187]

I am a die hard Boys fan and could care less but you make no sense at all. All the reasons you just mentioned are the same reasons they gave for Burnell to have a good year. Skinz have a good running back, good defense,you said he was good at managing the game? so tell me what's your point or real reason you don't feel he would be a starting QB in the NFL?

the point was Campbell was little more than an average QB at the COLLEGE level. If you can merely manage a game at the pro level, you can get by. But if that's all you've ever proven at the college level...doesn't really inspire much confidence that he'll turn into a quality starting NFL level QB.
Point was that I never saw Campbell shoulder Auburn, or make any big throws, or deep throws, or ever really look like he was capable of such. If you would've put Campbell on about any other team in college that year, he may have not even gotten drafted IMO.

Alternatively, remember that Brunell was once one of the best QBs in the NFL and was a heck of a lot more than a game manager, not to mention the fact that he can still be deadly accurate on occasion and still flashes some solid arm strength every now and then.

 

[Billy Bullocks]

Yes, and you just exude intelligence and class...

I am worried about Brunell's health - as any non-homer should be. However, like most of Gibbs' QBs he doesn't have to win the game, just not lose it.

Can the same be said of Bledsoe? Not with that running game.

Everyteam has their question mark:

Dallas - The OL/Running Game
Skins - The QB
Giants - Defense/Eli's Progress
Iggles - Health/Rec. Corps

Health shold be said about all teams.
Tiki's age should be mentioned for NY.

ANd I dont know if the running game itself is nessecarily a weakness. I would say we have 2 very capable RB's, the OL play has been very average for the last 8 or so years at least here in Dallas. We wont see any 8 man fronts with TO this year, add that to the mix.

We went 10-6 with Quincy being a bus driver, with a worse RB, WR corp and defense.

 

[Sonny#9]

Health shold be said about all teams.
Tiki's age should be mentioned for NY.

ANd I dont know if the running game itself is nessecarily a weakness. I would say we have 2 very capable RB's, the OL play has been very average for the last 8 or so years at least here in Dallas. We wont see any 8 man fronts with TO this year, add that to the mix.

We went 10-6 with Quincy being a bus driver, with a worse RB, WR corp and defense.

Yeah Tiki is 31-32 and I have a feeling he'll hit a wall like Martin did last year.

Julius Jones is in the I'll-believe-it-when-I-see-it filing...and I've had him on my Fantasy Team the past 2 years so I know his MO. I don't know much about Barber - but neither is close to Portis and Betts is a typical Gibbs back up - not flashy, blue collar type.

As far as 10-6 w/ Quincy - wierder things have happened...I feel like that was lucky breaks and an easy schedule more than anything else - like the Skins going 3-1 under Spurrier to open the '04 season.

 

[Gent]

It would be nice if Tiki slowed down this year, but don't get your hopes up. He only recently turned 31 and doesn't have high mileage. His career attempts (1890) are only about 10 games ahead of guys like LT (1702) and Alexander (1717). They are about the same as Fred Taylor (1831) and less than Edgerrin James (2188).

-Gent

 

[Billy Bullocks]

It would be nice if Tiki slowed down this year, but don't get your hopes up. He only recently turned 31 and doesn't have high mileage. His career attempts (1890) are only about 10 games ahead of guys like LT (1702) and Alexander (1717). They are about the same as Fred Taylor (1831) and less than Edgerrin James (2188).

-Gent

Very good point about that.

Fred Taylor has taken a beating, and he is injury prone, so he would be a bad example in my book, but I see your point.

He still can probably crank out a good year or two, and I don't expect him to just flat line this year. However, not many RB's have been very good when they hit that 31-32 year age mark. I'm just saying his age has to be a concern....Manning needs to pick it up, because I dont see Tiki coming with the same type of year he had last year (his career best I would say).

 

[kartr]

Why are there so many articles about Brunell's age and fragility? There are many other 'old' QBs in the league, yet they receive no such negative attention.

Brunell 35
T Green 35
Favre 36
Bledsoe 33
B Johnson 37
Warner 34
McNair 33
K Collins 33
Garcia 36
Kitna 33

Mark played great last season. He only received a nagging knee injury at the end of last season by an illegal hit - Nick Greisen tackled him by the knees in week 16. The Skins offense stunk in the playoffs last season because two strong defenses figured out how to concentrate on Santana and take him out of the game, not because Brunell slowed down. Teams won't be able to double and triple him on every play this year. Mark will be fine.

Exactly, and some of the qb's on that list has had their share of injury problems too.

 

[kartr]

I thought he was a good college QB but he was good only because:
1) he had Cadillac and Ronnie Brown
2) he had an amazing defense
3) he didn't have to make very many throws for them to win
4) he was good at managing the game and limiting his mistakes

I'm a skeptic of his because I question his ability to throw the ball downfield accurately and consistently. Just never got the feeling that he had starting NFL-QB talent.
I watched Auburn a LOT his last year there and I'm not trying to hate on the skins or anything, I just never saw Campbell as a starting NFL QB. I always saw him as a decent backup at best and it has nothing to do with who drafted him. Just my honest assessment. I imagine we'll find out at some point fairly soon if I'm right or wrong.

You seem to forget that Campbell's running backs at Auburn didn't run wild every game. You said good at managing games and limiting his mistakes, that's exactly what starting qb's do. You also seem to forget that Campbell didn't have very good receivers at Auburn. Clinton Portis is much more a proven back than what Campbell at Auburn and the Commanders receivers are ten times better than the receivers Campbell had at Auburn. When Gibbs talks about Campbell, he absolutely drools about his potential. Campbell will do just fine when called upon. PS. QC got us to the playoffs in 2003, beating both Bledsoe and Vinny, our last two starting qbs. So in comparing Campbell to QC, you're comparing him to a playoff qb, what's so bad about that.

 

[dougonthebench]

smack Brunell inthe mouth,and Game Over!

 

[Hostile]

You seem to forget that Campbell's running backs at Auburn didn't run wild every game. You said good at managing games and limiting his mistakes, that's exactly what starting qb's do. You also seem to forget that Campbell didn't have very good receivers at Auburn. Clinton Portis is much more a proven back than what Campbell at Auburn and the Commanders receivers are ten times better than the receivers Campbell had at Auburn. When Gibbs talks about Campbell, he absolutely drools about his potential. Campbell will do just fine when called upon. PS. QC got us to the playoffs in 2003, beating both Bledsoe and Vinny, our last two starting qbs. So in comparing Campbell to QC, you're comparing him to a playoff qb, what's so bad about that.

Speaking of drool, here we go again.

Why don't you just become a Commanders fan? Honestly what's the hold up?

 

[5Stars]

Campbell will do just fine when called upon. PS. Crankcase got us to the playoffs in 2003, beating both Bledsoe and Vinny, our last two starting qbs. So in comparing Campbell to Crankcase, you're comparing him to a playoff qb, what's so bad about that.

Fixed...

 

[Billy Bullocks]

You seem to forget that Campbell's running backs at Auburn didn't run wild every game. You said good at managing games and limiting his mistakes, that's exactly what starting qb's do. You also seem to forget that Campbell didn't have very good receivers at Auburn. Clinton Portis is much more a proven back than what Campbell at Auburn and the Commanders receivers are ten times better than the receivers Campbell had at Auburn. When Gibbs talks about Campbell, he absolutely drools about his potential. Campbell will do just fine when called upon. PS. QC got us to the playoffs in 2003, beating both Bledsoe and Vinny, our last two starting qbs. So in comparing Campbell to QC, you're comparing him to a playoff qb, what's so bad about that.

Dude, you are such a Skins fan. I've never seen you make any positive comments about the Boys, all you do is praise the Skins.

PS. Redskinsfans = Internet for LOL

 

[ghst187]

You seem to forget that Campbell's running backs at Auburn didn't run wild every game. You said good at managing games and limiting his mistakes, that's exactly what starting qb's do. You also seem to forget that Campbell didn't have very good receivers at Auburn. Clinton Portis is much more a proven back than what Campbell at Auburn and the Commanders receivers are ten times better than the receivers Campbell had at Auburn. When Gibbs talks about Campbell, he absolutely drools about his potential. Campbell will do just fine when called upon. PS. QC got us to the playoffs in 2003, beating both Bledsoe and Vinny, our last two starting qbs. So in comparing Campbell to QC, you're comparing him to a playoff qb, what's so bad about that.

well here's the deal, I don't think Campbell is very good and I don't think he's ever going to be very good, at least not starting good.
really, can you tell me anything about him that impressed you at Auburn? The only thing I can think of is that he didn't lose games for Auburn...but that can be said for any OU QB of the Stoops era but none of them ever turned into anything in the pros.
Meanwhile, there's a guy named Leftwich that had exponentially more talent and ability than Campbell ever thought about coming out of college and a lot of analysts are saying Lefwich is on the hotseat this year.
I just don't see that much potential in Campbell. I think Ramsey had a much better chance of becoming a decent starter.
And here's the deal about QC, he sucked and always did. He can't even make it in the CFL now, its because he sucks and always has.

 

[AtlCB]

You seem to forget that Campbell's running backs at Auburn didn't run wild every game. You said good at managing games and limiting his mistakes, that's exactly what starting qb's do. You also seem to forget that Campbell didn't have very good receivers at Auburn. Clinton Portis is much more a proven back than what Campbell at Auburn and the Commanders receivers are ten times better than the receivers Campbell had at Auburn. When Gibbs talks about Campbell, he absolutely drools about his potential. Campbell will do just fine when called upon. PS. QC got us to the playoffs in 2003, beating both Bledsoe and Vinny, our last two starting qbs. So in comparing Campbell to QC, you're comparing him to a playoff qb, what's so bad about that.

I can definitely tell that you haven't watched many Auburn games. Both Cadillac Williams and Ronnie Brown were over 100 yards in most of the games that season. Both Williams and Brown were better college backs than Portis is an NFL back. The OL at Auburn was a better college OL than Washington has for an NFL line. Ben Obumanu was a decent college WR. Santana Moss is a better NFL receiver than Obumanu was a college WR, but none of the other Washington receivers are proven.

Campbell was good because he didn't have to throw often. When he did, he was rarely under pressure and had some decent receivers to throw to.

 

[Derinyar]

You seem to forget that Campbell's running backs at Auburn didn't run wild every game. You said good at managing games and limiting his mistakes, that's exactly what starting qb's do. You also seem to forget that Campbell didn't have very good receivers at Auburn. Clinton Portis is much more a proven back than what Campbell at Auburn and the Commanders receivers are ten times better than the receivers Campbell had at Auburn. When Gibbs talks about Campbell, he absolutely drools about his potential. Campbell will do just fine when called upon. PS. QC got us to the playoffs in 2003, beating both Bledsoe and Vinny, our last two starting qbs. So in comparing Campbell to QC, you're comparing him to a playoff qb, what's so bad about that.

QC was a playoff QB, agreed. I still have no clue who sold their soul to get that team into the playoffs, it just wasn't good enough to be there. If getting to the playoffs once and then being out of the league two years later is a good bar for a QB, then more power to you.

Auburn was a heavy running team with a dominant OL. No the pure talent at Auburn wasn't as good as the pure talent that Washington has on its line. But realize that the pure talent that Auburn has on its line isn't as good as the pure talent that the worst OL in the NFL has on it. Thats the same that can be said across the board, on both sides of the ball.

Auburn had a running game, that for college football, was the equivalent of anything you could see in the NFL. Their line would have been equivalent to one of the top 3-4 in the league. In that situation your basically giving the ball to the QB and saying, "Don't **** it up." I think the skins majorly reached with that pick, just like the Bills did in taking Losman.

Just remember that talent wise almost every player in the NFL was one of the top starters for thier schools before they hit the NFL. The worst player on an NFL roster was one of the best players on thier college roster.

 

[wileedog]

The Skins offense stunk in the playoffs last season because two strong defenses figured out how to concentrate on Santana and take him out of the game, not because Brunell slowed down. Teams won't be able to double and triple him on every play this year. Mark will be fine.

It was obvious long before the playoffs that Moss was the only threat in the passing game (and to a lesser extent Cooley). Certainly other teams late in the season were also concentrating on Moss as well. I think you are taking Brunnel wearing down as the season progressed way too lightly.

We watched it happen 2 years ago with Vinny. He was 5 years older than Brunnell, but also much bigger and stronger. Still, even as the season progressed you could see him wearing down game by game.

Lastly, I still don't think Randel El and Lloyd are guys who will take much pressure off Moss. Both can be single covered if you have a decent secondary, and everyone else in the division does. Time will tell I suppose.

But if I were a Skins fan, Brunnell would definitely be my #1 worry.

 

[Gamebreaker]

Really? Producing the lowest offensive output total ever in the playoffs against a defense that isn't even considered remotely close to other great defenses in the past is fighting valiantly?

So they played the Bucs and Seahawks on the same field?

 

[Vintage]

You seem to forget that Campbell's running backs at Auburn didn't run wild every game. You said good at managing games and limiting his mistakes, that's exactly what starting qb's do. You also seem to forget that Campbell didn't have very good receivers at Auburn. Clinton Portis is much more a proven back than what Campbell at Auburn and the Commanders receivers are ten times better than the receivers Campbell had at Auburn. When Gibbs talks about Campbell, he absolutely drools about his potential. Campbell will do just fine when called upon. PS. QC got us to the playoffs in 2003, beating both Bledsoe and Vinny, our last two starting qbs. So in comparing Campbell to QC, you're comparing him to a playoff qb, what's so bad about that.

Can you make a post that does not contain QC, Carter, Quincy, or any other variations of Quincy Carter or ellude to the former QB Quincy Carter?

Bill Parcells....HOF caliber coach, cut him.

Methinks Parcells knows more about Carter's abilities than you do.

And the Jets; Herman Edwards' former team, cut him as well. Maybe, just maybe, these coaches are onto something....

 

[DGreenFan87]

It was obvious long before the playoffs that Moss was the only threat in the passing game (and to a lesser extent Cooley). Certainly other teams late in the season were also concentrating on Moss as well. I think you are taking Brunnel wearing down as the season progressed way too lightly.

We watched it happen 2 years ago with Vinny. He was 5 years older than Brunnell, but also much bigger and stronger. Still, even as the season progressed you could see him wearing down game by game.

Lastly, I still don't think Randel El and Lloyd are guys who will take much pressure off Moss. Both can be single covered if you have a decent secondary, and everyone else in the division does. Time will tell I suppose.

But if I were a Skins fan, Brunnell would definitely be my #1 worry.

brunell is my number one worry. i'm not going to sit here and say that he's gonna be superman and last throught the entire season no matter what. yes he's old and yes he has a record of injuries. but i think that he's not as brittle and sensitive as everyone makes him out to be. brunell worn down at the end of last season AND he had a limited number of recievers. but i wanna also bring up the big hit he took during the giants game. it wasn't some little tap on the leg. so taking that into consideration his leg WAS banged up. i don't feel like it was because he's fragile, but because he took a big hit at the end of the season. and with no time to heal or rest, he had to play with a injured leg. now, loyalties aside, brunell can make it the entire season healthy with our O-line and portis running the ball effectively and our recievers keeping the defense away from him. but i would be very worried if he got hit bad enough cause it's tough to say whether or not he can take it.