Numbers do not lie

[SmallTown]

"Brunell has thrown for fewer than 100 yards in three of his last four games. He has a league-worst 51.1 percent completion rate, including 37 percent on third downs.

The Redskins scored their touchdowns on a blocked punt and on an option pass by running back Clinton Portis, who threw for more yards (15) in the second half than Brunell (8). Coach Joe Gibbs trusted Brunell to throw just twice in the second half, putting the games in the hands of Portis, who ran for 147 yards on 34 carries. Brunell didn't throw at all in the fourth quarter, with Gibbs opting for runs on third & 10, third & 9 and third & 20. "



I'm sorry. This is the NFL. This isn't some sort of development league. These guys get paid big bucks to do a job. If they can't do the job, time to find someone else. Time for these offensive coaches to start COACHING their young QB to make him better and ready to play. Brunell is a lost cause.

 

[Larry Gude]

And furthermore...

...the Ravens won the Super Bowl in 2000 with mediocre, not poor, quarterbacking.

While their D allowed an average of only 10 points game, the team averaged about 20 per game scored which includes defensive touchdowns.

Trent Dilfer could get it done when he had to. Brunnel is D O N E.

Trivia; the Skins passed up the opportunity to draft Dilfer. Who did they take instead?

For bonus points who took Dilfer?

 

[T.Rally]

...the Ravens won the Super Bowl in 2000 with mediocre, not poor, quarterbacking.

While their D allowed an average of only 10 points game, the team averaged about 20 per game scored which includes defensive touchdowns.

Trent Dilfer could get it done when he had to. Brunnel is D O N E.

Trivia; the Skins passed up the opportunity to draft Dilfer. Who did they take instead?

For bonus points who took Dilfer?

I'm thinking Seattle.

Billick in all his arrogance couldn't stand not having a quarterback who could throw for big yardage. So he trades a mediocre quarterback who wouldn't lose a game for him for Elvis Grbac. The whole Ravens squad resented him and despite still having the best defense they lose in the playoffs. Couldn't have happened to a better team.

 

[tlatchaw]

I'm thinking Seattle.

Billick in all his arrogance couldn't stand not having a quarterback who could throw for big yardage. So he trades a mediocre quarterback who wouldn't lose a game for him for Elvis Grbac. The whole Ravens squad resented him and despite still having the best defense they lose in the playoffs. Couldn't have happened to a better team.

Baltimore Ravens 17
Washington Redskins 10

'nuff said.

 

[Otter]

...the Ravens won the Super Bowl in 2000 with mediocre, not poor, quarterbacking.

While their D allowed an average of only 10 points game, the team averaged about 20 per game scored which includes defensive touchdowns.

Trent Dilfer could get it done when he had to. Brunnel is D O N E.

Trivia; the Skins passed up the opportunity to draft Dilfer. Who did they take instead?

For bonus points who took Dilfer?

Shuler...Dilfer, Philly,I believe..looking up now

(add on(edited)...one out of two)

 

[T.Rally]

In my haste brought on by detest of the Ravens, I misunderstood the question.

It had to be Shuler, 1994 or so. Dilfer went to the Bucs.

 

[xusnret]

Numbers

I found this very helpful in understanding how the numbers came into play Sunday. The number 10 has a very remarkable effect.

 

[Larry Gude]

That...xu...

...is about as clear as one can define Brunnels uh, umm...output.

 

[dems4me]

"Brunell has thrown for fewer than 100 yards in three of his last four games. He has a league-worst 51.1 percent completion rate, including 37 percent on third downs.

The Redskins scored their touchdowns on a blocked punt and on an option pass by running back Clinton Portis, who threw for more yards (15) in the second half than Brunell (8). Coach Joe Gibbs trusted Brunell to throw just twice in the second half, putting the games in the hands of Portis, who ran for 147 yards on 34 carries. Brunell didn't throw at all in the fourth quarter, with Gibbs opting for runs on third & 10, third & 9 and third & 20. "



I'm sorry. This is the NFL. This isn't some sort of development league. These guys get paid big bucks to do a job. If they can't do the job, time to find someone else. Time for these offensive coaches to start COACHING their young QB to make him better and ready to play. Brunell is a lost cause.

I agree with you and have since before the season started, Brunnell is past his prime if you ask me. I was watching ESPN last night catching up on game scores for various surveys I'm in and they were showing stats... they'd list one quarter back and his stats.... 256 yards, then another 238 yards, then another for 261 yards... and then Brunnell popped up with a whopping 56 yards!!! Absolutely unacceptable in the NFL, and he is still trying to complete little 5 or 6 yard plays on 3rd down where we need 10+ for a first down. I think that is also factoring in on the Redskin's poor third down conversions.

 

[Pete]

nice av

 

[dems4me]

nice av

Glad you find it sexy.

 

[Ken King]

Yep, numbers don't lie - look here http://www.nfl.com/teams/stats/WAS/2004/regular

Concentrate on the Team stats and the Passing stats. Offensively they are real close to their competition. So I guess a few big defensive or special teams plays have gone against them, not to mention some officiating issues. These guys could be a lot higher in the standings then what they are if they caught a break.

As to the passing I remember what Ramsey did last year and the Skins truly don't need that, no team does. Besides Brunell doesn't throw that many away. You also must remember that Coach Gibbs is known for sticking with his first choice and then that guy eventually comes through for him.

 

[SmallTown]

we stay close because of defense. We have the #1 defense in the NFL. Only 5 teams rank below us in offense. I know QBs need time to get use to the system. But damn. What Brunell is doing is missing wide open receivers. By at least 10 yards. That has nothing to do with the system. When Ramsey struggled last year, you could partially blame the system because he was picking himself up off the turf after each play. But brunell stands there, does a simple post pattern and overthrows by 15 yards.

 

[Larry Gude]

Ken...

..those stats are the teams we played against and what they did against us, not league averages. You are arguing that Brunnels stats compare favorable as if we'd played a top defense every week, which our opponents did collectively facing us. Bucs, yeah, Dallas yeah and Baltimore but come on, the Browns? Bears? Lions?

I do agree that the breaks went against us time and time again and that that would have made, possibly, a huge difference in terms of momentum and offensive confidence. I've argue that they should have been 6-0 at one point. Hell, we're a few plays from being 8-0.

If we're 6-2 and Brunnel is plodding along but playing like a vet, not throwing pics and giving up bad sacks and fumbling snaps, well, OK.

And the team is truly much better in so many ways than last. The issue is time. You don't get three to five years anymore from the majority of your roster and you don't get that from your assistants either.

Williams is gonna get a head job next year or the one after and that leaves the D in flux AGAIN. Half the staff starts collecting Social Security next year.

You seem to hold Ramsey responsible for Spurriers offense. He was SUPPOSSED to call all those audibles. Some people seem to think Hasselback is the answer because things went smoother when he played. Well, the first thing Spurrier did when Patrick was hurt was can the complicated audibles.

The point about Brunnel is three fold;

1. We have yet to win a game BECAUSE of his play. Even the Packer game, great, he finds Portis but it comes back, bad penalty. Well, all game long and the next play, he reads poorly and throws an E Z pick. It's fairy simple to make the argument that we have 3 wins in spite of his play. Plus, he needs extra time to plant and throw because his arm is gone. High throws are a sign of this. Guys with cannons fight throwing it into the ground.

2. After 8 games, how shaky is the argument that he will get better?

3. Again Ramsey. It's a given that Brunnel is not the guy next year. We could find out NOW if it's gonna be Ramsey. Better teams will stuff the running game and Ramsey has not been able to help.

In any event, we'll know soon enough. We have another weak team, Cinncy. Brunnel plays poorly and we're out of excuses and Ramsey will be stuck playing, next, the Eagles then Pittsburgh then the Giants and Philly again.

We'e got room for one, maybe two more losses. If Brunnel gets us through these next 5 with only one loss and I'm the chump.

 

[Ken King]

..those stats are the teams we played against and what they did against us, not league averages. You are arguing that Brunnels stats compare favorable as if we'd played a top defense every week, which our opponents did collectively facing us. Bucs, yeah, Dallas yeah and Baltimore but come on, the Browns? Bears? Lions?

I do agree that the breaks went against us time and time again and that that would have made, possibly, a huge difference in terms of momentum and offensive confidence. I've argue that they should have been 6-0 at one point. Hell, we're a few plays from being 8-0.

If we're 6-2 and Brunnel is plodding along but playing like a vet, not throwing pics and giving up bad sacks and fumbling snaps, well, OK.

And the team is truly much better in so many ways than last. The issue is time. You don't get three to five years anymore from the majority of your roster and you don't get that from your assistants either.

Williams is gonna get a head job next year or the one after and that leaves the D in flux AGAIN. Half the staff starts collecting Social Security next year.

You seem to hold Ramsey responsible for Spurriers offense. He was SUPPOSSED to call all those audibles. Some people seem to think Hasselback is the answer because things went smoother when he played. Well, the first thing Spurrier did when Patrick was hurt was can the complicated audibles.

The point about Brunnel is three fold;

1. We have yet to win a game BECAUSE of his play. Even the Packer game, great, he finds Portis but it comes back, bad penalty. Well, all game long and the next play, he reads poorly and throws an E Z pick. It's fairy simple to make the argument that we have 3 wins in spite of his play. Plus, he needs extra time to plant and throw because his arm is gone. High throws are a sign of this. Guys with cannons fight throwing it into the ground.

2. After 8 games, how shaky is the argument that he will get better?

3. Again Ramsey. It's a given that Brunnel is not the guy next year. We could find out NOW if it's gonna be Ramsey. Better teams will stuff the running game and Ramsey has not been able to help.

In any event, we'll know soon enough. We have another weak team, Cinncy. Brunnel plays poorly and we're out of excuses and Ramsey will be stuck playing, next, the Eagles then Pittsburgh then the Giants and Philly again.

We'e got room for one, maybe two more losses. If Brunnel gets us through these next 5 with only one loss and I'm the chump.

Larry,

Do league averages really mean a thing or is it what you do on any given Sunday? That is how the QBs get rated by their actual play, right?

Remembering last season and the regular demise these guys experienced under the Ramsey helm I think they should cut their losses with him and try something new. I am in no way a Brunell fan, but I think a lot less of Ramsey and the confusion he displayed when behind center. Personally if a change is to be made the Hasslebeck (sp?) kid would be who I would go with. If it is nurturing that is needed I think the effort would be better spent on him and finding another QB for next season.

It is obvious that we are missing something or the Coach would have had Ramsey in there already. I know Gibbs seems extremely stubborn at times with his dedication to the player he sees as his top dog, but Coach is there day in, day out and might just be seeing something none of us arm-chairers are.

 

[Larry Gude]

Ken...

...We agree in principle, Brunnel is a problem, not a solution.

I'm not wedded to Ramsey other than a, he's here, b, he has played some good ball.

I don't think you're giving him enough credit and to much of the blame for Spurriers system but the point is the same; Brunnel = bad.

So, if Gibbs is not enamored with Pat, fine, play Hasselback. ANYTHING but teh slow death of Brunnel.

I totally respect Gibbs and his loyalty and his leadership. I'm trying to make an argument in the forums here as though I was making the case to him.

My position is simple; there is more upside to Pat now, including settling whether or not he is the guy and I believe, at worst, we would be no worse off in each game with him.

Gibbs expected alot of things from Brunnel;

Experience, leadership, accuracy, mobility, toughness. I think all agree that Mark does not have everything Gibbs thought he would, especially and stunningly lacking accuracy on short passes and making some rookie decisions and opposing personel, from execs to players say the same thing; Brunnel doesn't have it anymore.

This team is on the razors edge with Brunnel. I say we're in better shape proving Ramsey one way or the other.

 

[mojorisin]

Why do you continually blame Spurrier? It should be obvious to you that he didn’t have the players for his system. It has never been a coaching problem with Spurrier or Gibbs. It was and is a talent problem. Brunell is a shell of what he used to be. Ramsey was never any good. I agree with Ken about Hasselback, put him in, they have nothing to loose. This season is over! Maybe next year they will get a quarterback.

 

[Larry Gude]

mojo...

...bzzttt: Wrong answer.

Spurriers system may have worked if he had the fastest receivers in the league, an advantage he typically enjoyed at Florida.

The thing is, opponents from players to other teams personel people all agreed that the system would not work as it was in the NFL with the Skins; Spuirriers system.

This year people are not knocking Joe Gibbs system; most teams use at least a version of it if not almost in total; they've knocked Brunnel.