Tuesday Morning QB Poll (Week 5)

[BurgundyNGold]

Week 5 saw the the Redskins run of victories come to an end as they were beaten handily by the Gints up in the Meadowloads. The Redskins could not stop the opponent defensively and could not muster more that 3 points offensively. Quarterback Mark Brunell completed 12 of 22 passes for a lackluster 109 yards as the Gints went on to drop the Redskins season tally to 2-3 by a score of 19-3.

What's your opinion on the Redskins starting QB? Here's how it works: Every week you vote for either "Approve", "Disapprove" or "Undecided". Remember, this question is a general feeling question, so it's not necessarily a result of the previous week's effort. I will then chart the results and post them as part of the next weeks poll. The polls will stay open until Saturday PM.

Ready, set ... vote!

More Info in the Blog, Results posted in the Blog over the weekend, tracking each week.

Here are last week's results...
http://img102.imageshack.us/img102/1821/2006qbpollweek04hj1.th.png (http://img102.imageshack.us/my.php?image=2006qbpollweek04hj1.png)

[CNYSkinFan]

for the first time ever I am undecided. I just don't know if this wasr Brunell's fault or the Line or the playcalling.

[Keino]

My general feeling is one of approval. When the offense around him is working, he is effective. When it is not, he is not.

[SpicyMcHaggis]

Undecided. Much like the rest of the offense, one week we play very well, the next we are horrible. We have, in 5 games, scored more than 30 points twice and just 3 points twice. Baffling. But the defense is consistent though..consistently bad.

[AliBabba]

Week 5 saw the the Redskins run of victories come to an end as they were beaten handily by the Gints up in the Meadowloads. The Redskins could not stop the opponent defensively and could not muster more that 3 points offensively. Quarterback Mark Brunell completed 12 of 22 passes for a lackluster 109 yards as the Gints went on to drop the Redskins season tally to 2-3 by a score of 19-3.

What's your opinion on the Redskins starting QB? Here's how it works: Every week you vote for either "Approve", "Disapprove" or "Undecided". Remember, this question is a general feeling question, so it's not necessarily a result of the previous week's effort. I will then chart the results and post them as part of the next weeks poll. The polls will stay open until Saturday PM.

Ready, set ... vote!

More Info in the Blog, Results posted in the Blog over the weekend, tracking each week.

Here are last week's results...
http://img102.imageshack.us/img102/1821/2006qbpollweek04hj1.th.png (http://img102.imageshack.us/my.php?image=2006qbpollweek04hj1.png)
Disaprove.

Do NOT change him YET. Brunell needs to start for now. After the Indy game, let's see how the situation looks. If at that time, Brunell has not picked it up, then lets get Campbell "coached up" during the bye.

[Keino]

Disaprove.

Do NOT change him YET. Brunell needs to start for now. After the Indy game, let's see how the situation looks. If at that time, Brunell has not picked it up, then lets get Campbell "coached up" during the bye.

Do you really want Campbell's first start (Under that scenario) to be against Dallas? I don't.

[BurgundyNGold]

My general feeling is one of approval. When the offense around him is working, he is effective. When it is not, he is not.
Yeah, this is pretty much where I am. He has his limitiations, we all know it. But right now, with the proper running game and OL play I think Brunell gives us the best chance to win.

[AliBabba]

Do you really want Campbell's first start (Under that scenario) to be against Dallas? I don't.
Yes. If Brunell doesn't look good against the Titans and colts.

[BurgundyNGold]

Do you really want Campbell's first start (Under that scenario) to be against Dallas? I don't.
Me either. If they terrorize him then we can look forward to 10 years of Campbell having a Dallass stigma.

[redskin_rich]

For the first time I am voting disapprove. It's not all on Mark but we simply don't have a good enough team to win on any consistent basis with a game manager.
It's time to usher in a new day. I'm ready to see what we invested 3 draft picks on last year. Bring on Jason Campbell.

[MONK_in_HOF]

I am undecided. The offensive line totally let him down last game, but he no longer has the legs to create much when the line breaks down.

[Skinz4lyfe]

I tentatively voted approve. But I would like to see what we can do if we do get a QB w/some mobility back there. Nevertheless, that line needs to step up and do better.

[Redskin4Life]

I still approve of the QB play... the weeks that Brunell looks great is cause of the OLine playing as they're expected to. The OLinemen have had maybe ONE good game (the Texans don't count)... Brunell's not going to be my scapegoat for the real problem. OLINE, YOU BETTER PICK IT UP!!

[NCskinsfanatic]

I disapprove of the OL, I've stated at length that Brunell is plenty good enough to win, his arm still has enough zip and he probably has the best understanding of this O, well other than Todd Collins. The OL isn't run blocking or pass protecting that is what I disapprove of.

[BostonSkins]

Disapprove, as always.

He's just not the guy, start Campbell soon. Maybe even this week against the Titans. What is the worst that could happen, we lose? We're not winning now.

[AliBabba]

Me either. If they terrorize him then we can look forward to 10 years of Campbell having a Dallass stigma.
My rational is as follows:

Although Brunell did not LOSE the game yesterday or in Dalass he did nothing to help us win either. Both teams are very susceptible to QBs going over the top: Giants (see Manning, McNabb, and Hasselback) and Cowboys (see Leftwich and McNabb). Now I don't know if a QB with a live arm would have won us the game yesterday, but I know that one big play could have gotten us back in it and allowed us to establish a running game.

My fear is that Brunell cannot outright win us these types of games. I know what happened against Jax but I believe that another QB with a solid game and a weapon like Moss could have produced similar results. Brunell's inconsistency, back-pedalling, weak arm, love of the quck toss OOB and lack of mobility (in the pocket) are going to be a weakness that good defenses will try to exploit all year.

I know that inserting an inexperienced QB is rarely the answer and I do not believe JC will all of a sudden make us an amazing team. BUT I do think that he will add a dimension to our offense that will make us more difficult to gameplan for. With all that said, I want to give Brunell two more weeks agains Tenn and Indy to see what he can do. I say this partly because I know there is NO chance that JC will start next week and partly because I think Brunell may have enough left to make it through this season. If I see him backing up against that sorry Tennessee defense or constantly throwing the ball OOB the next two weeks - I want him out of there.

[Swirvi]

At the rate we are going, we are in for a .500 season. I don't see any difference between finishing 8-8 with Brunell and 5-11 or 6-10 with Jason Campbell. Neither one is satisfactory and at least with Campbell, he will have had about 1/2 of a season to prepare for next year and we will get the better draft pick.

I'm not down on this year already. But I think we just need some sort of a spark. What if Jason Campbell can provide that?

[Vonslydog]

Once again, I remain undecided.

[shally]

Week 5 saw the the Redskins run of victories come to an end as they were beaten handily by the Gints up in the Meadowloads. The Redskins could not stop the opponent defensively and could not muster more that 3 points offensively. Quarterback Mark Brunell completed 12 of 22 passes for a lackluster 109 yards as the Gints went on to drop the Redskins season tally to 2-3 by a score of 19-3.

What's your opinion on the Redskins starting QB? Here's how it works: Every week you vote for either "Approve", "Disapprove" or "Undecided". Remember, this question is a general feeling question, so it's not necessarily a result of the previous week's effort. I will then chart the results and post them as part of the next weeks poll. The polls will stay open until Saturday PM.

Ready, set ... vote!

More Info in the Blog, Results posted in the Blog over the weekend, tracking each week.

Here are last week's results...
http://img102.imageshack.us/img102/1821/2006qbpollweek04hj1.th.png (http://img102.imageshack.us/my.php?image=2006qbpollweek04hj1.png)

brunell is making a bad situation worse..play campbell

[SpicyMcHaggis]

At the rate we are going, we are in for a .500 season. I don't see any difference between finishing 8-8 with Brunell and 5-11 or 6-10 with Jason Campbell. Neither one is satisfactory and at least with Campbell, he will have had about 1/2 of a season to prepare for next year and we will get the better draft pick.

I'm not down on this year already. But I think we just need some sort of a spark. What if Jason Campbell can provide that?
Actually, because of the Duckett trade, that may not be true.

[Keino]

I find it interesting that on a general feeling question in the span of 7 days people can go from approve to disapprove. I can see all those who approved last week now being undecided, but I can't understand the extreme shift from one Pole to the opposite.

[smoak]

The votes are 6-6-6. That is a really telling outcome.

Honestly, I don't see how people disapprove of Brunell. The defense was horrible. The line was ineffective. The receivers dropped passes.

This isn't the fault of any one man.

[redskin_rich]

Like I said before, I don't blame the loss on Brunell but I don't think we can win enough to make the playoffs with him this year. Therefore, I think it is time to move on. I have to vote disapprove if I want someone else QB'ing this team.

[PennSkinsFan]

As one fo the harsher Brunell critics, I give him an approval this week and a thumbs up for weathering a pass rush storm because of an inconsistent Line. Brunell did nothing to switch me from approve to disapprove, this one lays squarely at the hands of Casey Rabach, Jon Jansen, Randy Thomas, Chris Samuels and Derrick Dockery.

[Dolla Bill]

brunell is making a bad situation worse..play campbell


That's my borderline way of thinking Shally. On one hand, I do not want to concede the season, but what if playing Campbell salvages the season? Brunell plays not to loose a game, but he will not go out and win a game. In the end, I do believe it is a team sport, and where one fails, the others fall like dominos as well.

[PennSkinsFan]

My rational is as follows:

Although Brunell did not LOSE the game yesterday or in Dalass he did nothing to help us win either. Both teams are very susceptible to QBs going over the top: Giants (see Manning, McNabb, and Hasselback) and Cowboys (see Leftwich and McNabb). Now I don't know if a QB with a live arm would have won us the game yesterday, but I know that one big play could have gotten us back in it and allowed us to establish a running game.

Can't win the game. when your running for your life.

[AliBabba]

I find it interesting that on a general feeling question in the span of 7 days people can go from approve to disapprove. I can see all those who approved last week now being undecided, but I can't understand the extreme shift from one Pole to the opposite.
I actually voted "Undecided" and that is not based as much on poor play but on lack of upside and lack of potential-to-turn-a-game-around-with-a-big-play-when-we-need-it

[Swirvi]

The votes are 6-6-6. That is a really telling outcome.

Honestly, I don't see how people disapprove of Brunell. The defense was horrible. The line was ineffective. The receivers dropped passes.

This isn't the fault of any one man.

To be honest, I have never approved of Brunell. He has had 2 good weeks out of 5. One was against the Texans, and we all know that Campbell could have done just as well with the check down passes. Brunell's only real good game came against Jacksonville, and even then I wasn't that impressed. Still, the majority of his passes were less than 15 yard dumpoffs and our skill players did the rest. He had one nice deep pass to a WIDE OPEN Lloyd, which any QB worth drafting should be able to hit. And it has even been admitted that his "game-winning" touchdown pass was a bad call since he threw it into double coverage, when Lloyd had single coverage on the other side of the field; and it was Moss who went up and made the play. I honestly don't think J.C. could have fared any worse over the last 5 weeks. Everyone talks about how most defenses eat up rookie QBs; but there are 2 things I will comment on that. For one, when defenses have provided any kind of pressure, Brunell has faltered big time. No coincidence that his 2 good games were the ones where he was unsacked. But give any QB enough time, and he will prosper. For another, I honestly think J.C. will fare a little better than Brunell agaisnt attacking defenses for his scrambling abilities alone. If he can make one or two attackers miss, he might buy himself enough time to pick up some yards or better yet, dump the ball off to one of our check down receivers. I know that Gibbs will not put JC in at all this year (or very much likely will not) but I don't see the negative with going with another option. We HAVE to see what we have in this QB.

[PennSkinsFan]

I actually voted "Undecided" and that is not based as much on poor play but on lack of upside and lack of potential-to-turn-a-game-around-with-a-big-play-when-we-need-itYeah but he deleivered the when-we-need-strike against Jacksonville?

[AliBabba]

Yeah but he deleivered the when-we-need-strike against Jacksonville?

:)

He did, but having an amazing punt returner at WR doesn't hurt. Not to take anything away from Brunell on that throw, because it won us the game, but when you have a playmaker like Moss playing a game like he was last week, you run more plays to get the ball in his hands, as we did. I believe that JC would have been sent out with the same instruction, to get the ball near Santana so he could make a play.

Also, last year Brunell made a few nice plays in week 2 against some team I can't remember and really was given carte blanche afterwards. He stunk it up at the end of the year though. I don't want us to become complacent and not analyze the QBs performance week to week based on one or two good plays.

[PennSkinsFan]

:)

He did, but having an amazing punt returner at WR doesn't hurt. Not to take anything away from Brunell on that throw, because it won us the game, but when you have a playmaker like Moss playing a game like he was last week, you run more plays to get the ball in his hands, as we did. I believe that JC would have been sent out with the same instruction, to get the ball near Santana so he could make a play.

Also, last year Brunell made a few nice plays in week 2 against some team I can't remember and really was given carte blanche afterwards. He stunk it up at the end of the year though. I don't want us to become complacent and not analyze the QBs performance week to week based on one or two good plays.

Believe me, I agree and I am not the biggest Brunell fan in the world, but just like we should not fluctuate week to week by a big play here or there he makes, we should not penalize him either when his offensive line failed to show up and offer any kind of protection to him.

Sunday's loss falls solely in the hands of the defensive line for lack of pressure, offensive line for failing to protect Brunell and open the running game, and a secondary that was flat out lost. Brunell was not a factor the loss of that game at all. He really stood no chance with the way his line played.

[redskin_rich]

Believe me, I agree and I am not the biggest Brunell fan in the world, but just like we should not fluctuate week to week by a big play here or there he makes, we should not penalize him either when his offensive line failed to show up and offer any kind of protection to him.

I promise not to fluctuate, as I approved every week last year, even when it wasn't deserved, because I thought Brunell was the best option. I now think JC is the best option and I will disapprove every week until he gets in the game. Then he will have to deserve my approval.

[PennSkinsFan]

:lol1: I promise not to fluctuate, as I approved every week last year, even when it wasn't deserved, because I thought Brunell was the best option. I now think JC is the best option and I will disapprove every week until he gets in the game. Then he will have to deserve my approval.

[RoanokeSkin]

I have been a constant disapprover of Mark. I fluctuated over to the approve side because of what I saw last week, but I did it with caution and even stated that it might be a mirage. I know the offensive line was not great (although Brunell had time on plenty of throws) and that the defense wasnt perfect (although not enough credit has been given for holding the Giants to field goals in several situations or it would have been 35-3).

The fact of the matter is that Mark can manage a game, but he isnt going to win you many. I watched McNabb take over the game against Dallas with big throws, and I believe it is time that we see if we can inject some life into this offense. 2 good games and 3 bad ones = disapprove.

[silverspring]

I voted disapprove, there is really nothing about our offense that i approved of last week. And at this point the question won't go away. We have now played 5 games, we haven't connected on 1 deep pass. Is it that saunders 700 pg playbook doesn't have any deep passes or is it that our coaching staff doesn't have confidence in brunell's arm?

[openallnight]

Although, there's much more to blame for this loss. The fact still remains our QB couldn't do enough himself to muster 20 measly points against the giants. Therefore, I disapprove.

[BurgundyNGold]

7-9-8. This poll is sure bringing a lot of clarity to the QB situation, lol.

[helimech24]

QB was fine this game, he had no turnovers. The WRs didn't get open at all, and the line was crap. Brunell did the best he could without the support of the rest of the offense.

[Redskin4Life]

QB was fine this game, he had no turnovers. The WRs didn't get open at all, and the line was crap. Brunell did the best he could without the support of the rest of the offense.
Here, here... well stated.

[DoGood]

I barely voted "approve" because the O-Line never showed up last week. Those guys are as inconsistant as they get. If Mark bombs with good protection, then we have a problem.

[PennSkinsFan]

How can many of you say "i disapproved as always", when last week there was ONLY 1 Disapprove vote?

[smoak]

To be honest, I have never approved of Brunell. He has had 2 good weeks out of 5. One was against the Texans, and we all know that Campbell could have done just as well with the check down passes.
So now Campbell can come in and do something that only one quarterback in the history of the game was able to accomplish??? I know that is was a simplified game plan, but Brunell executed and we don't if Campbell is or isn't caapable of doing anything close to that. I've seen NFL QBs throw checkdowns into the chest of D-linemen.


Brunell's only real good game came against Jacksonville, and even then I wasn't that impressed. Still, the majority of his passes were less than 15 yard dumpoffs and our skill players did the rest. He had one nice deep pass to a WIDE OPEN Lloyd, which any QB worth drafting should be able to hit. And it has even been admitted that his "game-winning" touchdown pass was a bad call since he threw it into double coverage, when Lloyd had single coverage on the other side of the field; and it was Moss who went up and made the play. I honestly don't think J.C. could have fared any worse over the last 5 weeks.

Again, that is wild speculation that Campbell would be as good. Brunell was fine in the Jags game, adn while I agree that his decision to throw to Moss was questionable, there is no denying the rapport they have and the need to get the football to the only receiver who seems capable of making a play. Brunell took a calculated risk and it worked out. Had it not worked out I'd be more likely to knock him for it.

Everyone talks about how most defenses eat up rookie QBs; but there are 2 things I will comment on that. For one, when defenses have provided any kind of pressure, Brunell has faltered big time. No coincidence that his 2 good games were the ones where he was unsacked. But give any QB enough time, and he will prosper. For another, I honestly think J.C. will fare a little better than Brunell agaisnt attacking defenses for his scrambling abilities alone. If he can make one or two attackers miss, he might buy himself enough time to pick up some yards or better yet, dump the ball off to one of our check down receivers. I know that Gibbs will not put JC in at all this year (or very much likely will not) but I don't see the negative with going with another option. We HAVE to see what we have in this QB.

We get it. You don't like Brunell and you want to see Campbell. I don't disagree on wanting to see Campble, but not with the season on the line. If we drop games to the Titans and Colts then I think it is time to close the era on MB. Until then I have his back.

[DoGood]

How can many of you say "i disapproved as always", when last week there was ONLY 1 Disapprove vote?

Easy. Some people live to hate. They avoid positive talk on the forums after a win like grim death.

[Keino]

How can many of you say "i disapproved as always", when last week there was ONLY 1 Disapprove vote?

Exactly.. People are using the criteria that BNG puts forth, yet another reason why these polls should be public.

[smoak]

Easy. Some people live to hate. They avoid positive talk on the forums after a win like grim death.

Exactly why I get so annoyed. Oh well. There isn't anything I can control other than the number of times I visit. And on that note...

[Dolla Bill]

Easy. Some people live to hate. They avoid positive talk on the forums after a win like grim death.

Actually, Bostonskin as I recall was that lone vote. At least he stuck to his guns. I had to vote undecided because I really saw tentativeness out of Brunell during the game, which makes me wonder if he's second guessing his arm or his decision making. I went from approve to undecided because I wanted to believe that MB was turning things around. If the OL can decide to show up to gameday, then this will always be approve.

[Biggie]

I voted disapprove, not because I hate Mark or anything, but because he's no longer good enough to make plays or take command of the team on his own. He's only as good as the offensive line in front of him, and that't not going to get it done against guys like Dwight Freeney.

[smoak]

I voted disapprove, not because I hate Mark or anything, but because he's no longer good enough to make plays or take command of the team on his own. He's only as good as the offensive line in front of him, and that't not going to get it done against guys like Dwight Freeney.

Just out of curiosity, what QB in the league is good without solid line play? I see Brady breakdown with pressure. McNabb has been having all day at times. Eli and Bledsoe make HORRENDOUS decisions when pressured. I just think football is a team sport and we need to pull together rather than pull apart.

[BurgundyNGold]

Exactly.. People are using the criteria that BNG puts forth, yet another reason why these polls should be public.
http://www.energizer.com/images/bunny/bio/bunny.jpg

:D

[RedskinsDave]

I voted disapprove but that doesn't mean we currently have anyone better.

[FunBunch5]

I voted dissapprove. IMO any NFL caliber QB can consistently put up 110 yards or less passing in a game. I know Brunell had the big game against Jacksonville, but those good games seem to be too far in between bad games.

[becky]

I voted undecided because frankly that's how I feel about this entire team, including the QB position, which is suffering because of inconsistent protection. I mean who knows which team is really going to show up from week to week?

[Keino]

http://www.energizer.com/images/bunny/bio/bunny.jpg

:D

Persistance. I will find some way to slide it in every single poll until you comply or your head explodes.

[CarMike]

Overall, approved.

Last week, disapproved.

[BigPlayJay]

For the first time I am voting disapprove. It's not all on Mark but we simply don't have a good enough team to win on any consistent basis with a game manager.
It's time to usher in a new day. I'm ready to see what we invested 3 draft picks on last year. Bring on Jason Campbell.

I'm with you.

I don't care about draft picks, but I think we aren't using our weapons because for whatever reason Brunell doesn't get the ball to Lloyd at all and ARE rarely. I think it is his and not the scheme's problem because he had the same problem last year with Patten and others.

I like Mark as a person and veteran player, but I say play Campbell. He will turn it over a time or two more than Brunell, but the team will move the ball much more consistently which will lead to more points.

[ryflan47]

Everyone played awful. This loss is not completely on him.

Undecided

[dabro]

Undecided. I believe I read, somewhere in these pages, that the Giants were conceding the run in order to shut down the big play downfield. They often had 7 backs covering 3 WR downfield. That means there were no targets to throw to. So, if that was the case (you can't tell on tv), Mark did well by not throwing the ball up for interceptions. On the other hand, he hasn't thrown it long, in the air that is, all season.

Since the Defense is struggling this year against a generally tough schedule, I think it's time to put Campbell in and let him get acclimated. That way we won't have to go through this as long next year, when he is the starter. The kid has an arm and good accuracy.

[PennSkinsFan]

Actually, Bostonskin as I recall was that lone vote. At least he stuck to his guns. I had to vote undecided because I really saw tentativeness out of Brunell during the game, which makes me wonder if he's second guessing his arm or his decision making. I went from approve to undecided because I wanted to believe that MB was turning things around. If the OL can decide to show up to gameday, then this will always be approve.

And for that I respect BostonSkins. BUT, other here tend to say the have always disapporved, when that is just not the case. My point here is this, vote how you want, I don't care, don't explain your vote, fine with me, but don't ssay you have always voted to disapprove, when in fact, against jacksonville, besides BostonSkins, you likely either did not vote or voted to approve.

I will tell you straight up, the first two weeks i voted disapprove. Why? mark brunell was horrendous, he was off, looked loss, and uncomfortable in the system. After a big win against Houston and a 22 staright compeltion performance, I voted undecided. Why? It was Houston and I needed to see more, i needed Brunell to show me he has grown comfortable in this system. After Jacksonville, I voted to Approve finally because he shoed consistency in comfort, was on traget, and played very well. Then after this week, I vopted to continue to Approve, because despite the loss, Brunell played pretty well with what time he was given by his Line. Not many QBs would have excelled with that pathetic blocking.

I just don't like the jumping week to week based on a win or loss. It took three games to move me to approve, and one loss that was clearly the fault of both Lines, is not a reason to shift my vote.

[Dolla Bill]

And for that I respect BostonSkins. BUT, other here tend to say the have always disapporved, when that is just not the case. My point here is this, vote how you want, I don't care, don't explain your vote, fine with me, but don't ssay you have always voted to disapprove, when in fact, against jacksonville, besides BostonSkins, you likely either did not vote or voted to approve.

I will tell you straight up, the first two weeks i voted disapprove. Why? mark brunell was horrendous, he was off, looked loss, and uncomfortable in the system. After a big win against Houston and a 22 staright compeltion performance, I voted undecided. Why? It was Houston and I needed to see more, i needed Brunell to show me he has grown comfortable in this system. After Jacksonville, I voted to Approve finally because he shoed consistency in comfort, was on traget, and played very well. Then after this week, I vopted to continue to Approve, because despite the loss, Brunell played pretty well with what time he was given by his Line. Not many QBs would have excelled with that pathetic blocking.

I just don't like the jumping week to week based on a win or loss. It took three games to move me to approve, and one loss that was clearly the fault of both Lines, is not a reason to shift my vote.

I agree with you, but with the QB position, there are numerous other tangibles that have to go into play. OL, WR, RB, playcalling.

OL: Have to have them block the guys up front to give him a chance, same with runblocking. It sets up the passing plays.

WR: Are they open or not? Drop passes, run correct routes, and a relationship with the QB.

RB: Is he running well or picking up the blitz on that key 3rd down? Is he running the correct route as well?

Playcalling: This is where I have the biggest problem with. One game great, next game is garbage. Why have a play action fake, and the only WR running the pattern is your 5th worst receiver? I can go on and on about scenarios in which the playcalling was horrendous in the Meadowlands.

I would like to see more individual polls instead of just the QB. Break the whole team down if there was a way, or just throw up a complete Redskins yay, nay, or disapprove thread. OUR QB is as good as who is around him and whether they do their job. I voted undecided because how can I say he did a poor job when everything around him was horrible as well. Last week I voted approve, but it was because Moss bailed him out with some great runs after the catch. In the end, its a team game. You live as a team, and you die as a team, and right now, this is not a "team" in that sense of the word. We have too many individuals trying to shine, instead of working together to make the Washington Redskins shine.

[Meatsnack]

What's to approve of after a game like that?

[C-7]

I find it interesting that on a general feeling question in the span of 7 days people can go from approve to disapprove. I can see all those who approved last week now being undecided, but I can't understand the extreme shift from one Pole to the opposite.



I believe the these polls are based on this week's performance, and we are not supposed to consider how good or bad the QB before. Those have always been BnG's instructions since he began these threads. That said, I disaprove and think Gibbs is delaying Cambell way too long.

[CNYSkinFan]

19-18-17....pretty much 1/3 in each camp wow

[BurgundyNGold]

19-18-17....pretty much 1/3 in each camp wow
The only thing I can make of this is that nobody in Redskin Nation knows what to make of this team right now, lol.

[Dolla Bill]

The only thing I can make of this is that nobody in Redskin Nation knows what to make of this team right now, lol.


That also goes for the players as well to be honest. Until they establish an identity, then we will form one as well.

[Keino]

I believe the these polls are based on this week's performance, and we are not supposed to consider how good or bad the QB before. Those have always been BnG's instructions since he began these threads. That said, I disaprove and think Gibbs is delaying Cambell way too long.

You couldn't be more wrong. Taken from the first post on the thread from BNG, as he posts each and every week:

Every week you vote for either "Approve", "Disapprove" or "Undecided". Remember, this question is a general feeling question, so it's not necessarily a result of the previous week's effort.

It is a general feeling question. How you generally feel about the QB situation, so once again, I renew my laughter at the notion that in the span of 7 days ones feelings could go from Approve to Disapprove as a general feeling. Are we a bunch of flip floppers? Shouldn't the natural progression be Approve to Undecided?

I honestly expected "undecided" to run away with this week's vote, as anyone who watched the game would see that it didn't matter if Joe Montana was QB, we wouldn't have had much success out of the position.

[CNYSkinFan]

You couldn't be more wrong. Taken from the first post on the thread from BNG, as he posts each and every week:



It is a general feeling question. How you generally feel about the QB situation, so once again, I renew my laughter at the notion that in the span of 7 days ones feelings could go from Approve to Disapprove as a general feeling. Are we a bunch of flip floppers? Shouldn't the natural progression be Approve to Undecided?

I honestly expected "undecided" to run away with this week's vote, as anyone who watched the game would see that it didn't matter if Joe Montana was QB, we wouldn't have had much success out of the position.
that is exactly what I did. I went from approve to undecided. If we lose to Tennesee and rack up less then a buck 50 passing I will be disapproving no matter who is in.

[Meatsnack]

You couldn't be more wrong. Taken from the first post on the thread from BNG, as he posts each and every week:



It is a general feeling question. How you generally feel about the QB situation, so once again, I renew my laughter at the notion that in the span of 7 days ones feelings could go from Approve to Disapprove as a general feeling. Are we a bunch of flip floppers? Shouldn't the natural progression be Approve to Undecided?

I honestly expected "undecided" to run away with this week's vote, as anyone who watched the game would see that it didn't matter if Joe Montana was QB, we wouldn't have had much success out of the position.
With all due respect, it says, " ...not necessarily a result of the previous weeks effort." I have always said that each game is judged in isolation when I vote on these things because we do not have an established franchise guy. Brett Favre gets a ton of slack because of an incredible body of work in Green Bay. Mark Brunell has hardly strung together three good games in a row in the Burgundy and Gold. We have won as often in spite of him as because of him. Can you imagine what this offense with these wideouts, Portis, Sellers, and Cooley would look like with a consistent Qb who can throw deep (e.g.Tom Brady) running the controls? Mark is so incredibly inconsistent it's maddening. US flip-flopping? I think the onus for being up and down lives elsewhere.

[Raven Rick]

Interestingly enough the poll #'s at this time accurately represent his play, imo. 5o/50 yea-to-ney, and about a third of the poll still undecided. As you know we get the Redskins shoved down our throat by the networks here in B'more, so I've seen the games. Brunell's looked good half the time, and like this weekend, miserable the other 50% of the time.

You guys have the same problem the Ravens have, a very experienced QB who is on the downside of his career. He can have a great game, and then just lay an egg.

[redskinz#1fan]

I voted disapprove this week. My only reason is because Brunells keeps locking on to just one WR. He needs to correct this right away. The loss this week fell on the entire team, not just Brunell!

[LATrueRedskin]

Approve. The offense doesn't revolve around Mark Brunell, it revolves around the OLine. If the OLine's performance is bad, we lose. It's that simple.

[redwolf1218]

have you guys seen any young guy on this team take the place of a previous starter, barring injury?

there is no way Brunell will get replaced until he at least breaks a leg.

[redskin_rich]

have you guys seen any young guy on this team take the place of a previous starter, barring injury?

there is no way Brunell will get replaced until he at least breaks a leg.
I personally hope it doesn't come to that. I was as disappointed as anybody with Theismann in '85 but the horrific situation that removed him was tragic. I won't lie though, I felt we were better off for it.

I think Gibbs has learned since, he didn't hesitate to bench Schroeder for Williams and vice-versa, nor did he hesitate to bench Williams for Rypien. Gibbs also shocked everyone by benching George Rogers for an unknown RB, in Timmy Smith for a Super Bowl. We all know how that turned out...

In '04, most, if not all, of us felt that Gibbs stuck with Brunell too long. He finally made the switch to Ramsey and it didn't make that much of a difference. Then he proclaimed Ramsey the starter for '05 and didn't hesitate to make the switch again after the first game, much to most of us fans dismay. He was right again, as it turns out.

So, here we are in '06 with an 0-2 division record and 0-3 conference record. We now face two inter-conference teams and though we need to win at least one of them, they don't matter as much in the scheme of things. Obviously, barring injury, Brunell will start these next two games and the following game against Dallas. From then on, it is all divisional and conference games and we can't afford to lose any. Once and if we do, I think Gibbs will make the change. Maybe not after the first conference/divisional loss but definitely after the 2nd. At that point, we will be all but mathematically eliminated from playoff contention.
Now personally, I would make the change now, because I think the rest of what I outlined is inevitable. But I would gladly be wrong again.

[shally]

The only thing I can make of this is that nobody in Redskin Nation knows what to make of this team right now, lol.

uh... no, i do... give me a cattle prod and about 1 hr and i would have this team playing some serious football.. old school baby, old school.. i can still feel the sting of the coaches lanyard on my thighs.. i didn't need much more incentive than that memory to do some serious hitting.. LOL

[openallnight]

How can many of you say "i disapproved as always", when last week there was ONLY 1 Disapprove vote?
LOL, i guess the disapprovers abstained from voting last week.

[RedskinsATW!]

I like Brunell as a person (at least how he presents himself, never met him personally) but he's not getting it done. Is his glass half-full or half-empty? I don't know, is 8-8 a success? He's either red hot or ice cold every game. Don't misunderstand, the O-lines play hugely impacts a QB's performance, but I just don't see him getting better with age.

The real playmakers and core of this team are all in their early-to-mid 20's (Portis, Moss, Taylor, Cooley) and so is Campbell. Building a core group of guys for the next 8-10 years sounds like a pretty good idea. I don't think JC goes in and Voila!... we're a SB contender. However, I think the experience helps us long-term. But I'm due for my next dosage of meds here in a minute.

I must confess I thought Marvin Lewis was stark-raving crazy for starting Carson Palmer after a respectable veteran in John Kitna had a "decent" but sometimes inconsistant year. Is Jason Campbell the next Carson Palmer? Is he Heath Shuler? I don't know but we'll never know with him on the bench. I would really like to know if he's our future franchise QB or a first-round bust. If he's "the man", great. If not, we keep shopping.

What I do know is there is an uncanny resemblance to the play of Mark Brunell, Kurt Warner, Steve McNair, Drew Bledsoe, and Jake Plummer right now. Pro athletes have a shelf life and these guys are near the end of theirs. Overall, pretty good careers but the twilight is getting closer by the minute.

I guess the answer is: I vote for the switch which is a "disapprove." Tennessee is not too imposing defensively and the Colts are no defensive juggernaut. My $.02.