Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
On Twitter: RedskinsInsider and PostSports  |  Facebook  |  E-mail alerts: Redskins and Sports  |  RSS

The Punter Situation

Frost got kicked in the calf and will be listed as probable on the first injury report of the week. He is expected to play. So the Skins brought in Landetta for a little insurance and to give him a look in case they needed somone in a pinch.

By Jason La Canfora  |  October 11, 2006; 1:34 PM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: He's Gone, Oh I, I'd Pay the Devil to Replace Him/ He's Gone - What Went Wrong?
Next: The Sports Reporters - An Oxymoron? Or Maybe Just A Mor...

Comments

JLC, any chance for Saurbrun? That dude kicks bombs!

Posted by: ArtMonkToTheSticks | October 11, 2006 1:48 PM | Report abuse

Not sure if that was directly in response to my and other people's questions, but thanks for the info.

Posted by: PSUAsh | October 11, 2006 1:48 PM | Report abuse

Any idea who kicked Frost in the calf?

Posted by: Skin Patrol | October 11, 2006 1:52 PM | Report abuse

Jason
Thanks - I, for one, appreciate the fact that you are doing this bloggy-thingy.

Ignore the naysayers ... you have created a thriving online community here. This helps me pass the day away at work for those few sanity breaks I can indulge in during the work day.

Someday I would like to meet the blogging regulars (Megskin, P Diddy, ArtMonkToTheSticks, Skinz, Chief Clancy Wiggum , PSUAsh, Joe in Raleigh, HaikuMan, The Governor, A Dog, jm220, and many many more - please forgive me if I left you off but getting writer's cramps).

We still up for a pub crawling night out when the wiffey is away?

Posted by: X.Hog | October 11, 2006 1:57 PM | Report abuse

I think it was that punter up in Northern Colorado that kicked him...

Posted by: MV Dame | October 11, 2006 2:00 PM | Report abuse

Frost seems to have improved a bunch. Wasn't his fault that the G-men scored after pinning them at their 2. I'll take an occasional shank if he can bury a team as well.

Hall -- seemed like a good decision then. Accurate, strong leg, never hurt. An asset at a high price
Now, so-so accurate, limited leg strength, missed lots of games, expensive. A liability. Hall will be back somewhere, one day. Just not here. Maybe he'll replace Morten Anderson when he retires in a few years.

Not a tough call to say goodbye. Only kicker worth that kind of $$ -- Vinitieri.

for those who recall -- Novak's best kick didn't count -- 50yds vs Denver last year in that weather that got called back on penalty.

Novk's an upgrade, a good kicker with upside who did make some clutch kicks. Seems like kickers that are clutch are that way from day 1. A good sign. Kickoffs are an issue, for sure.

Either case, 'Skins kicking game isn't the issue. Its Jekyll and Hyde play of the offense, while the D is consistent -- in a bad way.

Posted by: AL | October 11, 2006 2:01 PM | Report abuse

With Salave'a struggling to stay on the field, do the Redskins have any interest in recently released Chief and former Redskin Lionel Dalton?

Posted by: Rain Man | October 11, 2006 2:05 PM | Report abuse

We're checking on Dalton and some other stuff as well.

Posted by: Jason La Canfora | October 11, 2006 2:08 PM | Report abuse

Whether Salave'a is on the field or not, I'm thinking the Skins are good at DT. Golston is joy and Montgomery is right on track. Salave'a has a high pain threshold. Its Cornelius G that is less durable. If there are defensive line moves to be made, its the end position. I wonder whether we can get Clemons back.

Posted by: dcsween | October 11, 2006 2:09 PM | Report abuse

Morten Anderson is going to have to die before he retires. Does that guy ever miss?

And that had to be Hall that kicked Frosty in the calf. Kicking jealousy and all ya know.

Seriously, Hall's kicking on Sunday wasn't at all like I think someone with a groin injury would be. Maybe it's sore or strained or pulled, but mayhap Gibbs has just had it with him being half-injured all the time; I'm not suggesting any conspiracy or cover-up(but that would be great if there was)...ohh, what was I going to say? Forget it; talking about kickers is so gawdawful boring.

Somebody write some more haikus or start all the nonsensical talk about how we can't get into the playoffs when we're not even at the halfway point, or complain about Brunell and his limp-noodle arm so we can all get mad at each other and scream and yell.

Oh, by the way. Didn't AC pitch yet another shutout? Oops, wrong sport right? Hehe, you know us women and sports, we just get so confused. Anyways, I just love AC and think he's really hawt, but 10 tackles and one measly sack in 5 games? Ouch!

Posted by: Megskin | October 11, 2006 2:23 PM | Report abuse

My favorite JLaC comment so far was "Frosty lives, Frosty lives". I will forever be a Frosty fan just for that comment.

Only in DC (and maybe Denver), do fans obsess over the kicker waiver wire. It's one of the main reasons I love being a 'Skins fan.

Posted by: P Diddy | October 11, 2006 2:24 PM | Report abuse

Brunell sucks. Put in Campbell.

Discuss.

:-)

Posted by: P Diddy | October 11, 2006 2:24 PM | Report abuse

Come on dcsween, you dont think Andre Carter is working out? Havent you seen the way he just throw offensive lineman around and scares the daylights out of running backs trying to block him? I mean seriously, opposing O-line coaches gameplan around that freak of a football player.

Kidding if you couldnt figure it out. We need to start looking at games on Sat. maybe we can find our future Charles Mann and Dex(I cause train wrecks)Manley. I loved that duo.....Ahhhh the glory days.

Posted by: gatorskinz2000 | October 11, 2006 2:25 PM | Report abuse

First they lured Coach Joe
Now Nascar's got a new Skin
Vote for Heath Shuler!

Posted by: MV Dame | October 11, 2006 2:35 PM | Report abuse

Ah, that clears that bit up. Thanks for the deeper information on Landeta's appearance, JlaC. I didn't think Frost was kicking horribly, just slightly erratic. When he's on the ball, he'll boom them quite nicely downfield. Hopefully, more experience will straighten that out. (It's nice to worry about giving players more experience, rather than whether someone's going to finally break down in a season or two, isn't it?)

Posted by: FlimFlam | October 11, 2006 2:43 PM | Report abuse

Dexter and Charles: wow. Yeah, we are never going to see a duo like that here again.

Posted by: Megskin | October 11, 2006 2:49 PM | Report abuse

X.Hog - Forgot about the pub crawl.
I'm up for doing something tonight in Shirlington/Old Towne area. Planning to go out and watch the baseball game.
The more the merrier.

Posted by: Jason La Canfora | October 11, 2006 2:49 PM | Report abuse

I've never understood kickers... its a very specific trade. I'm sure the pressure is big time, but let's be honest. You spend alllll week doing your thing. You kick. Sure, they're a "different breed" and "not football players", but why is there such a revolving door with kickers? Does the pressure get to them? I know in baseball, some guys just aren't cut out to be the closer. With a closer, you want a blow away fastball, but sometimes you get a guy who just has giant marbles. Not blow away, not dominant... just clutch. You can have that 3 digit heat, butthe inability to shrug off a bad pitch. Those guys don't hack it. So we have kickers, the NFL version of the closer. We want clutch. We want testicular fortitude. 50+ yard range is nice, but my God, please just be consistent. Line it up and nail it. That's my rant. I know I usually don't contribute much substance to the group, but there's my beef.

Posted by: Dorf | October 11, 2006 2:51 PM | Report abuse

Did anyone ever find out what was up with Marcus Washington spitting up during the game? Is he ok?! I saw him get run over that one play and I was concerned but never heard anything else.

Posted by: skinzgirl53 | October 11, 2006 2:56 PM | Report abuse

"I think it was that punter up in Northern Colorado that kicked him..."


Good one, MV Dame.

Posted by: Joe in Raleigh | October 11, 2006 2:56 PM | Report abuse

Jason - tonight sounds like fun BUT I need at least 1 day advanced warning since I live at the beach (VAB).

Please PLEASE do have Pub Crawl #1 tonight and post plenty of digital pics for all to enjoy.

Maybe you can even swing by Megskins cave.

Posted by: X.Hog | October 11, 2006 2:59 PM | Report abuse

Megskin,

Have you seen Dexter Manleys son?

Dexter Manley II DL 6-2 266 Jr. Fairfax, VA

He plays for Oregon. Hes not too shabby. He leads their team in sacks, and second in tackles for loss.

Never say never. I guess the question is, does Charles Mann have a son that plays as well.

Posted by: gatorskinz2000 | October 11, 2006 3:01 PM | Report abuse

To all the Brunell bashers I have a question...

Do you think JC is the best qb we have? Why? I saw this kid play in college a handful of times. He was a good college qb, thats it. Nothing more. He played with 2 really good RBs and played behind a nasty Oline. Easy to be succesful qb at that point. Nothing to warrant trading all we did for him. I strongly believe we made a mistake by trading up for him.

I agree Brunell has his moments where he'd get benched if he were a HS qb. But JC is not the answer. He wont win us super bowl.

Now dont get me wrong, I hope I eat these words, and JC turns out to be a great qb. But in my heart I find it really hard to believe that he can.

Brunell, you have 1 fan here -- just no stupid mistakes please.

HAIL

Posted by: Not a Brunell Fan, but not a hater either | October 11, 2006 3:03 PM | Report abuse

Have you seen Dexter Manleys son?

Nope, can't say I have.

Too bad some other team (one that builds through the draft) will get him while we sit and watch him maul the rest of the NFL until he's knees are shot, he's lost a step, and can hardly tackle anymore before the Skins sign him to a five-year bazillion dollar contract.

Posted by: Megskin | October 11, 2006 3:11 PM | Report abuse

But JC is not the answer. He wont win us super bowl.

Nor will Brunell, end of discussion.

Posted by: Megskin | October 11, 2006 3:16 PM | Report abuse

Given the nature of Sauerbruns suspension I don't see Gibbs bringing him aboard. You know Gibbs is all about "character" players.

Posted by: skinzgirl53 | October 11, 2006 3:18 PM | Report abuse

Given the nature of Sauerbruns suspension I don't see Gibbs bringing him aboard. You know Gibbs is all about "character" players.

Posted by: skinzgirl53 | October 11, 2006 3:18 PM | Report abuse

Jason La Canfora: You do not want to meet these goons. I bet you this is such a motley crew of people. I love you all, but we know Jason...he does not want to see us. Just an awkward mix of middle-aged people who have 9 kids and live in Frederick with twentysomethings that rep it to the death in Gtown.


Posted by: The Governor | October 11, 2006 3:19 PM | Report abuse

I like frosty... no need to risk Sauerbraun on this team, especially since other teams with worse punters are avoiding him right now too. let the steroids thing and other incidents clear up with another team.

What about bringing in some help at D though? The Patriots just released a D-lineman as well as Hank Poteat, and other teams are shedding some defense too. Maybe we can go back to having the ol' Gregg style defense, no real superstars, but a bunch of guys working together. it's disgusting that our defense is as bad as it is right now.

Posted by: Helmfish | October 11, 2006 3:21 PM | Report abuse

As far as the Brunell issue. We all can pretty much assume that he wont be the one to take us to a Super Bowl. My bigger issue, is that we havent had a solid quarterback in years. When will we get our franchise QB? Who will it be? Will we ever get one?

Take 5 very good QBs for example: Troy Aikman, Peyton Manning, Dan Marino, and John Elway, Joe Montana. All started at some point in their rookie years. We constantly go for older, past prime QB's and look for 2-3 good years out of them. We will invest in young O-linemen, Jansen/Samuels and make them Redskins for life. When have done that in the past 20+ years?

If Gibbs would have had any of these QB's, none would have played their rookie years. And that is scary.

And no I am not saying that Campbell is any where on the level of these Qb's, but I am also not saying he isnt. There is only one way to find out. Brunell isnt the answer, we know this. He is too inconsistent, maybe if we had him in the mid 90's, but he isnt on that level anymore.

Posted by: gatorskinz2000 | October 11, 2006 3:24 PM | Report abuse

I don't understand how the D got so bad?!! We were off the hook last year. They're acting like they don't know how to tackle. On one play Sunday I counted 5 missed tackles. That is NOT a G Williams defense

Posted by: skinzgirl53 | October 11, 2006 3:24 PM | Report abuse

No go on Dalton from what we here.

Posted by: Jason La Canfora | October 11, 2006 3:25 PM | Report abuse

Any rumors/rumblings about bringing in Derek Strait, the corner that the jets just released?

Posted by: Greg (Boston) | October 11, 2006 3:25 PM | Report abuse

it's disgusting that our defense is as bad as it is right now.

Yup. Like a mouthful of warm, chunky sewage water. Grilliams needs to get with it.

Posted by: Megskin | October 11, 2006 3:25 PM | Report abuse

Jason Campbell was an excellent QB in college, not merely a "good" one. He finished his senior year with a 70% completion percentage and protected the ball well. He was 2nd in the league at 10 yards per attempt, which means you'll have a hard time chalking that completion percentage up to short throws.

And he did that against punishing SEC defenses.

His team certainly deserves enormous credit for that success, but he's a Professional Grade football player. Whether or not he should replace Brunell is a discussion worth having, but don't undervalue Campbell just because you stand by Brunell.

Posted by: Skin Patrol | October 11, 2006 3:26 PM | Report abuse

a small plane just hit a nyc building. right now tv has more coverage than newspaper sites.

Posted by: dealer | October 11, 2006 3:30 PM | Report abuse

Sorry for the 2nd post, but can we stop with the theories regarding Jason Campbell, and whether he'll be a successful qb or not? Lets let him actually play in a game or two before we pass judgement on the guy. He's held a clipboard for 2 years, what POSSIBLE evidence has he given to indicate that he can't cut it?

Posted by: Greg (Boston) | October 11, 2006 3:30 PM | Report abuse

Not sure if I fall under the "basher" category.

I don't think JC was worth all those picks. 2 First Rounders and a 3rd rounder? I'm not sure anyone who's name doesn't end in Manning (The elder) or Brady is worth that.

I just wonder how many years of Portis, ARE, Moss, Taylor etc. prime are going to be wasted as we watch an elder qb deteriorate and a young qb learn. My preference is to GASP think long-term.

JC has to take his lumps and learn the game. Skins have to find out if he's NFL material. I'd rather "throw away" this year and have 3 years of Portis, Moss, Taylor et al's prime than waste another one.

Anyway I'm not sure we'd be much worse, if at all with JC in the game.

If that constitutes me as a basher then I'm guilty as charged.

Posted by: Skinz | October 11, 2006 3:30 PM | Report abuse

Megskin, what are the chances that Snyder, in his endless pursuit of the good ol' days, DOESN'T draft Dexter Manley II first-round in 2008? I say slim to none. Even if the Skins have traded away all their picks by then, he'll find a way to make it happen.

Be wary of any reports about TomKat being part-owner of whichever franchise ends up in LA. They're sure to have the first pick in the draft which they'll kindly trade to the Redskins for a song...

Posted by: MV Dame | October 11, 2006 3:33 PM | Report abuse

So I guess the theory would be to throw Campbell to the wolves while he tries to learn his 6th offensive system in the last 6 years? Last time I checked Brunnel had a qb rating of 90 for the year. They COLLECTIVELY played LOUSY against the Giants. Look at Phillip Rivers, how did he do spending a few years on the bench? Seems like he's going to be ok?

Posted by: Greg (Boston) | October 11, 2006 3:34 PM | Report abuse

"take his lumps"... ugh. Why does everyone keep saying that?

Posted by: Joe in Raleigh | October 11, 2006 3:38 PM | Report abuse

Here's a nice quote from one of J La C's columns in today's Post:

"The Redskins will play the 40th game of the second Gibbs era on Sunday -- including the playoffs -- and stand at 19-20. Six of those wins came during the team's winning streak in December and January of last season, the only momentum the team has shown since this staff took over in 2004.

For all of the big salaries and talent among the players and coaches, the Redskins have been inconsistent much of this coaching staff's time, playing well only when their backs seem to be against the wall.

"That's kind of been the story here since I've been here -- not being consistent and coming out every week with the same kind of intensity," said tailback Ladell Betts, a 2002 draft pick. "It's tough to put your finger on how that happens or why it happens. It's just something that is right now, and we have to try to change it."

How many times have we heard that: "It's tough to figure out why we suck." How about this for an answer: It starts at the top. I've heard a lot about how Gibbs is going to bring back organizational smartness to a team that has been very lacking in that department. He's been labeled the CEO of the team. But look at a lot of the key personnel decisions. Only this week they finally realize that Hall's career is basically over? I mean, come on, hello! That's not the sign of a smart, winning organization. Ore what about the Duckett signing? You know, during the Gibbs I era, Gibbs did not have final say on personnel decisions. It wasn't his strength. That's why we had Bobby Beatherd. Gibbs's strength was offensive play calling and making half-time adjustments.

The bottom line is that the Redskins did not come out ready to play against a fired-up, motivated Giants team. Except for the end of last season when they faced elimination, they haven't been able to play consistently, and often times look like a bottom-rung team. Anyone remember the Raiders and Tampa Bay games last year?

Snyder keeps making the same mistake that the whole team makes: going after the big-name free agent. In this case it was Gibbs, the biggest name free agent coach. What is a lot harder to do, but what Jack Kent Cooke did back in 1980, and winning teams do now, is find a young, up and coming assistant coach, team him up with a solid, experienced general manager, and let them assemble a cohesive football team over the span of a couple of years. I'm sorry to say it, but that's what this organization needs, what we didn't get, and, with Snyder as owner, probably never will. Then again, what does Snyder care, the Skins are the most profitable sports franchise in the country.

Posted by: jakeweed | October 11, 2006 3:42 PM | Report abuse

Do you take sugar? One lump or two?

Posted by: MV Dame | October 11, 2006 3:43 PM | Report abuse

Skins,

"I don't think JC was worth all those picks. 2 First Rounders and a 3rd rounder? I'm not sure anyone who's name doesn't end in Manning (The elder) or Brady is worth that."

The Redskins traded Denver for their 1st round pick in 2005 (which ultimately landed them JC) for a 1st rounder the next year, a 3rd rounder that year, and 4th rounder in 2006. So JC was not traded for "two first rounders" but rather a 3rd and 4th rounder.

Tom Brady was selected, I believe, in the 6th round. Yet he still matured into one of the greatest QBs in the league.

I agree with pretty much everything else you said to one degree or another.

Posted by: Skin Patrol | October 11, 2006 3:45 PM | Report abuse

Skin Patrol,

My point was those are the only two players in the league i'd trade 2 first rounders and a third rounder for.

Reg: Taking lumps. Everyone around here is getting grumpy. Give me a better way of putting it and i'll use it.

I'm trying to think of two qb's who played in their second year.

Rothlesburger in his second year...hmmm won a superbowl.

Emanning.com in his second year passed for more yards than his brother and was 5th overall.

Posted by: Skinz | October 11, 2006 3:52 PM | Report abuse

Hey all, can we please stop referring to Jason Campbell as "JC"? It's making me a little uncomfortable. I mean he may one day end up being a heck of a quarterback, but he'll never be Jim Caviezel...

Posted by: MV Dame | October 11, 2006 3:53 PM | Report abuse

Hey guys. Even if they signed someone now, it would be real tough for him to play Sunday, especially a corner or a position like that.
Usually. it's something they'll look at again after Sunday's game and make another round of calls, unless there is a guy so talent that they'd need to sign him now to keep him from signing elsewhere.

I wouldn't expect more this week, but next week could be interesting.

Posted by: Jason La Canfora | October 11, 2006 3:56 PM | Report abuse

Meg, Hall stabbed him in the calf-- with envy.
Gov, you kill me.

QB coaches, #8 is going no where except with the first team o, until he totally wigs out, or he's injured. JC is holding the clip board and nothing more. Next year, totally different.

Posted by: coolio | October 11, 2006 3:59 PM | Report abuse

I used to respect Steve Czaban (sp?) and his opinions about the redskins. I used to think, this is the one guy covering the skins that thinks the same way about the team and any issues surrounding them that I do.

No more.

This guy is off his rocker lately. He was going on and on and on this morning on sportstalk980 about how earth shattering it was that Gibbs "admitted" at his monday press conference that he makes the calls on whether to go for it on 4th down.

How could Czaban not have known this was the case, after the countless stories about his and Saunders' role going into this season? Gibbs saying this on Monday was not news, it had been reported probably dozens of times in the Post and other local papers this season and pre-season.

So, what is wrong with this guy?

Posted by: Barno | October 11, 2006 4:00 PM | Report abuse

Skinz, all I'm trying to say is that, lets let Campbell play ONE GAME, before we annoint him a bust, or anything otherwise. We've made our beds with him, we cannot go back and undo these trades, same with Duckett. While I'd rather have that third round pick back, had Portis been out for a longer period of time, we'd be saying that Gibbs was a GENIUS. Perspective is needed.

Posted by: Greg(Boston) | October 11, 2006 4:01 PM | Report abuse

I'm not arguing that fact Greg. That's all i'm trying to say as a matter of fact. My preference is simply to do it sooner rather than later. For the reasons I've listed above:

I don't think it will be a significant drop off.

I think we have players in their prime for about 3 years before our offense gets "Old" and he needs that time to get better and establish chemistry.

If he's not good then we speed up the process of finding a good QB and I don't have to jump off a bridge because of 20 bad years as a fan.

Their are players on the team now that can make him look good as they do with Brunell.

Posted by: Skinz | October 11, 2006 4:06 PM | Report abuse

Skinz, it's not the saying that makes me go "ugh" it's the philosophy that a QB has to initially fail in order to ultimately succeed. I reject the theory of "taking lumps."

Sure, there are examples where a QB has overcome a bad first season and found success. But for every one, there are 3 more that never managed to turn it around. In fact, I think that initial failure is more likely to breed more failure.

I don't mean to sound testy. I think it's just how to goes after a nasty loss. Tomorrow we'll discuss the myriad ways we're going to trounce the flaming thumbtacks.

Posted by: Joe in Raleigh | October 11, 2006 4:11 PM | Report abuse

Who is to say that after learning the system for a year, Campbell can't be light's out next year?? With the aforementioned players who will be hitting their prime. I see the glass as half full.

Posted by: Greg(Boston) | October 11, 2006 4:12 PM | Report abuse

we do need to make some moves with the defense. the O is what it is now, there's no more receivers we could add (though maybe one we could trade... patten, i'm looking at you, and don't go too far thrash), the backs are there, and although we need depth at the O-line, it is defense that needs to be patched now. even if we got somebody this second, he probably couldn't play against TN this weekend, but he could start learning, get to know the team and the playbook... or did lavar take all the playbooks with him, too?

Posted by: Helmfish | October 11, 2006 4:15 PM | Report abuse

My preference is to GASP think long-term

The Danny wants to win now. This year. He's not planning for next year, the year after, or five years down the road. Even if someone were to post an interview with him saying that he is planning for winning long-term I wouldn't believe it. He adheres to the theory that you can buy a championship each year, and all his off season moves revolve around this. The key here is the difference between buying and building.

Gibbs signed a contract for five years (somebody correct me if I'm wrong on this), he wasn't looking to build long term when he got here, and let's be honest--he knows jack-$#i! about being a GM. So what's left? Throw everything away and take your 5 best shots at the superbowl, buying, acquiring and reloading each year.

JC is here for the last two seasons. Who here really thinks Brunell is going to be playing next year? Speak up if you think he is, cause I sure don't. And I don't think Gibbs thinks Brunell was going to make it past three either. Even if Brunell doesn't retire, JC is going to still be given a shot to beat him out. And he'll have had enough time behind a clipboard that Gibbs is going to feel comfortable enough handing the offense to him. We effectively bought our next QB. Gibbs saw what he wanted and chopped off our future for him. I'm surprised, given The Danny's ability to go and get who he wants, that we'd spend so much for a rookie, so that leads me to believe that Gibbs saw something in him he really likes.

I think The Danny has gotten close enough that he doesn't see anything wrong with what he is doing. If something is broken he buys a fix. Defense not up to par? Buy Grilliams. Offense not scoring enough? Buy Saunders. Every year people are stunned with our offseason acquisitions. We go out and get the previous years best performers and sign them to huge money. Every offseason we swing for the fences and hit home runs, unfortunately a lot of these tend to not pay off. However, getting Portis paid off. Getting Moss paid off. Getting ARE paid off. (Yeah he hasn't been drop-dead stunning yet, but anyone who has seen him play knows he's the real deal). Anyone here going to tell The Danny he was wrong with those moves? Not me.

But, this isn't building a football team, it's buying one.

Posted by: Megskin | October 11, 2006 4:19 PM | Report abuse

Megskin, what are the chances that Snyder,[..] DOESN'T draft Dexter Manley II first-round in 2008? I say slim to none.

None.

Posted by: Megskin | October 11, 2006 4:24 PM | Report abuse

When Brunell has a good game against the Titans, please dont come back saying, see I told you he was still good. Because if you arent good against an 0-4 team who are you good against? He had an emotional game against the Jags and was looking for a little payback against the team that kicked him to the curb. It doesnt hurt when Moss has 100 yards after the catches.

We can see when he plays the Colts, how he fares against a quality opponent. Especially since teh colts will be coming off a bye week with plenty of time for their defense to prepare for the skins. Look how well the giants did coming off their bye week. All I ask of Gibbs for Christmas is if it gets to the point when we are mathematically eliminated from playoff contention to play Campbell. If Gibbs makes a statement that Brunell will be the front runner to start next year, I will meet some of you at the Bridge, and jump with you.

Posted by: gatorskinz2000 | October 11, 2006 4:24 PM | Report abuse

I'll taking my laptop and tv this weekend to the bridge and watch from there. Should we lose I will die having the satisfaction that I beat you all to it.

Posted by: Megskin | October 11, 2006 4:30 PM | Report abuse

Joe and Greg, we agree, I guess i'm very poor at putting thoughts to words.

Meg, of course your right. How could I have been so stupid. Thanks for helping me see the light.

Steve Czaben,

Please read this from Clark Judge at sportsline. It may sound familiar. Non story.

That was three years ago, when Mornhinweg was called an "assistant head coach," whatever that meant. Now he's the team's assistant head coach and offensive coordinator, and I can tell you what that means: trouble for Eagles opponents.

Cue this week's numbers: Philly is first in four offensive categories -- including passing and total offense -- and second only to Chicago in scoring. The Eagles put up 38 points on Dallas last weekend, 31 on Green Bay the game before and 38 on San Francisco the game before that.

OK, so Mornhinweg doesn't call all the Eagles' plays. He and Reid collaborate, and the pair is so successful that Philadelphia is on pace to obliterate just about every team record for offense. At the rate they're going, the Eagles would finish with 6,685 total yards, 4,861 passing yards, 326 first downs, 496 points ...

Posted by: Skinz | October 11, 2006 4:31 PM | Report abuse

By the way, I just wanted to comment on an earlier remark. Steve Czaban is the biggest tool in the entire belt, other than Will Thomas on Fox 5, who deserves to get dropped in a trailor park in West Virginia, with only a flashlight, a map of Virginia, and 3-D glasses to fend for himself.

Czaban is exactly what's wrong with sports "pundits" and talk radio/cable shows today. He tries SO hard to be macho, he talks too loud, his opinions are bad, girls think he is unattractive, he dresses poorly, he constantly sniffs Gibbs' throne and he tries too hard to be macho (I know I already said this, but wanted to drive it home for all the bamas that are reading).

Every TV announcer/pundit/talk radio dude needs to follow the lead of the greatest broadcast duo in the history of pro sports. That's right folks, ArtMonktotheSticks and The Governor's favorite: Steve Buckhantz and Phil Chenier. These are the guys everyone should model their games after. Smart, informed, understated, great tag lines "Dagger!" and "Haywood needs to keep that ball high after the rebound...", great personalities, they like eachother...Buckhantz would go to war for Chenier. The only way I was able to get through the 90s watching Wizards basketball was because of Buck and Phil. My buddy said Buckhantz was plastered at their celebrity golf tournament and just hanging out with everyone...See! You don't have to shout and yell and pretend you would serve in Iraq if you didn't have to do television to be cool to males 18-45. Just be yourself. Get hammered off camera.

ArtMonktotheSticks will provide you with a monologue over how much we love Buckhantz and Phil at some point after reading my post because he loves them.

Booyakashot.

Posted by: The Governor | October 11, 2006 4:33 PM | Report abuse

I don't get it, do people think that Brunnel is the problem with this team? Guy's got a 90 qb rating for the year, and he's the root of all our problems? While I'm all for Campbell to start next year, I'd say that we need to focus on the defense as the root of our issues this year. Get off the field on third down, sack the qb, force some turnovers, those things are what is ailing us, I think.

Posted by: Greg(Boston) | October 11, 2006 4:34 PM | Report abuse

Wait, so are we going to Cap City in Shirlington tonight? I have to go to the gym there first, but maybe after we can all meet up?

Posted by: HS | October 11, 2006 4:41 PM | Report abuse

Greg, we must be watching the same broadcast (we probably are since I am in Boston too) when we see that the QB position isn't as urgent to fix as the Defense. Brunell is a mediocre, not great but not bad QB who used to have mobility, used to have greater confidence, and has something slightly better then developed basics to run an offense. Sure, I wish the offense would take some more risks (like going for it on fourth and inches), and occasionally take smarter risks (don't throw on third and one... why? why dammit, why?) but MB isn't the problem and JC isn't necessarily the cure. I do hope JC gets some development time on the field this year, hopefully during blowouts in our favor, but however it comes it's welcome.

GET SOME FRIGGIN' DEFENSE REDSKINS!

this team had a defense that made coaches earnestly think about punting on second down, and made receivers earnestly think about hugging the sidelines or, well, just anywhere 36/21 wasn't. we have no protection in the middle, without someone or something to balance 36/21 he might turn into a 56(55), and little pass rush, not to mention a dreadful lack of turnovers.

please, please give me hope that we will begin patching up this D, even if the players we get in the next week or two do nothing more than motivate the players we have now to play at the caliber worthy of keeping their jobs.

Posted by: Helmfish | October 11, 2006 4:43 PM | Report abuse

Holla at Greg(Boston) Brunell is not the issue, its thrid down defense plain and simple. The secondary is not good right now, and that means no all out blitz, which means Greg Williams defense is in deep s---.

I would love to join a pub crawl, but I holding it down for Redskins nation here in Seattle

Posted by: PSUAsh | October 11, 2006 4:44 PM | Report abuse

Moment of silence for Cory Lidle...

Posted by: Anonymous | October 11, 2006 4:47 PM | Report abuse

I don't get it, do people think that Brunnel is the problem with this team?

Because he is a half-a-year qb at this point in his career. Half the year he is good to great; half the year he is draw-dropping horrible.

Guy's got a 90 qb rating for the year, and he's the root of all our problems?

No, but you'll find two camps on this blog. The people that think we should ditch him and prepare for next year via JC, and the group that thinks we can actually make it to the playoffs with Brunell.

I'd say that we need to focus on the defense as the root of our issues this year.

Nobody says much about this because there isn't a whole hell of a lot about it we can do. If Grilliams can't get them to play, no one can.

I think.

Thinking is overrated. Please leave that to the professionals. Don't worry, we'll tell what you should be worrying about and when to jump off the Bridge.

Posted by: Megskin(QueenBee) | October 11, 2006 4:47 PM | Report abuse

Greg in Boston,

You are correct, our defense it horrendous. Our offense isnt exactly potent though. Stats have some relevance, but all I care about is 2-3, and having a strong feeling of going into our bye week at 3-4. 4-3 would be awesome and we'd be going into a break with momentum. That is somewhat unrealistic at this point. We have no push on our D-line, and with the defense the way it is, we would basically have to win a shoot out ever week to win. I think the point is some of us are trying to make is that jason Campbell can make all of these screens and dump off passes that Brunell does every game. Except we would have our "future", using Gibbs words there, in getting reps and confidence. Those are passes you use for an inexperienced QB to get him comfortable with the game before unleashing the offense. Those arent plays you run with an able veteran. Right now we dont look good on either side of the ball, I guess we'll just have to wait and see how this unfolds these next two weeks.

If we dont win this week, I see our season going down the drain fast.

Posted by: gatorskinz2000 | October 11, 2006 4:49 PM | Report abuse

Meg, of course your right

I'm not right, just opinionated.

Posted by: Megskin | October 11, 2006 4:50 PM | Report abuse

1. I dunno, I think Jason C. has a hose for an arm and he seems willing to scramble in the pocket and throw on the run. Seems serviceable to me. I'm happy with the pick.

2. I'm OK with going into the next two games with Brunell. I'm even willing to stick with Brunell until he gets injured and goes down for the year. [In the preseason, I read that one of the Vegas sports books had the over under on Brunell being out for the season at week 8.] Good point about Rivers acknowledging that utility of watching game film with a seasoned pro for a couple of years. I think Jason will be ready when Brunell goes down, esp. now that Saunders has had to dumb down his Encyclopedia Saundranica playbook for BRUNELL.

3. Neither John Hall nor the Northern Colorado punter got to Frost. It was Jeff Gilooly trying to find work.

4. Individual players don't win/lose games, they only make/miss/force/stop big plays. Teams win football games. This is why Fantasy Football is so misguided. We can and will win lots more games. Its a matter of setting the tone in the first quarter. A few guys step up ... we win a division game at home ... this crowd will whistle a new tune.

5. I can't get the image of warm chucky sewage out of my head. Very uncool, Megskin.

Posted by: dcsween | October 11, 2006 4:53 PM | Report abuse

Meg, LOL, thanks for the advice about thinking, my wife tells me the same thing. Look, Mark isn't IDEAL for this team, but he threw 23 td's/10 int's last year, I'd take that and so would a lot of teams in the NFL. So I guess I don't comprehend the thinking of ditching the year as you stated?? Should we have ditched the year last year when we were 5-5? Should we have ditched the year this year at 0-2? What is a good cutoff point?

Right back at you, PSU, and HELMFISH!!

Posted by: Greg (Boston) | October 11, 2006 4:54 PM | Report abuse

gatorskinz2000 If Coach Joe states that I will be driving from Jersey to join you. With a 100 pound weight to make sure I don't come back up. lol

Posted by: jm220 | October 11, 2006 4:56 PM | Report abuse

Two more things ...

1. Hank Poteat already got snapped up this afternoon, and

2. I agree that Simon Bar $nyder's strategy of buying not building is the #1 problem. I still can't figure out how they juggle the books on the salary cap. Maybe its all deficit spending.

3. Until they change league rules, we can't trade the owner. Therefore, if he stops Jason LaC again and, say, asks him for some Grey Poupon, the response should be "but of course."

Posted by: dcsween | October 11, 2006 4:57 PM | Report abuse

The Governor is on point today. Steve czczczzcczabans is a dude that does not get invited to parties. He's the angry sports guy. "LOOK AT ME I'M LOUD". I can't listen to that 980 morning show anymore due to his presence.

Not to shift the focus too far from Redskins nation but we could all pick up some knowledge from our boys Steve and Phil. Faithful service, jublience in the face of unbridled adversity, and clarity of thought and mind. In a recent poll, The Wizards duo was voted; 'dudes I'd most like to consume adult sodas with who I wouldn't normally be able to...do that with'.

I am so excited for another season with these guys. It is like having the Governor and I doing the games from his comfortable couch while his wife makes comments in the background and we ignore them because our boys are talking about what Michael Ruffin brings: intangibles.

A nod and a booyakashot to Steve and Phil. We will eat Tennessee's lunch this weekend.

Posted by: ArtMonkToTheSticks | October 11, 2006 4:58 PM | Report abuse

I like the way Queen Bee thinks.

Basically if you still think we are going to the Super Bowl this year, you think leprechauns are going to jump out of your toilet and give you 3 wishes. Not going to happen. Half of us are win now, half of us are looking to win next year.

If you dont put in Campbell soon you are just postponing his learning curve. Get it in now when we arent going anywhere, so next year we can look a little better.

I'd love to see a poll in here of people who truly truly believe we are going to the SuperBowl this year.

Right now we are sitting pretty with San Francisco in the NFC. SAN FRANCISCO!!!!!
Do I need to type that again, because as I was typing it I almost cried. Ok fine just to get my point across, SAN FRANCISCO!!!!
Oh and their QB was in Cambpells draft class, in case you forgot.

Posted by: gatorskinz2000 | October 11, 2006 4:59 PM | Report abuse

Mark isn't IDEAL for this team, but he threw 23 td's/10 int's last year

Yup, that's called a tease. You know, the school girl with the skimpy plaid skirt, now you see it, now you don't. He's a flirt, I'll give you that. Just wait until you try and go all the way with him and the ducks start flying and skipping off the turf.

Posted by: Megskin | October 11, 2006 5:01 PM | Report abuse

Trying to catch up: who is "ARE?"

Posted by: Who? | October 11, 2006 5:02 PM | Report abuse

Kickers are boring - Anyone know what happened to Patten? He hasn't gotten much playing time and I think he was a scratch last game. The Skins always say that they like free agency better than the draft because they're getting a known commodity but for all they "know" about these players only half of them turn out any good.

Posted by: David | October 11, 2006 5:03 PM | Report abuse

Antwaan Randle El

Posted by: gatorskinz2000 | October 11, 2006 5:04 PM | Report abuse

Antwaan Randle El

Posted by: gatorskinz2000 | October 11, 2006 5:05 PM | Report abuse

Greg and Helmfish what is in the water in Boston. The guy threw for 45 yards in the first half. 109 for the game against one of the worse pass d in the league. Look back at the fist two games when the wr were open and he couldn't get the ball to them. It it the ground. Just stop with saying he is a good QB.

Posted by: jm220 | October 11, 2006 5:05 PM | Report abuse

Everybody! Jason started another thread ... time to jump to the next one. Topic is Czaban.

Posted by: dcsween | October 11, 2006 5:07 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company