[QUOTE=Brute44]What worries me about this game is the fact that the defense, for the third week in a row continues to struggle against the run late in the game. [/QUOTE]

Did you ever think this may be due to the fact that the offense keeps starting the second half with 3 and outs. The defense is tired. If the offense can stay on the field a little longer the defense will have fresh legs.

[QUOTE=Brute44]If Ramsey starts this game we LOSE. Gibbs knows it and the whole team knows it.[/QUOTE]Wow. That's a pretty speculative statement. If we're going to start making statements like that, why don't I just go the other way with it, and say that the only thing that kept Mark Brunell from LOSING this game was the defense. Gibbs knows it and the whole team knows it.

And I'd be willing to take it a step further and say that the only thing that's [i]really[/i] keeping Mark Brunell in his starting role is a very large contract that is starting to look like a very large cinderblock chained to the collective foot of this team.

Joe Gibbs and the Redskins PR machine would like you to believe otherwise-- going so far as to throw the offensive line under the bus (despite producing a 200+ yard rushing day), and overlooking absolutely horrible passes while claiming the receivers just aren't open, deep or otherwise.

Anyone who's not wearing burgundy and gold glasses (or has otherwise taken them off temporarily to inspect the situation more clearly), bears witness to the fact that Mark Brunell is simply a very bad quarterback at this point in his career, and that his woeful performances are a direct cause of the offensive struggles, not vice-versa.

uhh... brunells lost 4 games and hasn't won either of the other two, so saying if ramsey starts, we lose, is pretty silly... brunell's given up 28 points BY HIMSELF! and he's had 5 TDs and [b]NINE TURNOVERS[/b]

not only is he not a rollout type passer, he's not any kind of passer ;)

our offense has given up 53 points off of turnovers at this point, for a vet QB trying to manage an offense, [b]He's Failing.[/b]

MB is killing this O. He is hurting the team too much and needs replaced, either of the 2 backups would be a better option right now.

Had the Bears put 9 men in the box and stuffed CP the skins would not have won yesterday. Thank you Bears coaches!

This is not like the Presidential Vote!
 

I can't vote for Brunell, because of the TOs. I can't vote for P. Ram, because of his TO ratio. I can't vote for Hasselbeck, because he imho is not an NFL caliber QB.

My dilemma is compounded by the fact that Brunell can manage a clock, when not fumbling!
P. Ram can't manage a clock because he throws ints!
Did I mention what I think of Hasselbeck?

So, rather than vote, I leave it up to HOF Coach Gibbs! Of course, he is in love with Brunell! So, the tie goes to the guy in there. It's just not our call!

Tough vote!

[QUOTE=NY_Skinsfan]Did you ever think this may be due to the fact that the offense keeps starting the second half with 3 and outs. The defense is tired. If the offense can stay on the field a little longer the defense will have fresh legs.[/QUOTE]

Gee, I never thought of that. I guess the Time Of Possion which was by the way, Redskins 34:01/Bears 25:59 shows that the Redskins had so many 3 and outs that they held the ball 8 minutes longer.

Hassleback is a gamer, Ramsey is the sack king , Brunell sucks

I vote for Brunell. I guess the guys who voted for Ramsey must be hoping that the Ramsey we'll get is not the guy who played against the Giants. I totally agree that Brunell is killing us, but so far when Ramsey got a chance this year he stunk even more than Brunell. I know he might be better than he showed in that game, but no one can say that out of what we've seen this year Ramsey is a better choice than Brunell. I guess maybe if you go by career stats in a Redskin jersey then Ramsey might be a better choice, but I don't think Brunell just suddenly forgot how to play football. I think the entire offense has been out of sync, 6 of 16 third down conversions against the Bears?

I saw all the overthrows, the out of bounds throws, the throws to no one in particular, and the tipped pass that was returned for a touchdown, and the miss on a wide open Coles. I saw it and thought "Brunell sucks" but if he won the job in an open competition in pre-season to switch now because we "think" someone else might be better means that we've become a lot more impatient under Snyder. Let Gibbs work out the kinks, and we all believe that he's going to do it. My guess is that the guys who are calling for Ramsey think that PR can turn the passing game around and lead us to the playoffs. But what has PR shown THIS YEAR to make anyone believe that?

I've still never heard anyone defend Hasselbeck's 0.00 rating in a game last year.

If Hasselbeck gets in the season is really over.

I have been disappointed in Brunell's play as well, but..
Gibbs does not replace Brunnell because Ramsey has not proved on the field that he is ready, period. I think you Ramsey fans have your beer goggles on when you see or talk about Ramsey. Ramsey is not yet as great as you think he is.
Ramsey has a powerful arm and great potential, but he does not think well on his feet. Ramsey gets sacked ALOT, holds on to the ball too long and does not read defenses well. Yes Ramsey throws a great deep ball, but that is about it. You can't live on the deep ball alone, defenses will just take that away and Ramsey will get impatient and start throwing interceptions or get saked, just like he did in the Giants game. I know all of you QB experts think the long ball will solve all of our Offense's problems, it will help but it is not the main problem. The bigger problem (beside the poor QB play) is the inconsistent play of the offensive line. Once the O-line starts blocking with some authority the rest of the offense will play better. Someone earlier in this thread pointed to the Vikings offense as great. The Vikings offensive line is playing like the best in the NFL right now. They have a 3rd or 4th string rookie running back starting right now, and he is running at will. Even with Randy Moss hurt, the Vikings running game is powerful.

how ironic defensewins, you say the long ball won't solve our problems and then point to the vikings running game... which is just about the greatest proof that long balls would solve all our problems...

their running game is good cause their QB can make the 40-50 yard passes on a regular basis, so you can't stack the line...

The poll question is who we think should start, so it's Ramsey...no question. But, Gibbs will not make the switch, especially after a win, no matter how bad Brunell played. Portis and the D basically saved Brunell's job for him.
The point is not that everyone thinks that Ramsey is that much better, but the fact that he can't be much worse. Ramsey has had what, less than 1 half of action, and was playing from behind trying to create something, and he failed. So what? Brunell had a great half against Dallas, but it wasn't quite good enough was it? Nope. One of the big things about Brunell was supposed to be his accuracy, but it has been practically non-existant. Let Ramsey practice will the 1st team and play, and we'll see what happens. That's all we ask. Brunell has been personally responsible for 4 scores by the opposing defense, two of which we overcame (thanks to the D), and two we didn't. All games have been won or lost by a TD or less, so that is the difference of 2-4 and 4-2. Lets just see what the "future of the Redskins" can do...

Heres the difference, even if Ramsey is just as bad as Brunell, at least hes trying to build somthing and gain experiance. Brunell is going no where in his career, he had a tremendous career. Hell he proboly falls into the second catagory of the best qbs ever to play the game ( the first catagory are your Montanas, Elways and Marinos). The fact is, his career is just about over. Putting Ramsey in there at least gains him some experiance so he can hopefully lead this team next year. If he goes in and lays an egg, at least it tells us we have to go in a different direction @ QB. I do think Ramsey will be successful in the NFL, hopefully with the Washington Redskins!

[QUOTE=That Guy]how ironic defensewins, you say the long ball won't solve our problems and then point to the vikings running game... which is just about the greatest proof that long balls would solve all our problems...

their running game is good cause their QB can make the 40-50 yard passes on a regular basis, so you can't stack the line...[/QUOTE]

That Guy,
Re-read my post, I said 'the long ball will help, but will not solve ALL of our offensive problems'.
The Vikings offensive line is protecting Culpepper, he has time to step up and throw. Also if you watched the Vikings game, you would have seen even in short yardage situations, the Seahawks "stacked the line" and played short yardage defense (8-9 men in the box) the Vikings offensive line still pushed the seahawk defense back and got first downs. The Viking line is big and impressive.
Our offensive line is not impressive at this point. They are not giving our QB's time and they are not getting done in short yardage this year.
Thats all. The long ball is not the only thing wrong with our offense. While it will help in regular offense sitations, it will not help in goal line and short yard, where we have been also seriously lacking.

The long ball is mising from our offense. But that isn't the killer, as far as I'm concerned. What' missing is the 12-15 yard out and the 12-15 yard curl/middle. We have no IN BETWEEN passing game either, and that is a killer. And that is beacues either Brunnell lacks the armstrength to throw this or lacks the accuracy or reads to hit it. And he doesn't need all day to throw this pass. He just doesn't, or very rarely.

I doub't very very much that Gibbs will take our advice, but it's time to go with Ramsey, and to let him get used to this offense. Brunnell led the offense to 13 points and gave up 7 on an INT. Ramsey can do that. ANd maybe he can do better. It's time!

last year patrick got sacked a lot because of spurrier's scheme, he had maybe 2.5 seconds or something rediculous in the pocket. Burnell is having like 5 or even 6 seconds in the pocket. and has a longer time of getting rid of the ball too. The only thing I believe Burnell has on Ramsey is experience so he can read defenses better, but if Ramsey has the time he will have the ability to break down defenses as well.

All I want is a pass over 30 yrds! Wich Mark can't seem to do.
I hope we put Ramsey in.

[QUOTE=Mattyk72]I've still never heard anyone defend Hasselbeck's 0.00 rating in a game last year.

If Hasselbeck gets in the season is really over.[/QUOTE]Yeah I believe that was the dallas game. It's not a very good thing to have your go to reciever play for the other team. (newman career high 3 ints)

:laughing-

don't get me wrong, ramsey telegraphs plays, he's slower (but can run), and he doesn't seem as comfortable in the pocket (i wonder why...), isn't super awesome at reading defenses, and holds on trying to make a play... BUT he can throw deep, he can throw hard, and he can hit his targets...

brunell sucks in a lot more ways... either way, i wish we had big ben right now ;) but since we don't i'd prefer ramsey.

[QUOTE=That Guy]don't get me wrong, ramsey telegraphs plays, he's slower (but can run), and he doesn't seem as comfortable in the pocket (i wonder why...), isn't super awesome at reading defenses, and holds on trying to make a play... BUT he can throw deep, he can throw hard, and he can hit his targets...

brunell sucks in a lot more ways... either way, i wish we had big ben right now ;) but since we don't i'd prefer ramsey.[/QUOTE]


Sure Ramsey can throw deep and hard and long, thats sounds so delicious doesn't it That Guy. In reality Brunell has thrown 3 INT's in 6 games and Ramsey threw 3 INT's in a half of play. Ramsey throws deep but unfortunately it's to the wrong colored jersey.;)

[QUOTE=Brute44]Sure Ramsey can throw deep and hard and long, thats sounds so delicious doesn't it That Guy. In reality Brunell has thrown 3 INT's in 6 games and Ramsey threw 3 INT's in a half of play. Ramsey throws deep but unfortunately it's to the wrong colored jersey.;)[/QUOTE]
yet brunell has given up 28 points by himself and ramsey has given up none...

brunell has 3 ints, but [b]NINE TURNOVERS[/b]. The numbers aren't as good as you think, and that was ramsey put in 14 points down and pressing. Its not a fair example, and you can go back to last year and see he's got more talent at this point.

[QUOTE=That Guy]yet brunell has given up 28 points by himself and ramsey has given up none...

brunell has 3 ints, but [b]NINE TURNOVERS[/b]. The numbers aren't as good as you think, and that was ramsey put in 14 points down and pressing. Its not a fair example, and you can go back to last year and see he's got more talent at this point.[/QUOTE]

First off Brunell has had [FONT=Arial Black]SEVEN TURNOVERS NOT NINE[/FONT]. lets start with the first fumble back in the Tampa game. The ball was handed off to Portis which he fumbled because he wasn't even looking for the ball which Barber recovered and went 9 yards to score. Brunell was accused of a bad hand off. Portis was not charged with a single fumble in the Tampa Bay game. You figure that one out. Now lets move to the Giants game. Brunell was sacked at our 40 and fumbled to Strahan. The very next play Warner threw a 38 yard TD pass to Carter. I don't know how you can put that one on Brunell when Bowen got beat badly on the play. Later on Brunell threw his first INT at our 39 to Robbins which was originally intended for Portis. There was a 4 play drive that our defense stopped and the Giants scored a field goal. So we'll play your game and say at this point Brunell has given up 2 fumbles and 1 interception which turn into 17 points in your view all against Brunell. I'm just gonna skip past the Ramsey Debacle and move onto the Dallas game. Not much here except Brunell was sacked by Dixon at the Dallas 42 and fumbled to Dixon which I think he fumbled back to Portis. No points were given up by Brunell in that one. Now to the Ravens game. Brunell was rolling out and from his blind side and was sacked by Reed which caused a fumble. That fumble was then returned 22 yards for a TD. I have no idea how you could blame Brunell for that one. He was blindsided by Reed because Betts completely missed his assignment on blocking Reed. Missed assignment isn't even the word for what Betts did on that play, he gave up what we old players used to call a LOOKOUT BLOCK. Thats where the blocker misses his block and yells back to the QB, LOOKOUT. Later on Brunell threw his second INT of the season to SUCKTIME Sanders, that was intended for Coles. Which by the way was a good pass that was just picked off by a player that wanted it more. After that play, the Ravens drove 70 yards and scored a field goal. Again if you want to blame that on Brunell, then fine. So at this point in your eyes Brunell has given up 2 INT's and 4 fumbles which in turn give the opposition a total of 27 points which ALL go against Brunell. We finally move to the chicago game. We all saw that the pass that was deflected at the line to Azumah for Brunell's third INT of the season that went 70 yards for the TD. That play couldn't happen again in a million years. It was just bad luck. So finally, Brunell has had 3 INT's one of which was a very odd 70 yard TD return and 4 fumbles that give Brunell a grand total of 34 points. You say 28 points and 9 turnovers. If your gonna blame the guy atleast give him his full share of the blame at 34 points. In my eyes, I see Brunell giving up 3 INT's for a total of 7 points that you can argue was strange at the least.

Brunell has 3 INTs and [B]6 fumbles, 4 of which were lost[/B]. So Brute44 is right in saying there are 7 turnovers total, but the error is understandable.
That fumble in the Bucs game WAS Brunell's fault. It was supposed to be a handoff, and the RB does not look the ball in on a handoff, he should be looking ahead. Brunell was tripped by a lineman, and still tried to get it to him when he should have just eaten it and take the sack. He admitted this after the game.
As far as other ones, yeah a blindside sack/fumble or a tipped ball aren't really a QB's fault, but they are still charged against them. Same with when a receiver runs the wrong route. So I guess both Brunell AND Ramsey should get passes for some of their TO's, huh? No, that's not how it's done. They are held responsible, whether they really are or not. So, Brunell is directly responsible for 21 points scored by the opposing defense in three games. I agree that any other time, the D could have stopped them, but didn't. Thanks to that D (and Portis), we have actually won 2 of those 3 games.
The one other fumble ran back for a TD (in the Giants game) was from a Portis fumble....just mentioning that because some of us tend to think all of them were Brunell (myself included).

the pass that sander's got was NOT a good pass at all, it was way under thrown into double coverage... that's completely and totally on brunell... on the tipped pass, brunell threw AFTER the guy's hand was up... he couldn't have not seen it sticking up there, the fact that it got picked isn't surprising, though the 70 yard return for a TD is... the ed reed play, he should have realized that he was blitzing (that's the only reason he started so close to the line), though the missed block isn't on him at all, its something that he could have possibly avoided...

you skipped over ramsey though... all his ints were in the end zone, one of which wouldn't have happened if gardner caught that TD pass, and another which coles ran the wrong way from what ramsey was expecting... either way, you'll argue against brunell's turnovers and not against ramsey's, who you blame completely.

in that short time ramsey did get 150 yards, which is more than brunell has gotten in either of the last two games and has given up less points (0 vs 14)... so its not exactly like brunell is burning up the turf, and right now i view him as a liability.

I voted for Ramsey cuz I've seen enough. I am just completely dumbfounded by how inaccurate Brunnel has been this season. Throwing without getting his feet set, even when he had plenty of time to do so, and sailing pass after pass over his wrs. Plus Cooley needs to get more looks as a wr and we need a more frequently spread out offense with more 3wr sets like this past week so the defense can't stack the line with 8 guys every play. I just hope Ramsey has atleast somewhat improved his need to stick the ball into a spot with a high% of a turnover as well as knowing how much time he has after the snap of the ball to look around before getting rid of the ball. But I can't say enough about the defense (for a small guy smoot sure is one tough SOB) as well as portis being used a little more properly. I can't wait til the packer game to have arrington, barrow, lott, and possibly daniels back as well as the knowledge that Gibbs has 2 weeks to make further adjustments to the offense and gameplan for favre and the packers.

no i think ramsey even thou he got brised up last year like crazy last year i think the o llines holdin uo there part plus mark and old fart he needs to jst retire already and tim hes jst not even close to his bro matt..r they frm da same mom??????? well all i kno is tim has a bangin wife but yea i think pat should strt

um, welcome jordanz301... could you please make more coherent posts though?? that monster up there is insanely hard to follow.

I voted for Ramsey.

[QUOTE=MarkBrunell]I voted for Ramsey.[/QUOTE]

:laughing-

Let Mark start against GB but have Ramsey ready, REALLY READY, if he starts to screw up. He just hasn't shown the arm strength. Man, they paid toooooo much for this guy.