Poll: Starting QB 2006
 

If you had to choose today, who is your starting QB for opening day 2006?

If you pick other, tell us who

Re: Poll: Starting QB 2006
 

I say, once we are mathematically out of the playoffs lets give the ball to campbell and see what he's got...let him finish out the year and he'll be ready for next year.

Re: Poll: Starting QB 2006
 

Why wouldn't any skin fan, wouldn't want Campbell to start, there no reason to bring in any other QB or keep, trying to hope Ramsey will just emerge like Brady and save the day, I'm so curious to see what Campbell can do, since some people in here thinks that he's such a dummy, its hard enough being a QB in this league, but still the Black QB has to continue to prove himself........the more things change the more they stay the same

Re: Poll: Starting QB 2006
 

I would like to see Campbell THIS SEASON, once/if we lose our 7th game, just too let him take a few lumps, or maybe suprise the hell out of us and be awsome. Unless that happens, I see Brunell as the starter.

Re: Poll: Starting QB 2006
 

[QUOTE=wewhite3]Why wouldn't any skin fan, wouldn't want Campbell to start, there no reason to bring in any other QB or keep, trying to hope Ramsey will just emerge like Brady and save the day, I'm so curious to see what Campbell can do, since some people in here thinks that he's such a dummy, its hard enough being a QB in this league, but still the Black QB has to continue to prove himself........the more things change the more they stay the same[/QUOTE]
Why do you always have to play the race card on things? I do not remember anyone here say that because Campbell is black he is stupid and therefor can not play QB.

Re: Poll: Starting QB 2006
 

I think Brunell should start next season. Lets use Brunell until he looks like a more permanent version of last year. There is no reason to stick a rookie qb in right now. Just look at how Ramsey turned out. Give Campbell another year to study the clipboard, get rid of Ramsey, move Campbell up to #2, and don't put in Campbell unless Brunell gets hurt.

Re: Poll: Starting QB 2006
 

Brunell gives us the best shot at winning now and next year.

I can't see him not being the starter next year, unless he gets hurt of course.

Re: Poll: Starting QB 2006
 

While I'm certainly not against Brunell starting the first few games next year, I personally chose Campbell as the guy I would start. My reasoning is that playing time will help him work through mistakes and improve. He'll probably struggle through the first six or eight games (like Carson Palmer) before figuring things out, but he'll have Brunell to show him the ropes. As for Ramsey, I like the guy but he simply won't get any chances in Washington. Trade him for a WR, DE, or draft pick.

Re: Poll: Starting QB 2006
 

I have no problem admitting that i voted for Ramsey to start in 2006...but that vote is contingent upons several things...since alot of things could still happen between now and then.

1.
First if Brunell gets us into the playoffs this year then i will immediately rescind...and would be fine with him going into next year as the starter...as he will have proven to be a positive addition to the redskins.

2.
If we dont make playoffs however, then Brunell will have proven to be a waste for this Franchise. I think it is fair to say that he was added to the team to win now...and if after two years of being the starter...he still hasnt gotten the team to the playoffs...then i believe you would be hardpressed to argue that adding Brunell was a successful move for the redskins organization.

As a result if this scenario comes true (more likely at this point since we may have to win 5 in a row to get into the playoffs...though i am still holding out hope we will get in) then i would be absolutely 100 percent opposed to continuing to start Brunell...as i belive he will have had his chance...and shown that he cuold not get the job done...for whatever reason.

That leaves Ramsey and Cambell as our other QBs. I said in another post that i am for sacrificing the teams chances of winning now...in order to aid our chances of winning much more later. Thus, if Gibbs deems Campbell ready to assume the starting role...then i would have no problem with that.

However...given Gibbs tendency to avoid starting young QBs i believe Ramsey oughta get his first real chance under Gibbs.

If Ramsey then goes out and succeeds (not neccessarily pro bowl...but proves to be a viable starting QB) then we could franchise him for the following year...and then Gibbs would have his choice of keeping either Ramsey or Campbell and really cashing in on the other by trading him away (like Sandiego will do this offseason with Brees or Rivers.

If Ramsey doesnt succeed...then Gibbs makes the switch to Campbell (not after 1 quarter...but at least after half the season) and we look toward the future. In any case, I dont think Ramsey would leave us with an awful record...considering he led us to a 3-4 finish last year...in an offense that was much less opened up and efficient than this years.)

Thats my 2 cents.

And one more thing for the record...From France where i am currently studying abroad...i am predicting us not needing to get a number two receiver in the offseason...because Taylor Jacobs steps up and fills that role...and Patten makes a fine number 3, and Thrash number 4.

Re: Poll: Starting QB 2006
 

Brunell, but it would be nice to see Campbell get some PT toward the end of the season.

Re: Poll: Starting QB 2006
 

I don't think Brunell has to take the team to the playoffs this year to justify his signing. He was brought in for what basically amounts to a 3-year deal. I would fully expect him to remain the starter for next year, Ramsey will stay at the #2 unless a quality trade offer comes along, and Campbell will remain as the #3.

Re: Poll: Starting QB 2006
 

To have to make the decision today, I would go with Mark Brunell. After all, our losses aren't his alone to own.

Re: Poll: Starting QB 2006
 

Matty i must say i disagree...i mean nothing against you of course...but i feel like it is undeniable that brunell was brought in here to win right away. If he hasnt done it for two years then i dont see how it couldnt have been better at the time to just keep Ramsey...and see what the guy could or couldnt do. Then at least we would have known for sure whether he had what it takes...and if not...we could have drafted someone else...ie cambell...and not to mention having money left over to sign a different guy that could have actually helped improve the team...either a d-lineman or helping retain peirce or just simply being in a healthier cap situation going forward.

I mean i am not blaming Gibbs...because he was of course doing what he felt was in the best interests of the club and could not know in advance what would have come out of it. However...if we do not make playoffs for the second year in a row that brunell has been starting...then there is no question in my mind that if we had it to do all over again...i would prefer to keep Ramsey...See what we had in him...and then draft someone else if he didnt workout. Therefore from my standpoint...if one agrees with that assessment...that if we do not make playoffs they would not have signed Brunell if they had to do it again...then i believe that is implicitly saying that he was not a good signing...thats just the way i see it though.

Re: Poll: Starting QB 2006
 

[QUOTE=NFLeurope]Matty i must say i disagree...i mean nothing against you of course...but i feel like it is undeniable that brunell was brought in here to win right away. If he hasnt done it for two years then i dont see how it couldnt have been better at the time to just keep Ramsey at the time...and see what the guy could or couldnt do. Then at least we would have known for sure whether he had what it takes...and if not...we could have drafted someone else...ie cambell...and not to mention having money left over to sign a different guy that could have actually helped improve the team...either a d-lineman or helping retain peirce or just simply being in a healthier cap situation going forward.

I mean i am not blaming Gibbs...because he was of course doing what he felt was in the best interests of the club and could not know in advance what would have come out of it. However...if we do not make playoffs for the second year in a row that brunell has been starting...then there is no question in my mind that if we had it to do all over again...i would prefer to keep Ramsey...See what we had in him...and then draft someone else if he didnt workout. Therefore from my standpoint...if one agrees with that assessment...that if we do not make playoffs they would not have signed Brunell if they had to do it again...then i believe that is implicitly saying that he was not a good signing...thats just the way i see it though.[/QUOTE]

Good point - I was thinking along the same lines.

That said, given Brunell's resurgence this year, I think he has the capability to live up to his expectations (i.e., winning and getting to the playoffs). However, the big "plus" for MB was that he played mistake-free football in preseason and at the start of the season. He certainly hasn't been doing that lately, and he needs to get back to that to be successful.

Re: Poll: Starting QB 2006
 

Brunell's comeback peaked in the couple of games after Dallas.

Now, he's back to a middle-of-the-pack QB. In passing yards, he ranks 15th (2,356 yards) and his QB rating is 13th (86.8).

Bring on Campbell next year, and keep Brunell as a seasoned veteran backup.

Re: Poll: Starting QB 2006
 

I think you also have to see it this way. A vital part of a young qb's development, especially in regards to a particular system, is to watch a veteran quarterback go out there and run the system. It helps the inexperienced guys see how things work, and it also helps to cut down on the "trial and error" time that it would normally take for QBs that are thrown into the fire from the start. The guys on the bench can see what works and what doesn't, or what the vet does to get out of bad situations. When a young qb sees how this is played on the field by the vet, then when he gets his chance, he is going to have a better understanding. Of course, ultimately, what helps the young guy out is to play, but at least he plays with a little more confidents in knowing he has an idea of how the system is supposed to be ran, rather than to basically go out there and guess. I think that is a big confidence booster for QBs like Ramsey and Campbell. The less mistakes they can cut down on before they even step out onto the field, the better they're going to play and the faster the development as well.

Re: Poll: Starting QB 2006
 

[QUOTE=Twilbert07]Brunell's comeback peaked in the couple of games after Dallas.

Now, he's back to a middle-of-the-pack QB. In passing yards, he ranks 15th (2,356 yards) and his QB rating is 13th (86.8).

Bring on Campbell next year, and keep Brunell as a seasoned veteran backup.[/QUOTE]

That's better than his career QB rating, and his third highest for a full season. He'll end up with ~3500 yards, which is, again, right around his average. The only stat that is really out of whack is the fumbles lost. He averages about 5-6 (with 2-3 lost) per year, but is on pace for almost 13 fumbles with 10 lost this year.

Maybe that says something, but I don't think he's "suddenly" a middle-of-the-pack QB. He is what he's always been, stat-wise.


[url]http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/1032[/url]

Re: Poll: Starting QB 2006
 

Last year was a wash for Brunell, Gibbs was trying to adjust his scheme, he didn't have the weapons he does now, he was playing hurt and it's no secret that the offense as a whole struggled.

This year we saw some flashes of what Brunell and this offense is capable of. I just think it's premature to say MB's time is over already. I don't see Ramsey getting another shot as the starter unless he really outperforms Brunell during the offseason, and I think we can forget about seeing Campbell until 2007.

Re: Poll: Starting QB 2006
 

I'm open to a QB competition in 2006, for sure. It's just that Jason Campbell would have to be extremely impressive to supplant Mark Brunell in my opinion. Brunell is an above-average NFL QB right now, just has he always was in Jacksonville.

I'll stick with Mark Brunell. He is not the reason we're losing games. He's one of the reasons that we have a chance to win every game that we end up losing.

Re: Poll: Starting QB 2006
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72]Last year was a wash for Brunell, Gibbs was trying to adjust his scheme, he didn't have the weapons he does now, he was playing hurt and it's no secret that the offense as a whole struggled.

This year we saw some flashes of what Brunell and this offense is capable of. I just think it's premature to say MB's time is over already. I don't see Ramsey getting another shot as the starter unless he really outperforms Brunell during the offseason, and I think we can forget about seeing Campbell until 2007.[/QUOTE]

I don't think your and his positions are mutually exclusive. I think NFLeurope's point was that making the playoffs will be the ultimate determinative factor in gauging his success. Yours (and the point I tried to make) seems to be that we can't know whether he's successful or not till after next year.

I think those two points are correct. MB has, through his improved performance this season, earned the right to start next year (IMO). We'll see what he does with it...

Re: Poll: Starting QB 2006
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72]I don't see Ramsey getting another shot as the starter unless he really outperforms Brunell during the offseason, and I think we can forget about seeing Campbell until 2007.[/QUOTE]

Steve McNair didn't play till his 3rd season, that one turned out pretty well. Nothing wrong with bringing Campbell along slowly. Matty's right, why rush it when you have a QB with a rating of 86 guiding your offense?

As a sidebar, I don't think Ramsey will be a Redskin in 2006. I'd be very surprised if he's still here.

Re: Poll: Starting QB 2006
 

[QUOTE=Schneed10]As a sidebar, I don't think Ramsey will be a Redskin in 2006. I'd be very surprised if he's still here.[/QUOTE]

Does Campbell move to #2? If so, we might see him sooner than we thought...

Re: Poll: Starting QB 2006
 

[QUOTE=onlydarksets]I don't think your and his positions are mutually exclusive. I think NFLeurope's point was that making the playoffs will be the ultimate determinative factor in gauging his success. Yours (and the point I tried to make) seems to be that we can't know whether he's successful or not till after next year.

I think those two points are correct. MB has, through his improved performance this season, earned the right to start next year (IMO). We'll see what he does with it...[/QUOTE]

It would be nothing short of asinine to judge Mark Brunell primarily based on whether or not the Redskins make the playoffs. Last I checked it was a team game. Mark Brunell has held up his end of the bargain, he is running the offense efficiently and effectively. If we do indeed fall short of the playoffs, the blame can be placed:

1) Injuries to the defensive line (Griffin and Salavea'a make the defense great when they're healthy).
2) Lack of ability to power run the ball when needed.
3) Lack of a viable #2 WR.
4) Inconsistent play at the #2 CB spot.

You can't blame Mark Brunell, it's hard to ask for more from a QB than he has given us.

Re: Poll: Starting QB 2006
 

aside from the fumbles,mark brunell has not been a problem for the redskins.he is definitely the starter next year.does anyone know if has had problems in the past with fumbling?

Re: Poll: Starting QB 2006
 

[QUOTE=onlydarksets]That's better than his career QB rating, and his third highest for a full season. He'll end up with ~3500 yards, which is, again, right around his average. The only stat that is really out of whack is the fumbles lost. He averages about 5-6 (with 2-3 lost) per year, but is on pace for almost 13 fumbles with 10 lost this year.

Maybe that says something, but I don't think he's "suddenly" a middle-of-the-pack QB. He is what he's always been, stat-wise.


[url]http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/1032[/url][/QUOTE]
I never said he "suddenly" was middle of the pack. I said he was "back to a middle-of-the-pack QB." And that means, he's back to where he's always been - an adequate QB who can manage games. However, as others have said on this thread, his fumbling is a major problem. (For Ramsey, it was one-and-done when it came to fumbles this year.)

Re: Poll: Starting QB 2006
 

[QUOTE=wewhite3]Why wouldn't any skin fan, wouldn't want Campbell to start, there no reason to bring in any other QB or keep, trying to hope Ramsey will just emerge like Brady and save the day, I'm so curious to see what Campbell can do, since some people in here thinks that he's such a dummy, its hard enough being a QB in this league, but still the Black QB has to continue to prove himself........the more things change the more they stay the same[/QUOTE]If they thought he was so dumb why did we wast a first round draft pick on him.

Re: Poll: Starting QB 2006
 

When in doubt, blame Brunell and wonder... WWRD (What Would Ramsey Do?)

Re: Poll: Starting QB 2006
 

Neither Brunell nor Ramsey is the long-term answer to the Skins' QB situation. So for now, we stick with what we have - Brunell. However, next year, I hope we begin to figure out a long-term solution.

Re: Poll: Starting QB 2006
 

I picked Brunell, but if things go south and Campbell gets to play this year it could change things.

Re: Poll: Starting QB 2006
 

[QUOTE=Schneed10]It would be nothing short of asinine to judge Mark Brunell primarily based on whether or not the Redskins make the playoffs. Last I checked it was a team game. Mark Brunell has held up his end of the bargain, he is running the offense efficiently and effectively. If we do indeed fall short of the playoffs, the blame can be placed:

1) Injuries to the defensive line (Griffin and Salavea'a make the defense great when they're healthy).
2) Lack of ability to power run the ball when needed.
3) Lack of a viable #2 WR.
4) Inconsistent play at the #2 CB spot.

You can't blame Mark Brunell, it's hard to ask for more from a QB than he has given us.[/QUOTE]

Nobody said it was fair - it's just the way it is. QBs, however, are held to different standards. Nobody talks about how many games a RB or WR has won. If we don't make the playoffs, people will look back and ask why we brought in an aging QB instead of grooming younger talent.

Keep in mind - this isn't about MB or his talent. He is a winner and he has proved himself more or less on an increasing basis since he has been here. What willl be judged is the hindsight wisdom of the front office in bringing him here if the team does not make the playoffs.

Re: Poll: Starting QB 2006
 

[QUOTE=Twilbert07]I never said he "suddenly" was middle of the pack. I said he was "back to a middle-of-the-pack QB." And that means, he's back to where he's always been - an adequate QB who can manage games. However, as others have said on this thread, his fumbling is a major problem. (For Ramsey, it was one-and-done when it came to fumbles this year.)[/QUOTE]

My bad - I thought you were referring to his performance last year.

Re: Poll: Starting QB 2006
 

[QUOTE=onlydarksets]My bad - I thought you were referring to his performance last year.[/QUOTE]
No, I don't count last year. I think he really was hampered by an injury.

Re: Poll: Starting QB 2006
 

Mark will be the starter next year unless Campbell could get some playing time and lights up the field. I dont think that will happen but you never know and we have no idea what Gibbs is thinking. As several people have mention Brunell has fumbled the ball several times. I'm not positive but haven't alot of those fumbles come from his blind side. Some of those fumbles should be blamed on the line and not Brunell.

Re: Poll: Starting QB 2006
 

I have to see Campbell play to pick him!!!

Re: Poll: Starting QB 2006
 

[QUOTE=Schneed10]It would be nothing short of asinine to judge Mark Brunell primarily based on whether or not the Redskins make the playoffs. Last I checked it was a team game. Mark Brunell has held up his end of the bargain, he is running the offense efficiently and effectively. If we do indeed fall short of the playoffs, the blame can be placed:

1) Injuries to the defensive line (Griffin and Salavea'a make the defense great when they're healthy).
2) Lack of ability to power run the ball when needed.
3) Lack of a viable #2 WR.
4) Inconsistent play at the #2 CB spot.

You can't blame Mark Brunell, it's hard to ask for more from a QB than he has given us.[/QUOTE]

Hey, im not sure whether or not this is a response to my post. But in case it is...perhaps i was not clear....what i said/meant to say was that I will judge the value of the BRUNELL SIGNING based on whether or not the skins make the playoffs. That i believe is a reasonable thing to do. The point is even if Brunell played pretty well...but not quite good enough to get us into playoffs...regardless of the multitude of other reasons there may have been for us not making playoffs...then ultimately his time with the skins was unsuccessful.

If you accept that much...then all im saying is if it had to be done again i would have rathered seen what Ramsey could do and hence chosen not to sign Brunell. Maybe Ramsey would have done better...maybe worse. But either way we wouldnt have been risking anything since the last two years...(if we dont make playoffs this year) will have been failures anyway. It should also be noted...that if Ramsey had started all of last season then our playoff drout may well have ended last year...since the NFC was so weak last year that 8-8 would have gotten us in.

In the end last year is last year and this year is this year...but all im saying is if they havnt found success in two years with the guy at the helm...then the decision to sign him was a mistake and it would have been much better for the organization to see what they had in Ramsey...and not sacrifice so much to get Brunell...

In terms of my stating that if the skins dont make the playoffs this year they ought to replace Brunell...well i guess that is just a gut feeling.

Because if we play Brunell next year and still dont make the playoffs...it will cast a huge shadow of doubt on this coaching staff and the moves they have made...

At least if we are playing a younger guy next year...whether or not we make the playoffs it will work toward developing someone for the future.

Just imagine if you start brunell...he doesnt get you to the playoffs...you wasted Ramsey completely, and Cambpell is still a rookie in terms of playing experience...cause he hasnt gotten any game time...that is just a situation that i would not be willing to risk...and is pretty much the worst case scenario i can imaigine... That is why i think the move should be made after this season...if we do not make the playoffs...to make Brunell the backup...a position i belive he will be perfectly suited to assume on a Gibbs team.

Re: Poll: Starting QB 2006
 

I see it as Brunnel unless the team keeps up it's slide to finish the year and Gibbs decides to give the rook some work and then Campbell is able to keep that going through the offseason and preseason. Ramsey isn't even going to be on the team as Gibbs will get atleast something in return for him before he tells the organization to piss off.

by the way as far as #2 wr, anyone else wish we had gone after Joe Jurevicious(sp?) instead of Patten? I know hindsight is pointless but oh well.

Re: Poll: Starting QB 2006
 

[QUOTE=NFLeurope]Hey, im not sure whether or not this is a response to my post. But in case it is...perhaps i was not clear....what i said/meant to say was that I will judge the value of the BRUNELL SIGNING based on whether or not the skins make the playoffs. That i believe is a reasonable thing to do. [/QUOTE]

It was in response to my post on the previous page, where I tried to reconcile your and Matty's viewpoints. I assume he mistook my post to say that MB himself would be judged. I clarified it:

[quote=onlydarksets]What willl be judged is the hindsight wisdom of the front office in bringing him here if the team does not make the playoffs.[/quote]

Re: Poll: Starting QB 2006
 

[QUOTE=skinsfanthru&thru]I know hindsight is pointless but oh well.[/QUOTE]

Without hindsight, this board's traffic would decrease by 75%! :postcop:

Re: Poll: Starting QB 2006
 

I don't think Heath Schuler ever got a fair shake.

Let's bring him back - I mean, what the hell!!?

Re: Poll: Starting QB 2006
 

[QUOTE=SallyJenkins]I don't think Heath Schuler ever got a fair shake.

Let's bring him back - I mean, what the hell!!?[/QUOTE]

You'd like that - wouldn't you? More fodder for your "articles"...