Who starts at QB?

[warriorzpath]

Originally Posted by #56fanatic

We have waited way to long to deal Ramsey.

I know in hindsight, the redskins should have dealt him a long time ago - but you can't live by hindsight, we don't have the power to go back in time. We can't really look at it like that, if we did then you can make the argument that the redskins shouldn't have really drafted him if they knew that he wasn't really going to have a chance. But they didn't really know that. You can only decide and plan things on what you know and what you feel. I'm sure gibbs didn't know that he was planning to pull out Ramsey before the first game was through, but he went with his gut and look how that turned out. And with Ramsey, I personally can't back a player that doesn't get that stamp of approval from gibbs. I couldn't argue with his success of qb decisions, which includes Brunell.

The best thing to do at this point is - keep Ramsey and hope the market for him heats up. The redskins may be able to keep him until the rookies sign because that cap space would have to be reserved for them anyways.

[#56fanatic]

Originally Posted by warriorzpath

I know in hindsight, the redskins should have dealt him a long time ago - but you can't live by hindsight, we don't have the power to go back in time. We can't really look at it like that, if we did then you can make the argument that the redskins shouldn't have really drafted him if they knew that he wasn't really going to have a chance. But they didn't really know that. You can only decide and plan things on what you know and what you feel. I'm sure gibbs didn't know that he was planning to pull out Ramsey before the first game was through, but he went with his gut and look how that turned out. And with Ramsey, I personally can't back a player that doesn't get that stamp of approval from gibbs. I couldn't argue with his success of qb decisions, which includes Brunell.

The best thing to do at this point is - keep Ramsey and hope the market for him heats up. The redskins may be able to keep him until the rookies sign because that cap space would have to be reserved for them anyways.

Gibbs knew Ramsey was not his guy when he got here. The signing of Brunell, the drafting of Campbell. That pretty much sums it up. I know we can go back in time, (unless my experiment works, in which I am going to be really, really rich and buy the skins from Danny). That was a decision that should have been made earlier, that is all I am saying. The writing was on the wall when he signed Brunell and drafted Campbell. We could have gotten a much higher pick, hell a pick at all since now we get dick!!

[warriorzpath]

Originally Posted by #56fanatic

Gibbs knew Ramsey was not his guy when he got here. The signing of Brunell, the drafting of Campbell. That pretty much sums it up. I know we can go back in time, (unless my experiment works, in which I am going to be really, really rich and buy the skins from Danny). That was a decision that should have been made earlier, that is all I am saying. The writing was on the wall when he signed Brunell and drafted Campbell. We could have gotten a much higher pick, hell a pick at all since now we get dick!!

But why would he then keep him and let him start the first game ? Just so he can stick it to ramsey and say i'll waste one of your years in the nfl - I don't think that Gibbs is vindictive like that, and if he was - he had nothing against ramsey. Like someone posted - Theisman was with the redskins before gibbs, and i'm sure he would have liked ramsey to succeed just as well. I just don't understand why he would intentionally wait to deal ramsey, if he knew that he wouldn't give ramsey a chance. It just sucks for everyone involved - the redskins team, ramsey, and gibbs, himself.

[BrudLee]

Originally Posted by warriorzpath

But why would he then keep him and let him start the first game ? Just so he can stick it to ramsey and say i'll waste one of your years in the nfl - I don't think that Gibbs is vindictive like that, and if he was - he had nothing against ramsey. Like someone posted - Theisman was with the redskins before gibbs, and i'm sure he would have liked ramsey to succeed just as well. I just don't understand why he would intentionally wait to deal ramsey, if he knew that he wouldn't give ramsey a chance. It just sucks for everyone involved - the redskins team, ramsey, and gibbs, himself.

I think that in looking for a villain in the Ramsey situation, we are forgetting the facts.

1) Gibbs gave the job, grudingly, to Ramsey after Brunell's horrible 2004 season - one that was marred by injury. Clearly he preferred Brunell's decision-making, but Ramsey's arm was measurably better than Brunell's.

2) Ramsey made several mistakes in his opening game - understandable mistakes, but mistakes nonetheless. Ramsey threw an interception on his second pass of the game, and his other two drives ended with fumbles, including the one on his injury that was recovered by Chicago. Ramsey finished 6 of 11 for 105 yards with two sacks and a 49.4 passer rating. Brunell, while not explosive, managed three scoring drives. Error-free football wins the day, and Brunell emerges the starter.

3) Trade overtures from the Jets (and other teams) at the deadline, would have left the team scrambling for a credible backup. The only other QB on the roster was Campbell, who was not ready for the job. While the offers were reportedly better than the ones we are hearing now, we would have left the franchise to a player who wasn't healthy enough to finish the previous year, with a rookie or someone off the street to replace him in case of injury.

Though we didn't need Ramsey on the team (he played only sparingly in blowouts the remainder of the season), that couldn't have been clear in late September, when the Jets were making overtures. Keeping Ramsey wasn't a question of Gibbs trying to screw Ramsey or anyone else, it was Gibbs trying to field the best roster he could in 2005.

[warriorzpath]

Originally Posted by BrudLee

I think that in looking for a villain in the Ramsey situation, we are forgetting the facts.

1) Gibbs gave the job, grudingly, to Ramsey after Brunell's horrible 2004 season - one that was marred by injury. Clearly he preferred Brunell's decision-making, but Ramsey's arm was measurably better than Brunell's.

2) Ramsey made several mistakes in his opening game - understandable mistakes, but mistakes nonetheless. Ramsey threw an interception on his second pass of the game, and his other two drives ended with fumbles, including the one on his injury that was recovered by Chicago. Ramsey finished 6 of 11 for 105 yards with two sacks and a 49.4 passer rating. Brunell, while not explosive, managed three scoring drives. Error-free football wins the day, and Brunell emerges the starter.

3) Trade overtures from the Jets (and other teams) at the deadline, would have left the team scrambling for a credible backup. The only other QB on the roster was Campbell, who was not ready for the job. While the offers were reportedly better than the ones we are hearing now, we would have left the franchise to a player who wasn't healthy enough to finish the previous year, with a rookie or someone off the street to replace him in case of injury.

Though we didn't need Ramsey on the team (he played only sparingly in blowouts the remainder of the season), that couldn't have been clear in late September, when the Jets were making overtures. Keeping Ramsey wasn't a question of Gibbs trying to screw Ramsey or anyone else, it was Gibbs trying to field the best roster he could in 2005.

I agree. Let me also add something to this - I personally think one of the greatest if not the greatest decision of 2005 was the decision to pull Ramsey and replace him with Brunell. It took a lot of courage for Gibbs to go with his instinct which went against the conventional reasoning of the masses- this was really the first time he did this since he has unretired. I know how there are some that disagree with his treatment of and decisions on ramsey, but I can't argue with the success of 2005.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by warriorzpath

I agree. Let me also add something to this - I personally think one of the greatest if not the greatest decision of 2005 was the decision to pull Ramsey and replace him with Brunell. It took a lot of courage for Gibbs to go with his instinct which went against the conventional reasoning of the masses- this was really the first time he did this since he has unretired. I know how there are some that disagree with his treatment of and decisions on ramsey, but I can't argue with the success of 2005.

Agreed. Ramsey got replaced. Did he get as much of a chance to prove himself as Brunell did? No. That's because Brunell already proved himself in Jacksonville. Ramsey is not proven yet. So Gibbs yanked him against Chicago, and Brunell's prior experience in Jacksonville gave Gibbs a good idea that he'd succeed again here, and what do you know, he was right.

A young Mark Brunell once got the same shot that Ramsey got from Spurrier and Gibbs. Brunell got a shot to be a starting quarterback, and in his first full season he took the league by storm and took the Jags to the championship game. Ramsey came into the league, showed courage, gained respect, but in the end was only mediocre.

Brunell has established that he can lead a team, that's why Gibbs went to him.

[Huddle]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Ramsey got replaced. Did he get as much of a chance to prove himself as Brunell did? No. That's because Brunell already proved himself in Jacksonville.

And, young Mark Brunell got a chance to prove himself in Jacksonville because some dumb ass in Green Bay didn't give it to him.

[scowan]

Though we didn't need Ramsey on the team (he played only sparingly in blowouts the remainder of the season), that couldn't have been clear in late September, when the Jets were making overtures. Keeping Ramsey wasn't a question of Gibbs trying to screw Ramsey or anyone else, it was Gibbs trying to field the best roster he could in 2005.[/QUOTE]

I beg to differ about Ramsey. Once the season started, we DID need him. Jason Campbell was not ready to step in should Brunell have gone down and we basically had two starters to work with. I also agree with other fans on this site that believe Ramsey was given every opportunity to be the starter and he just did not do enough to make it happen. That is why the Gibbs decision was so tough to make and so contriversial.

[#56fanatic]

Originally Posted by scowan

Though we didn't need Ramsey on the team (he played only sparingly in blowouts the remainder of the season), that couldn't have been clear in late September, when the Jets were making overtures. Keeping Ramsey wasn't a question of Gibbs trying to screw Ramsey or anyone else, it was Gibbs trying to field the best roster he could in 2005.

I beg to differ about Ramsey. Once the season started, we DID need him. Jason Campbell was not ready to step in should Brunell have gone down and we basically had two starters to work with. I also agree with other fans on this site that believe Ramsey was given every opportunity to be the starter and he just did not do enough to make it happen. That is why the Gibbs decision was so tough to make and so contriversial.[/QUOTE]

I dont know anybody is saying we didn't need him. What I am saying is he obviously wasn't in any of the long term plans for the Redskins. What we are saying is we could have gotten a pretty good draft pick for him last year, instead of getting nothing this year. Gibbs always wants two, if not three good QBs, so keeping him was better than having a rookie as the #2, no doubt.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by BrudLee

I think that in looking for a villain in the Ramsey situation, we are forgetting the facts.

1) Gibbs gave the job, grudingly, to Ramsey after Brunell's horrible 2004 season - one that was marred by injury. Clearly he preferred Brunell's decision-making, but Ramsey's arm was measurably better than Brunell's.

2) Ramsey made several mistakes in his opening game - understandable mistakes, but mistakes nonetheless. Ramsey threw an interception on his second pass of the game, and his other two drives ended with fumbles, including the one on his injury that was recovered by Chicago. Ramsey finished 6 of 11 for 105 yards with two sacks and a 49.4 passer rating. Brunell, while not explosive, managed three scoring drives. Error-free football wins the day, and Brunell emerges the starter.

3) Trade overtures from the Jets (and other teams) at the deadline, would have left the team scrambling for a credible backup. The only other QB on the roster was Campbell, who was not ready for the job. While the offers were reportedly better than the ones we are hearing now, we would have left the franchise to a player who wasn't healthy enough to finish the previous year, with a rookie or someone off the street to replace him in case of injury.

Though we didn't need Ramsey on the team (he played only sparingly in blowouts the remainder of the season), that couldn't have been clear in late September, when the Jets were making overtures. Keeping Ramsey wasn't a question of Gibbs trying to screw Ramsey or anyone else, it was Gibbs trying to field the best roster he could in 2005.

Rational thinking is underrated, keep it up