Who starts at QB?

[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.

[offiss]

Originally Posted by Huddle

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.

Farve got the buisness from atlanta as well. Brees was horrible and would have been cut if it wasen't for a holdout by Rivers in 2004.

Bottom line does anyone believe that Brunell is the answer? Good luck if you do, Brunell is NO difference maker on the field, the day we win a SB with Brunell is the same day we could win one without him.

Anyone who thinks Ramsey recieved fair treatment is only kidding themselves. Gibbs has a major bias for Brunell, if you want to say that Gibbs is on the money about Ramsey, and he is no good, fine, but who really believes that Brunell is any good? Does anyone really believe that just because Gibbs marches Brunell out on that field every sunday that he's the goods?

Im tired of hearing about Ramseys mistakes, as if Brunell didn't make the same mistakes or worse when he was on the field, the difference is Gibbs was willing to overlook Brunells mistakes, but no Ramseys.

And fianlly why is Ramsey out of here? Because Gibbs had to bribe him to keep his mouth shut last season in return for freedom from our organazation in the offseason.

Gibbs in his handling of Ramsey absolutly destroyed any value Ramsey had as if he had some kind of vendetta against the guy, now we pigeon hole ouselves with the signing of Collins, and Collins is going to be our #2 QB? That's right Todd Collins is going to be our #2 what a comforting feeling knowing how brittle Brunell is at this point in his carreer, If Campbell isn't ready to take over the starting job this season we have a problem, and Gibbs has a problem as far as his talent evaluation goes, but we will just have to wait and see, I would love for Ramsey to find a nice fit for himself. we will regreat this upcoming season when he's no longer around because I don't believe Brunell will last another season.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by offiss

Farve got the buisness from atlanta as well. Brees was horrible and would have been cut if it wasen't for a holdout by Rivers in 2004.

Bottom line does anyone believe that Brunell is the answer? Good luck if you do, Brunell is NO difference maker on the field, the day we win a SB with Brunell is the same day we could win one without him.

Anyone who thinks Ramsey recieved fair treatment is only kidding themselves. Gibbs has a major bias for Brunell, if you want to say that Gibbs is on the money about Ramsey, and he is no good, fine, but who really believes that Brunell is any good? Does anyone really believe that just because Gibbs marches Brunell out on that field every sunday that he's the goods?

Im tired of hearing about Ramseys mistakes, as if Brunell didn't make the same mistakes or worse when he was on the field, the difference is Gibbs was willing to overlook Brunells mistakes, but no Ramseys.

And fianlly why is Ramsey out of here? Because Gibbs had to bribe him to keep his mouth shut last season in return for freedom from our organazation in the offseason.

Gibbs in his handling of Ramsey absolutly destroyed any value Ramsey had as if he had some kind of vendetta against the guy, now we pigeon hole ouselves with the signing of Collins, and Collins is going to be our #2 QB? That's right Todd Collins is going to be our #2 what a comforting feeling knowing how brittle Brunell is at this point in his carreer, If Campbell isn't ready to take over the starting job this season we have a problem, and Gibbs has a problem as far as his talent evaluation goes, but we will just have to wait and see, I would love for Ramsey to find a nice fit for himself. we will regreat this upcoming season when he's no longer around because I don't believe Brunell will last another season.

, SQUAWK!!!

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by offiss

Farve got the buisness from atlanta as well. Brees was horrible and would have been cut if it wasen't for a holdout by Rivers in 2004.

Bottom line does anyone believe that Brunell is the answer? Good luck if you do, Brunell is NO difference maker on the field, the day we win a SB with Brunell is the same day we could win one without him.

Anyone who thinks Ramsey recieved fair treatment is only kidding themselves. Gibbs has a major bias for Brunell, if you want to say that Gibbs is on the money about Ramsey, and he is no good, fine, but who really believes that Brunell is any good? Does anyone really believe that just because Gibbs marches Brunell out on that field every sunday that he's the goods?

Im tired of hearing about Ramseys mistakes, as if Brunell didn't make the same mistakes or worse when he was on the field, the difference is Gibbs was willing to overlook Brunells mistakes, but no Ramseys.

And fianlly why is Ramsey out of here? Because Gibbs had to bribe him to keep his mouth shut last season in return for freedom from our organazation in the offseason.

Gibbs in his handling of Ramsey absolutly destroyed any value Ramsey had as if he had some kind of vendetta against the guy, now we pigeon hole ouselves with the signing of Collins, and Collins is going to be our #2 QB? That's right Todd Collins is going to be our #2 what a comforting feeling knowing how brittle Brunell is at this point in his carreer, If Campbell isn't ready to take over the starting job this season we have a problem, and Gibbs has a problem as far as his talent evaluation goes, but we will just have to wait and see, I would love for Ramsey to find a nice fit for himself. we will regreat this upcoming season when he's no longer around because I don't believe Brunell will last another season.

Raise your hand if you think Ramsey didn't get fair treatment is BS

Did Gibbs bribe him with Portis' steroids?

I don't know much we really regretted 2005, getting to the playoffs for the first time since 1999, finishing with a winning record...all without Ramsey. So I doubt we'll regret 2006 without him again. Of course, apparently we would have been 14-2 and world champs with Ramsey

[Huddle]

Originally Posted by TAFKAS

Raise your hand if you think Ramsey didn't get fair treatment is BS

I mentioned this in another thread.

A poll on extremeskins, voted on by about 250 fans, showed that fans thought Ramsey had not had a fair shot as a Redskin by a margin of almost exactly 2 - 1.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by offiss

Gibbs in his handling of Ramsey absolutly destroyed any value Ramsey had as if he had some kind of vendetta against the guy, now we pigeon hole ouselves with the signing of Collins, and Collins is going to be our #2 QB? That's right Todd Collins is going to be our #2 what a comforting feeling knowing how brittle Brunell is at this point in his carreer, If Campbell isn't ready to take over the starting job this season we have a problem, and Gibbs has a problem as far as his talent evaluation goes, but we will just have to wait and see, I would love for Ramsey to find a nice fit for himself. we will regreat this upcoming season when he's no longer around because I don't believe Brunell will last another season.

I'm just messing with you, Offiss. Only because you say the same things all the time.

A serious note though. The bolded part of your post seems to assume that Campbell is total trash and isn't even ready to be the #2. I think that's a terrible assumption to make. Are you basing that on the Schefter report? Because I don't think it's accurate in the least.

You seem to be so quick to defend Ramsey, saying he didn't have a fair shot. And yet you don't seem willing to give Campbell a chance to prove himself in your mind at all. That's a true sign that you're a Ramsey homer.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by offiss

the day we win a SB with Brunell is the same day we could win one without him.

I'll take a SB win regardless of who's playing QB, hell I'd take it if you suited up and played! LOL

[JET]

Offiss, to attribute Gibbs treatment of Ramsey to malice is to stray beyond what seems reasonable. It doesn't fit Gibbs character and it has hurt the team in terms of what they can get trade-wise for Ramsey. I didn't much care for Gibbs preference for Brunell myself, but we'll never know if the season would have been better, the same, or worse with Ramsey at the helm. It's really an exercise in aggravation to waste time wondering about it.

And yet I did anyway. I did a bit of stat comparison, just out of morbid curiousity. Here are some numbers from Ramsey in 2004 (the second line is what his stats might have looked like for 16 games) and Brunell in 2005. I figure the addition of Moss and Rabach, and return of Jansen balance out Brunells injury. By that I mean Brunells numbers in 2004 were artificially bad, so with the increase in talent in 2005 things come close to evening out. There are flaws in this comparison, but anyway:

QB_____Games Yds TDs Ints Fumbles lost yds/game rating sacked yds
Ramsey_9____1665_10_11__6______1___185______74.8__ 23____137
_______16___2960_18_20__11_____2___ 185______74.8__41____244

Brunell_16____3050_23_10__10_____6___190.6_____85. 9__27____213

Yardage wise things are about on par. The fumbles are about even. Brunell lost more but the difference in a fumble being a turnover versus being recovered by the offense are usually due to chance, so I don't hold this stat against Mark.

The TD-interception ratio and sacks are what really jump out at me. Brunell is much better at avoiding interceptions. I always thought that Ramsey would make up for this difference with the yards he gained, but I was wrong. The sacks are funny, in a sad way. Brunell lost quite a few more yards per sack, probably because of the extra deep drops he takes.

I started this comparison thinking that it would show Ramsey the superior QB, but I was wrong. On paper Brunell outperformed him. It goes to show how far perception can be from reality.

Edit: My formatting skillz are subpar

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by Huddle

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.

That statement right there is a contender for the Schneed10 smackdown of the day award.

Some dumbass in Green Bay? Um at the time, that would have been Mike Holmgren. And at the time, he let Brunell go because HE HAD BRETT FAVRE. Who only led the team to a Super Bowl victory, of all things.

Jesus H Christ. I can't believe what I'm reading. But let's go with the Green Bay comparison for a minute. If Gibbs lets Ramsey go and Ramsey gets to the conference Championship game, while the QB Gibbs chose (doesn't matter if it's Brunell or Campbell) won us a Superbowl in the next few years, wouldn't you be happy? Seems the Green Bay comparison goes right to my argument.

If Ramsey is the one that goes on and wins a Super Bowl while we spin our wheels at QB, then I can see why we'd all be way up in arms over the decision. But like Holmgren, Gibbs is letting a QB go because he thinks the other QBs he currently has can win a Super Bowl. Time will tell if it's the right decision.

But if you're placing your money on Ramsey to win that one, you're in disagreement with just about every GM in the league.

[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