Who starts at QB?

[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