![]() |
|
|||||||
| Locker Room Main Forum Commanders Football & NFL discussion |
| View Poll Results: Who should start week 8 against the Packers? | |||
| Ramsey |
|
68 | 70.83% |
| Brunell |
|
19 | 19.79% |
| Hasselbeck |
|
9 | 9.38% |
| Voters: 96. You may not vote on this poll | |||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
|
#1 |
|
The Starter
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 46
Posts: 1,034
|
Jesus christ, Ramsey.
Yes, I said Jesus Christ or Ramsey...God is a great QB. |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 | |
|
Uncle Phil
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 45,256
|
Quote:
__________________
You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Camp Scrub
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 62
|
If Ramsey starts this game we LOSE. Gibbs knows it and the whole team knows it. As for the deflected interception that went 70 yards for a TD, I feel that this team has had some horrible luck with the whole turnover thing and that will continue until this team gets on a winning streak and confidence to boot. Brunell played well enough to win, yes he made some bad throws but hes hurt and HE IS NOT A ROLLOUT TYPE PASSER. I hope that coach sees this and make some changes with the scrambling /rollout play calls. The majority of Brunell's bad throws came off of rollouts. This has continued to be a pattern throughout the season. 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. I don't even know if I should say late in the game or the entire second half. I'm not criticizing them, they played there hearts out. Other that that, WE WON GUYS. Enjoy the next two weeks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 | |
|
Impact Rookie
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Albany, NY
Age: 53
Posts: 838
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 | |
|
Camp Scrub
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 62
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Camp Scrub
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Iowa
Age: 50
Posts: 93
|
Hassleback is a gamer, Ramsey is the sack king , Brunell sucks
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Impact Rookie
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Nashville, TN
Age: 54
Posts: 960
|
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? |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 | |
|
The Starter
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Charlottesville, VA
Age: 50
Posts: 1,501
|
Quote:
And I'd be willing to take it a step further and say that the only thing that's really 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. |
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|