Patrick Ramsey's Future

[skinsguy]

Originally Posted by Daseal

The difference is Harrington and Carr don't get yanked out of the lineup consistantly. Ramsey needs AT LEAST a full year to play and get in his rhythm.

Ramsey hasn't gotten yanked out of the lineup consistantly. Since he started last year, he stayed in for the rest of the season and impressed coach Gibbs enough to be named the undisputed starter for the 2005 season.

I do agree though, he does need a full year to play and get in his rhythm. This also includes him staying away from injuries.

[rickmmrr]

Ramsey's never been behind a good O-line. This year he should be and it will make all the difference.

[sportscurmudgeon]

The question is about Ramsey's future - presumably here in Washington.

First, I continue to believe that Joe Gibbs is uncomfortable with Patrick Ramsey as the QB of this team. Remember back to the time when Gibbs was hired. He had been here about two weeks and said that he and the coaching staff had looked at the films from the year before (Spurrier II) and they were amazed to see who the previous regime had in the starting positions. Then, the FIRST thing that Gibbs did was to go out and woo Mark Brunell to agree to come here in a trade. Bad sign...

Then Gibbs played Brunell forever and a week last year until it became embarrassing - and then he went to Ramsey. But even with Ramsey showing improvement - note I did not say he was great nor did I say he projected to be a Pro Bowl contender this year - the Skins spent a lot of capital to move to a position to draft Jason Campbell to play QB. They did not use that pick with the intention that Jason Campbell will be a clipboard holder for three or four years. They took a QB because they think they need an upgrade at that position.

[Aside: Scouts and reporters are oohing and ahhing about how wonderfully Jason Campbell throws the ball in camp. Swell. I do recall that when Ramsey was drafted, the scouts and the reporters AND Sonny Jurgensen who knows something about throwing a ball were going into orgasmic raptures about how great Ramsey's arm was. Moral: Wait till you see offensive players in a game against defenses that are NFL caliber before entering a rapturous state.]

Here's what Ramsey needs to do to be a success on this team in this season:

Option #1: Skins win the NFC East Division Title. Doesn't matter what the record is, if the Skins are the Division Champs, Ramsey as the QB for the team is a success. The bottom lime is winning; it trumps ALL the other stats. The corrolary to this is that once in the playoffs, Ramsey cannot play so badly that he embarrasses the team; no bed-wetting is allowed in the playoffs

Option #2: Skins do not win the Division so we have to look at stats to measure Ramsey's progress and justify his continued existence in DC:

QB Rating: Minimum acceptable is 80. Good season is 85-87.

TD/ INT Ratio: Minimum acceptable is 2. Good season is 2.2

Red Zone effeiciency: Average points per Red Zone posession would be 4 to be minimally acceptable. Good season would be 4.5.

3rd down efficiency: Minimum acceptable is 40%. Good season is 44-46%.

Fumbles - whether lost or recovered - must be less than 10 for the year.

Yards gained per pass attempt: [note: that is not per completion!] Minimum acceptable is 7. Good season is 8.5-9.0.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

I completely agree about winning. If we go 10-6 or 11-5 and Ramsey stinks it up, it STILL would be hard to shop him or think about trading him in the offseason.

[skinsguy]

There is no doubt that Gibbs still has some questions about Ramsey, but he is still the guy for this season beyond a shadow of a doubt. If the Redskins have a losing season, Ramsey will be sitting the next year. 8-8 MIGHT keep Ramsey in, but Campbell will definitely be pushing the next season. So, SC is right, we HAVE to have winning season to solidify Ramsey as our guy for the long haul.

[GoSkins!]

Gibbs is in year 2 of a 5 year tenure. Finding out that you need a QB and trying to find him at the start of year 3 is a bad option. If Gibbs was 35 years old and planning to stay for 10 years, I don't think we would have traded to get Jason Campbell. What are are seeing is Gibbs plan of action to make sure he produces a winning team in the time that he can stay with the team.

If Campbell needs two years to develop, he could start in Gibbs 4th year. Chances are, his first real shot at going deep into the playoffs would be in Gibbs 5th (last) or 6th (good luck) season.

We traded next years number one pick and more to find some insurance for Gibbs to be able to win big before he retires for good.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by GoSkins!

Gibbs is in year 2 of a 5 year tenure. Finding out that you need a QB and trying to find him at the start of year 3 is a bad option. If Gibbs was 35 years old and planning to stay for 10 years, I don't think we would have traded to get Jason Campbell. What are are seeing is Gibbs plan of action to make sure he produces a winning team in the time that he can stay with the team.

If Campbell needs two years to develop, he could start in Gibbs 4th year. Chances are, his first real shot at going deep into the playoffs would be in Gibbs 5th (last) or 6th (good luck) season.

We traded next years number one pick and more to find some insurance for Gibbs to be able to win big before he retires for good.

Well said.

I think this offseason was a rude awakening for Gibbs in free agency. He saw so called "core guys" walk for more money. That could easily happen again, and god forbid it happens with Ramsey after he hypothetically puts up good numbers over the next two years. Then what? Campbell is Gibbs' insurance policy at QB.

[offiss]

All this talk about Campbell being an insurance policy, we paid a hefty price for ins., and this plan doesn't cover a whole lot, we didn't draft a great college QB, and yet he's going to challenge for super bowl's in 2 years? What about the Brunell ins. policy, how did that work out?

Here's our ins. policy as it stand's, we are 1 hit away from having either Brunnell or Campbell starting for us this year, sound's to me like we have no ins. for the next 2 year's, but in 2 year's we will be set, that's if Ramsey fails, But if Ramsey can't get the job done under Gibbs, then good luck Campbell your going to need it.

[MTK]

Only time will tell I guess.

In today's NFL I know it's all about now and what have you done for me lately, but there's nothing wrong with keeping an eye on the not so distant future.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Originally Posted by offiss

All this talk about Campbell being an insurance policy, we paid a hefty price for ins., and this plan doesn't cover a whole lot, we didn't draft a great college QB, and yet he's going to challenge for super bowl's in 2 years? What about the Brunell ins. policy, how did that work out?

Here's our ins. policy as it stand's, we are 1 hit away from having either Brunnell or Campbell starting for us this year, sound's to me like we have no ins. for the next 2 year's, but in 2 year's we will be set, that's if Ramsey fails, But if Ramsey can't get the job done under Gibbs, then good luck Campbell your going to need it.

Would ya rather have signed another washed-up veteran like Brunell as a backup though?

[offiss]

Originally Posted by TheMalcolmConnection

Would ya rather have signed another washed-up veteran like Brunell as a backup though?

No way, I was 1 of the guy's who didn't want Brunell in the first place.

But if we were going to look to the future it should have been done with Gibbs first draft when there was much more talent at the QB position, and then he would already had a year under his belt, the Brunell signing was a win now signing, now all of a sudden we pull an about face and we are building for the future at the QB position? With a coach who we all know doesn't have a big window of opportunity? With a player who at best is a project?

How bout drafting Matt Schaub the previous draft he went to the Falcons with the 27th pick in the 3rd rd, and will probably be better than Campbell, there are plenty of way's to get a backup at the QB position with some experience, right now we don't have a backup realistically, Campbell who is a 3 year project, or Brunell who is another year older, what do you think?

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Schaub would have been a great pickup. But basically the nature of the free agent QB market in the NFL is that you are either a has-been or a never-was. There's just no gray area.

[GoSkins!]

Originally Posted by offiss

No way, I was 1 of the guy's who didn't want Brunell in the first place.

But if we were going to look to the future it should have been done with Gibbs first draft when there was much more talent at the QB position, and then he would already had a year under his belt, the Brunell signing was a win now signing, now all of a sudden we pull an about face and we are building for the future at the QB position? With a coach who we all know doesn't have a big window of opportunity? With a player who at best is a project?

How bout drafting Matt Schaub the previous draft he went to the Falcons with the 27th pick in the 3rd rd, and will probably be better than Campbell, there are plenty of way's to get a backup at the QB position with some experience, right now we don't have a backup realistically, Campbell who is a 3 year project, or Brunell who is another year older, what do you think?

Even if you didn't like Brunnel, there is no way you could have predicted the distaster he was last year. Gibbs had to get another guy. This is how he chose to do it.

[offiss]

Originally Posted by GoSkins!

Even if you didn't like Brunnel, there is no way you could have predicted the distaster he was last year. Gibbs had to get another guy. This is how he chose to do it.

Sorry but I was very close to that prediction as I stated many times before the trade that he was more of a playmaker than a passing QB and that doesn't fit into Gibbs offensive philosophy, as well as I also said his abiltity to run around and make play's is about over and he will have to rely on his passing skills to get by which I have never been a big believer in, as was neither Tom Coughlin who wanted to get rid of him back in Brunell's prime becuase he didn't believe he could win with him, did I believe he would be as bad as he was? No! But I couldn't imagine anyone being that bad.

I understand how Gibbs choose his new QB, the question is did he use the same evaluation process that he used to bring Brunell in? You no the process that had us give up a 2nd round pick and 43 million to a QB who was replaced by a rookie and was going to be released?

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

1. As I said a million times before the start of the season, I didn't like the trade because Brunell was a likely June 1 release, we gave up too high a pick, he's old, and his deal was too big.

2. I also thought Brunell would be successful here.

3. However, I said by week 3 that Brunell stunk and Gibbs was crazy for keeping him in there - even if he was coming to a new team, head coach, and offense. I also said Gibbs' offense stank up the joint and needed to change. I was totally ridiculed for making such calls. With an a-holeesque grin, I can say I was right on both counts; Brunell has been benched and Gibbs has admitted that he needed to make major changes to his offensive schemes (and offensive personnel) this off-season.

In any event, I don't think there's much room for debate about Brunell. We all now know it was a mistake (which even Gods like Gibbs are allowed to make every so often). So, lets put him (and Gibbs' 2004 offense) behind us. Gibbs learned from his mistakes and we're moving on with Ramsey.