Brees and Rivers and the Market for Ramsey

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

What's wrong with keeping Ramsey around if he is willing to stay and be the backup? Some seem to think it is imperative that Campbell be elevated because he is the heir. Can't he be the heir to the heir? The argument that there are a bunch of successful QBs who started right away or in their second year has a pretty big loop hole. All the guys mentioned put together have won 0 SBs. In fact the only guy lately to have won a SB early was Brady and even then he didn't actually win the Super Bowl. Bledsoe did. Not that he wouldn't have also but he didn't so he doesn't get credit there. Look, all I care about is having a sound and complete solution at QB. To me that means a guy starting who can lead a team into the playoffs with a backup who can come in and do the same. Most teams don't have this. Most have two guys about the same though one might be a little better or just a little different in a way to fit the scheme better. But neither can be expected to lead them into the playoffs consistently. Other teams like the Colts have a great QB but they are dead in the water after that. How many teams have two guys they can trust to lead a team? I am not saying PR can lead us to the playoffs consistently but I am assuming he can for my argument. Or actually I am assuming the Skins think he can(same for Brunell). In that case I would think they'd like to keep him if possible while letting Campbell mature into a guy they can trust to lead them to the playoffs maybe 3 or 4 years from now. You'll never convince me that letting Campbell sit 3 years is going to prevent him from becoming good. There is a ton of evidence that QBs who sit and leanr become more complete and successful QBS in the long run. I know this is a different approach than just about every team takes now but there are only like two real successful teams over the last few years. The Pats and the Figgles. The Patriots by luck had this arrangement with Bledsoe and Brady initially and have been lucky enough since to keep Brady healthy and stay at the top. The Eagles never had two guys but were also lucky enough to keep McNabb healthy enough that having a good second stringer didn't keep them from being the best NFC team. Until now and look what happened. Maybe investing a ton at the qb position to create depth is the way to go to stay on top in the long run.

I have no idea why you're suggesting that Jason Campbell can't step up and be a #2 QB capable of leading a team to the playoffs in his second year. Where are you getting this idea? Have you read something that says Campbell is not progressing very well? If so, please post it. Otherwise, I see no reason to believe that a first round pick in his 2nd year isn't capable of performing BACKUP DUTIES for a team with a great RB, a good offensive line, a stud deepthreat, and an emerging H-back.

Secondly, I think all of this is besides the point. Ramsey won't be around next year because he wants to head to greener pastures. What would you do? Stay here and compete with Brunell until he retires, and then compete with Jason Campbell; or would you ask to be traded someplace where you could compete with one QB instead of two? It's a no-brainer. Ramsey will want out, and Gibbs will want to accomodate that.

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

I have no idea why you're suggesting that Jason Campbell can't step up and be a #2 QB capable of leading a team to the playoffs in his second year. Where are you getting this idea? Have you read something that says Campbell is not progressing very well? If so, please post it. Otherwise, I see no reason to believe that a first round pick in his 2nd year isn't capable of performing BACKUP DUTIES for a team with a great RB, a good offensive line, a stud deepthreat, and an emerging H-back.

Secondly, I think all of this is besides the point. Ramsey won't be around next year because he wants to head to greener pastures. What would you do? Stay here and compete with Brunell until he retires, and then compete with Jason Campbell; or would you ask to be traded someplace where you could compete with one QB instead of two? It's a no-brainer. Ramsey will want out, and Gibbs will want to accomodate that.

Where did I suggest that?
Dude, learn to read and read to learn. My point wasn't that Campbell can't, rather it was that maybe the Skins think Ramsey can and why not keep both for depth. If they do then Campbell as a less experienced younger guy would be the third stringer. I don't see why letting Campbell stay the third for another year hurts us or him if Ramsey can handle the job and is willing. It can only help him really. I am really discussing more of a theoretical approach to the qb position than this specific situation. Substitute other names if you wish. I am talking about depth here. Letting guys grow and mature without pressure.

[skindogger47]

We traded a lot to get Campbell, which we WOULD NOT HAVE DONE if Joe Gibbs had faith in PRam. Ramsey is an immobile JP Losman. Which is bad, though I'm sure some of you think Losman is the real deal, even though he has done NOTHING to prove it.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

Where did I suggest that?
Dude, learn to read and read to learn. My point wasn't that Campbell can't, rather it was that maybe the Skins think Ramsey can and why not keep both for depth. If they do then Campbell as a less experienced younger guy would be the third stringer. I don't see why letting Campbell stay the third for another year hurts us or him if Ramsey can handle the job and is willing. It can only help him really. I am really discussing more of a theoretical approach to the qb position than this specific situation. Substitute other names if you wish. I am talking about depth here. Letting guys grow and mature without pressure.

Well there are so many goofy things going on with your argument, I don't know where to start.

#1 You seem to want to assume that Ramsey wants to stay and be a backup here. Where the hell are you getting that idea? Or is this just another one of your assumptions for arguments' sake? Ramsey requested a trade earlier in the season, and his situation has not gotten better, there's no way he'll want to stay, and Gibbs doesn't like to keep guys who don't want to be here. Let's deal in reality, not a bunch of who-struck-John assumptions.

#2 You seem to suggest that it will help Campbell if he's the #3 instead of the #2. Newsflash man, but the #3 never sees the field. At least the #2 has a shot at seeing some real live action at some point. Guys need to play to get any better, or at least get a decent share of practice reps. Nobody gets better by sitting idle. Eli progressed by playing, Roethisberger, Carson Palmer, Tom Brady, all of them.

#3 Letting Campbell stay as the 3rd and keeping Ramsey as our second does hurt us, in the salary cap department. Ramsey would take up a couple million of room next year. Instead we could make Campbell the #2 which he will be perfectly capable of, and we can get another rookie or some vet in for minimum pay. Plus, if we keep Ramsey through this year, it hurts us from a GM perspective because he'll fly the coop in January 2007 as a free agent, I'd rather get a 3rd or 4th rounder for him this year.

#4 There is no such thing as growing and maturing without pressure at the QB position. The QB position is all about pressure and how you handle it. If QBs need to be shielded from pressure, then they're in the wrong line of work. If anything, you want to expose young QBs to pressure to see how they'll respond. We all could see Tom Brady was going to be a good one in his first year of action, because how poised and calm he remained in big pressure situations. 2006 would be a good time to expose Campbell to that as a #2 and find out how he'll respond. We already know Ramsey doesn't respond well to those situations.

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Well there are so many goofy things going on with your argument, I don't know where to start.

#1 You seem to want to assume that Ramsey wants to stay and be a backup here. Where the hell are you getting that idea? Or is this just another one of your assumptions for arguments' sake? Ramsey requested a trade earlier in the season, and his situation has not gotten better, there's no way he'll want to stay, and Gibbs doesn't like to keep guys who don't want to be here. Let's deal in reality, not a bunch of who-struck-John assumptions.

Now YOUR ASSUMING he doesn't want to stay. It has been denied numerous times by all involved that he ever asked for a trade. Whether it's true or not it HAS been denied. Even if he did ask for a trade is it hard to fathom that he could change his mind? Maybe he thinks all of a sudden this is a great opp for him. I don't know but it is possible. Point is we don't know.
I was postulating a theoretical idea that, admittedly I wasn't clear about, I applied to this situation. If you don't want to discuss a theoretical idea then that's fine but don't denigrate someone for it.

Originally Posted by Schneed10

#2 You seem to suggest that it will help Campbell if he's the #3 instead of the #2. Newsflash man, but the #3 never sees the field. At least the #2 has a shot at seeing some real live action at some point. Guys need to play to get any better, or at least get a decent share of practice reps. Nobody gets better by sitting idle. Eli progressed by playing, Roethisberger, Carson Palmer, Tom Brady, all of them.

Young QBs don't "need to play to get better" For every guy you mentioned there can be 3 or 4 that were given similar opps and never panned out. I don't think it is unreasonable to say a second year guy can still get value out of being the third stringer. Maybe he can get more value out of that than being the second stringer and getting forced into action before he is mentally ready. I don't know but it seems to me that it cant hurt. Seeing as this is how Gibbs did it in the past I would guess he thinks much the same way. I agree letting Campbell play more could well get him to super star status within a couple seasons. Or it could have him flipping burgers back in Alabama by the time he is 26. I don't really want to argue this because neither of us is really right. Some guys it will help to play and some it won't. Plus I am not arguing that the best thing to do for Campbell is to sit him as the 3rd guy. I am saying for the Skins having him as the 3rd guy increases the likelihood that he will be great and provides future depth. This is down the line but it most likely increase those things By how much? Who knows.

Originally Posted by Schneed10

#3 Letting Campbell stay as the 3rd and keeping Ramsey as our second does hurt us, in the salary cap department. Ramsey would take up a couple million of room next year. Instead we could make Campbell the #2 which he will be perfectly capable of, and we can get another rookie or some vet in for minimum pay. Plus, if we keep Ramsey through this year, it hurts us from a GM perspective because he'll fly the coop in January 2007 as a free agent, I'd rather get a 3rd or 4th rounder for him this year.

Now your debating whether the idea of keeping 3 good QBs is good or not and that's cool to me. I personally think that I am not sure. How's that for confusing? The thought I presented came from looking at what they did this year and wondering if they might try it again next year. If they do and it is successful maybe the way the rest of the league handles the position isn't always the right way to go and keeping the three is a good long term solution to the position. I know it ties up money in the cap but maybe it is worth it. As far as getting value for Ramsey I guess that gets weighed against what value you have for him as your second stringer. I'd love to end up getting something for him too if they aren't going to keep him. I'm not suggesting we keep him for no good reason.

Originally Posted by Schneed10

#4 There is no such thing as growing and maturing without pressure at the QB position. The QB position is all about pressure and how you handle it. If QBs need to be shielded from pressure, then they're in the long line of work. If anything, you want to expose young QBs to pressure to see how they'll respond. We all could see Tom Brady was going to be a good one in his first year of action, because how poised and calm he remained in big pressure situations. 2006 would be a good time to expose Campbell to that as a #2 and find out how he'll respond. We already know Ramsey doesn't respond well to those situations.

Well that's a fundamental argument. Could it be that having a QB trained well in his mechanics and understanding the offense completely enough to have supreme confidence when he finally gets put into pressure situation will be even more successful than trial by fire? Maybe, maybe not. I tend to go with my more conservative approach while many others go with yours. Again it depends on the player in question I can't honestly comment on Campbell since I have no idea what the guy can handle. I would say that maybe Ramsey would respond better now knowing the offense more completely and seeing how it was run by a vet. I look at PRs deficiencies as not being in the "pressure-handling" area but more in the decision making area. But that's just me.

[Southpaw]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

2006 would be a good time to expose Campbell to that as a #2 and find out how he'll respond. We already know Ramsey doesn't respond well to those situations.

Do you mean like he responded in the Giants game, by throwing a 76 yard touchdown pass to Santana Moss after Brunell went down?

[skindogger47]

Ramsey isnt going to be satisfied being a backup for another year when there are opportunities to play somewhere else. Jason Campbell will be a more than servicable backup next season. Why do people think Joe Gibbs drafted this guy, so he can take over when Joe leaves? He will back up next year and start in 2.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

What's wrong with keeping Ramsey around if he is willing to stay and be the backup? Some seem to think it is imperative that Campbell be elevated because he is the heir. Can't he be the heir to the heir? The argument that there are a bunch of successful QBs who started right away or in their second year has a pretty big loop hole. All the guys mentioned put together have won 0 SBs. In fact the only guy lately to have won a SB early was Brady and even then he didn't actually win the Super Bowl. Bledsoe did. Not that he wouldn't have also but he didn't so he doesn't get credit there. Look, all I care about is having a sound and complete solution at QB. To me that means a guy starting who can lead a team into the playoffs with a backup who can come in and do the same. Most teams don't have this. Most have two guys about the same though one might be a little better or just a little different in a way to fit the scheme better. But neither can be expected to lead them into the playoffs consistently. Other teams like the Colts have a great QB but they are dead in the water after that. How many teams have two guys they can trust to lead a team? I am not saying PR can lead us to the playoffs consistently but I am assuming he can for my argument. Or actually I am assuming the Skins think he can(same for Brunell). In that case I would think they'd like to keep him if possible while letting Campbell mature into a guy they can trust to lead them to the playoffs maybe 3 or 4 years from now. You'll never convince me that letting Campbell sit 3 years is going to prevent him from becoming good. There is a ton of evidence that QBs who sit and leanr become more complete and successful QBS in the long run. I know this is a different approach than just about every team takes now but there are only like two real successful teams over the last few years. The Pats and the Figgles. The Patriots by luck had this arrangement with Bledsoe and Brady initially and have been lucky enough since to keep Brady healthy and stay at the top. The Eagles never had two guys but were also lucky enough to keep McNabb healthy enough that having a good second stringer didn't keep them from being the best NFC team. Until now and look what happened. Maybe investing a ton at the qb position to create depth is the way to go to stay on top in the long run.

FRPLG, what do you mean Bledsoe won the Super Bowl, not Brady?

[skindogger47]

I firmly believe that we would not be in the playoffs if Ramsey was our QB this year.

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by skindogger47

I firmly believe that we would not be in the playoffs if Ramsey was our QB this year.

I firmly believe that none of us has even a clue what this team would have done with Ramsey as QB this year. It really is hard to predict. He did a decent job last year when asked but he looked real bad in camp. So who knows? I am glad Gibbs made the move and we are in the playoffs now.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

I firmly believe that none of us has even a clue what this team would have done with Ramsey as QB this year. It really is hard to predict. He did a decent job last year when asked but he looked real bad in camp. So who knows? I am glad Gibbs made the move and we are in the playoffs now.

He followed up that crappy preseason with a crappy game against the Bears. There's no way Ramsey hits 2 TDs to Moss in the last five minutes of the game against Dallas. That alone would have given the Cowboys one more win and one more loss for us, meaning we'd be watching Dallas play the Bucs this weekend.

I think you're nuts, FRPLG. You need to let go of this love affair with Patrick Ramsey. At what point do you move on and realize he's not going to cut it as a championship QB? How many more inconsistent performances do you need to see?

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by TAFKAS

FRPLG, what do you mean Bledsoe won the Super Bowl, not Brady?

I misremembered. Bledsoe led them to win the AFC championship game that year not the Superbowl. Either way it doesn't matter to me as Brady has proven he has the goods and he showed he ahd them that year. I'd concede he was a guy who won a SB early but he is the exception and not the rule.

[bedlamVR]

It is a point that Ramsey is in his final year of his contract if it were me and if it were an option I would redo my contract in the offseason to bring his cap figure down from the 3 million it is now. Make the deal more of that of a backup but not less than the kid and aim to start next year as a Redskin.

Given the number of first round picks in previous years that have dropped totally out of the NFL (Cade McCown, Alki Smith, Tim Couch?) and with no clear cut chances on better or equal teams might Ramseys best option not be here and be the interim/insurance guy between Brunell and Cambell?

In 2004 he spent much of the year rehabbing his injury and didn't have a fair shot at unseating Brunell, in 2005 he had the entire offseason to get more comfortable with Gibbs offence but still didn't get it (not long enough) but 2006 is a new year a new chance to show coach how much he has grown and try and win the now three way competition a new .

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Stumbled or did Moss push him down like a bitch?

I could have sworn it was a combo of Allen back-peddling and Moss pushing him down.

[Defensewins]

WARNING: this is not a personal attack.
I like that!

Offiss
I have nothing against you, but Hog1 called you a Ramsey-homer, not a redskins-homer. Frankly after reading a ton of your pro-Ramsey posts, I have to agree with Hog1, you are a Ramsey-homer. There is nothing wrong with that.
If you were coach of the Redskins staring tomorrow, you would bench Brunnell and start Ramsey. Right?
Even though Brunnell had a great year and Ramsey hasn't PROVEN he can be a dependable NFL QB, you stated in no uncertain terms you would put all your chips on Ramsey. I think you have said that Ramsey he is a better QB than Mark Brunnell and Campbell. That is basing alot on potential. That is a Ramsey-homer.