Who starts at QB?

PWNED · 03-15-2006, 03:38 PM

i dont think anyone can argue with the success.. of course its hard to say, but i think many of us would have liked to have maybe seen ramsey in the playoffs because of brunells bum knee.

PWNED · 03-15-2006, 03:43 PM

well i guess there are two types of people in this world.

1) those who need closure ...

Schneed10 · 03-15-2006, 03:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paintrain

I really hate to get back into this but it bugs the hell out of me.. How was the way Ramsey treated 'a disgrace'? The 2 training camps that he flopped? The 2 pre-seasons he played crappily thru? The turnovers when he played in the regular season? The sacks because he held the ball for......ev......er....?

Guys, he didn't step up and grab the job, electrify the team, wow the coaches, establish that he was unquestionably, unequivocably THE MAN so please spare us the 'Ramsey never had a chance' bs..

If he came in and played like Elway or Favre (both of whom he's been compared to in this thread) then we wouldn't be having this discussion.. He came in and played like Gus Frerotte and his career path is following accordingly..

Marvelous post.

warriorzpath · 03-15-2006, 03:53 PM

Hey PWNED, I have the answer to your signature below your posts - i bet it would win me THE prize too.

BrudLee · 03-15-2006, 03:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PWNED

well i guess there are two types of people in this world.

1) those who need closure ...

Finish, damnit!!!

SmootSmack · 03-15-2006, 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paintrain

I really hate to get back into this but it bugs the hell out of me.. How was the way Ramsey treated 'a disgrace'? The 2 training camps that he flopped? The 2 pre-seasons he played crappily thru? The turnovers when he played in the regular season? The sacks because he held the ball for......ev......er....?

Guys, he didn't step up and grab the job, electrify the team, wow the coaches, establish that he was unquestionably, unequivocably THE MAN so please spare us the 'Ramsey never had a chance' bs..

If he came in and played like Elway or Favre (both of whom he's been compared to in this thread) then we wouldn't be having this discussion.. He came in and played like Gus Frerotte and his career path is following accordingly..

I gotta agree with Schneed. That post really summarizes the feelings a lot of us have about Ramsey. Especially the part about him following the career path of Frerotte. That's my fear (for lack of a better word) about what Ramsey's career will be. He'll be steady for a long time, but this is as good as he'll be...Of course, I could be wrong

Schneed10 · 03-15-2006, 03:59 PM

Quote:

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.

warriorzpath · 03-15-2006, 04:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by warriorzpath

Hey PWNED, I have the answer to your signature below your posts - i bet it would win me THE prize too.

It's Lois Lane

i am to superman as Lois Lane is to clark kent.

Because both of you were secret lovers to both. J/K

I wanted to type something funnier, but I know this is a family site

PWNED · 03-15-2006, 04:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrudLee

Finish, damnit!!!

thanks brud. i had to have SOMEONE say that.

PWNED · 03-15-2006, 04:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by warriorzpath

It's Lois Lane

i am to superman as Lois Lane is to clark kent.

Because both of you were secret lovers to both. J/K

I wanted to type something funnier, but I know this is a family site

yes the people that DIDNT want the prize thought it would be funny to send me a PM of that too. drew54 happened to answer me correctly and will be receiving an auto'd card in the mail.

scowan · 03-15-2006, 04:06 PM

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.

warriorzpath · 03-15-2006, 04:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TAFKAS

I gotta agree with Schneed. That post really summarizes the feelings a lot of us have about Ramsey. Especially the part about him following the career path of Frerotte. That's my fear (for lack of a better word) about what Ramsey's career will be. He'll be steady for a long time, but this is as good as he'll be...Of course, I could be wrong

Hopefully the redskins will be winning so many games plus the superbowl, to even notice what ramsey is doing. My point: the redskins should focus on what they have instead of what they don't have - winning would acheive this, they wouldn't have to worry about him or anyone else that doesn't have an indian on their helmet.

warriorzpath · 03-15-2006, 04:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by warriorzpath

Hopefully the redskins will be winning so many games plus the superbowl, to even notice what ramsey is doing. My point: the redskins should focus on what they have instead of what they don't have - winning would acheive this, they wouldn't have to worry about him or anyone else that doesn't have an indian on their helmet.

... unless of course that "other" player is a free agent

Huddle · 03-15-2006, 04:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RobH4413

hypothetically speaking: ... suppose we keep ramsey ...

If Gibbs opens his mind and let's saunders have equal influence in the decision of whom to start at QB, thus guaranteeing a fair competition then what would be the result?

My conclusion is only that our QB depth chart will be much more attractive w/ Ramsey than without.

(no particular order)
1)Brunell --------------------1) Brunell
2)Campbell ----is less then---2)Ramsey
3)Collins--------------------- 3)Campbell

I can't imagine paying two million a year to hire an OC and then not giving him the final say on who plays QB in his scheme. Joe Gibbs will have input surely but Saunders will make the call.

However, the Ramsey Bridge was burned before Saunders got here. He doesn't want to play here.

Huddle · 03-15-2006, 04:35 PM

Quote:

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.

03-15-2006, 03:38 PM	#61
PWNED The Starter Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: ZOMGZZZ!!111 Age: 32 Posts: 1,160	Re: Who starts at QB? i dont think anyone can argue with the success.. of course its hard to say, but i think many of us would have liked to have maybe seen ramsey in the playoffs because of brunells bum knee. __________________ 143 lbs of twisted steel and sex appeal.

03-15-2006, 03:43 PM	#62
PWNED The Starter Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: ZOMGZZZ!!111 Age: 32 Posts: 1,160	Re: Who starts at QB? well i guess there are two types of people in this world. 1) those who need closure ... __________________ 143 lbs of twisted steel and sex appeal.

03-15-2006, 03:53 PM	#64
warriorzpath Registered User Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 1,880	Re: Who starts at QB? Hey PWNED, I have the answer to your signature below your posts - i bet it would win me THE prize too.

03-15-2006, 04:06 PM	#71
scowan The Starter Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: KY Age: 55 Posts: 1,559	Re: Who starts at QB? 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.

Who starts at QB?

Locker Room Main Forum