Re: Brees and Rivers and the Market for Ramsey
 

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.

Re: Brees and Rivers and the Market for Ramsey
 

[QUOTE=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.[/QUOTE]

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.

Re: Brees and Rivers and the Market for Ramsey
 

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.

Re: Brees and Rivers and the Market for Ramsey
 

[QUOTE=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.[/QUOTE]

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

Re: Brees and Rivers and the Market for Ramsey
 

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

Re: Brees and Rivers and the Market for Ramsey
 

[QUOTE=JoeRedskin]Well, since we're relying on cowboy coaches - Parcells has said that Ramsey just doesn't have what it takes and will never be a winning QB in the NFL.[/QUOTE]

Is that true? He really came out and said that or are you extracting that meaning from a different statement?

Re: Brees and Rivers and the Market for Ramsey
 

[QUOTE=TAFKAS]FRPLG, what do you mean Bledsoe won the Super Bowl, not Brady?[/QUOTE]
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.

Re: Brees and Rivers and the Market for Ramsey
 

[QUOTE=skindogger47]I firmly believe that we would not be in the playoffs if Ramsey was our QB this year.[/QUOTE]
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.

Re: Brees and Rivers and the Market for Ramsey
 

[QUOTE=celts32]Is that true? He really came out and said that or are you extracting that meaning from a different statement?[/QUOTE]
It has been reported that during the draft process before Cooley was drafted Parcells told Cooley, during a visit to the Cowboys, that he was no better than a depth/backup player in the NFL based on the film Parcells had watched on him. Parcells is clearly a master talent evaluator as well as a master talent motivator. Or maybe he is just a master asshole.

Re: Brees and Rivers and the Market for Ramsey
 

[QUOTE=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.[/QUOTE]

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?

Re: Brees and Rivers and the Market for Ramsey
 

[QUOTE=Schneed10]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?[/QUOTE]
Woah woah woah!
Love affair with Ramsey? Where the hell did you get that from? You'll need to go back and search through my posts. I am an ardent Gibbs supporter and always thought he was doing what was best. And I haven't said anything to contradict that here in thsi thread. My posts, I thought, clearly stated I was assuming that the SKINS THEMSELVES believe Ramsey could do the job. And that was simply a pragmatic assumption for the sake of the discussion. They may or may not believe that but it was part of my assumption about how THEY are handling this andhow THEY may in the future. Not necessarily how I would. I think the general principle of having depth at the position is good, yet contrary to general league think, but I wouldn't go so far as to say I want PR as part of depth or not. Sorry if I wasn't clear on that.

Re: Brees and Rivers and the Market for Ramsey
 

[QUOTE=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.[/QUOTE]
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.

Re: Brees and Rivers and the Market for Ramsey
 

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.

Re: Brees and Rivers and the Market for Ramsey
 

[QUOTE=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.[/QUOTE]

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.

Re: Brees and Rivers and the Market for Ramsey
 

[QUOTE=diehardskin2982]with the Saints in the #2 spot they will either take Lienarht or Young. If they hire Mike Martz they will get Leinarht. I wanted to trade for Darren Howard. But if the Abraham for Ramsey trade goes through, I'd take it in a heart beat. My question is what will they do with Arrington?[/QUOTE]
Abraham is a better rushing the passer off the edge than anyone we have by miles - you take that deal for Ramsey, and restructure Abraham's contract if necessary. Sadly, the Skins almost certainly will have to part ways with LaVar. His $12M cap figure next year makes that a virtual forgone conclusion. Thank goodness we have Marcus Washington locked up at a lesser figure.