Warpath  

Home | Forums | Salary Cap Info | Shop | Donate | Stay Connected




Go Back   Warpath > Redskins Forums > Redskins Locker Room


Reality Bites!

Redskins Locker Room


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-13-2004, 08:14 PM   #46
Thank You, Sean.
 
Gmanc711's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Gaithersburg, MD
Age: 28
Posts: 7,495
Ramsey in 2002: 2-4 , thats not counting when he came off the bench against the Tennesee Titans and went nuts. And the Giants game in week 14 I included, but he may not have started that game.
Ramsey in 2003: 4-7 as a starter, that IS including the dolphins game when he played less than a quarter.
Ramsey in 2004: 1-3 as a starter.

So overall he is 7-14 as a starter. Although I would go as far as saying 8-13, taking away the loss @ Miami in 2003 and adding the win @ Tenessee in 2002, but whatever.
__________________
#21
Gmanc711 is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
Old 12-13-2004, 08:20 PM   #47
‎\m/
 
Mattyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 41
Posts: 79,391
He didn't start that Giants game in week 14 in '02, 7-13 sounds about right, now that I think of it they flashed a graphic last night saying he was 7-12.
Mattyk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2004, 08:42 PM   #48
Impact Rookie
 
VTSkins897's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Richmond, VA
Age: 30
Posts: 890
i like our defensive players but a lot of it is from Williams doin' a great job of not only getting these guys to make an adjustment, but also adjusting to their strengths. no one could have predicted the awesome play of our D, especially the DL. i think the fact that russell was ever even here sorta shows u can't just go signing ppl left and right.

look at the chargers. stuck with schottenheimer, and while i admit they lucked out on the whole brees situation, that right there shows that if u leave a guy in a system long enough he'll have a good shot of catching on. would rivers be 10-3? maybe... but probably not.

i'd be willing to bet that our best shot would be to minimize changes. let's look to the draft for once and try to work our way up. sure if there's a guy u definitely think will have an impact, get him. at the same time don't expect even a mild overhaul. if that does end up happening i wouldnt expect any major improvement soon.

since there were problems with both execution and game-planning (players and coaches), i sorta see the problems as hand-in-hand, naturally. it follows that both the players and the coaches owe it to each other to try and get it right. that's why i'm a..... devotee..... of continuity/
VTSkins897 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2004, 08:45 PM   #49
Puppy Kicker
 
Daseal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Arlington, Virginia
Age: 31
Posts: 8,178
VT skins: Hard to build through a draft with your 2nd rounder already gone! Could still have it and be short a Brunell!
Daseal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2004, 08:53 PM   #50
Playmaker
 
sportscurmudgeon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 3,159
Illdefined:

This year's DL is a HUGE improvement over last year's DL and the reason is that they did two things in the off-season:

1. They got a different Defensive Coordinator

2. They got rid of a bunch of lazy and overpaid guys who - by the way - have not caught on anywhere else and risen to stardom.

That amounts to "blowing up the DL" and using some smarts in order to put together a new unit that is not flashy and not fancy, but it gets the job done.

By the way, it ought to be a severe indictment of EVERYONE who was invovled in any way in selecting that crew for a DL last year. And by everyone I mean anyone from Danny Boy down to the guy who puts out the towels and the soap in the shower room.


Ramseyfan:

Coles was a great acquisition back when he was not hurt. He was really good in 02 and was fine in 03. He plays hard on every play and he plays hurt. I said that I admire all that. Now, when I watch him in the final days of 04, I see someone who cannot run nearly as fast as he could in 02 and someone who does not have nearly the accdeleration coming out of a break as he did in 02. That's not because he is a bad guy or a loafer or a mediocre player; it is because he is hurt. Now the long range planning question for the Skins is this: Is he going to get better or not? That's a combination football/medical question and I admit I have no idea what the probablilities are here. Maybe he needs surgery; maybe he needs rest and therapy; maybe he needs a trip to Lourdes; maybe it will never get better. I don't know; I suggest that the coaches better damned well have a very well informed opinion on this by February 2005.

If Coles is likely to get better, then he stays for sure and is your #1 guy and all you need do for the WRs is to go build around him. If he is not likely to get better - meaning he regains his previous straight-away speed and his acceleration out of a cut - then at best he is your #2 guy and maybe he his only your #3 guy. That presents a much harder problem for the coaching and scouting staff because lead WRs don't come cheap and there ai'nt a whole lot of cap room. But they have to do the unemotional evaluation and the planning because this WR corps full of beasts and warriors and guys who catch TDs and guys who make spectacular plays grades out to be - - mediocre.

I said that Ramsey was an improvement - statistically - over Brunell and I believe that in December 2004 Ramsey is a better QB than Brunell. That ain't saying much, but if it makes you happy to hear it again, I'll be glad to say it. I would absolutely not go back to Brunell. In fact, in my musings about what to do next year, I said that you had to give serious consderation to cutting Brunell and taking the cap hit. But Ramsey isn't even average yet. Remember, average means that there would be 15 or 16 starting QBs in the NFL next week who are worse than him NOW. Don't get caught up in the "potential" business; I'm talking NOW. I've gone through the starting QBs for next week and I can't find 15 who are worse; I can find 10, but that's about it. So, as of this weekend, he is "below average" for the job he is being asked to do. Maybe he'll be much better next year or some day in the future, but right now...

Thanks to all of you who tried to figure out Ramsey's win/loss record as a starter. Your consensus is that he indeed has won less than ten games and has lost about 60% of the games he started My guess was that he had won less than 10 games and had lost about 66% of the games he had started. That's imperfect but not off by a mile...
__________________
The Sports Curmudgeon
www.sportscurmudgeon.com
But don't get me wrong, I love sports...
sportscurmudgeon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2004, 09:07 PM   #51
Uncle Phil
 
SmootSmack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 44,481
SC, ok so Ramsey is below average right now. But let me ask you this, is he-in your mind-improving? Is he a better QB now than he was a month ago?

I would say that while he's not preparing his speech for Canton right now, he is a better QB
__________________
You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You
SmootSmack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2004, 09:59 PM   #52
Impact Rookie
 
VTSkins897's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Richmond, VA
Age: 30
Posts: 890
true das. i definitely didn't want brunell in DC...
VTSkins897 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2004, 10:08 PM   #53
Franchise Player
 
Sheriff Gonna Getcha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 34
Posts: 8,317
SC,

Coles, even as his toe is now, as a number 3 wideout? There are GMs who would give their left nut to have Coles as a number 2 and a lot who would love to have him as their #1. Let me break it down:

Panthers - Muhammed is damn good, but not better than Coles
Dolphins - Booker/Chambers - Coles beats em both
Pats - they've got excellent depth but no one as talented as Coles
Ravens - nuff said
Bears - nuff said
Jets - I'd take Coles over Moss
Browns - Morgan and Bryant are good #2's
Jags - I take Coles over Smith (who's aging)
Broncos - Lelie has had one decent year
Chiefs- Morton/Kennison don't match up
Raiders - Porter is a solid #2
Chargers - Don't overestimate McCardell
Cowboys - Would you take Kewshawn over Coles; I wouldn't
Falcons - Peerless Price has lived up to his name, just not the Falcons expectations
49ers - Lloyd ain't TO
Seahawks - I'll take Robinson with a side of weed and a few drops

Giants - Toomer and Coles are a push
Titans - Mason and Coles are a draw
Packers - Playing with Favre makes Walker look better than he is
Saints - An aging Horn and Coles are a push
Bucs - Clayton will be a star, but he isn't yet

Vikes - I don't like Moss, but he's a stud
Lions - Roy Williams is the next TO
Bengals - Johnson is better
Steelers - Ward is better
Texans - Johnson will be better but he's a #3 pick and cost more
Colts - Harrison; they don't come any better
Eagles - Sorry to say TO beats LC
Rams - Okay, Bruce and Holt are better and their contracts show that
Cardinals - Boldin's better & so is Fitzgerald, but Fitz was a top 5 pick

Of 32 teams, only 9 have a better #1 IMO and of those, only the Cards, Bengals, and Lions are paying less for their #1. Finally, as to turf toe, it a serious issue, but it's not as though the guy is suffering from a broken neck; he'll recover in time.

As to Ramsey, I didn't just say he was a statistical improvement over Brunell. I said he improved our offense and our team as a whole. I honestly think he gives us a chance to win. It just so happens we've had playcallers who either gave him NO protection or kept him on a 5 yard leash.
Sheriff Gonna Getcha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2004, 11:04 PM   #54
Puppy Kicker
 
Daseal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Arlington, Virginia
Age: 31
Posts: 8,178
Ramsey: I don't agree with you on a lot of teams:
Panthers: Steve Smith, been on IR all year one of my favorite receivers.
Dolphins: Ill take Chambers or Booker any day!
Tennessee: Mason better
Giants: Coles better than Toomer
Saints: Horn is better

Agree with the rest.
Daseal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2004, 11:52 PM   #55
Special Teams
 
heybigstar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Age: 30
Posts: 369
Way earlier someone said ST is overhyped... for christ sakes he is 21 years old...
he has made big hits as well as been responsible for 5 int's this year in his first year,
he also makes wide receivers drop passes out of fear....

The Great Sonny Jurgensen said on Redskins report last week: "If you look at every
team around the league, each team has 2 or 3 great players... now.... Sean Taylor....
(softly) Sean Tayor is a rare player.....

He will be an All-pro next year.. guaranteed...
__________________
Hail to the Redskins.
heybigstar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2004, 12:40 AM   #56
Franchise Player
 
Sheriff Gonna Getcha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 34
Posts: 8,317
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daseal
Ramsey: I don't agree with you on a lot of teams:
Panthers: Steve Smith, been on IR all year one of my favorite receivers.
Dolphins: Ill take Chambers or Booker any day!
Tennessee: Mason better
Giants: Coles better than Toomer
Saints: Horn is better

Agree with the rest.
Steve Smith is a very good receiver, but I don't think he's as good as Coles (in terms of toughness and class and he's speedy but not as speedy as Coles).

Horn's better, but he'll be 33 next season, cost the Saints over $5 million this season, and last season produced less than 1,000 yards. So, I'd take Coles.

Mason is good, but he's got durability issues, is 30 years old, in 8 seasons has produced only one 80+ reception season and three 1,000 yard seasons, and he carries a cap figure of almost $6 million.

Chambers and Booker are very solid starters, but I don't think I'd rather have either one of them over Coles.

Booker will be 29 next season, has produced only 2 seasons in his career of over 1,000 yards and only 2 seasons of 65+ receptions, averages just 11 ypc, and last season produced just 52 receptions for 715 yards.

Chambers has yet to produce a 1,000 yard season and has never caught more than 64 balls in a season. He's got potential, but that potential has not yet been realized.

Since becoming a full-time starter, Coles has produced 59 catches for 868 yards, 89 catches for 1,264 yards, 82 catches for 1,204 yards (while injured in an offense guided by Rob Johnson, Patrick Ramsey, and Tim Hasselbeck), and is on pace for 94 yards and 1,010 yards in an offense that has stunk this season and with a dislocated finger (against the Cowturds) and severe turf toe.

As for fumbles, his chances of fumbling on each catch is lower than any of the other WRs you said are better. His chances of losing a fumble are only 1 in 328.
*(1/328)=1 for every 328 receptions

Coles - 1 lost (1/328), 3 total (1/109)
Booker - 2 lost (1/178), 5 total (1/71)
Mason - 6 lost (1/72), 12 total (1/36)
Chambers - 1 lost (1/223), 4 total (1/55)
Horn - 3 lost (1/159), 7 total (1/68)


The guy plays with heart and fights for each and every yard; he NEVER gives up. I have so much respect for the guy.

Last edited by Sheriff Gonna Getcha; 12-14-2004 at 01:01 AM.
Sheriff Gonna Getcha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2004, 01:11 AM   #57
Pro Bowl
 
skinsguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Greensboro, North Carolina
Posts: 6,375
I didn't get to see the game Sunday night, but I figured the "boo birds" would come out once again if the Redskins lost. I suppose maybe it's far more easier to be critical of the team, than to just cheer for them win or lose. I thought the Redskins could have beaten the Eagles, but wasn't surprised when they didn't. The Eagles are the best team in the NFC and only beating the Redskins by 3 points and themselves not being able to score over 17 points against us shows me that the Skins fought hard. Most of us said even if the Redskins DID when this game, they wouldn't have had as good of a game statistically as they did against the Giants.

Still, the Redskins have a good chance of finishing out the season at 7-9. Maybe it's just me, but I think when skins fans find more pleasure in criticing the team rather than being Redskins fans, maybe it's time for them to move on.
skinsguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2004, 01:42 AM   #58
Franchise Player
 
Sheriff Gonna Getcha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 34
Posts: 8,317
I'd be fine with 7-9. It's an inaugural season. We've got an ENTIRELY new coaching staff and 7 new starters on defense and 5 new starters on offense (that's over half the team).

Give us time, we shall see Gibbs bring us victory.
Sheriff Gonna Getcha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2004, 01:49 AM   #59
Special Teams
 
bedlamVR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 389
Glass half full.. more like glass smashed on the floor and in splinters swept up and put in the trash three weeks ago. I would like to know who other than Smoot who by definition is unable to walk on water next year might get beaten will be an overpriced bum next year does SC want on the team . Who would he like coachng?

So far Ramsey needs replacing, as do our entire WR corp except possibly thrash and Coles, 3/5ths of our offensive line, our place kicker, ST, all but one of the TE's, I have not seen comments about Portis or Betts but i am sure one of them could go and lets say we could afford these wholesale changes .... how would we be better by bringing in 9-10 min salary starters?

No we are not good but we are not that bad there is a difference between being realistic and optomistic but equally there is a diffference between being objective and being pessermistic... if only there were some happy medium..
bedlamVR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2004, 08:22 AM   #60
The Starter
 
jbcjr14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Austin, Texas
Age: 44
Posts: 2,009
All I can say is....WOW.
__________________
"Work Harder: millions on welfare are counting on you" - Obama 2009 address to Congress.
jbcjr14 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:21 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site is not officially affiliated with the Washington Redskins or the NFL.
Page generated in 0.33225 seconds with 9 queries

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25