Warpath  

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




Go Back   Warpath > Redskins Forums > Redskins Locker Room


McCants: Your thoughts?

Redskins Locker Room


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-01-2005, 11:08 AM   #46
Uncle Phil
 
SmootSmack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 44,740
Re: McCants: Your thoughts?

With Campbell-a mobile QB of solid character-it's almost as if Gibbs was looking for a young Brunell isn't it?
__________________
You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You
SmootSmack is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
Old 05-01-2005, 03:12 PM   #47
Puppy Kicker
 
Daseal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Arlington, Virginia
Age: 31
Posts: 8,220
Re: McCants: Your thoughts?

I agree we had other needs, but I think he would have been gone early 2nd. You're right -- it is speculation.
__________________
Best. Player. Available.
Daseal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2005, 06:15 PM   #48
Pro Bowl
 
skinsguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Greensboro, North Carolina
Posts: 6,536
Re: McCants: Your thoughts?

Quote:
Originally Posted by RedskinsJunkie
No! What I am saying is even Gibbs can make mistakes and that was a HUGE one. OUr year would have been completely different if Ramsey started from day one. His first two starts were against Philly and Pittsburgh on the road??? I am just saying that Gibbs puts a lot into character and Ramsey and McCants are definitely not on his good side, but both were better options last year than the players that Gibbs played. McCants at worst last year should have been the number 3 WR.
That's very very very debatable Redskinsjunkie! The way Ramsey looked in preseason and in the games in which he came in in relief of Brunell, I cannot see any indication that things would have been better. With all of us arguing over execution, playcalling, receivers, quarterbacks,Gibbs' rust; it's plain to see that Ramsey would not have put a big enough band-Aid on our problems with offense.

Not to mention the fact that Ramsey himself said he was not ready to play at the beginning of the season - Gibbs had no choice but to put in someone he felt could run the offense better - but enough of that..we've stomped that argument into the ground here already!
__________________
Not the same Skinsguy that posts on ES.
skinsguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2005, 06:48 PM   #49
Pro Bowl
 
skinsguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Greensboro, North Carolina
Posts: 6,536
Re: McCants: Your thoughts?

Quote:
Originally Posted by offiss
Really? What indication did you see in pre-season that Brunell would be any better than he was in the regular season?

Didn't Ramsey come into a game when we were in a hole against the Giant's and started moving the ball up and down the field? Something we hadn't seen from Brunell all year, and if it wasen't for an easy drop by Gardner he would have probably won that game for us, and he did all that without getting the rep's in practice because he was the #2 QB, and running Gibbs offense for the first time in meaningful action. Then guess what the following week he was back on the bench.

As for Ramsey stating he wasen't ready? At least he's honest I am still waiting for Brunells reasoning behind horrific performance, either he wasen't ready, or he's just plain bad, either way Gibbs obviously made the wrong choice at QB.

My problem with this whole issue is both Brunell and Ramsey are being scapegoated here for what I believe was Gibbs offensive problems, and playcalling, and now Gibbs is looking to another QB as if that's the problem, Sooner or later he has to look in the mirror. Ramsey deserves to be afforded the same opportunity and confidence that Gibbs showed for Brunell.

It's not a question of Ramsey being honest - if he said he wasn't ready to start, then he wasn't. Being able to lead a football team involves more than just physical ability...you've got to be mentally ready. Sure, Ramsey came in and moved the ball against the Giants in the first game - he also threw how many interceptions?

Before you jump to conclusions, I didn't say that Brunell looked that good in pre-season...actually I felt Hasselbeck probably should have had as much consideration to start as what Brunell and Ramsey had.

Let me put it this way: both Quarterbacks looked horrible in preseason to me. The decision probably came down to which one was more ready mentally. Performance wise, I don't believe either one of them should have started. That's the point my argument that putting Ramsey in more than likely would not have done us any favors.
__________________
Not the same Skinsguy that posts on ES.
skinsguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2005, 10:07 PM   #50
Pro Bowl
 
skinsguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Greensboro, North Carolina
Posts: 6,536
Re: McCants: Your thoughts?

Quote:
Originally Posted by offiss
I agree! My point was how mentaly ready was Brunell compared to Ramsey?
As for the INT's let's face it 1 should have never happened it came after the Gardner drop and he threw 1 up for grabs late in the game, persoanlly I think the cause of those INT's was Ramsey's willingness to try to make something happen in an offense with recievers who were running easily covered routes, where as Brunell just threw the ball away.

Obviously my thought on the capability of our QB's lies with gibbs and his offense last season, and not the QB's themselves, let's face it I am not, nor ever been a big Brunell fan, but even I have to admit that Brunell is a much better QB than what we saw last season, and I believe that falls on Gibbs.
I think both quarterbacks suffered from mental flaws this past year. Ramsey wasn't mentally ready because he probably still had a certain amount of shell shock from the previous year, coupled with having to learn a new system. In preseason, Ramsey to me just did not look ready.

Brunell, I think he lacked the mental toughness in different way. Brunell had been out for what, a year or two with an injury? I believe overall, he knew how to manage the offense and he knew how the offense should have been ran. The problem was, I think Brunell tried to play too safe and conservative. That could be Gibbs fault, then again, it could have been Brunell wanting to make the least amount of mistakes as possible in addition to realizing he didn't have the arm he once had. In my opinion, it just looked like a quarterback who couldn't realize that his career probably ended a couple years ago.

In regards to the playcalling, yes, Gibbs wasn't the mastermind like I have known him to be in his previous stint. At times, he played it rather conservative; maybe putting too much emphasis on getting the most out of the least(running on 3rd and 4.) However, I give him the benefit of the doubt, because I haven't known any coach that can come back to a sport he has been away from for over a decade and pick up from where he left off 11 or 12 years ago. However, to ignore the fact that the execution was poor would not be wise. Even with Brunell in the game, he made some high percentage throws to our receivers only to see them drop a football that was heading between the numbers. So, it wasn't all on Joe Gibbs and it wasn't all on the players.

For the most part, I felt by season's end everything had improved. Playcalling was better, execution was better. I feel execution and playcalling go hand in hand. The reason is that when players continue to execute successfully on a consistant bases, it opens your playbook more. If your players can't execute the high percentage plays, I can't see adding a lower percentage play to be very logical or helpful. By that point, if you do, then you're gambling and guessing...which can put you in more trouble in games than keeping things simple. So, in that respect, certainly it would be on Joe Gibbs' playcalling..what choice did he have?
__________________
Not the same Skinsguy that posts on ES.
skinsguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2005, 08:12 AM   #51
Special Teams
 
RedskinsJunkie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Connecticut
Age: 38
Posts: 128
Re: McCants: Your thoughts?

Another thing to consider here is that Ramsey had to look over his shoulder for Brunell and now again this pick shows Gibbs overall distrust that Patrick can run the offense. He can do it and Gibbs needs to make his Quarterback, the field general of the football team, feel as comfortable as possible and get him to perform on the field. If Gibb's is such the magician of developing QBs then he should do it. It isn't as if Ramsey doesn't have all of the tools.
__________________
Jimoh--- OH NO!
RedskinsJunkie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2005, 09:43 AM   #52
Playmaker
 
BrudLee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Rehoboth Beach, DE
Posts: 3,494
Re: McCants: Your thoughts?

Quote:
Originally Posted by offiss
I agree! My point was how mentaly ready was Brunell compared to Ramsey?
As for the INT's let's face it 1 should have never happened it came after the Gardner drop and he threw 1 up for grabs late in the game, persoanlly I think the cause of those INT's was Ramsey's willingness to try to make something happen in an offense with recievers who were running easily covered routes, where as Brunell just threw the ball away.
Ramsey also inherited a deficit (sounds like a defense of a politician). When he made it into the game we were down 20-7, so the Giants knew we were throwing, and adjusted their defense accordingly. Brunell left in the middle of the third quarter with a hamstring strain (dance! dance!) and ramsey had 18 attempts in the remainder of the game. To compare, Brunell had (I believe) three full games with fewer attempts, so that's a pretty big number for the team at that time.
__________________
There's nowhere to go but up. Or down. I guess we could stay where we are, too.
BrudLee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2005, 10:04 AM   #53
Special Teams
 
RedskinsJunkie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Connecticut
Age: 38
Posts: 128
Re: McCants: Your thoughts?

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrudLee
Ramsey also inherited a deficit (sounds like a defense of a politician). When he made it into the game we were down 20-7, so the Giants knew we were throwing, and adjusted their defense accordingly. Brunell left in the middle of the third quarter with a hamstring strain (dance! dance!) and ramsey had 18 attempts in the remainder of the game. To compare, Brunell had (I believe) three full games with fewer attempts, so that's a pretty big number for the team at that time.
HUH? Which makes it even more impressive that Ramsey was moving the ball on them when they knew he was going to throw...
__________________
Jimoh--- OH NO!
RedskinsJunkie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2005, 12:19 PM   #54
Pro Bowl
 
skinsguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Greensboro, North Carolina
Posts: 6,536
Re: McCants: Your thoughts?

Quote:
Originally Posted by RedskinsJunkie
Another thing to consider here is that Ramsey had to look over his shoulder for Brunell and now again this pick shows Gibbs overall distrust that Patrick can run the offense. He can do it and Gibbs needs to make his Quarterback, the field general of the football team, feel as comfortable as possible and get him to perform on the field. If Gibb's is such the magician of developing QBs then he should do it. It isn't as if Ramsey doesn't have all of the tools.

Gibbs named Ramsey the starter for 2005 before the 2004 season was even completed from what I remember or at least shortly after. At that point, I don't believe Ramsey was having to look over his shoulder.

Hey, Gibbs can only do so much...it's up to Ramsey to prove himself a field general and if he can't do the job, we obviously have to go to someone else who can.
__________________
Not the same Skinsguy that posts on ES.
skinsguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2005, 12:39 PM   #55
Puppy Kicker
 
Daseal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Arlington, Virginia
Age: 31
Posts: 8,220
Re: McCants: Your thoughts?

Gibbs also said Ramsey was the quarterback of the future. This pick will further shatter Ramsey's confidence.
__________________
Best. Player. Available.
Daseal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2005, 12:43 PM   #56
Special Teams
 
RedskinsJunkie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Connecticut
Age: 38
Posts: 128
Re: McCants: Your thoughts?

Quote:
Originally Posted by skinsguy
Gibbs named Ramsey the starter for 2005 before the 2004 season was even completed from what I remember or at least shortly after. At that point, I don't believe Ramsey was having to look over his shoulder.

Hey, Gibbs can only do so much...it's up to Ramsey to prove himself a field general and if he can't do the job, we obviously have to go to someone else who can.
Agreed, but don't you think that bringing in 2 quarterbacks in 2 years with an incumbant starter could kind of screw with his head a bit??? I really think confidence is a HUGE factor in a QB. Everyone wants to compare our team lately with NE because of WR, what if every year Belichek (sp?) brought in guys to compete for Brady's job??? Again, I don't consider these guys in the same ball park right now, but Ramsey has a lot of upside and if he had some continuity in the team and coaches he would be a lot farther along than he is right now. I mean the guy when in two polar opposite directions in Offense from Spurrier to Gibbs... I think we need to give this guy a full season in Gibbs system.

Oh, and Gibbs said that Brunell was the starter for 2004 and he didn't finish the season that way ( Thank God!!!)
__________________
Jimoh--- OH NO!
RedskinsJunkie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2005, 01:04 PM   #57
I like big (_|_)s.
 
TheMalcolmConnection's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Lexington, Virginia
Age: 32
Posts: 17,548
Re: McCants: Your thoughts?

I'm glad everyone is finally starting to remember what I stated when Campbell was first brought in. I know Gibbs wants people with nerves of steel, but a person can only take so much. Ramsey has officially been shafted these past couple of years.

Even so, he can put a lot of that blame on himself for not winning the job in training camp. If I were Ramsey, this is how I would think about the situation in his obviously college-educated brain:

"If they are going to pay Brunell so many millions of dollars, why WOULDN'T they start him, regardless of how he does in training camp or not?"

I mean, you don't bring someone in with that much money and not start them.
__________________
Regret nothing. At one time it was exactly what you wanted.
TheMalcolmConnection is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2005, 01:22 PM   #58
Playmaker
 
Defensewins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 2,917
Re: McCants: Your thoughts?

Do you mean Ramsey's confidence is so weak that we can not have another good QB on the roster or it will 'mess with his head?
If so, get rid of him. We can not have a QB we have hold his hand and have to reassure all time for him to play well. This the NFL and you will always have competition/back ups on your team.

RedskinsJunkie said, "Everyone wants to compare our team lately with NE because of WR, what if every year Belichek (sp?) brought in guys to compete for Brady's job??? Again, I don't consider these guys in the same ball park right now, but Ramsey has a lot of upside and if he had some continuity in the team and coaches he would be a lot farther along than he is right now."

In the first SB season Brady was the backup that came in after Bledsoe got hurt, and when Bledsoe got healthy there was a huge QB controversy. Imagine having a probowl Qb (Bledsoe) on our bench that had previously led his team to the superbowl? Brady played great, the pressure did not effect him. Under your logic Ramsey would have folded like a cheap suit if he had Beldsee on his team.
Defensewins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2005, 01:38 PM   #59
Special Teams
 
RedskinsJunkie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Connecticut
Age: 38
Posts: 128
Re: McCants: Your thoughts?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Defensewins
Do you mean Ramsey's confidence is so weak that we can not have another good QB on the roster or it will 'mess with his head?
If so, get rid of him. We can not have a QB we have hold his hand and have to reassure all time for him to play well. This the NFL and you will always have competition/back ups on your team.

RedskinsJunkie said, "Everyone wants to compare our team lately with NE because of WR, what if every year Belichek (sp?) brought in guys to compete for Brady's job??? Again, I don't consider these guys in the same ball park right now, but Ramsey has a lot of upside and if he had some continuity in the team and coaches he would be a lot farther along than he is right now."

In the first SB season Brady was the backup that came in after Bledsoe got hurt, and when Bledsoe got healthy there was a huge QB controversy. Imagine having a probowl Qb (Bledsoe) on our bench that had previously led his team to the superbowl? Brady played great, the pressure did not effect him. Under your logic Ramsey would have folded like a cheap suit if he had Beldsee on his team.
2 different situations. Brady came in because a guy was hurt. It was a much easier decision to make when the incumbant is a) hurt b) old and c) going into a contract year. Belichek obviously didn't see that much difference in the 2 QBs to pay out the money to keep Bledsoe and he knew that he could get good value from him by trading him for picks. Ramsey/Brunell/Campbell is a completely different scenerio.
__________________
Jimoh--- OH NO!
RedskinsJunkie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2005, 01:43 PM   #60
‎\m/
 
Mattyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 41
Posts: 81,969
Re: McCants: Your thoughts?

If Ramsey's confidence is broken by some healthy competition then we don't need a player like him on the team.

I'm sure this example is going to be brought up alot in the coming months and it already has, but look at how Brees responded in San Diego. The Chargers basically left him for dead and were all set to rebuild with Rivers, but Brees responded by working his tail off in the offseason and went out and had a Pro Bowl season.

Once Ramsey stopped pouting last year he seemed to respond pretty well to the presence of Brunell, and look where it got him, instead of continuing to pout all year he was ready when called upon late in the season and he is now the starter for 2005.

Going through last year should enable him to handle the presence of Campbell just fine.
Mattyk 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 12:58 PM.


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 0.47165 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