Commanders Post at The Warpath - View Single Post

joecrisp · 12-13-2004, 02:22 PM

I agree that it's important to let the players decide who will play, based on their performance, but let's look at how that's played out so far at the quarterback position: Gibbs held an open competition in the preseason to find out who should be playing, and both of the candidates-- not having a full opportunity to establish any continuity with the offense during practices-- pretty much stumbled their way through the competition, and the only reason anyone emerged as a "winner" is that Brunell was an 11-year veteran, and well... Joe Gibbs likes veteran quarterbacks.

After Brunell "played" his way into the starting quarterback role, Gibbs allowed him to play his way through nine miserable starts before finally deciding he had played his way OUT of the starting job.

Now we have Ramsey as the starter, and while the results have been mixed, Gibbs has admittedly seen vast improvement from the youngster, and he will undoubtedly allow Ramsey the same opportunity he afforded Brunell, and let him keep or lose the starting job through his performance. If Ramsey stumbles mightily through the last 3 games, then Gibbs will likely decide it's time to give someone else a chance to prove they're worthy.

My point is not that you must disallow any opportunity for other players to prove themselves, but rather that you must ALLOW one player-- and that's one player at a time-- to prove themselves at the position of quarterback. We've seen the Spurrier days of shuffling quarterbacks whimsically based on the inevitable peaks and valleys that all quarterbacks must play through. We've seen the Gibbs way of splitting reps between two quarterbacks in the hopes that one quarterback would emerge as a bastion of stability out of such a de-stabilizing scenario. We've also seen what happens when you commit to a player out of some misguided sense of loyalty or financial obligation.

Gibbs must make the decision-- not for the sake of making a decision-- but for the sake of the quarterback, the offense, and the team as a whole. He needs to make that decision early, and he needs to base it on how he sees the quarterbacks perform on a daily basis. Gibbs believes he needs to give his starting quarterback 90% of the reps in practice. If that's his chosen method, then it would follow that he would need to choose a starting quarterback in order for that methodology to be effective. You don't institute that system after the 4th preseason game-- you institute it early in the offseason. If the guy you choose proves in practice that he's worthy of being the starter, you keep him in there. If he doesn't, you give the next guy the opportunity to take 90% of the reps until he proves he can do the job or he can't.

12-13-2004, 02:22 PM	#45
joecrisp The Starter Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Charlottesville, VA Age: 49 Posts: 1,501	I agree that it's important to let the players decide who will play, based on their performance, but let's look at how that's played out so far at the quarterback position: Gibbs held an open competition in the preseason to find out who should be playing, and both of the candidates-- not having a full opportunity to establish any continuity with the offense during practices-- pretty much stumbled their way through the competition, and the only reason anyone emerged as a "winner" is that Brunell was an 11-year veteran, and well... Joe Gibbs likes veteran quarterbacks. After Brunell "played" his way into the starting quarterback role, Gibbs allowed him to play his way through nine miserable starts before finally deciding he had played his way OUT of the starting job. Now we have Ramsey as the starter, and while the results have been mixed, Gibbs has admittedly seen vast improvement from the youngster, and he will undoubtedly allow Ramsey the same opportunity he afforded Brunell, and let him keep or lose the starting job through his performance. If Ramsey stumbles mightily through the last 3 games, then Gibbs will likely decide it's time to give someone else a chance to prove they're worthy. My point is not that you must disallow any opportunity for other players to prove themselves, but rather that you must ALLOW one player-- and that's one player at a time-- to prove themselves at the position of quarterback. We've seen the Spurrier days of shuffling quarterbacks whimsically based on the inevitable peaks and valleys that all quarterbacks must play through. We've seen the Gibbs way of splitting reps between two quarterbacks in the hopes that one quarterback would emerge as a bastion of stability out of such a de-stabilizing scenario. We've also seen what happens when you commit to a player out of some misguided sense of loyalty or financial obligation. Gibbs must make the decision-- not for the sake of making a decision-- but for the sake of the quarterback, the offense, and the team as a whole. He needs to make that decision early, and he needs to base it on how he sees the quarterbacks perform on a daily basis. Gibbs believes he needs to give his starting quarterback 90% of the reps in practice. If that's his chosen method, then it would follow that he would need to choose a starting quarterback in order for that methodology to be effective. You don't institute that system after the 4th preseason game-- you institute it early in the offseason. If the guy you choose proves in practice that he's worthy of being the starter, you keep him in there. If he doesn't, you give the next guy the opportunity to take 90% of the reps until he proves he can do the job or he can't.