Thoughts on Ramsey and Brunell...

[skinsguy]

Originally Posted by Twilbert07

Just what I said in my previous post: The jury's still out on him, and we need to consider our options at QB for next season. Brunell is the perfect veteran back-up who Gibbs likes to have around. His record as a starter this year (4-6), regardless of whose fault the close losses are, doesn't cut it, in my opinion. Are you satisfied with a losing team this year?

Wait! Are you saying that even if it isn't Mark Brunell's fault that we are 5-6 right now, benching him is still the answer? That doesn't make any sense.

[offiss]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Ok, I thought you were talking about this year.

I still don't understand why people are still hung up on last year though.

Brunell has had 1 subpar year out of 13. That's called a fluke in my book. I get the feeling some people are just waiting (hoping?) for him to crash and burn again.

Waiting?

[offiss]

Originally Posted by FirstandTen

Ok what has Ramsey ever lead us too?

Thats kind of the point here, Ramsey really hasen't been given a chance under Gibbs.

[offiss]

Originally Posted by Twilbert07

Just what I said in my previous post: The jury's still out on him, and we need to consider our options at QB for next season. Brunell is the perfect veteran back-up who Gibbs likes to have around. His record as a starter this year (4-6), regardless of whose fault the close losses are, doesn't cut it, in my opinion. Are you satisfied with a losing team this year?

Apparently so, no one wants to take into account the inability of the offense under Brunell to salt the game away with nothing more than 1 firstdown late in a game, kind of ironic that the QB everyone inc. Gibbs has so much stock in, are scared to death to possibly put the ball in the air on a high percentage pass play late in the game.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by offiss

Waiting?

So to you he's crashed to last year's level??

[offiss]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

So to you he's crashed to last year's level??

No not at all, but he's not getting the job done either, and that's the bottom line, Brunell was a win now move I think we can both agree on that, well we ain't winning now, so really what's the point of having him here? We gave up a lot to get him between a #2 and 43 mil, but maybe the biggest thing we gave up when Brunell was aquired was the developement of Ramsey.

It's the belief of many that so long as Ramsey is on the bench he's no good because Gibbs has basically said so. Well it's not like Gibbs hasen't been wrong before in his brief tenure this go round, he admitted Betts was much better than he thought when he came back.

He made a big play for Portis and lets face it he defends this guy to no end no matter what happens, and can anyone really say Portis has been anything close to what they thought we were getting?

My belief is Gibbs doesn't neccassarily belive he can't win with Ramsey, or that Ramsey is a lowsey QB, but I do believe he feels he can win with Brunell and that's his choice of prefrence, Gibbs is accountable for Brunell, and Portis, Ramsey is not his guy, Gibbs has almost 100mil tied up between the 2 I believe he is highly motivated to making a success out of both, that's a tough pill to swallow to watch carreer stats go down the drain the second you trade for a player, it doesn't make Gibbs look good, especially when he was in a win now mode.

Matty you know it's no secret on my feelings on this topic, but I do want to win first and fore most, my feeling has been that Ramsey would provide the best opportunity for that now, and defiently the long haul, but's it's pretty obvious we will probably never find out what Ramsey can do until he gets a chance somewhere else, my feeling is to bad for us.

[MTK]

Brunell continues to be the convenient fall guy.

Someone said it already, he had a 96.8 QB rating last week with no turnovers and we still lost.

It's obvious there are other problems that are contributing to the offensive woes right now, regardless of who is playing QB.

[offiss]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Brunell continues to be the convenient fall guy.

Someone said it already, he had a 96.8 QB rating last week with no turnovers and we still lost.

It's obvious there are other problems that are contributing to the offensive woes right now, regardless of who is playing QB.

Like what?

[MTK]

Umm maybe dropped passes on 3rd downs, ill-timed penalties when you have the ball at the opponents 31 yard line with a game winning FG in range. You know, stuff like that.

I know Brunell's 96.8 rating contributed mightily to the loss last week, but perhaps there are other things at play here. Just maybe.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Umm maybe dropped passes on 3rd downs, ill-timed penalties when you have the ball at the opponents 31 yard line with a game winning FG in range. You know, stuff like that.

I know Brunell's 96.8 rating contributed mightily to the loss last week, but perhaps there are other things at play here. Just maybe.

Matty, maybe if your big ego wasn't in the way you'd see that if Ramsey was playing QB then Royal wouldn't drop passes, Rabach wouldn't blatantly hold opponents, Portis wouldn't fumble, there would be peace in the Middle East, we'd find Osama, we'd know what the hell is really going on on Lost, Elvis would be alive and all the impersonators would be dead....seriously man, how the hell did you become an administrator?

[MTK]

Originally Posted by TAFKAS

Matty, maybe if your big ego wasn't in the way you'd see that if Ramsey was playing QB then Royal wouldn't drop passes, Rabach wouldn't blatantly hold opponents, Portis wouldn't fumble, there would be peace in the Middle East, we'd find Osama, we'd know what the hell is really going on on Lost, Elvis would be alive and all the impersonators would be dead....seriously man, how the hell did you become an administrator?

Obviously me ego is blocking my vision, but damn I sure do love my WARPATH EGO!

[RedskinPete]

Originally Posted by NFLeurope

I posted the following response in the thread about what personnel we would need next year...but on second thought i guess it doesnt really belong there...so i am creating a separate thread...

Let me know what you guys think:

You know, i figure ill prolly get some reactionary comments for this...but here goes...

I have seen a number of people suggest that we ought to get rid of Ramsey at the end of the season and get whatever we can for him...whether that be a 2nd (unlikely), a 3rd, or a 4th.

Now i just dont agree. I mean if nothing else having a quality back-up is something on which you simply cannot place enough emphasis.

Look at what happend to the Jets this year. They were a playoff team last year...and they didnt really lose too many guys, and even picked up Ty Law. But their QB goes down and look at them now...they may be one of the top candidates to win the Reggie Bush sweepstakes.

Now whether you liked the pick or not...i suppose it is true that we drafted Jason Cambell as our QB of the future. However, none of us know how far along he is in his development. In fact many analysts on draft day...and many guys on this board were saying that he was a project...that he was brought in here to ride the pine and learn for 2 years...and then take over eventually.

So i mean considering we are looking to make a serious run at the playoffs and possibly looking to become a contender next year...I think it would be silly to stake the entire season on Mark Brunells shoulders. Mark Brunell will be 36 and if Cambell is not ready, then the skins really ought to think long and hard before giving up a damn good back-up QB in Ramsey (in my humble opinion starting material) for a measly 4th rounder. They need to at least make sure they get something worthwhile for him...or shouldn't trade him.

Now here is the part i know ill get shit for...

It is my opinion that despite the fact that he has proven to be a good leader and an admirable competitor...and a seemingly good guy...that the Mark Brunell signing has not been a good thing for the redskins. Here is why i think that...

One should not only consider a players performance in deciding whether or not he was a good signing. You also have to consider the cost to benefit ratio. The first example that comes to mind is that of Randy Moss and the Oakland Raiders...

I read an article recently that questionned whether or not Moss was actually helping the raiders or not. The guy is putting up good numbers...but look at his paycheck. While he was out injured...the raiders focused more on their running attack and actually played good winning football while moss was out or not playing a large role in the offense. When he is in the game...his contract necessitates that a certain amount of the offensive plays are based on him...and thus the raiders run less. So while just looking at the guys stats you might say he was a great signing...just consider the huge commitment the raiders have made in taking on his 75 million contract...and the fact that they are still only 4-7. If they hadnt signed him...they could still have a good offense...and could have invested the money his contract eats up...elsewhere.

Now how is this related to Brunell? Well while it seems unfair to criticize Gibbs an Co. for the initial signing now...since hindsight is always 20/20 and they didnt have the luxury of knowing how things would turn out when they signed Brunell. I do believe that it is legitimate to judge a signing based on the results you get vs what you gave up to get those results.

Brunell is getting paid alot. (more than our other 2 QB's i believe). His first season here was a disaster, and now despite vastly improved play on his part...the team still may not make the playoffs.

In addition to the dollar cost of his contract, his signing also led us to waste any viable cotribution that Ramsey MIGHT have been able to make to this team.

Of course no one can tell what would have been if it had been ramsey starting in place of Brunell. However, Ramsey was a first rounder, a big investment for this franchise, and considering that he never was given an opportunity comparable to the oppurtunities that other first rounders normally get...we may never find out whether Ramsey would have turned out to be another Drew Brees...or another bum.

He might have been great. He might have been terrible. Or he might have been mediocre.

But it is the not knowing that constitues a wasted investment...and should in my mind be considered as part of the cost we undertook in signing Brunell.

You can take it even further and suggest that the cost of Brunells contract could have been even more than just 1 wasted first rounder. For IF...and i do say IF Ramsey did prove to be a Viable starter...then we would of course never have drafted Jason Cambell. And so it could even be possible...though noone will ever know...that in addition to the actual dollar investement...Brunell's signing also cost us 2 first rounders (QB investments - Ramsey drafted before his arrival...who we wont know about. Campbell drafted after his first season...precisely because we didnt know about Ramsey, or Brunell- both of whom only played a portion of the season and neither played exceptionally well.)

So in conclusion i would just like to state...that in my opinion the cost to benefit ratio of signing Brunell has not even come close to panning out. You know i mean maybe im wrong...and he will come back and lead us to the playoffs or a superbowl and that would be great. But frankly...at this point...i would really have rathered seen what we had in Ramsey...before going out and getting a guy who when it is all said and done...may have only led us to 2 mediocre seasons...but cost us so very very much.

Sorry about the length...i just got kinda carried away...

I would say over all you are right But Ramsey is far off and may never be a good NFL QB. But this season has been so so because of other free agent busts and ones that got away. The 2006 season looks no better with no 1st rounder[going to Denver]. We Need a great GM!!!

[Twilbert07]

Originally Posted by skinsguy

Wait! Are you saying that even if it isn't Mark Brunell's fault that we are 5-6 right now, benching him is still the answer? That doesn't make any sense.

No, we need to stick with Brunell for the rest of the year.
However, we need to settle the QB situation before the start of next season, and I don't see much good in picking someone who will be 36 to be our starter for 2006, that's all.

[Twilbert07]

Originally Posted by offiss

Apparently so, no one wants to take into account the inability of the offense under Brunell to salt the game away with nothing more than 1 firstdown late in a game, kind of ironic that the QB everyone inc. Gibbs has so much stock in, are scared to death to possibly put the ball in the air on a high percentage pass play late in the game.

I agree with you completely about the offense's inability to move the chains late in the game. It's cost us the past two games.

[RedskinPete]

Originally Posted by Twilbert07

I agree with you completely about the offense's inability to move the chains late in the game. It's cost us the past two games.

A over rated line and over paid!!! The truth hurts to the tune of 5-6!