Ramsey/Brunell: a closer look

[MTK]

RF,

Just answer this simple question, what has Ramsey done this preseason to earn the job?

Ok, I lied, answer two questions, who has looked better so far, Ramsey or Brunell?

The writing is on the wall. Ramsey is not the answer right now, he needs work. Meanwhile Brunell has shown that he can be efficient and he doesn't turn the ball over. It would be silly to keep forcing the issue with Ramsey right now. Gibbs probably should have pulled the plug in training camp.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

RF,

Just answer this simple question, what has Ramsey done this preseason to earn the job?

Ok, I lied, answer two questions, who has looked better so far, Ramsey or Brunell?

The writing is on the wall. Ramsey is not the answer right now, he needs work. Meanwhile Brunell has shown that he can be efficient and he doesn't turn the ball over. It would be silly to keep forcing the issue with Ramsey right now. Gibbs probably should have pulled the plug in training camp.

I agree that Ramsey didn't do anything to earn the job in the preseason. I also agree that Brunell looked better in the preseason (albeit against backups).

HOWEVER, according to Joe Gibbs himself, the preseason was not supposed to be a competition between Ramsey and Brunell. According to Joe Gibbs' statements from last season and this past offseason, Ramsey was going to be our starter; not possibly our starter, not probably our starter, but our starter. Basically, Gibbs went back on his word.

[jdlea]

For all those "In Gibbs We Trust" folks...should we trust him like Patrick Ramsey did?

[offiss]

Originally Posted by jdlea

For all those "In Gibbs We Trust" folks...should we trust him like Patrick Ramsey did?

LOL!

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Ramseyfan

I agree that Ramsey didn't do anything to earn the job in the preseason. I also agree that Brunell looked better in the preseason (albeit against backups).

HOWEVER, according to Joe Gibbs himself, the preseason was not supposed to be a competition between Ramsey and Brunell. According to Joe Gibbs' statements from last season and this past offseason, Ramsey was going to be our starter; not possibly our starter, not probably our starter, but our starter. Basically, Gibbs went back on his word.

So despite a very shaky preseason by Ramsey and a very solid one by Brunell, Gibbs should just overlook that and stick by his word. For what? Word doesn't win football games.

Ramsey had his chance to take this job. He had the entire offseason of OTA's, minicamps and training camp. He then had the preseason to convince the team he could be the man. He did nothing to squash the concerns the coaches had about him. He's turning the ball over, he's indecisive, he just doesn't look like a QB that has a firm grasp of the offense, and for someone who's in year 2 of the system and has worked as the starter all offseason, his performance has been very subpar to say the least.

At this point I don't see any sort of arguement for Ramsey that makes sense. Ramsey has been shaky, Brunell has been solid. Looks like an easy choice to me. People want to say look at what Brunell did last year... well HELLO look what Ramsey has done THIS year, not much!

Like I said, I think the only mistake Gibbs made was sticking by Ramsey for so long this preseason. Don't get me wrong, I was behind the decision at the time. But looking back it's easy to see that it should have been a formal open competition for the job. But Gibbs did exactly what we wanted, he stuck by Ramsey and gave him every chance to claim the job. He simply didn't do it... how can that not be any more clear? Gibbs DID stick to his word, he gave Ramsey a fair shot to claim the job.

I'm sorry but a 65 QB rating with 4 INTs in a little over 6 quarters of work in the preseason is not going to win you a lot of support from your coaches, let alone a firm grip on the starting job. Then in 3 series of work against the Bears he coughs it up twice and throws another head scratcher of a pick.

Bottom line, Ramsey had his chance to claim the starting job. If you can honestly tell me he did enough to be the unquestioned starter for this team, I'd really love to hear it.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

So despite a very shaky preseason by Ramsey and a very solid one by Brunell, Gibbs should just overlook that and stick by his word. For what? Word doesn't win football games.

Ramsey had his chance to take this job. He had the entire offseason of OTA's, minicamps and training camp. He then had the preseason to convince the team he could be the man. He did nothing to squash the concerns the coaches had about him. He's turning the ball over, he's indecisive, he just doesn't look like a QB that has a firm grasp of the offense, and for someone who's in year 2 of the system and has worked as the starter all offseason, his performance has been very subpar to say the least.

At this point I don't see any sort of arguement for Ramsey that makes sense. Ramsey has been shaky, Brunell has been solid. Looks like an easy choice to me. People want to say look at what Brunell did last year... well HELLO look what Ramsey has done THIS year, not much!

Like I said, I think the only mistake Gibbs made was sticking by Ramsey for so long this preseason. Don't get me wrong, I was behind the decision at the time. But looking back it's easy to see that it should have been a formal open competition for the job. But Gibbs did exactly what we wanted, he stuck by Ramsey and gave him every chance to claim the job. He simply didn't do it... how can that not be any more clear? Gibbs DID stick to his word, he gave Ramsey a fair shot to claim the job.

I'm sorry but a 65 QB rating with 4 INTs in a little over 6 quarters of work in the preseason is not going to win you a lot of support from your coaches, let alone a firm grip on the starting job. Then in 3 series of work against the Bears he coughs it up twice and throws another head scratcher of a pick.

Bottom line, Ramsey had his chance to claim the starting job. If you can honestly tell me he did enough to be the unquestioned starter for this team, I'd really love to hear it.

Matty, just after the game you said Ramsey should probably start and you didn't seem to indicate that it should be any other way. Gibbs didn't stick to his word since he said Ramsey was going to be the starter for 2005...he was for about 15 minutes. We can have a good debate about who should be the quarterback, but I can't see room for debate on Gibbs going back on his word (without parsing phrases in a Clinton-esque fashion).

I don't understand the "toss away Mark Brunell's 2004 performance" talk around here. Okay, let me get this straight.....forget about Mark Brunell's performance in 9 regular season games last year. Concentrate on his mediocre performance in three quarters of regular season play and four preseason games against backups?

What has Ramsey done this year? You're absolutely right in saying "NOT MUCH." He was in for all of fifteen minutes before the "loyal to a fault" Gibbs yanked him.

Look at the post-game poll in which the overwhelming majority of people were originally saying that Ramsey should be the starter. Ever since Gibbs announced that Brunell would be starting, people have "flip-flopped." I understand the faith in Gibbs, but I would like to see people stop bashing Ramsey and acting like Brunell is Peyton Manning and admit that they SOLELY changed their minds based on what Gibbs decided to do.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

I can't believe that we are talking about Campbell starting some games.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Ramseyfan

Matty, just after the game you said Ramsey should probably start and you didn't seem to indicate that it should be any other way. Gibbs didn't stick to his word since he said Ramsey was going to be the starter for 2005...he was for about 15 minutes. We can have a good debate about who should be the quarterback, but I can't see room for debate on Gibbs going back on his word (without parsing phrases in a Clinton-esque fashion).

I don't understand the "toss away Mark Brunell's 2004 performance" talk around here. What? Okay, let me get this straight.....forget about Mark Brunell's performance in 9 regular season games last year. Concentrate on his mediocre performance in three quarters of regular season play and four preseason games against backups?

What has Ramsey done this year? You're absolutely right in saying "NOT MUCH." He was in for all of fifteen minutes before the "loyal to a fault" Gibbs yanked him.

Look at the post-game poll in which the overwhelming majority of people were originally saying that Ramsey should be the starter. Ever since Gibbs announced that Brunell would be starting, people have "flip-flopped." I understand the faith in Gibbs, but I would like to see people stop bashing Ramsey and acting like Brunell is Peyton Manning and admit that they SOLELY changed their minds based on what Gibbs decided to do.

To a point I have flip-flopped.

I supported Gibbs' decision to stick by Ramsey, even though he was struggling I was thinking well there must be something that Gibbs sees in him to keep sticking with him. Maybe he's close to turning the corner.

Now it's obvious he isn't close to turning that corner. Gibbs has decided to pull the plug before things get ugly. He stuck by Brunell last year way too long and he's not going to repeat that.

Now I'm supporting Gibbs' decision to make the switch.

Looking at the big picture, and keeping emotion out of it, Brunell is the better option right now.

I don't know why there's this view that people can't change their minds.

Winning in the NFL and in life is all about adapting to change and making adjustments on the fly.

Sticking to a plan is great, but when circumstances dictate a change in plans, sticking to your plan just for the sake of sticking to it is not a smart thing to do.

[drew54]

Anyone else wish we had taken a chance on Trent Dilfer instead of Heath Shuler.

Maybe he could have been the long term game manager that we needed and then we wouldnt have to worry about Mark Brunell and Patrick Ramsey.

[monk81]

Originally Posted by drew54

Anyone else wish we had taken a chance on Trent Dilfer instead of Heath Shuler.

Maybe he could have been the long term game manager that we needed and then we wouldnt have to worry about Mark Brunell and Patrick Ramsey.

Talk about remember when............I remember telling a friend during the preseason when Gus, Heath, were battlin' for QB starting position, that the QB I liked out of all of our QBs based on performance was Trent Green.........oh if only we had kept him

[illdefined]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

To a point I have flip-flopped.

I supported Gibbs' decision to stick by Ramsey, even though he was struggling I was thinking well there must be something that Gibbs sees in him to keep sticking with him. Maybe he's close to turning the corner.

Now it's obvious he isn't close to turning that corner. Gibbs has decided to pull the plug before things get ugly. He stuck by Brunell last year way too long and he's not going to repeat that.

Now I'm supporting Gibbs' decision to make the switch.

Looking at the big picture, and keeping emotion out of it, Brunell is the better option right now.

I don't know why there's this view that people can't change their minds.

Winning in the NFL and in life is all about adapting to change and making adjustments on the fly.

Sticking to a plan is great, but when circumstances dictate a change in plans, sticking to your plan just for the sake of sticking to it is not a smart thing to do.

the point is, Ramsey was clearly the better option last year, and Gibbs didn't take it. he saw something in Brunell too, he didn't turn any corner, but he stayed with him and it killed our season. that proved he was fallible, and is the only reason we're questioning him now. it's not emotion, it's *recent memory*.

10 games was too way too long last year but 19 minutes??

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by illdefined

the point is, Ramsey was clearly the better option last year, and Gibbs didn't take it. he saw something in Brunell too, he didn't turn any corner, but he stayed with him and it killed our season. that proved he was fallible, and is the only reason we're questioning him now. it's not emotion, it's *recent memory*.

10 games was too way too long last year but 19 minutes??

Those 19 minutes resulted in one interception on a badly thrown ball, and two fumbles. Luckily only one was recovered by the Bears.

In the NFL these days, you can't sit in the pocket and wait and wait and wait. In the NFL now, the pass rush is coming. Be it in the form of Jevon Kearse, Michael Strahan, Demarcus Ware, or a host of blitzing LBs and safeties. Defenses bring the house nowadays. You can't sit and wait for it, you have to get rid of the ball. That has always been Ramsey's #1 problem, and we can't wait for that to change any longer. He should have shown progress by now.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by illdefined

the point is, Ramsey was clearly the better option last year, and Gibbs didn't take it. he saw something in Brunell too, he didn't turn any corner, but he stayed with him and it killed our season. that proved he was fallible, and is the only reason we're questioning him now. it's not emotion, it's *recent memory*.

10 games was too way too long last year but 19 minutes??

Do you really think his decision was based soley on the Chicago game?

[e16bball]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

RF,

Just answer this simple question, what has Ramsey done this preseason to earn the job?

Ok, I lied, answer two questions, who has looked better so far, Ramsey or Brunell?

The writing is on the wall. Ramsey is not the answer right now, he needs work. Meanwhile Brunell has shown that he can be efficient and he doesn't turn the ball over. It would be silly to keep forcing the issue with Ramsey right now. Gibbs probably should have pulled the plug in training camp.

Brunell looked better in preseason, but Ramsey looked better in the Bears' game. Say what you will about him throwing the first pick and the fumble, he made things happen for us on offense. Brunell simply lacks the ability to make plays. The game on Sunday looked exactly like last season, except he had a little better arm strength. Still dink and dump, and still nothing dynamic whatsoever.

He can probably provide us with consistent mediocrity, but who wants that? Sure, Ramsey makes some bad plays, but I think his good plays outweigh that. We might even lose a game because of Ramsey, but I promise you we will never WIN a game because of Brunell. Why is everyone all of a sudden happy that we are putting in a QB who, basically by his own admission, is there to play "not to lose"? As much as I hate to say it, this team is not good enough to win 9 games with a QB who won't take chances. Our defense is amazing and our running game is solid. But the holes that have looked so big for Portis thus far will start closing up the instant teams realize Brunell is no threat to beat them deep.

I guess it's a question of whether you'd rather beat all the teams we ought to beat with Brunell, and none of the teams on our own plane, or maybe lose a game we could've won with Ramsey, and then come out and get hot and beat some good teams. Quite frankly, I'd MUCH rather see the latter, because it's the only way this team has a shot at making the playoffs, which SHOULD be the goal of every player, every coach, every executive, and every fan. Simply finishing 7-9 is not sufficient. Well, not sufficient for me anyway.

As an addendum, and I believe RamseyFan may have addressed this by now, it was not Ramsey's job to earn. It was Ramsey's job, period. It was Brunell's job to earn, and IMO the only way he could've done that (after last season, which still counts by the way, even if you converted Brunell fans don't want it to) is to play light-out. He hasn't done that. He's played good, safe, efficient ball, which is what you want from your BACKUP. He didn't set the world on fire, and, IMO, certainly didn't do enough to take the job from Ramsey one quarter into the season.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by e16bball

Brunell looked better in preseason, but Ramsey looked better in the Bears' game. Say what you will about him throwing the first pick and the fumble, he made things happen for us on offense. Brunell simply lacks the ability to make plays. The game on Sunday looked exactly like last season, except he had a little better arm strength. Still dink and dump, and still nothing dynamic whatsoever.

He can probably provide us with consistent mediocrity, but who wants that? Sure, Ramsey makes some bad plays, but I think his good plays outweigh that. We might even lose a game because of Ramsey, but I promise you we will never WIN a game because of Brunell. Why is everyone all of a sudden happy that we are putting in a QB who, basically by his own admission, is there to play "not to lose"? As much as I hate to say it, this team is not good enough to win 9 games with a QB who won't take chances. Our defense is amazing and our running game is solid. But the holes that have looked so big for Portis thus far will start closing up the instant teams realize Brunell is no threat to beat them deep.

I guess it's a question of whether you'd rather beat all the teams we ought to beat with Brunell, and none of the teams on our own plane, or maybe lose a game we could've won with Ramsey, and then come out and get hot and beat some good teams. Quite frankly, I'd MUCH rather see the latter, because it's the only way this team has a shot at making the playoffs, which SHOULD be the goal of every player, every coach, every executive, and every fan. Simply finishing 7-9 is not sufficient. Well, not sufficient for me anyway.

As an addendum, and I believe RamseyFan may have addressed this by now, it was not Ramsey's job to earn. It was Ramsey's job, period. It was Brunell's job to earn, and IMO the only way he could've done that (after last season, which still counts by the way, even if you converted Brunell fans don't want it to) is to play light-out. He hasn't done that. He's played good, safe, efficient ball, which is what you want from your BACKUP. He didn't set the world on fire, and, IMO, certainly didn't do enough to take the job from Ramsey one quarter into the season.

An excellent post.