![]() |
|
Locker Room Main Forum Commanders Football & NFL discussion |
View Poll Results: After 2 preseason games, who is your starter? | |||
Ramsey |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
51 | 89.47% |
Brunell |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
4 | 7.02% |
Campbell |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
2 | 3.51% |
Voters: 57. You may not vote on this poll |
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
![]() |
#21 |
Playmaker
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Richmond, VA
Age: 45
Posts: 3,814
|
Re: QB controversey?
it's still has to be Ramsey for now, but it is nice to know from what we've seen so far, that if Brunnel is needed he can be relied on and last year was not the real Brunnel. and if absolutely neccesary, Cambell has shown good enough composure in the pocket and touch and zing on his passes to fill in some time late in the season. But unless Ramsey absolutely falls on his face, he's our starting qb.
|
![]() |
![]() |
Advertisements |
![]() |
#22 |
Playmaker
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: nyc
Age: 49
Posts: 2,631
|
Re: QB controversey?
i'm sorry but i must've missed it. what exactly was the official excuse for Brunell stinking up ALL of last season?
i remember he was good last pre-season too, but what's the current reason going around for his sucky regular season? was it an injury? if so, why wasn't Ramsey put in earlier? i'm not being facetious either, i really wanna know |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#23 |
Playmaker
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Rehoboth Beach, DE
Posts: 3,494
|
Re: QB controversey?
I think people are being a little quick to declare Ramsey's career in Washington ove based on these two preseason games. We have shown precisely nothing to other teams, other than the shotgun formation. No trick plays, no special sets (other than the shotgun formation) - nothing.
We are running a "vanilla" set, while we learn what our players are capable of. Beat up Ramsey for the INTs if you want, but also admit that Brunell likely is throwing for 190 first half yards. Brunell averaged less than 133 yards per FULL GAME last year. That isn;t just bad for the passing game, it's bad for the running game as well. Having a QB who can stretch the field makes Portis's job a lot easier, too. And honestly, as a defensive coordinator facing the Redskins, when you see Broughton, Cartwright or even Betts in the backfield (instead of Portis), you don't cheat your safeties up to the line, you leave them in pass coverage. That doesn't help Patrick.
__________________
There's nowhere to go but up. Or down. I guess we could stay where we are, too. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#24 | |
Fight for old DC!
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Aldie, VA
Age: 47
Posts: 4,101
|
Re: QB controversey?
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#25 | |
Playmaker
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Rehoboth Beach, DE
Posts: 3,494
|
Re: QB controversey?
Quote:
__________________
There's nowhere to go but up. Or down. I guess we could stay where we are, too. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#26 | |
Playmaker
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: nyc
Age: 49
Posts: 2,631
|
Re: QB controversey?
Quote:
and a Redskins team in the Red Zone without Portis or Cooley isn't a Redskins offense, it's a schrimmage team practicing PASS PLAYS. did no one notice we got more 20+yd pass plays in this one game than we did ALL last season? so did Gibbs just find Spurrier's playbook in the trash and adopt it or is he practicing execution for the newest part of his offense? c'mon guys think. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#27 | |
Playmaker
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: nyc
Age: 49
Posts: 2,631
|
Re: QB controversey?
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#28 |
Living Legend
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: chesapeake, va
Age: 61
Posts: 15,817
|
Re: QB controversey?
I voted for Ramsey. I feel we must give him 7 or 8 games if he is not showning improvment and if we are not winning its time to say good by to. If he is pulled as the starter we must go with Campbell and get him started as our starting QB. Forget about Brunell and trying to reach the playoffs. It will be the time to start preparing for our future and just hope were not having this conversation a few years from now about Campbell. I would love to see Ramsey her for many more years but he has to make his stand early in the season.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#29 |
Playmaker
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Rehoboth Beach, DE
Posts: 3,494
|
Re: QB controversey?
I think the depth chart will be Ramsey, Brunell, and Campbell - but if Ramsey can't finish the season (due to inefficiency), Campbell will get the start. If the season is still viable and the playoffs can be reached (which would likely mean that Ramsey was injured), then Brunell will play.
__________________
There's nowhere to go but up. Or down. I guess we could stay where we are, too. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#30 |
The Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Yorktown, Va
Age: 56
Posts: 1,587
|
Re: QB controversey?
I know that I've pointed this out before, but even though there are questions, I think we can all agree that both Ramsey and Brunell look much better than they did at this point last year. That makes me feel a little better.
I think the Ramsey is the starter going into the regular season. Brunell had trouble last year even before the hamstring so we can't just look at his performance this year against the second/third string. That said, if Ramsey continues to throw the ball to the wrong guy in non pressure situations (i.e. first down inside the redzone) we have to start paying attention to that. There was another smart guy with a rifle arm who made poor decisions we got to look at a few years ago named Jeff George. We all can agree that we wouldn't want to see him again. Ramsey needs to show he can control himself when the urge to throw hits and the guy just isn't open. Right now, Gibbs will have to make calls to protect him from himself.
__________________
Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts. A. Einstien |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|