Coles Vs Moss

[Monkart]

Originally posted by SirSmizzy

Hey guys im new here....Some of you might know me from another skins site...Just wanted to stop in and check this place out.

Do you think Moss will outproduce Coles?

hmmmm! This contest could be Toe to Toe:D

[Die Hard]

Brunell playing better than Ramsey last year is hilarious.

I wouldn't say Brunell played better.... I'd say Brunell played less worse in preseason It was dreadful all-around.

Don't you remember those 3/8 for 58 yard games from both of them?

Brunell won the competition though, fair and square, even though it was by a slim margin.

At least during the games.

What many people don't know is.... Brunell won the competition in practices.

Apparently, in practices he was unstoppable... completing 15 passes in a row... and having practices where he was 32/35 attempts.

THAT is why Gibbs stuck with him for so long... expecting him to get out of the funk. He figured it was inevitable Brunell was going to break out.

He saw it in practice. A lot. It just never translated into the games.... and it dumbfounded Gibbs.

[RDSKNfaithfull]

Originally posted by Art

As for this part, it's simply not true we drafted Ramsey and never gave him a real shot to prove himself. He was essentially given the starting job as a rookie and was unable to handle it. He was given the starting job as a second-year player and would have played all year, except he got hurt.

Last year he was outplayed by Brunell in camp, at practices and in preseason games and started the year second-string. For the first time as a Redskin, he was forced to win the job and couldn't. He'd been given the chances prior to that without having to earn it.

He then came in and played moderately ok, though not very good or even actually good at all. Teams go 6-10 with a QB capable of a 74 QB rating. That's what they do. Now the job is his again to keep or lose. He'll start as long as he doesn't get hurt or spike himself.

For the receiver question, like most here, I think the answer is Coles is a better receiver when healthy, but, the Coles who appears to be available now is unlikely to be as good as Moss will be for us this year. It is possible Moss has a really great year and makes the argument possible that he's simply a better receiver than Coles under any circumstances. For now, that's not the case.

Actually he reported to camp late his rookie year. His second year he showed promise.

Last year Brunell did not out perform Patrick at any point I attended camp 2-3 times a week and neither did anything to put themselves ahead of eachother so tie went to the Vetran the coach brought in.

[Westbrook36]

Originally posted by Art

I think the only person who cared about the contract Brunell got was you -- and those like you -- as certainly Gibbs did not. As Gibbs said, Ramsey was a first-round pick, and you're supposed to start them, every time someone said you're supposed to start players with big contracts. Gibbs obviously probably thinks like most people who are smart enough to care about winning. He probably thinks you play the guys who you can win with, and those are usually guys better than other guys. As a Skin fan, are you seriously suggesting Joe Gibbs is as dumb as you to let the contract of a player, or the round a player is picked in, determine whether he starts or not?

Art, isn't it true that a common argument around these parts for not resigning AP and FS is the fact that they would have had to be offered more money then Washington and Springs and Gibbs didn't want to set that precedent?

Is this an argument that is along the very same lines?

Also, who was first on the depth chart when camp began. I honestly don't know so I'm asking a question. But, if Brunnell was number 1, that would give you a good idea of the thoughts of those at Redskins park as to who would be given every opportunity to play after signing such a large contract and given up a 3rd round pick for the pleasure of signing.

[SonnyJ]

Originally posted by Westbrook36

Art, isn't it true that a common argument around these parts for not resigning AP and FS is the fact that they would have had to be offered more money then Washington and Springs and Gibbs didn't want to set that precedent?

Is this an argument that is along the very same lines?

Can't say that I follow this one very well. They weren't offered more than the other two simply because the team didn't think they were worth it, not because of any "precedent", unless that precedent was that they feel that their better players deserve more money. Real cutting-edge precedent there. One more instance of Snyder being a dirtbag who is running the Redskins into the ground.

Now, how does this correlate to the Brunell/Ramsey situation? Perhaps you could elaborate?

[Westbrook36]

Originally posted by SonnyJ

Can't say that I follow this one very well. They weren't offered more than the other two simply because the team didn't think they were worth it, not because of any "precedent", unless that precedent was that they feel that their better players deserve more money. Real cutting-edge precedent there. One more instance of Snyder being a dirtbag who is running the Redskins into the ground.

Now, how does this correlate to the Brunell/Ramsey situation? Perhaps you could elaborate?

I'm not even sure if it is true or if it can be attributed to Gibbs but it has been said several times on ES that Smoot and Pierce were not resigned or given that little extra push at the end because they would have been making more money than Springs and Washington and the Skins didn't want to go down that slippery slope in regards to escalating salaries.

The point of bringing this topic into the current discussion is the fact that Art so vehomently stated that salary would never interject into Gibbs thinking as far as pecking order of players in concerned. Granted, two different sets of players and two different situations but I think salary is a mitigating factor for many teams when determining depth charts.

I've have, for years, thought Andy Reid was holding back young player development in order to sign them to multi-year deals when their value was really low. I think Westbrook, for example, could have had 5 more tds in each of the last two years but Reid went away from him where he is most dangerous, the goalline.

Don't listen to me, I love a good conspiracy theory. :laugh:

[ironmic]

moss if healthy should go for about 75 catches and 1056 yrds with no less than 11 touchdowns

[autographcollector]

Originally posted by boobiemiles

I'm a skins fan, and I have to ask, are you smelling the stuff you're shoveling? How are you going to sit a QB that makes 42 million. Do you really think that Gibbs thought Ramseys would start over Bruhell? I know Joe is no fool. He would never have gave him a 42 million dollar contract if he did. And to top it off we gave him a huge signing bonus.

As for Moss i saw some of the highlights from last year. barring injury he'll stretch the field, and that all we need to dictate to the defenses around the league. If you have to play a safety back, then the wholes will ope up for Portis.

Uhhh BOOBIE Brunell smoked Ramsey in preseason. Ramsey was a bust in preseason last yeat.

[Art]

Originally posted by SirSmizzy

There was no way brunell got as much $$$ as he did to back up.

And the entire premise of this idiocy falls down when you realize Brunell got as much money as he did and did back up. And is heading into this training camp. Clearly the contract isn't dictating playing time, so, clearly repeated assertions to the contrary are bogus, foolish and better left unstated if believed, yes?

[Art]

Originally posted by Westbrook36

Art, isn't it true that a common argument around these parts for not resigning AP and FS is the fact that they would have had to be offered more money then Washington and Springs and Gibbs didn't want to set that precedent?

Is this an argument that is along the very same lines?

Also, who was first on the depth chart when camp began. I honestly don't know so I'm asking a question. But, if Brunnell was number 1, that would give you a good idea of the thoughts of those at Redskins park as to who would be given every opportunity to play after signing such a large contract and given up a 3rd round pick for the pleasure of signing.

Honestly, WB, this is something like all of us having a conversation about apple pie then having you chime in that donuts taste good, and isn't that really the issue. Yes, it's largely absolutely true the Redskins didn't want to pay AP and FS more money than players they deemed superior at their positions after a year of evaluating that talent.

So?

It has nothing to do with the conversation about Brunell being the starter because of contract, because, for such a thing to be valid, it would be valid as we speak, and it's not. Clearly more than simply how much money a player makes dictates playing time. Performance dictates it. Ramsey was beaten out by Brunell and Brunell lost the job to Ramsey later. The contract wasn't a factor when Brunell played better and wasn't a contract when Ramsey took over. Performance was from start to finish.

Had Ramsey outplayed Brunell last offseason he'd have started opening day. Just like he's presumably going to start this opening day, but, if Brunell plays better than he does, I would hope Gibbs plays the guy who gives the team the best chance to win in his view.

[jrockster21]

Coles vs. Moss:

vs.

[HeHateMe]

Good analysis Art.

But my only question is why did they wait so long last season to pull Brunell?

[SirSmizzy]

Originally posted by jrockster77

Coles vs. Moss:

vs.

i didn't know the roadrunner headed straight for the sidelines like santana does.

Who knew?

[Art]

Originally posted by HeHateMe

Good analysis Art.

But my only question is why did they wait so long last season to pull Brunell?

I think Die Hard may have touched on it. Brunell was, according to some comments, nearly perfect in long stretches at practice. He would go whole sessions and a ball wouldn't touch the ground. Gibbs kept waiting for it to translate and it never did.

Add to that we'd just beaten Chicago and had the Green Bay game stolen from us and just had beaten Detroit which should have put us at 4-4 with a three game winning streak and though Brunell was not all that good during it, the thought was the team might be starting to find a way.

Add to that Gibbs had the horrifying introduction to Ramsey on the field with the full offense installed against the Giants. He saw the flashes of brilliance and the boggling stretches if insanity from him. Half a dozen passes bouncing off Giant defenders. Throws you just can't conceive anyone but Jake Plummer thinking are acceptable as they get picked off. The big gun and a 50 percent completion percentage.

Then, Ramsey came in against Cincy and had a 48 percent completion percentage and another six or seven balls hitting defenders in the hands with the full offense in. Only by scaling everything back and forcing Ramsey to learn how to throw complete passes could Gibbs play with Ramsey there. And, slowly he started letting Ramsey cut it loose.

To my anger, he did it far too late. It was clear Ramsey's strength was in the intermediate passing game but Gibbs feared the mistakes so much he would play it so close to the vest because he'd rather take a 3 minute drive for a punt than a :30 second interception drive.

Now, I think Gibbs finally started to get Ramsey to conform. Started to get him to trust the receiver adjust routes. To throw where the receivers weren't trusting they'd get there. And Ramsey continued to flash the brilliance he has at times that makes you wonder what he could be if he could get consistent.

[HeHateMe]

Alright then.

Now I would ask how long is the leash on PR this season?

At what point, do you think, could we see MB or JC get some action?

[Art]

Originally posted by HeHateMe

Alright then.

Now I would ask how long is the leash on PR this season?

At what point, do you think, could we see MB or JC get some action?

You won't see Campbell barring injury. You may well see Brunell though. I can certainly envision Ramsey making the type of killing mistakes that lose games and forcing the change. I imagine the factors will be what our record is, how close we are to being a better team and at least half the year.

Unlike some here, I don't fear the concept of Brunell playing. Heck, I think a veteran with his career might just thrive with the opportunity to erase some of the worst QB play anyone has ever seen from last year with something mildly interesting this year.

That said, I think Ramsey's upside is so great if he really answers the call, we'll have one very fine year.

[Westbrook36]

Art, if Ramsey loses the job in preseason or is pulled due to poor play, is it a slam dunk that he is gone after his contract? Is it a slam dunk that Campbell is the starter going into 06?

[jrockster21]

Originally posted by SirSmizzy

i didn't know the roadrunner headed straight for the sidelines like santana does.

Who knew?

That's the endzone.

[HeHateMe]

Originally posted by Art

You won't see Campbell barring injury. You may well see Brunell though. I can certainly envision Ramsey making the type of killing mistakes that lose games and forcing the change. I imagine the factors will be what our record is, how close we are to being a better team and at least half the year.

Unlike some here, I don't fear the concept of Brunell playing. Heck, I think a veteran with his career might just thrive with the opportunity to erase some of the worst QB play anyone has ever seen from last year with something mildly interesting this year.

That said, I think Ramsey's upside is so great if he really answers the call, we'll have one very fine year.

What kind of season is it going to take for the Skins to address PR's contract extension this offseason?

Or will they just wait until he actually becomes a Free Agent?

[HeHateMe]

Originally posted by Art

You won't see Campbell barring injury. You may well see Brunell though. I can certainly envision Ramsey making the type of killing mistakes that lose games and forcing the change. I imagine the factors will be what our record is, how close we are to being a better team and at least half the year.

Unlike some here, I don't fear the concept of Brunell playing. Heck, I think a veteran with his career might just thrive with the opportunity to erase some of the worst QB play anyone has ever seen from last year with something mildly interesting this year.

That said, I think Ramsey's upside is so great if he really answers the call, we'll have one very fine year.

Also,

Will the leash on PR be as long as it was on MB last season?

[jrockster21]

Originally posted by HeHateMe

Also,

Will the leash on PR be as long as it was on MB last season?

I think with 8 starts under his belt and an entire offseason as the starter will give Gibbs more confidence in him. Plus, with his commitment to opening up the offense, he has little choice but to let out the leash a little bit.

I wouldn't be surprised if the very first play from scrimmage is a bomb....

[Renegade7]

Moss will outproduce Coles in 2005. That's not because Moss is a better receiver, tho. It's because Coles isn't healthy. Coles is a monster when healthy.

[HeHateMe]

Originally posted by Renegade7

Moss will outproduce Coles in 2005. That's not because Moss is a better receiver, tho. It's because Coles isn't healthy. Coles is a monster when healthy.

Excuse me Renegade, this thread is about Brunell and Ramsey.

Not Coles and Moss.

[Renegade7]

Originally posted by HeHateMe

Excuse me Renegade, this thread is about Brunell and Ramsey.

Not Coles and Moss.

Oh, damn, my b.

[Renegade7]

Originally posted by Westbrook36

Art, if Ramsey loses the job in preseason or is pulled due to poor play, is it a slam dunk that he is gone after his contract? Is it a slam dunk that Campbell is the starter going into 06?

If Ramsey loses the job at all this season, no doubt about it he's gone. This'll also prove that Gibbs was a genius in drafting Campbell, seeing he already saw Ramsey wasn't cut for the job. If Ramsey rises or falls, we have a back-up plan. And there's no way in God's green earth Brunell will be starting a game in B&G in 2006. No way, no how.