SirSmizzy Posted July 19, 2005 Author Share Posted July 19, 2005 Originally posted by jrockster77 That's the endzone. Sideline Santana Moss ...Good luck with him man. He's as soft as a baby ass and scared of contact. Of all the WR's that have come thru NY....he was the 1 i wasn't worried about losing. Good luck to him in washington. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LiveStrongSkins Posted July 19, 2005 Share Posted July 19, 2005 Originally posted by SirSmizzy Sideline Santana Moss ...Good luck with him man. He's as soft as a baby ass and scared of contact. Of all the WR's that have come thru NY....he was the 1 i wasn't worried about losing. Good luck to him in washington. Good luck with " Laverneaus Toes" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirSmizzy Posted July 19, 2005 Author Share Posted July 19, 2005 Originally posted by LivestrongSkins Good luck with " Laverneaus Toes" Aka Hobbles McGee? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted July 19, 2005 Share Posted July 19, 2005 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? I doubt Ramsey will lose the job in the preseason, but, if he is pulled for poor play at some point, I suspect he's gone when his contract runs out because he won't be good enough to worry about keeping any longer. But, in such a case, I would think Brunell would become the presumptive starter for 2006 until Campbell was deemed totally ready by the staff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted July 19, 2005 Share Posted July 19, 2005 Originally posted by HeHateMe 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? This offseason is almost done, so, nothing at all will extend Ramsey's contract. I suspect the team will evaluate where he is as a player when his contract comes up. With the protection of Campbell developing the team probably has to see if Ramsey develops into a legitimate starter before extending him. If so, it'll be too late to get the best deal possible and you'll have to nail him down as he's at his highest value, if you want to keep him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boobiemiles Posted July 19, 2005 Share Posted July 19, 2005 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? Every single one of us, including Patrick Ramsey, saw how Brunell beat him out. Brunell was no great shakes, no doubt. But he was better than Ramsey when faced with competition. So, please, quit thinking others are smoking something to suggest a Hall of Fame head coach actually cares enough about about winning to play guys who play better than other guys. Please don't do that to yourself. I never questioned Joe's inteiigence, but I see that I am dumb because I feel that you don't pay a potential back up 42 million dollars. Are you serius. Do you think that Joe who had his hand in every signing didn't convince Snyder that Brunell was worth the money? DO you you think Snyder decided all by himself, "humm I'll pay Brunell 42 million dollars but he may ride the bench, ah whatever here yoo go Mark." I don't know what world youlive in, but where I'm from you get paid based on the Potential Contribution and the gravity it will have pertaining to that company, industry, etc. I know Joe thought Brunell would start. He slanetd it that way. I didn't see Joe taking Ramsey out for dinner, or flying to Ramsey's favorite hunting grounds to speak to him about his importance as a skin. Everybody looks good in Preseason. WHat I don't understand is Ramseys in his second year out of a shot gun system that they run in Tulane had 2166 yards, 14 TD and 9 ints. To me he showed improvement. That same year Brunell got beat out by a rookie, and played in just 3 games and he sucked. What would warant a 42 million dollar contract, unless he was going to start in the first place. As for Coles, I commend him on getting what he really wanted and that is a neew contract with guaranteed money. This is the NFL. The not for long league, and the way contracts are designed you have to look out for yourself. Moss will stretch the field, and give the D coor something to think about. Joe was smart in getting Moss, but he didn't show the smae judgement in getting and signing Bruhell. Just admit it. And yes Joe does take into account how much money a player gets, just look yup the Smoot and Pierec situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TLusby Posted July 19, 2005 Share Posted July 19, 2005 Originally posted by Art I doubt Ramsey will lose the job in the preseason, but, if he is pulled for poor play at some point, I suspect he's gone when his contract runs out because he won't be good enough to worry about keeping any longer. But, in such a case, I would think Brunell would become the presumptive starter for 2006 until Campbell was deemed totally ready by the staff. I believe Gibbs will go to Campbell if Ramsey fails and the season is essentially lost. Why would we go to Brunell who will be a June 1st cut? Why not develop the #1 draft pick just as NY did with Eli. They will be rewarded this year for giving Eli the chance to fail! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted July 19, 2005 Share Posted July 19, 2005 Originally posted by boobiemiles I never questioned Joe's inteiigence, but I see that I am dumb because I feel that you don't pay a potential back up 42 million dollars. Are you serius. Do you think that Joe who had his hand in every signing didn't convince Snyder that Brunell was worth the money? DO you you think Snyder decided all by himself, "humm I'll pay Brunell 42 million dollars but he may ride the bench, ah whatever here yoo go Mark." I don't know what world youlive in, but where I'm from you get paid based on the Potential Contribution and the gravity it will have pertaining to that company, industry, etc. I know Joe thought Brunell would start. He slanetd it that way. I didn't see Joe taking Ramsey out for dinner, or flying to Ramsey's favorite hunting grounds to speak to him about his importance as a skin. Everybody looks good in Preseason. WHat I don't understand is Ramseys in his second year out of a shot gun system that they run in Tulane had 2166 yards, 14 TD and 9 ints. To me he showed improvement. That same year Brunell got beat out by a rookie, and played in just 3 games and he sucked. What would warant a 42 million dollar contract, unless he was going to start in the first place. As for Coles, I commend him on getting what he really wanted and that is a neew contract with guaranteed money. This is the NFL. The not for long league, and the way contracts are designed you have to look out for yourself. Moss will stretch the field, and give the D coor something to think about. Joe was smart in getting Moss, but he didn't show the smae judgement in getting and signing Bruhell. Just admit it. And yes Joe does take into account how much money a player gets, just look yup the Smoot and Pierec situation. Boob, let me be clear here. Yes, you are dumb because you feel you don't pay a potential backup $42 million. You are dumb because you don't realize I am serious. You are dumb because you don't understand I can be serious because you HAVE a backup with a $42 million contract. Obviously the team is, absolutely, willing to put a player with that contract on the bench based on performance. The world I live in is the one where we actually spend a moment or two acknowledging fact. Where we see a statement on one hand that no way the Redskins would put a player with a $42 million contract on the bench, then, turn our heads to look at the roster, and realize the Redskins put that very same player on the bench already, proving playing time is based on something other than contract. You are dumb because you won't even let actual happenings penetrate the brainless positions you formulated and maintain. That makes you dumb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boobiemiles Posted July 19, 2005 Share Posted July 19, 2005 Originally posted by Art Boob, let me be clear here. Yes, you are dumb because you feel you don't pay a potential backup $42 million. You are dumb because you don't realize I am serious. You are dumb because you don't understand I can be serious because you HAVE a backup with a $42 million contract. Obviously the team is, absolutely, willing to put a player with that contract on the bench based on performance. The world I live in is the one where we actually spend a moment or two acknowledging fact. Where we see a statement on one hand that no way the Redskins would put a player with a $42 million contract on the bench, then, turn our heads to look at the roster, and realize the Redskins put that very same player on the bench already, proving playing time is based on something other than contract. You are dumb because you won't even let actual happenings penetrate the brainless positions you formulated and maintain. That makes you dumb. OK Art name another team in the league that signed a guy to a 42 million dollar contract, and they went into the season thinking he may be a back up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted July 19, 2005 Share Posted July 19, 2005 Originally posted by boobiemiles OK Art name another team in the league that signed a guy to a 42 million dollar contract, and they went into the season thinking he may be a back up? There are half a dozen of these teams each year. Hell, we're going to sign Jason Campbell to a huge contract and expect him to sit on the bench for at least a year. But, the question remains, in this conversation, is it, or is it not, clear that the Redskins will not start a guy with a $42 million contract, meaning the value of the contract does not dictate starting roles on this team? Before you answer, tell me where on the depth chart Mark Brunell is at the moment. Then, say, "Yeah, you're right, the contract isn't what dictates playing time. I see that now. Wow, I was being dumb." You do that and it'll be easy for you to get out of this foolish position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boobiemiles Posted July 19, 2005 Share Posted July 19, 2005 Originally posted by Art There are half a dozen of these teams each year. Hell, we're going to sign Jason Campbell to a huge contract and expect him to sit on the bench for at least a year. But, the question remains, in this conversation, is it, or is it not, clear that the Redskins will not start a guy with a $42 million contract, meaning the value of the contract does not dictate starting roles on this team? Before you answer, tell me where on the depth chart Mark Brunell is at the moment. Then, say, "Yeah, you're right, the contract isn't what dictates playing time. I see that now. Wow, I was being dumb." You do that and it'll be easy for you to get out of this foolish position. Again, Art name me a team that signs a guy to a 42 million dollar contract, and expect him not to start? What the results are is not in contention here. It what the intent was. I never said you were dumb to say that half a dozen teams sign back ups to 42 million dollar contrcats. Go ahead and name me one and I'll shut up. Yes Art, pay does dictate if a player plays or not. You don't sign bench warmers to high contracts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted July 19, 2005 Share Posted July 19, 2005 Originally posted by boobiemiles Again, Art name me a team that signs a guy to a 42 million dollar contract, and expect him not to start? What the results are is not in contention here. It what the intent was. I never said you were dumb to say that half a dozen teams sign back ups to 42 million dollar contrcats. Go ahead and name me one and I'll shut up. Yes Art, pay does dictate if a player plays or not. You don't sign bench warmers to high contracts. Boob. I'll name you one. Washington. Washington has a player with a $42 million contract on the bench. Therefore, your position is invalid to say teams do not put players with big contracts on the bench. Teams do all the time, based on performance. Just as we did with Brunell. Teams do it all the time with rookies. Your position is teams do not have players with $42 million contracts in reserve as a reason Mark Brunell is starting. Except, Mark Brunell isn't starting. He's in reserve. Based on performance, not contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted July 19, 2005 Share Posted July 19, 2005 I like Moss like everyone else, however if his toe is hurting I doubt he will play like Coles will. Moss is good but Coles is much better, and if healthy it isn't even close. Moss has to be able to prove he can be in the same sentence as Coles which he has not yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boobiemiles Posted July 19, 2005 Share Posted July 19, 2005 Originally posted by Art Boob. I'll name you one. Washington. Washington has a player with a $42 million contract on the bench. Therefore, your position is invalid to say teams do not put players with big contracts on the bench. Teams do all the time, based on performance. Just as we did with Brunell. Teams do it all the time with rookies. Your position is teams do not have players with $42 million contracts in reserve as a reason Mark Brunell is starting. Except, Mark Brunell isn't starting. He's in reserve. Based on performance, not contract. No Art that was not my position at all. I clearly said that no team signs a player to a 42 million dollar contract if they don't think he will start. Please do not twist my words. Based on performance Bruhell was put on the bench. I know you want to be right, but you are not. I said how many teams sign a guy to a huge contract and beleive that he'll be riding the pine. Do you really think that Snyder would pay a back up more than his projected starting QB? You said that the competition in camp was fair. i said that the competition was slanted becuase the huge contract given to Bruhell before the competition even started. I know we want to believe that Joe is a saint and means everything he says. I'm not doubting his word, but his judgement and yours are in question here. Once again I will ask you name me one team were a player gets a 42 contract and is projected as a back up. Washington is not one Art. bruhell sucked in 03 and 04, we just sign him to a huge contract, and then said it's all fair in traing camp. How do you think Snyder would feel about giving 42 million dollars to a back up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boobiemiles Posted July 19, 2005 Share Posted July 19, 2005 What the results are is clear, it was the initial intentions are that is not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted July 19, 2005 Share Posted July 19, 2005 Originally posted by boobiemiles No Art that was not my position at all. I clearly said that no team signs a player to a 42 million dollar contract if they don't think he will start. Please do not twist my words. Based on performance Bruhell was put on the bench. I know you want to be right, but you are not. I said how many teams sign a guy to a huge contract and beleive that he'll be riding the pine. Do you really think that Snyder would pay a back up more than his projected starting QB? You said that the competition in camp was fair. i said that the competition was slanted becuase the huge contract given to Bruhell before the competition even started. I know we want to believe that Joe is a saint and means everything he says. I'm not doubting his word, but his judgement and yours are in question here. Once again I will ask you name me one team were a player gets a 42 contract and is projected as a back up. Washington is not one Art. bruhell sucked in 03 and 04, we just sign him to a huge contract, and then said it's all fair in traing camp. How do you think Snyder would feel about giving 42 million dollars to a back up? I have not twisted your words. I've made them invalid by showing you that based on performance, not contract, decisions about playing time are made by most every team in the league, including Washington. The Redskins signed Brunell to give Gibbs a veteran who had a great career in the league. Gibbs opened the competition up at camp and not only did I say it was fair, but, so did Gibbs and so did Ramsey, or have you forgotten, Ramsey actually confirmed he was given every opportunity? So, once again, I ask you to explain how if a $42 million contract is the determining factor for playing time, why that isn't the case with the very player you mention here. Brunell did suck last year. He was not bad in 2003, though he was injured and they went to their QB of the future. In any case, the premise that a contract determines playing time remains an invalid presumption. All facts and statements from all parties involved and the history reveals that to be true. Yet, you cling to stupidity. This is your cross to bear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boobiemiles Posted July 19, 2005 Share Posted July 19, 2005 Originally posted by Art I have not twisted your words. I've made them invalid by showing you that based on performance, not contract, decisions about playing time are made by most every team in the league, including Washington. The Redskins signed Brunell to give Gibbs a veteran who had a great career in the league. Gibbs opened the competition up at camp and not only did I say it was fair, but, so did Gibbs and so did Ramsey, or have you forgotten, Ramsey actually confirmed he was given every opportunity? So, once again, I ask you to explain how if a $42 million contract is the determining factor for playing time, why that isn't the case with the very player you mention here. Brunell did suck last year. He was not bad in 2003, though he was injured and they went to their QB of the future. In any case, the premise that a contract determines playing time remains an invalid presumption. All facts and statements from all parties involved and the history reveals that to be true. Yet, you cling to stupidity. This is your cross to bear. Name me a team that signs a player to a 42 million dollar contract and he's not projected to start. What else do you expect Ramseys to say? Joe didn't keep his word? Name me one team that signs a guy to such huge contract and think he won't start. You keep arguing what happened, again it was the intention that is question here. I'll submit your right. Teams do sign back ups to huge contracts going into camp. :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boobiemiles Posted July 19, 2005 Share Posted July 19, 2005 This arguement is redundant. Yes Joe was honest when he signed Bruhell to a bigger contract than Ramseys. And yes teams do sign projected backups to beigger contracts than a possible starter. And yes it was a fair competition when one player in the salary cap system makes more than the starting player. You are completely right Art. Joe thought Bruhell would possibly ride the pine, and he was more than prepared to answer questions from the media about having the highest paid back up in the NFL and invest so much money into a player that is not playing. You are right Art you are much smarter than me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganggreen76 Posted July 19, 2005 Share Posted July 19, 2005 Originally posted by LivestrongSkins Coles on the other hand is a sure-thing possession reciever. He is fast but doesnt have the quick accelleration of moss. He fits in perfectly with pennington. Pennington doesnt have the deep arm but is great at throwing the intermediate routes. Coles is a good intermediate route runner. That's the perception. The reality is Pennington was the lowest rated passer in the NFL on passes between 11-20 yards in 2004 and he was the highest rated passer in the NFL on passes of 21+ yards in 2004. With Mike Heimerdinger calling the plays the NYJ offense will be much more wide open Coles will get his wish to go downfield more often. Santana Moss will do well in Washington, win-win trade for both teams, imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted July 19, 2005 Share Posted July 19, 2005 Originally posted by boobiemiles Name me a team that signs a player to a 42 million dollar contract and he's not projected to start. What else do you expect Ramseys to say? Joe didn't keep his word? Name me one team that signs a guy to such huge contract and think he won't start. You keep arguing what happened, again it was the intention that is question here. I'll submit your right. Teams do sign back ups to huge contracts going into camp. :doh: The intention was to play the player who played better. That's what Joe said. It's what Mark said. It's what Patrick said. It's what all of them said happened. But, I understand your position. We ought to ignore what every person involved says and simply presume they are telling lies to believe abject idiocy. Good work, Boob. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ross3909 Posted July 19, 2005 Share Posted July 19, 2005 Gibbs is an insurance guy. If you follow his system you will see it over and over, dont put all your eggs in one basket...or player. Gibbs brought in Brunell and paid so much for him because it is what he told Snyder that it was the insurance that he had to have at the most important position on the field. As for Coles and Moss, Moss will streach the field and be a great fit for Ramsey. In this system he wont need to take a hit because he will be running by defenders, Patten and Thrash will be our traffic guys. Coles is a beast and has a great heart, however he is not a lockerroom leader, he pretty much keeps to himself, and he is injured. His toe injury is affecting his game and he is not the Coles that you remember. You will no longer see the great cuts, separation, and speed that you did however you will still see the guy make some amazing catches and take great hits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FLSKINSFAN Posted July 19, 2005 Share Posted July 19, 2005 Art, you never let me have any fun. You've shut this guy up before I could even get back into the discussion, maybe next time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boobiemiles Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 Originally posted by Art The intention was to play the player who played better. That's what Joe said. It's what Mark said. It's what Patrick said. It's what all of them said happened. But, I understand your position. We ought to ignore what every person involved says and simply presume they are telling lies to believe abject idiocy. Good work, Boob. Art if we signed a guy to a 42 million dollar contract and we thought he'd be a back up, we'd be adumb as you want me to be. Are you serious? That would make us the dumbest franchise in sports. I mean a 42 million dollar back up. This is DC people play politics all the time. What else are they suppose to say. If Ramsey said, "yo this is wrong, all wrong. They bring in this guy and he is making more money than me, and this is the NFL. Money does count againt the cap, there are rules. You don't throw 42 million dollars at a guy and EXPECT him to be a back up. Its not a fair competion" no Ramsey would look like cry baby, becuase people like you side with Joe no matter what. Once agian name me a team that sign players before a snap in pre-season to a 42 million dollar contract and think that same guy is going to be a back up? Name me a team that signs a guy to 42 million dollar contract and say well we dont really expect this guy to start. The job isn't his really, we just hope it is. You're crazy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boobiemiles Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 Originally posted by FLSKINSFAN Art, you never let me have any fun. You've shut this guy up before I could even get back into the discussion, maybe next time. What were you going to say? Go Go Joe!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 Originally posted by boobiemiles Art if we signed a guy to a 42 million dollar contract and we thought he'd be a back up, we'd be adumb as you want me to be. Are you serious? That would make us the dumbest franchise in sports. I mean a 42 million dollar back up. That's the point, no decisions were made regarding playing time when he was signed. He was signed to compete for the job and he won it in training camp (did you watch Ramsey in the preseason games...not good!!). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.