Renegade7 Posted August 14, 2005 Share Posted August 14, 2005 Originally posted by fwo40 Competition is fine.....I have no problems with it.... But Brunell was given the job when he got here and played his way out of it. Campbell is a rookie. None of this changes after one preseason game. Gibbs will give the other two shots, but none of us know if they will shine sufficently to be given the job. Reps vs 2nd stringers in preseason are not enough....and Ramsey should be given the chance Brunell was given last year....to start the season and then lose it if he performs terrible. I don't agree with waiting half the season to see if Ramsey is the man. At the end of the preseason, Gibbs will decide who's the best and put him in there to best run the offense. I hope Campbell is the guy. He looks to be the most talented QB on the roster right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldenster95 Posted August 14, 2005 Share Posted August 14, 2005 This is laughable. Brunell plays some downs against folks who'll be manning the cheeseburger detail at Mickey Ds next week and, all of a sudden, he's some type of hero. On the flip side, Ramsey is facing people like Julius Peppers and he, based on one half of pre-season play, sucks. However, this may turn out (and those who're bashing Ramsey may in fact be right after all is said and done), those who're jumping to conclusions based on this limited factual predicate are fools. One thing did catch my eye tonight, however, and it was raised in another thread. That point was that Brunell apparently was recovering from elbow surgery last year and pushed himself to play to vindicate Gibbs' decision to sign him. Now, supposedly, he's better. If that's true, that outta make for some interesting stuff. However, as of right now, we have Brunell stinking up the joint last year and playing well against some scrubs. Ramsey did well as a starter last year and looked so-so against one of the top defenses in the NFL. Until things start unfolding, the default conclusion right now is that Ramsey is better than Brunell. To say otherwise based on yesterday's game is simply moronic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KevinMac Posted August 14, 2005 Share Posted August 14, 2005 Originally posted by OrangeSkin I just don't see how Brunell can come off of his horrid performance last year and magically become a servicable starter. I Yet, people think Ramsey can come off of the past 3 years and majically become a servicable starter. Strange, ain't it? Originally posted by DonMagicJuan man i wonder about my peoples....i swear..most of you make us look bad, im sorry but ONE PRESEASON game doesnt mean the end...give the man time... every NFL team is laughing at us during this time, because we either say SUPERBOWL or Critcize a player beacause of one bad game, give the man his chances...let him prove us wrong, if not, then we make the comments...until then, LETS WAIT TILL MID SEASON before any switches...jeez COME ON SKINS FANS...I BELIEVE IN YOU! 1) This is not ONE PRESEASON game. This is 3+ years in witch no progression has occured. I swear I can't figure out what Ramsey has ever done to warrant the faith you guys have in him. 2) If we WAIT TIL MID SEASON before we make changes, the season is lost. Maybe that is okay with you, but not for most of us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldenster95 Posted August 14, 2005 Share Posted August 14, 2005 Originally posted by Renegade7 I don't agree with waiting half the season to see if Ramsey is the man. At the end of the preseason, Gibbs will decide who's the best and put him in there to best run the offense. I hope Campbell is the guy. He looks to be the most talented QB on the roster right now. Ummmmm . . . the only way that Campbell becomes a starter this season is if Brunell and Ramsey suffer some serious bodily injury and if there are absolutely no other vet QBs we can fetch to fill in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illone Posted August 14, 2005 Author Share Posted August 14, 2005 Originally posted by Ghost of Nibbs McPimpin Uh yeah, I'm aware of that. You can be simultaneously conscious of two facts that may involve similar factors (teams, team colors, players, numbers, etc.) He was talking abour RYPIEN's play against San Fran, which would lead me straight to '90. That you didn't automatically know that is not you 'being right.' Mitchell fumbled in that 92 playoff game. That's what most people look at in that game. THe "Ryp choking consistently when it mattered" memory is from the '90 season against the Niners. That's like confusing the 84 playoff game vs. the Bears and the 87, merely because they have the same teams involved and you claiming that 'we're both right.' no, you were wrong. You are officially a jackass. I phrased that post in a QUESTION. See the ? symbol? Yea, tool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldenster95 Posted August 14, 2005 Share Posted August 14, 2005 Originally posted by KevinMac Yet, people think Ramsey can come off of the past 3 years and majically become a servicable starter. Strange, ain't it? 1) This is not ONE PRESEASON game. This is 3+ years in witch no progression has occured. I swear I can't figure out what Ramsey has ever done to warrant the faith you guys have in him. 2) If we WAIT TIL MID SEASON before we make changes, the season is lost. Maybe that is okay with you, but not for most of us. Jeez, that's why Ramsey's rating as a starter last year came statistically close enough to Brett Favre's right? How's that for some history for you? If Ramsey had started the whole season, we'd be a playoff team. Would you be saying the same stuff about a playoff QB? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PREDICTOR Posted August 14, 2005 Share Posted August 14, 2005 Originally posted by TimFolk The offense is built around #26. He was in like 2 plays. Lets see what Ramsey can do when he has his playmaker taking pressure off him next week. Not only are you right on that count, but perhaps even more important is that Gibbs is calling the plays. He aware of every facet of this game. He chooses who to start and who to pull. If we were trying to win the game or impress the fans I might be worried but THAT is not on Gibbs agenda. Some of these fans cannot be convinced because they are just Ramsey haters. Notice that they NEVER tell you the name of the QB who is going to start in the pro bowl and take the Redskins to the Superbowl. As I keep saying..if they are such experts they need to take $1000 and bet it on the Bears to win that first game and they can make some money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renegade7 Posted August 14, 2005 Share Posted August 14, 2005 Originally posted by goldenster95 Ummmmm . . . the only way that Campbell becomes a starter this season is if Brunell and Ramsey suffer some serious bodily injury and if there are absolutely no other vet QBs we can fetch to fill in. Or he's the best QB on the roster. What's wrong with that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeffSchmeff Posted August 14, 2005 Share Posted August 14, 2005 However, this may turn out (and those who're bashing Ramsey may in fact be right after all is said and done), those who're jumping to conclusions based on this limited factual predicate are fools. Goldy - you've discounted your entire post with this double talk. You just said that people jumping to conclusions based on Ramsey's performance tonight are fools, but the bashers may be right after all is said and done. C'mon man, you can do better. Use some better lawyers tricks EDIT - actually, after reading, maybe I'm the fool. I believe that one preseason game is not the end all be all for #11. He needs to show significant progress in preseason games to get my endorsement though. Brunell isn't as bad as he was last season. He was coming off elbow surgery and playing on a bad wheel. I think his hamstring injury contributed to his ability to put velocity on the ball. Whatever - I misread your original post. Nobody can come to any conclusion after only one game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldenster95 Posted August 14, 2005 Share Posted August 14, 2005 Originally posted by Renegade7 Or he's the best QB on the roster. What's wrong with that? If Campbell is the best QB on the roster, we're in serious trouble. You can't be serious that we'd start a rookie QB when have Ramsey or Brunell are you? :laugh: :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Posted August 14, 2005 Share Posted August 14, 2005 Originally posted by illone You are officially a jackass. I phrased that post in a QUESTION. See the ? symbol? Yea, tool. Yeah, I can see a question mark. So what? You included the question in case you were wrong. But the point of your response was to debate a conclusion and experience another poster apparently was more familiar with, thus the question mark is irrelevant. If you're so uncertain as to be unable to challenge an assertion made by another poster, perhaps you should refrain from replying. Or, ask sincerely, if your memory was correct. So, in the final analysis, that you phrased your counter to SHF as a question is not immaterial. It's funny that you call me a tool, yet from post one in this thread you've essentially called out a bunch of people, made strident and arrogant claims, been contentious (Ok, I do that too and tried to parse words and evade the implications of your own expressed thoughts when they did not suit your shifting argument. Don't call me a jackass because I call you on being a tool. :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldenster95 Posted August 14, 2005 Share Posted August 14, 2005 Originally posted by JeffSchmeff Goldy - you've discounted your entire post with this double talk. You just said that people jumping to conclusions based on Ramsey's performance tonight are fools, but the bashers may be right after all is said and done. C'mon man, you can do better. Use some better lawyers tricks Nah. My point is that there's not enough info to judge Ramsey and Brunell on right now. And the info on both is skewed because Ramsey was playing against one of the premiere defenses in the league whereas Brunell was playing against scrubs. That's not discounted by my observation that Ramsey may tank. He may. But those who're saying it now just don't have the info to back that observation up. Thus, my point really here is that those who're bashing Ramsey and praising Brunell based on what's gone on this pre-season are doing so on a thin factual record. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldenster95 Posted August 14, 2005 Share Posted August 14, 2005 Jeff, saw your edit. Thanks. BTW, are you an ESPN refugee. I can't remember if you are or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeffSchmeff Posted August 14, 2005 Share Posted August 14, 2005 Originally posted by goldenster95 Nah. My point is that there's not enough info to judge Ramsey and Brunell on right now. And the info on both is skewed because Ramsey was playing against one of the premiere defenses in the league whereas Brunell was playing against scrubs. That's not discounted by my observation that Ramsey may tank. He may. But those who're saying it now just don't have the info to back that observation up. Thus, my point really here is that those who're bashing Ramsey and praising Brunell based on what's gone on this pre-season are doing so on a thin factual record. I edited my post at the time you were posting this reply. I get that you really can't draw any conclusions after only one preseason game. All good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hooper Posted August 14, 2005 Share Posted August 14, 2005 Ramsey didn't look good tonight -- even when he was playing against the second string. Brunell looked pretty good. But he looked pretty good in preseason last year as well. It means nothing. I watched lots of games this weekend -- not many guys impressed. Dallas looked frickin' awful. But I will say this. With Pat's constant happy feet and his continued inability to see the field, that Campbell pick is looking better and better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illone Posted August 14, 2005 Author Share Posted August 14, 2005 Originally posted by Ghost of Nibbs McPimpin Yeah, I can see a question mark. So what? You included the question in case you were wrong. ASSumption;). :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeffSchmeff Posted August 14, 2005 Share Posted August 14, 2005 Yes, I'm OG ESPN, but I defected long ago. I don't post much - especially during the offseason, but I'll be around more when there's real stuff to talk about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Posted August 14, 2005 Share Posted August 14, 2005 Originally posted by goldenster95 Nah. My point is that there's not enough info to judge Ramsey and Brunell on right now. And the info on both is skewed because Ramsey was playing against one of the premiere defenses in the league whereas Brunell was playing against scrubs. That's not discounted by my observation that Ramsey may tank. He may. But those who're saying it now just don't have the info to back that observation up. Thus, my point really here is that those who're bashing Ramsey and praising Brunell based on what's gone on this pre-season are doing so on a thin factual record. This is where I am. RIght now, we have history as a laboratory. Brunell didn't just play 'poorly.' He had one of the worst seasons a QB of THAT or any caliber could ever have. Ramsey played well at times and was an important part of some victories. That said, a couple of the people who've expressed anti-Ramsey sentiment have done it since the beginning, or at least the beginning of our contact with them. The worst part is, the parts of his game that have changed have been ignored and now we have revisionists stating that 'it's the same thing every year." Is it? Ramsey was known for intermediate passes, 15-30 yards downfield. Now he's somehow turned into someone "who can't complete anything other than a dump off." The kid that showed moxie and pocket presence in several starts before 2004 and during that season is now "Mr. White Tony Banks." The QB who couldn't move or play fake to save his life in 2002 but improved both aspects of his game in subsequent years is still "slow as molasses" Ramsey. I don't mind criticism, but shouldn't the criticisms reveal some measure of consideration and intelligence on the part of the critic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illone Posted August 14, 2005 Author Share Posted August 14, 2005 Originally posted by Ghost of Nibbs McPimpin I don't mind criticism, but shouldn't the criticisms reveal some measure of consideration and intelligence on the part of the critic? Sure. Three years of losing games isn't enough for you? :doh: You love to try to diss people with your posts. It's lame. Why not try to look at the big picture and see things as they are? Your suggestion that posters who think Ramsey sucks are not intelligent is just, well, dumb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimmiJo Posted August 14, 2005 Share Posted August 14, 2005 Didn't Brunell have a major throwing-sholder injury a few years back? I remember saying last year (to myself) that he may not be fully healed yet. I think I am starting to believe this. He threw better passes tonight than at any time last year. The big throw early on was a bullet for 20+ yards. And he converted 3rd downs, something Ramsey did not do. Ramsey is not a quality starter right now. I'm not sure he will develop either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CHUBAKAH Posted August 14, 2005 Share Posted August 14, 2005 Originally posted by illone Sure. Three years of losing games isn't enough for you? :doh: You love to try to diss people with your posts. It's lame. Why not try to look at the big picture and see things as they are? Your suggestion that posters who think Ramsey sucks are not intelligent is just, well, dumb. I couldn't agree more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimmiJo Posted August 14, 2005 Share Posted August 14, 2005 Originally posted by Hooper But I will say this. With Pat's constant happy feet and his continued inability to see the field, that Campbell pick is looking better and better. I'm with you Hoop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Posted August 14, 2005 Share Posted August 14, 2005 Originally posted by illone Sure. Three years of losing games isn't enough for you? :doh: You love to try to diss people with your posts. It's lame. Why not try to look at the big picture and see things as they are? Your suggestion that posters who think Ramsey sucks are not intelligent is just, well, dumb. It's not a diss. I'm describing the appropriate approach to any criticism(or praise.) You've not once heard me say, "Pat's game is flawless, this dude is the best QB in the league!" Yet you hear the opposite from the anti-Ramsey brigades. When I say "intelligence" I mean USING IT, not merely possessing it. There's all the difference in the world between saying, "I don't think Ramsey sees the field well and that leads to breakdowns in other facets of his game that sometimes appear to be progressing" and saying, "Ramsey stinks, it's the SAME THING YEAR IN AND YEAR OUT." Maybe perspective and wisdom and football knowledge are what I meant, rather than intelligence. But in the end, the lack of utilizing your mind in a more considered fashion yields similar results. By the way, 3 years of losing games--in what capacity? What little we were CAPABLE OF, victory-wise during SPurrier's tenure, was Ramsey. Last year. 3-4. With 3 games coming against the NFC Champion Eagles and 15-1 Steelers in his second start with the playbook still wrapped tight? The dude has far fewer starts than Harrington or Carr. How is it they've not been fully judged and you see fit to judge Ramsey on FEWER STARTS?! That seems more than a bit absurd. It never occurred to anyone here that Trung Canidate was not a premier rusher in this league? I mean, I got suckered in too, thinking he could work in THIS(Spurrier) system, but he didn't. THAT was Patrick's running back, he and a pre-Gibbs Betts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeffSchmeff Posted August 14, 2005 Share Posted August 14, 2005 Ghost - Remember when Ramsey first got his opportunity? Remember the compliments about how much "poise" he had against Tennessee? He's had the bravery to stand in and deliver the pass, but that has also been one of his biggest criticisms. This year, he seems after one game to be too jumpy. Look back to the play where he felt pressured and tried to scramble. It ended up being a one yard gain, but why not throw that ball away? Also, how can you explain his apparent inability to look off receivers? I'll give you the pass to Moss may have come out of his hand wrong, (which I've recently heard him use as an excuse in a TV interview) but why was he throwing to a double covered WR in the first place? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimmiJo Posted August 14, 2005 Share Posted August 14, 2005 Originally posted by Ghost of Nibbs McPimpin Last year. 3-4. With 3 games coming against the NFC Champion Eagles and 15-1 Steelers in his second start with the playbook still wrapped tight? Yes let's talk about last year, specifically the Eagles. Do you remember the Skins driving the length of the field to the red-zone at the end of the game and then 'Pat" throwing a pick on first and ten into triple-coverage? It cost us the game, yes? He does not see the field. He holds the ball too long. He makes bad decisions. In other words - he is not "super-football-smart." He is not a quality starter in the NFL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.