tenken627 Posted September 13, 2005 Share Posted September 13, 2005 Here are the stats for each QB in every single game of 2004. I've also added the score and Portis/Betts stats as well. I differentiated between the games where Ramsey started and when he was called up from the bench due to injury or poor play from the starter. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Brunell went 118/237, 1194 Yds, 7 TDs, 6 Int, 3 Fumbles Lost as a starter in 9 games in 2004. Ramsey went 142/217, 1313 Yds, 8 TDs, 6 Int, 1 Fumble Lost as a starter in 7 games in 2004. Ramsey went 169/272, 1665 Yds, 10 TDs, 11 Int, 1 Fumble Lost total in 9 games in 2004. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Brunell had 6 games out of 9 total in which he had a turnover as a starter in 2004. Ramsey had 5 games out of 7 total in which he had a turnover as a starter in 2004. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Washington won 2 games out of 6 in games where Brunell started and had a turnover in 2004 (Tampa Bay, Chicago). Washington won 1 game out of 5 in games where Ramsey started and had a turnover in 2004 (Minnesota). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Washington won 1 game (Detroit) and lost 2 games (Dallas, Cleveland) in where Brunell started and had no turnovers in 2004. Washington won 2 games (New York Giants, San Francisco) and lost 0 games in where Ramsey started and had no turnovers in 2004. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- # of games Brunell had over 150 Yards passing as a starter in 2004 = 3 of 9 # of games Ramsey had over 150 Yards passing as a starter in 2004 = 6 of 7 # of games Ramsey had over 150 Yards passing total in 2004 = 7 of 8 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- # of games won in where Brunell had over 150 Yards passing as a starter in 2004 = 0 # of games won in where Brunell had under 150 Yards passing as a starter in 2004 = 3 (Tampa Bay, Chicago, Detroit) # of games won in where Ramsey had over 150 Yards passing as a starter in 2004 = 3 (New York Giants, San Francisco, Minnesota) # of games won in where Ramsey had under 150 Yards passing as a starter in 2004 = 0 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Week 1 Washington 16-10 Tampa Bay Brunell - 13/24, 125 Yds, 0 TD, 1 Fumble Lost Portis - 29 rushes, 148 Yds, 1 TD Week 2 New York Giants 20-14 Washington Brunell - 10/18, 92 Yds, 1 TD, 1 INT, 1 Fumble Lost Ramsey - 9/18, 142 Yds, 1 TD, 3 INT Portis - 20 Rushes, 69 Yds, 0 TD, 2 Fumbles Lost Week 3 Dallas 21-18 Washington Brunell – 25/43, 325 Yds, 2 TD Portis – 23 Rushes, 94 Yds, 0 TD Week 4 Cleveland 17-13 Washington Brunell – 17/32, 192 Yds, 0 TD Portis – 20 Rushes, 58 Yds, 1 TD, 1 Fumble Lost Week 5 Baltimore 17-10 Washington Brunell – 13/29, 83 Yds, 1 TD, 1 INT, 1 Fumble Lost Portis – 25 Rushes, 53 Yds, 0 TD Week 6 Washington 13-10 Chicago Brunell – 8/22, 95 Yds, 1 TD, 1 INT Portis – 36 Rushes, 171 Yds, 0 TD Week 7 BYE Week 8 Green Bay 28-14 Washington Brunell – 25/44, 218 Yds, 2 TD, 2 INT Portis – 17 Rushes, 70 Yds, 0 TD Week 9 Washington 17-10 Detroit Brunell – 6/17, 58 Yds, 0 TD Portis – 34 Rushes, 147 Yds, 0 TD, 1 Passing TD Week 10 Cincinnati 17-10 Washington Brunell – 1/8, 6 Yds, 0 TD, 1 INT Ramsey – 18/37, 210 Yds, 1 TD, 2 INT Portis – 17 Rushes, 81 Yds, 0 TD Week 11 Philadelphia 28-6 Washington Ramsey – 21/34, 162 Yds, 0 TD, 1 INT Portis – 17 Rushes, 37 Yds, 0 TD Week 12 Pittsburgh 16-7 Washington Ramsey – 19/34, 138 Yds, 1 TD, 1 INT Portis – 6 Rushes, 17 Yds, 0 TD Betts – 8 Rushes, 34 yds, 0 TD Week 13 Washington 31-7 New York Giants Ramsey – 19/22, 174 Yds, 3 TD Portis – 31 Rushes, 148 Yds, 1 TD Week 14 Philadelphia 17-14 Washington Ramsey – 29/45, 251 Yds, 0 TD, 1 INT Portis – 23 Rushes, 80 Yds, 2 TD Week 15 Washington 26-16 San Francisco Ramsey – 18/27, 214 Yds, 1 TD Portis – 35 Rushes, 110 Yds, 0 TD Week 16 Dallas 13-10 Washington Ramsey – 19/29, 158 Yds, 1 TD, 2 INT Portis – 10 Rushes, 32 Yds, 0 TD Betts – 13 Rushes, 43 Yds, 0 TD Week 17 Washington 21-18 Minnesota Ramsey – 17/26, 216 Yds, 2 TD, 1 INT, 1 Fumble Lost Betts – 26 Rushes, 118 Yds, 1 TD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted September 13, 2005 Share Posted September 13, 2005 I hate to do this because you've done a lot of work to assemble these statistics, but who cares? Those things happened a while ago and situations are much different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
More Complete Posted September 13, 2005 Share Posted September 13, 2005 Thanks for the breakdown. What point are you trying to make? If any. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Posted September 13, 2005 Share Posted September 13, 2005 I hate to do this because you've done a lot of work to assemble these statistics, but who cares? Those things happened a while ago and situations are much different. Of course they're different. For those who support GIbbs and/or Brunell at all costs. it also puts the lie to Gibbs concern about turnovers. He wasn't willing to even examine the basics last year, and those stats show that we won with Ramsey--PERIOD. We lost due to Brunell's turnovers and won in SPITE of his sub-100 yard passing games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeaconBlue Posted September 13, 2005 Share Posted September 13, 2005 I hate to do this because you've done a lot of work to assemble these statistics, but who cares? Those things happened a while ago and situations are much different. Oh so NOW statistics are no longer relevant? Every other player ever debated about on this board has been judged by his previous performances. Why pray tell should MB be exempt now? Lord... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stormy Posted September 13, 2005 Share Posted September 13, 2005 I hate to do this because you've done a lot of work to assemble these statistics, but who cares? Those things happened a while ago and situations are much different. How so? Ramsey compiled much better numbers (especially if you toss out his emergency appearance vs NYG in week 2), and a better winning % with the same lesser personnel that Brunell crashed and burned against as he led them to a 3-6 start, and the NFL's worst passing Offense. Brunell almost singlehandedly lost games for us versus teams like the Ravens and Giants last year with his combined TOs and utter lack of production. If Ramsey was better with lesser personnel, why would he not be better with improved personnel (personnel which he can actually utilize in the vertical game like Moss/Patten, which Brunell will utterly waste?) Other than the alleged injury, after which Brunell inexplicably had his best game in 2004, what has changed so dramatically? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
herb mul-key Posted September 13, 2005 Share Posted September 13, 2005 yes I just do not see Brunells significant upside, his days of 300yd passing games are long gone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tenken627 Posted September 13, 2005 Author Share Posted September 13, 2005 Didn't take me too long, just copy/paste most of it during downtime at work. My point is to debunk the myth that Brunell isn't exactly mistake free. If you notice, he had 6 games out of 9 in which he had a turnover in them. We only won 2 of those. And that the only games where Brunell won while starting was Tampa Bay, Chicago, and Detroit, in which all 3 games Portis ran for over 100 yards. He lost 6 games when Portis didn't run for over 100 yards and it didn't matter if Brunell passed for little or a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wilbur58z Posted September 13, 2005 Share Posted September 13, 2005 All that research and the point is entirely missed. Funny. Brunell played last season with a bad hamstring. Ramsey played healthy and when Gibbs had made "modernized" the offense by the 2nd half of the season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted September 13, 2005 Share Posted September 13, 2005 My point is that Ramsey did fine last year. Brunell played poorly. However, since the moment the Viking game ended, what has Ramsey done to improve? Brunell has more zip on his passes, moves around much better, and played mistake-free for an entire preseason. Simply stated, he's progressed from last season. Ramsey had a lower completion percentage, holds the ball too long, and has become more apt to turn the ball over. Simply stated, he's regressed from last season. Why would you blindly ignore 6 or 7 weeks of recent performance and judge them on what happened a year ago? I'm not discounted stats...pull up some stats from the preseason games...that should tell you why some think Brunell is a good option. I know that you'll all say "preseason doesn't matter" so this is a meaningless debate. It must have mattered to Gibbs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Posted September 13, 2005 Share Posted September 13, 2005 All that research and the point is entirely missed. Funny.Brunell played last season with a bad hamstring. Ramsey played healthy and when Gibbs had made "modernized" the offense by the 2nd half of the season. Brunell played with a bad hamstring and proceeded to have his best game of the season after suffering the injury(though how much of that was Rod Gardner making some great plays, I don't know) So bad, that instead of stepping into the pocket and throwing, he backpedaled right into the pass rush. He was SCARED. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tenken627 Posted September 13, 2005 Author Share Posted September 13, 2005 All that research and the point is entirely missed. Funny.Brunell played last season with a bad hamstring. Ramsey played healthy and when Gibbs had made "modernized" the offense by the 2nd half of the season. Brunell looked the same in week 1 of 2005 as he did in 2004 regular season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wilbur58z Posted September 13, 2005 Share Posted September 13, 2005 Ramsey's turnovers are way more mindless than Brunell's. Brunell's turnovers were the type where it wouldn't have mattered if Ramsey or Brunell were in there (missed blocks leading to blindside fumbles, tipped balls leading to INTs, etc). Ramsey's are basically the dumbest turnovers imaginable....almost blatant. He just basically lobs the ball to the defender. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tenken627 Posted September 13, 2005 Author Share Posted September 13, 2005 My point is that Ramsey did fine last year. Brunell played poorly. However, since the moment the Viking game ended, what has Ramsey done to improve? Brunell has more zip on his passes, moves around much better, and played mistake-free for an entire preseason. Simply stated, he's progressed from last season. Ramsey had a lower completion percentage, holds the ball too long, and has become more apt to turn the ball over. Simply stated, he's regressed from last season. Why would you blindly ignore 6 or 7 weeks of recent performance and judge them on what happened a year ago? I'm not discounted stats...pull up some stats from the preseason games...that should tell you why some think Brunell is a good option. I know that you'll all say "preseason doesn't matter" so this is a meaningless debate. It must have mattered to Gibbs. Ramsey usually has bad stats in the preseason and training camp for whatever reason. He didn't exactly light it up in the preseason the last 2 years either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Posted September 13, 2005 Share Posted September 13, 2005 Ramsey's turnovers are way more mindless than Brunell's.Brunell's turnovers were the type where it wouldn't have mattered if Ramsey or Brunell were in there (missed blocks leading to blindside fumbles, tipped balls leading to INTs, etc). Ramsey's are basically the dumbest turnovers imaginable....almost blatant. He just basically lobs the ball to the defender. That's blatantly false. Brunell should have eaten the bal against Tampa rather than try to hand off to Portis. He should have eaten the ball vs. the Giants rather than backpedal and try to do anything. That's all he did last year--backpedal into the pass rush(the pocket means the farther you go back, the more you're exposed to the ends) His INT vs. the Bengals was a tipped pass? STOP MAKING ___ UP! God, I can't stand people who want to revise reality to fit their needs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted September 13, 2005 Share Posted September 13, 2005 Ramsey usually has bad stats in the preseason and training camp for whatever reason. He didn't exactly light it up in the preseason the last 2 years either. OK, well that's fine but that's scary. Especially when those bad habits continue into the first regular season game in the form of a pick and a fumble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stormy Posted September 13, 2005 Share Posted September 13, 2005 All that research and the point is entirely missed. Funny.Brunell played last season with a bad hamstring. Ramsey played healthy and when Gibbs had made "modernized" the offense by the 2nd half of the season. 2 of his worst games came before the "hurt hamstring", and his best game by far came in the very week he sustained the injury? Funny, we found out how severe it was WAY after the fact, and that the coaches let him play 7+ games after he allegedly injured it. Pretty inconsistent premise to say the least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CBMGreatOne Posted September 13, 2005 Share Posted September 13, 2005 4 of the last 5 weeks were preseason games. Oh, and Ramsey had us in the lead when he was in the game. Ramsey has only had one extended period of time during which the starting position was safely and securely his, and that was in Spurrier's second year when the scheme left Ramsey to have the tar beaten out of him every game. Is it possible that Brunell plays much better now that his hamstring is healthy? I guess, but count me a skeptic. Mark Brunell is a joke and does not belong in any NFL game action for all of the reasons that have been tirelessly presented over and over and over again, and corroborated with statistical reinforcement. Take off the Gibbs goggles and see what everyone else in the league sees: Starting Mark Brunell is an absolutely HORRIBLE decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wilbur58z Posted September 13, 2005 Share Posted September 13, 2005 That's blatantly false. Brunell should have eaten the bal against Tampa rather than try to hand off to Portis.He should have eaten the ball vs. the Giants rather than backpedal and try to do anything. That's all he did last year--backpedal into the pass rush(the pocket means the farther you go back, the more you're exposed to the ends) His INT vs. the Bengals was a tipped pass? STOP MAKING ___ UP! God, I can't stand people who want to revise reality to fit their needs. OK, so that's three turnovers that were his fault over 8 games? Ramsey does that in 2 quarters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wilbur58z Posted September 13, 2005 Share Posted September 13, 2005 2 of his worst games came before the "hurt hamstring", and his best game by far came in the very week he sustained the injury? Funny, we found out how severe it was WAY after the fact, and that the coaches let him play 7+ games after he allegedly injured it. Pretty inconsistent premise to say the least. :doh: So your premise is that hamstring's don't get worse during the course of playing 5-6 NFL games after you hurt it? If anything, Brunell SHOULD play better early around the time of the Dallas game because he hasn't played 5-6 games on a bad hamstring at that point. And Brunell's two worst games were not the Tampa and Giants game. Please. Did you not watch the 2-3 week period culminating with the Cincy game when he basically looked like a gimp? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stormy Posted September 13, 2005 Share Posted September 13, 2005 OK, so that's three turnovers that were his fault over 8 games? Ramsey does that in 2 quarters. In Games *Started* last year (not games where either came in as a Sub): Ramsey: 82.6 QB Rating 65% Comp % 8TD 6INT 1 Fumble Lost (That's DAMN, DAMN solid first year in a system) Brunell: 63.9 QB Rating 49% Comp % 7TD 6INT 3 Fumbles Lost Huge disparity, and appears that Brunell is as likely to commit the big turnover as a starter, as Ramsey, in our system. The myths people feed themselves in an attempt to support their premises. Gibbs mismanagement of this situation is epic in proportion. It will not only tarnish his character, it will also tarnish his record, as it will likely lead to his presiding over the worst passing/scoring offense in the NFC in consecutive years. Sad state of affairs for a man I once admired beyond belief. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted September 13, 2005 Share Posted September 13, 2005 Ramsey: 82.6 QB Rating 65% Comp % 8TD 6INT 1 Fumble Lost (That's DAMN, DAMN solid first year in a system) Brunell: 63.9 QB Rating 49% Comp % 7TD 6INT 3 Fumbles Lost Wait, what?? Stormy says that Ramsey has proven more than Brunell...shoot, we better get Gibbs on the phone and have him change his mind! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stormy Posted September 13, 2005 Share Posted September 13, 2005 Wait, what?? Stormy says that Ramsey has proven more than Brunell...shoot, we better get Gibbs on the phone and have him change his mind! No, actually that is statistical fact "saying" that in Regular Season games where Ramsey and/or Brunell have started during the Joe Gibbs regime, it's been a landslide in favor of Ramsey in terms of success. Gibbs, and anyone else, can choose to ignore statistical fact, but it won't change the accuracy of it. Time will determine whether Gibbs accurately saw criteria which trumped the statistical performance of those QBs in his system to date. Perhaps that will be the case, but it sure hasn't been if past indicators are accurate predictors of future performance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CurseReversed Posted September 13, 2005 Share Posted September 13, 2005 I think ramsey can be just as good or better then brunell in the intermediate and long range passing game. he started to show a lot of good things in that bears game, stepping into the pocket and delivering accurately. on most of his non first drive throws. But the fact is is that even though brunell cant throw the long ball that well he does a lot of other things better then patrick ramsey including the most important thing, I think, and that is mobility. brunell when healthy can move around the pocket and deliver much more short and medium range passes accurately. When patrick misses he usually misses big and that can kill us in a clutch situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wilbur58z Posted September 13, 2005 Share Posted September 13, 2005 No, actually that is statistical fact "saying" that in Regular Season games where Ramsey and/or Brunell have started during the Joe Gibbs regime, it's been a landslide in favor of Ramsey in terms of success. Gibbs, and anyone else, can choose to ignore statistical fact, but it won't change the accuracy of it. Time will determine whether Gibbs accurately saw criteria which trumped the statistical performance of those QBs in his system to date. Perhaps that will be the case, but it sure hasn't been if past indicators are accurate predictors of future performance. Statistics are meaningless without context. **Read** this thread for the context. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.