Gibbs's Apparent Overall Team Philosophy, and Why it's Wrong

[AJ_Skins]

I realize this is a controversial way to phrase it, and quite frankly, it's based more on the explanation given by those here trying to defend the Brunell decision than Gibbs's own statements, but there is a point to be made here.

It has been said, and one could assume there is some truth to it, that Gibbs's reasoning in benching Ramsey in favor of Brunell is about turnovers. Even though Brunell turned the ball over every bit as much as Ramsey did last year, let's assume for the sake of argument that Brunell will not turn it over this year.

In this scenario, it is said that because the team has a strong defense and potentially strong running game, it is worth sacrificing production in the passing game for safety, and fewer mistakes, leaving it up to the defense to hold opposing teams under 21 points, and leaving it to special teams to win the field position battle, keeping the game close and scoring just enough to win it in the fourth quarter.

The most obvious problem with this assessment is that it was tried last year, and it failed. Again, the hoped-for difference here is that Brunell will not turn the ball over the way he did last year, will have slightly better production in the passing game, and that will be enough to change the margins from losses to wins.

The problem I have with it is that it misses an entirely different approach that could (and should) be taken using the same components, in light of the fact that this is the MODERN NFL, not the NFL of 10-20 years ago.

In Brunell you have a QB who MAY be less mistake-prone than Ramsey IF he is a totally different QB from what he was last year. In Ramsey you have a QB who is SUPPOSEDLY more likely to turn the ball over, but also holds out the promise of far greater production in the passing game.

The reason why the play-it-safe approach is wrong is this: having a strong defense should not be a reason to fear turnovers at all costs. On the contrary, it should be a reason to fear them less. With a defense as stifling as ours was last year, you have an eraser which can provide cover for tunrovers, and keep them from turning into points. What that means is that you can AFFORD to take a few more chances downfield on lower-percentage plays, because your defense can come back and play clean-up. With the running game we are likely to have, which will draw a lot of defenders up to the line, those opportunities downfield wil be there, if you have a QB and WRs who can take advantage of them. We have the receivers, and we HAD the QB until Gibbs's inexplicable decision on Monday.

Gibbs has obviously acknowledged the fact that defenses have become far more aggressive than they were before he left coaching. The flip side to that is that offenses have had to become more agressive, because the only way to slow down that agression on the defensive side of the ball is to make them pay when they blitz. The grind-it-out approach no longer works, because you will simply grind to a halt under the pressure of 7- or 8-man run blitzes.

If the assumptions about why Gibbs made the decision are correct, then in my opinion his logic is flawed, and based on outdated thinking. What we have in our defense is an insurance policy that should allow us more freedom on offense, including enough freedom to tolerate a few poor throws by Ramsey, in light of the fact that he can outproduce in one quarter what Brunell can do in three.

We are attacking other teams on defense, and then curling up into a ball and playing dead on offense, as if begging the opposing team not to hurt us. We saw where it led last year. Gibbs claimed in the offseason he was going to change. Unless or until Brunell shows he can still throw the ball, and when I say that I mean COMPLETE passes to WRs down the field, the decison to put him in instead of Ramsey is a repudiation of what he claimed he was going to do, and a monumental error in judgement, even IF Brunell has a few less turnover, which remains to be seen.

[SamSneed36]

Well your argument falls apart in the first few paragraphs. Ramsey couldnt hit a single long ball in the preseason. He under threw everyone. Brunell on the other hand, Mr Noodle arm last year, hit several perfect bombs such as to Farris and off A Browns face. Also the long one to A Brown in the Pitt game off his hands. And dont tell me it was because he was playing against the second team D, because the recievers were well covered, a perfect pass is a perfect pass and the ball placement has zilch to do with who is covering

[RedskinDan0557]

How did the Raven's win the Superbowl a couple of years ago?

:dallasuck

[IronMike]

It does not matter if Gibbs starts Ramsey or Brunell. The problem is quite simple:

Gibbs is playing not to lose, instead of playing to win.

We all know what happens when you play not to lose.

:doh:

[redman]

Even though Brunell turned the ball over every bit as much as Ramsey did last year, . . .

Here's where you lost me. Your premise is wrong. Someone indicated that while Brunell had something like 11 fumbles and INT's during his 10 starts, Ramsey had around 18.

Also, Brunell was injured last year and looks better now. Ramsey was healthy then and is healthy now, and looks exactly the same. What's his excuse?

[Samuels]

AMEN... And what happened to this redesigned offense to stretch the field it did'nt last 1 game. Now were back to keep every game close where either team could win. We have become pathetic has a franchise and a true laughingstock.

I just want to hear the excuses for Brunell come Monday or how courageous he was with those monster hits he'll take to deliever downfield.

[AJ_Skins]

How did the Raven's win the Superbowl a couple of years ago?

:dallasuck

The Ravens' Qbs that year did not perform nearly as poorly as Brunell has. Go look at the stats if you want. They were able to hit somebody over the top (Shannon Sharpe usually) when they needed to. Brunell has not yet shown an ability to do that. What's more, they had a sturdy, bruising power runner in Jamal Lewis, not an elusive smaller back like Portis.

[ironmic]

It does not matter if Gibbs starts Ramsey or Brunell. The problem is quite simple:

Gibbs is playing not to lose, instead of playing to win.

We all know what happens when you play not to lose.

:doh:

i think that will change quickly...iDO believe we only opened the playbook up to page 2 for the bears we will be on chapter 24 by the time monday nite is over. :helmet: :logo: :2cents:

[AJ_Skins]

Well your argument falls apart in the first few paragraphs. Ramsey couldnt hit a single long ball in the preseason. He under threw everyone. Brunell on the other hand, Mr Noodle arm last year, hit several perfect bombs such as to Farris and off A Browns face. Also the long one to A Brown in the Pitt game off his hands. And dont tell me it was because he was playing against the second team D, because the recievers were well covered, a perfect pass is a perfect pass and the ball placement has zilch to do with who is covering

Nah...first of all, preseason means nothing. It never does. Look at what happens in live games. Ramsey had over 100 yards in about 1.5 quarters. Brunell had 70 over the whole rest of the game.

[Samuels]

I believe if you include 2 games where Ramsey did'nt even start he had 11ints and 1 fumble. Brunell turned the ball over more but he can manage the game with our redesigned WCO better,right? LMFAO did anybody watch this team last year it was unbearable till PR came in.

[AJ_Skins]

Here's where you lost me. Your premise is wrong. Someone indicated that while Brunell had something like 11 fumbles and INT's during his 10 starts, Ramsey had around 18.

Also, Brunell was injured last year and looks better now. Ramsey was healthy then and is healthy now, and looks exactly the same. What's his excuse?

That's not true at all. I don't have them on hand, but the numbers are here on the board somewhere, I'm sure. I know that Ramsey had 11 INTs (three of which were in the Giants game and can almost be forgotten) and Brunell had 6. Brunell had three fumbles returned for TDs by the opposing defense, which is probably the most crushing and avoidable kind of turnover there is, and I'm not sure how many more that were lost.

[herrmag]

Nah...first of all, preseason means nothing. It never does. Look at what happens in live games. Ramsey had over 100 yards in about 1.5 quarters. Brunell had 70 over the whole rest of the game.

Yes, and let's ignore practice too (Insert A.I. quote).

[chet06]

Well your argument falls apart in the first few paragraphs. Ramsey couldnt hit a single long ball in the preseason. He under threw everyone. Brunell on the other hand, Mr Noodle arm last year, hit several perfect bombs such as to Farris and off A Browns face. Also the long one to A Brown in the Pitt game off his hands. And dont tell me it was because he was playing against the second team D, because the recievers were well covered, a perfect pass is a perfect pass and the ball placement has zilch to do with who is covering

Who cares about the damn preseason..It is meant for warm up. If the preseason mattered it would be the regular season. I can believe everyone on this board is so impatient that they want ramsey to complete 60 yard bombs fro the OTAs.

This is crazy. Boonell had 8 games last year and he sucked.

[SamSneed36]

AMEN... And what happened to this redesigned offense to stretch the field it did'nt last 1 game. Now were back to keep every game close where either team could win. We have become pathetic has a franchise and a true laughingstock.

I just want to hear the excuses for Brunell come Monday or how courageous he was with those monster hits he'll take to deliever downfield.

We took a few shots and deffinatly were throwing longer passes. Im sorry guys, we dont have T.O. and McNabb or Chad Johnson or Holt or Harrison. We arent an offensive powerhouse that is gonna break 60 yard TD plays all the time. We had a very solid offensive showing last week except for stalling in the redzone. That was the only real problem. We put togeather some very solid drives, we had a long pass to Moss that would have been complete if they hadnt committed a pass interference, and the 15 yard pass Moss turned into a 50 yarder, the 23 yard pass to cooley, a 20 or so yarder to Royal that was just out of reach. Not bad against a supposedly good Bears D. Also, it was week one. Give it a lil time

[Tulane Skins Fan]

The Ravens' Qbs that year did not perform nearly as poorly as Brunell has. Go look at the stats if you want. They were able to hit somebody over the top (Shannon Sharpe usually) when they needed to. Brunell has not yet shown an ability to do that. What's more, they had a sturdy, bruising power runner in Jamal Lewis, not an elusive smaller back like Portis.

they actually had jamal lewis AND priest holmes. do we have portis and LT?

[SamSneed36]

Who cares about the damn preseason..It is meant for warm up. If the preseason mattered it would be the regular season. I can believe everyone on this board is so impatient that they want ramsey to complete 60 yard bombs fro the OTAs.

This is crazy. Boonell had 8 games last year and he sucked.

When you are tryin to show you are the starter and that you have improved the preseason is your shot. If he wasnt doing his best then he doesnt deserve the job.

Im tried of everyone citing last year as far as Brunell goes. His main knock was arm strength. Evidently he was injured, and OBVIOUSLY his arm is a lot stronger based on yes, the preseason. Just because it is preseason doesnt mean his arm wasnt looking a whole lot better.

If the preseason is just practice why couldnt ramsey do better. If it doesnt mean anything at all, how do the coaches know who to cut to get down to the 53 man roster. Use some common sense man

[ntotoro]

In Brunell you have a QB who MAY be less mistake-prone than Ramsey IF he is a totally different QB from what he was last year. In Ramsey you have a QB who is SUPPOSEDLY more likely to turn the ball over, but also holds out the promise of far greater production in the passing game.

Ramsey has the stronger arm. That's a given. Brunell, even at his peak, has never been known to have a cannon for an arm.

Question...

As strong as Ramsey's arm is, how often does he actually connect with a WR when throwing the bombs? What percentage of the time does he connect versus an incompletion or an interception? Having an arm doesn't mean a whole lot otherwise.

[SamSneed36]

Nah...first of all, preseason means nothing. It never does. Look at what happens in live games. Ramsey had over 100 yards in about 1.5 quarters. Brunell had 70 over the whole rest of the game.

Yea and we got zero points with Ramsey and three drives deep into the redzone with Brunell. Three turnovers with Ramsey, zero with Brunell. Ramsey had one 50 or 60 yard pass to Moss, 90% of which was all Mosses doing. Not like it was some Peyton Manning floater just over the outside shoulder right into the bread basket.

[AJ_Skins]

We took a few shots and deffinatly were throwing longer passes. Im sorry guys, we dont have T.O. and McNabb or Chad Johnson or Holt or Harrison. We arent an offensive powerhouse that is gonna break 60 yard TD plays all the time. We had a very solid offensive showing last week except for stalling in the redzone. That was the only real problem. We put togeather some very solid drives, we had a long pass to Moss that would have been complete if they hadnt committed a pass interference, and the 15 yard pass Moss turned into a 50 yarder, the 23 yard pass to cooley, a 20 or so yarder to Royal that was just out of reach. Not bad against a supposedly good Bears D. Also, it was week one. Give it a lil time

We have extremely fast receivers. If you have a QB with a strong arm, and they get on the same page, they should be able to torch secondaries on a fairly regular basis if everybody gets in sync. That was the hope we had. Now the hope is dead.

[ntotoro]

Nah...first of all, preseason means nothing. It never does. Look at what happens in live games. Ramsey had over 100 yards in about 1.5 quarters. Brunell had 70 over the whole rest of the game.

52 yards of Ramsey's total was one pass to Moss, the YAC of which being about 40.

[SoCalSkins]

Ramsey has the stronger arm. That's a given. Brunell, even at his peak, has never been known to have a cannon for an arm.

Question...

As strong as Ramsey's arm is, how often does he actually connect with a WR when throwing downfield? What percentage of the time does he connect versus an incompletion or an interception? Having an arm doesn't mean a whole lot otherwise.

He was pretty good on 3rd and long against the Bears. Scott was far worse on long throws.

[jimster]

I believe if you include 2 games where Ramsey did'nt even start he had 11ints and 1 fumble. Brunell turned the ball over more but he can manage the game with our redesigned WCO better,right? LMFAO did anybody watch this team last year it was unbearable till PR came in.

actually he had 6 fumbles but only lost one, but still a fumble.

In addition, he would have had about 8 int's in the Cincy game alone had their DB's been able to catch.

....not to pile on.

[ntotoro]

He was pretty good on 3rd and long against the Bears. Scott was far worse on long throws.

I'm talking the long throws. You know, the ones that everyone says his arm is good for, not the 10-15 yard jobs that any Pro-level QB can throw. Brunell didn't have any plays go downfield. Moss wasn't even on the field in the second half (cramps, IIRC).

[denverdan]

In this scenario, it is said that because the team has a strong defense and potentially strong running game, it is worth sacrificing production in the passing game for safety, and fewer mistakes, leaving it up to the defense to hold opposing teams under 21 points, and leaving it to special teams to win the field position battle, keeping the game close and scoring just enough to win it in the fourth quarter.

The problem I have with it is that it misses an entirely different approach that could (and should) be taken using the same components, in light of the fact that this is the MODERN NFL, not the NFL of 10-20 years ago.

Gibbs has obviously acknowledged the fact that defenses have become far more aggressive than they were before he left coaching. The flip side to that is that offenses have had to become more agressive, because the only way to slow down that agression on the defensive side of the ball is to make them pay when they blitz. The grind-it-out approach no longer works, because you will simply grind to a halt under the pressure of 7- or 8-man run blitzes.

If the assumptions about why Gibbs made the decision are correct, then in my opinion his logic is flawed, and based on outdated thinking.

How many games did the Steelers win last year useing the grind-it-out, low risk passing, field position approach? Most team use it. Gibbs teams have always used this approach in conjunction with play action that will burn a D-fense who is too aggressive, last year we didn't have the recievers to make it work, this has been addressed. Lets give it more than one game shall we.

[AJ_Skins]

Ramsey has the stronger arm. That's a given. Brunell, even at his peak, has never been known to have a cannon for an arm.

Question...

As strong as Ramsey's arm is, how often does he actually connect with a WR when throwing downfield? What percentage of the time does he connect versus an incompletion or an interception? Having an arm doesn't mean a whole lot otherwise.

The stats to look at there are YPC and Completion PCT. Last year, the YPC were going to be low no matter who was in there, because those are the plays Gibbs was calling. Ramsey's Completeion PCT was 65%, Brunell's was 48%. To see what Ramsey can do on deep throws, you'd have to go back to Spurrier. I remember him hooking up with Coles downfield quite a bit, but the numbers there will be skewed also because Spurrier's philosophy was throw deep no matter what, don't protect and don't run the ball.