AJ_Skins Posted September 28, 2005 Author Share Posted September 28, 2005 AJ, if you're sick of bickering with someone you think is immature...tackle this my above post. You say Ramsey only got 3 drives (one quarter), but Gibbs says the staff is continually evaluating the personnel...any remarks? The fact that they are constantly evaluating personnel doesn't explain the decisions. With Ramsey, seriously...I don't know why it's so hard for people to get this through their heads...it's not just about the merits/demerits of Ramsey's play...it's about Ramsey's play in comparison to the alternatives...it seems utterly impossible to me that any kind of evaluation could make you think going back to Brunell is a good idea. Maybe they just put WAY too much weight on pratice, Brunell looks good in practice, and they don't take into account the huge difference when there are live bullets flying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrunellSuperbowl Posted September 28, 2005 Share Posted September 28, 2005 Look at it this wayWould you feel comfortable in the pocket if you had a coach who didnt believe in protecting the QB Spurrier tried to run a college O in the NFL and ontop of that he tried to replace Stephen Davis with Trung Canidate so... no O Line No RB who is gonna succeed with that? Ramsey sucked. How come as soon as Hassleback came in he was protected? Maybe because he gets rid of the ball quicker? Spurrier was not a good coach in the NFL. But it has nothing to do with his offensive scheme. He ran a offensive scheme simular to what passing teams do in the NFL. He sucked because he had no idea how to pick players. He brought in terrible GATORS and did not even pay attension to the draft when we drafted Ramsey. AS SOON AS WE GOT RAMSEY HE KNEW ONE THING. HE WANTED TO TRADE HIM BECAUSE HE SUCKS Ramsey is a coach killer. He will make every coach look bad that he plays for. He will show flashes of being a okay QB. And then suck. Then the coach will get blamed for not bringing out the good in him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted September 28, 2005 Share Posted September 28, 2005 The fact that they are constantly evaluating personnel doesn't explain the decisions. With Ramsey, seriously...I don't know why it's so hard for people to get this through their heads...it's not just about the merits/demerits of Ramsey's play...it's about Ramsey's play in comparison to the alternatives...it seems utterly impossible to me that any kind of evaluation could make you think going back to Brunell is a good idea. Maybe they just put WAY too much weight on pratice, Brunell looks good inpractice, and they don't take into account the huge difference when there are live bullets flying. Maybe Gibbs sees Ramsey continue to struggle with accuracy. Maybe he sees that Brunell has, at least temporarily, regained his arm strength. And maybe these two facts have put the two QBs on an even playing field physically. If that's the case, why not play the proven, more mobile, more careful QB? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJ_Skins Posted September 28, 2005 Author Share Posted September 28, 2005 Ramsey sucked. How come as soon as Hassleback came in he was protected? Maybe because he gets rid of the ball quicker? Spurrier was not a good coach in the NFL. But it has nothing to do with his offensive scheme. He ran a offensive scheme simular to what passing teams do in the NFL. He sucked because he had no idea how to pick players. He brought in terrible GATORS and did not even pay attension to the draft when we drafted Ramsey. AS SOON AS WE GOT RAMSEY HE KNEW ONE THING. HE WANTED TO TRADE HIM BECAUSE HE SUCKSRamsey is a coach killer. He will make every coach look bad that he plays for. He will show flashes of being a okay QB. And then suck. Then the coach will get blamed for not bringing out the good in him Maybe I need to put it in your language... HOW OLD R U? In retrospect, it's too bad Gibbs didn't trade Ramsey right off the bat, because the Dolphins were offering us a first round pick. Now if they trade him, they'll be lucky to get a third. All that loss, and he's barely seen the field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrunellSuperbowl Posted September 28, 2005 Share Posted September 28, 2005 The fact that they are constantly evaluating personnel doesn't explain the decisions. With Ramsey, seriously...I don't know why it's so hard for people to get this through their heads...it's not just about the merits/demerits of Ramsey's play...it's about Ramsey's play in comparison to the alternatives...it seems utterly impossible to me that any kind of evaluation could make you think going back to Brunell is a good idea. Maybe they just put WAY too much weight on pratice, Brunell looks good inpractice, and they don't take into account the huge difference when there are live bullets flying. Gibbs is fading out Arrington too right? LOL . Gibbs really is handling that D HUH. GET OUT OF HERE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrunellSuperbowl Posted September 28, 2005 Share Posted September 28, 2005 Maybe I need to put it in your language...HOW OLD R U? The fact that they are constantly evaluating personnel doesn't explain the decisions. With Ramsey, seriously...I don't know why it's so hard for people to get this through their heads...it's not just about the merits/demerits of Ramsey's play...it's about Ramsey's play in comparison to the alternatives...it seems utterly impossible to me that any kind of evaluation could make you think going back to Brunell is a good idea. Maybe they just put WAY too much weight on pratice, Brunell looks good in practice, and they don't take into account the huge difference when there are live bullets flying. A AGE YOU WANT TO BE. I SEE you are 30? AND THIS IS REALLY MAKING YOU REAL DEPRESSED. NO GIRL. You should go outside. Life is not all doom and gloom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted September 28, 2005 Share Posted September 28, 2005 A AGE YOU WANT TO BE. I SEE you are 30? AND THIS IS REALLY MAKING YOU REAL DEPRESSED. NO GIRL. You should go outside. Life is not all doom and gloom Alright...just because the dude likes Ramsey over Brunell doesn't mean that he's some dork who doesn't venture outside. You're posting to the message board at 8:45 too... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Posted September 28, 2005 Share Posted September 28, 2005 Again, I must stress, this "brunellsuperTROLL" needs to settle the hell down. Because for all his talk about what people do on the outside world, he has to realize that if he talked this way to someone who was being civil in the REAL WORLD, he'd get his **** rolled on, right? Kinda makes me wish I were still in Silver Spring. (and for the millionth time, until Hasselbeck came in, Steve refused to put in hot reads, change the blocking schemes or techniques or do shorter routes. THAT is why the ball got out quicker.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJ_Skins Posted September 28, 2005 Author Share Posted September 28, 2005 Seriously, this kid is like 12... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TLusby Posted September 28, 2005 Share Posted September 28, 2005 Whatever is going on here, I hope that Coach Gibbs and the rest of the staff will reconsider what seems to be the silent death sentence they've passed on these two guys. They may need some work, but they deserve better. They at least deserve a shot. Let the coaches coach! Good guys do not always finish first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted September 28, 2005 Share Posted September 28, 2005 Let the coaches coach! Good guys do not always finish first. That's the thing...Brunell is Ramsey in 8 years...he's a good guy too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hands11 Posted September 28, 2005 Share Posted September 28, 2005 I don't know...the more I see of this, the more I think it's some kind of a battle of wills. Both of them were kind of entrenched before Gibbs got here, and maybe he doesn't feel like they're "getting with the program" the way he wants them too. If that's the case you don't play a passive-aggressive game with them, benching them on false pretenses and then waiting for them to figure it out on their own. You bring them in, sit them down face -to-face and tell them, "I need you to get with the program". Regardless of how anyone has played, there was just something wrong about the way Gibbs handled Ramsey, the way he made that move. Something about it just seemed....cowardly. Now that LaVar is apparently right there in the same situation, I think there is definitely something else going on in both cases. I think your dead wrong and are reading this differently then how its happening. Ramsey was given a chance to correct his mistakes. He was making some progress but it was at a snails pace. Things he needed fixed were highschool mistakes. Not looking off recievers. Not being able to put an arc on the ball. Not being able to move in the pocket. Did you see Eli Payton this last game ? You dont have to run around, just move in the right direction to avoid the rush. Ramsey never got that. If he didnt show something special, he was done by the bye anyway. That injury just gave Brunell a chance earlier then expected. And now you see what Gibbs was seeing. Brunell can still run. He still has a strong enough arm to get it down field. He has an arc on his ball. He can avoid a sack. And he know how to win. Hes a 3 time pro bowler and he can run the offense better. Just wait till you get back on the field. No teams have to defend against the bomb and the 25 yard scramble. Now we get Portis and Coley going. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCS Posted September 28, 2005 Share Posted September 28, 2005 Whoa. I clicked on this thread and found myelf on the playground. You guys going to go " oh yeah?" too in this? Maybe you'll call each other more names and be all tough and stuff as well. Gee. Way to raise the bar here guys. Perhaps you can simply ignore the poster in question, or if responding don't go down to that level. Nothing quite as original as throwing sand at each other, but it could work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrunellSuperbowl Posted September 28, 2005 Share Posted September 28, 2005 he is going outside i will go outside. He has asked me my age 20 times when it is right in my profile. It shows how he is the troll. THIS GUY IS 12 BLABLABLA . He is only on this message board to bring down Skins fans. Gibbs does not like Arrington. No skins that is 30 would say crap like this. Gibbs played John Riggins and Dexter Manley. Why would he use personal relationships to play the best players? He is not a skins fan. Do not pretend to be Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrockster21 Posted September 28, 2005 Share Posted September 28, 2005 "Anti-skins propaganda"...lol. Like I said, I just want to understand what's going on here. I thought we were allowed discussions on a message board. If it pisses you off, maybe it's because it has the ring of truth to it...I fully admit this is speculation, though. AJ, if it was one post, yes, it would be a discussion. But you continue to post about how f-ed up Ramsey was treated and everything else negative about the Redskins you can possibly make up. Once you've been doing it for so long, yes, it becomes propaganda. So give it a rest already, alright?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrockster21 Posted September 28, 2005 Share Posted September 28, 2005 If he can succeed elsewhere, why can't he succeed here? The only possible explanation under that scenario is that Gibbs has it in for him, and he won't get a shot here no matter what. Which is exactly what I said I suspected in the original post. I don't understand why you keep saying Ramsey never got a shot here! He had his shot at the end of last season, and played mediocre. He started every game in the preseason, and looked the same as he always has. He started week one, and looked the same as he always has. Ramsey has had every opportunity in the world to improve, but he hasn't. I don't understand why you refuse to acknowledge this?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Posted September 28, 2005 Share Posted September 28, 2005 I don't understand why you keep saying Ramsey never got a shot here! He had his shot at the end of last season, and played mediocre. He started every game in the preseason, and looked the same as he always has. He started week one, and looked the same as he always has. Ramsey has had every opportunity in the world to improve, but he hasn't. I don't understand why you refuse to acknowledge this?? I firmly disagree. He started mediocre and then elevated his play to good(part of that due to opening up the offense.) And FAR better than Brunell has been here, the last 5 minutes notwithstanding. I just think that's a cop-out. Rather than saying some things didn't improve or there was a key flaw, too many people want to say "there's been no improvement in 4 years," "he sucks," "he was mediocre last year." If we get QB play like we got in the last 5 games last year, we're a playoff team FOR SURE(assuming our O-line and run game is in order.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrunellSuperbowl Posted September 28, 2005 Share Posted September 28, 2005 I don't understand why you keep saying Ramsey never got a shot here! He had his shot at the end of last season, and played mediocre. He started every game in the preseason, and looked the same as he always has. He started week one, and looked the same as he always has. Ramsey has had every opportunity in the world to improve, but he hasn't. I don't understand why you refuse to acknowledge this?? he is not a Redskins fan. He is one of many trolls like GHOST whatever among others who came when Snyder bought the team .There is a lot of skins hate because of Snyder. I am not sure why but it is weird and seems like there is something else behind it. They call radio stations and post on message boards pretending to be Redskins fans. I am 20 and only remember the last 2 years of Gibbs. How can some on who is 30 and rememebers the 80s not think Gibbs does not play the best guys who thinks give the team the best chance of winning? This AJ SKINS guy is a troll. When we drafted Cambell he said we drafted him because he wears 17 and is black. GET A LIFE MAN. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJ_Skins Posted September 28, 2005 Author Share Posted September 28, 2005 Let me explain this a little more clearly. I was very optimistic before last season. Gibbs was back. I had no opinion one way or another about the QB position. Based on his history, I thought Brunell would be solid. This year, I was optimistic because Gibbs said he was going to change the offense, got some receivers to go with it, and was going to play Ramsey. You know who ruined my optimism and made me "depressed" both times? MARK BRUNELL. The last 5 minutes of the Cowboys game does not wipe out the first 55 as if they never happened. Up until the end, that game was the lowest point of my 23+ years as a Redskins fan. When those plays happened to turn it around, I just got back to even keel-- not optimism. Sorry if that doesn't suit you. It was a great win in terms of the Redskins/Cowboys rivalry. I won't take anything away from that-- but in terms of the big picture for the season, there was much more bad in that game than good. Even the coaches admit that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrockster21 Posted September 28, 2005 Share Posted September 28, 2005 9 games. Brunell stunk it up for 9 games. Worse than Ramsey has EVER played in a Redskins uniform. Ramsey got one quarter. I just don't buy it. I've said this before, and I'll say it again. Brunell didn't shock the world in his Redskins' debut, but he didn't lose the game, either. Against the Giants, the ball took a lot of New York bounces. Brunell got injured, and Ramsey came in. What did Ramsey do? He threw 3 interceptions. 3. We turned the ball over 7 times in that game, and were still in a position to win. If Ramsey is this wonderkid that you continue to make him out to be, shouldn't we have won that game? And don't you think that had something to do with the subsequent 7 games that Brunell started? I mean, if Ramsey came in and absolutely torched the Giants to bring us back and win, who knows what could have been. But he stunk it up. I think the Giants game is where it all started for Ramsey; that was his best opportunity. If he plays well, maybe Gibbs sits Brunell for a few more games or maybe he yanks Brunell a few games earlier than he did. Who knows? But I hate hearing about how Brunell stunk it up for 9 games without hearing about the piss-poor job Ramsey did in relief. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrunellSuperbowl Posted September 28, 2005 Share Posted September 28, 2005 I firmly disagree. He started mediocre and then elevated his play to good(part of that due to opening up the offense.)And FAR better than Brunell has been here, the last 5 minutes notwithstanding. I just think that's a cop-out. Rather than saying some things didn't improve or there was a key flaw, too many people want to say "there's been no improvement in 4 years," "he sucks," "he was mediocre last year." If we get QB play like we got in the last 5 games last year, we're a playoff team FOR SURE(assuming our O-line and run game is in order.) all you do is make up stuff to make yourself look better. first of all he played in 7 games. He played the Giants and Bengals games for basically the whole game. He lost both games by himself becuase of bone head plays. He lost the Eagles game by himself. He did not score 13 points in either the first Eagles game or the Steelers game. He did not in both of those games. He played well in 2 games. Vs the Giants and Vikings at the end of the year both at home. Brunell played well in 1. Vs the Cowboys last year. 2-1 . BIG WHOOP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hands11 Posted September 28, 2005 Share Posted September 28, 2005 Uh huh...one simple question...why did Brunell get 9 games last year and Ramsey only got one quarter? You actually need ths posted again ? It wasnt all Brunell, it was an outdated offense. In his first year back, Gibbs trusted an injured Brunell more then Ramsey. Gibbs played the experienced player. Did I agree for maybe 3-4 games, yes. Did he ride him to long, yes. Call it a rookie hall of fame mistake BUT. http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/1032 3-time Pro Bowler: 1996, 1997, 1999 Seasons among the league's top 10 Pass attempts: 1996-2, 2000-10 Completions: 1996-2, 2000-9t Passing yards: 1996-1, 1997-9, 2000-8 Passing TDs: 1996-8, 2000-10t Adjusted yards per pass: 1996-6, 1997-4, 1998-8, 1999-10, 2001-8, 2002-10 Among the league's all-time top 50 Pass attempts: 35 Completions: 30 Passing yards: 40 and P Ramsey Patrick Ramsey never finished in the top 10 in any major category. Patrick Ramsey is not in the all-time top 50 in any major category. Postseason data None available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tr1 Posted September 28, 2005 Share Posted September 28, 2005 We're seeing a pattern alright, AJ. You have no respect for a Hall of Fame coach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrockster21 Posted September 28, 2005 Share Posted September 28, 2005 Let me explain this a little more clearly. I was very optimistic before last season. Gibbs was back. I had no opinion one way or another about the QB position. Based on his history, I thought Brunell would be solid. This year, I was optimistic because Gibbs said he was going to change the offense, got some receivers to go with it, and was going to play Ramsey. You know who ruined my optimism and made me "depressed" both times? MARK BRUNELL. The last 5 minutes of the Cowboys game does not wipe out the first 55 as if they never happened. Up until the end, that game was the lowest point of my 23+ years as a Redskins fan. When those plays happened to turn it around, I just got back to even keel-- not optimism. Sorry if that doesn't suit you. It was a great win in terms of the Redskins/Cowboys rivalry. I won't take anything away from that-- but in terms of the big picture for the season, there was much more bad in that game than good. Even the coaches admit that. So why not give Brunell a couple more games? Let's see how he does against Seattle. If he stinks it up again, then you can start calling for his head, okay? At the moment, we are 2-0 and on top of the NFC East. I for one like that a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hail2skins Posted September 28, 2005 Share Posted September 28, 2005 Ghost, I don't know. I don't remember much about the Giants and SF games....we scored 31 and 26 so I guess the offense was decent. We still looked like ish for the most part in the Dallas game there and in the Philly game here.....don't know whether that was still due to conservative playcalling or what. The Vikings game was the only one I remember thinking....."God, if the offense had looked this way all year....." Anyway, we'll see what happens the next few games. Cross your fingers that Monday night was a wake-up call for the offense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.