supersmartbrunell5 Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 You don't trade and get a 1st round pick to draft a QB and have him serve as your number 3 guy for 2 straight years. You also don't field a roster for long with 2 1st round draft picks sitting behind a pricey (washed-up I might add) veteran. It's not economically resonsible in the salary cap era, hence our lack of depth at several other positions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MidPennSkin Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 Ramsey will probably want to look around and see if he can get a trade that will let him have a good chance to start somewhere. If he can find one, we should let him go, if the trade is acceptable, say a 3rd rounder or better. If it's a 4th or worse, we probably should keep him because a good backup QB is worth more than that - what if Brunell is injured and his season is over? We can't go into the what should be a playoff season with only one untested rookie QB. It's not obvious that Ramsey can find a team that will give him a good chance to start, however. Look at what happened to Gardner. He was the 15th pick overall and had 4 years with us as a starter, but all we got for him was a 6th. Then, at Carolina, he couldn't beat out their 3rd WR, so they let him go. Now he's with Green Bay, and might be their 3rd WR next year if he's lucky. With a new HC, who knows? Here's an article about his prospects for the future, which don't look all that great. Ramsey could turn out the same way, so his best bet might be to stick around here and hope to get some playing time to improve his stats here. Then next year he would be an UFA, and could go with the highest bidder. I guess what I'm trying to say is, it may be in both the team's and Ramsey's best interest for him to stay a Redskin next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shallyshal Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 It's time to move on. He understandably won't want to be the number three and that's what it appears he would be here. A three-way open competition hurts us because it means three guys are splitting snaps while learning a new offense. agreed. i am still a big ramsey fan, but he will need to prove himself elsewhere. we to get what we can for him and move on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shallyshal Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 I doubt he'd be willing to back up again at this point, the guy wants a career of his own agreed. he won't get it here. but he does still have value Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shallyshal Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 Campbell has more big game expierence then Ramsey does. Campbell was in the SCC and lead his team undefeated in big games. Ramsey has had no big games in college or pros. not to be confrontational, but campbell really played poorly until his senior year when he was surrounded by all star talent. ramsey started for 3 years for a bad team that played lesser schools, but was still in a pro style offense. he has a lot of potential but has been hampered by playing for spurrier and getting hammered. i thinkhe needs a change of venue badly. after that, it is up to him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shallyshal Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 He's gone after this year no matter what so you might as well get something for him when you can especially when you gave away a 3rd and 4th rounder to move up a year and draft another QB. Besides players notice things like how you treat a player like Ramsey. you are right about getting something for ramsey. but in addition to the way players note how ramsey is treated, they also note how well a qb plays. how well he seems to see the field. how long he takes to get rid of the ball.. it has been chewed on forever how ramsey does not seem to see the field well and holds the ball way too long... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-Prime Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 You need to balance out the worth.. On one hand you have a pro level QB with knowledge of the system who could come in, in a pinch and you'd not see a terrible drop off. What is that worth? To me? nothing short of a second round pick. If we can't get that, then we keep him imo. Patrick Ramsey signed a contract and he'll be paid in accordance with that contract. It's not at all unfair keeping him here.. I once felt as some of you do, but realizing he has no future here, I'd like to get whatever I can out of him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJ_Skins Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 I think the team is in a bind. They have to know that they can't depend on Brunell at this stage of his career, and betting on Campbell would be a huge gamble. I don't think they're oblivious to these things. The team has messed up with Ramey, plain and simple. His development has been stunted, and his relationship with the team has been damaged, but they need him. The team went to the second round of the playoffs last year, and taking steps that you have reason to believe could create a significant step backward from the progress made last year can't be an option. They need somebody else substantial at QB besides just Brunell and Campbell if they want to be serious about next year. To me it's a no-brainer to just keep Ramsey and have an open competition for the starting job. I'm not aware of any free agent QBs who are available and would be a major upgrade over Ramsey, but maybe there is somebody. If so, they could consider trading Ramsey and signing that player. Otherwise, they've got to keep him. If there was a firmly entrenched starter and the team was set that would be one thing, but you've got one QB clearly on the tail end of his career, and another who hasn't taken a snap in a regular season game. You've got to stock the position as much as possible and let the best man win. But then I try think sanely, and this team doesn't have a great track record with being sane. Neither do a lot of its fans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akorn22 Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 Personally, i think that the only thing having to do with Ramsey that could make us better is to start him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ntotoro Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 I think the team is in a bind. They have to know that they can't depend on Brunell at this stage of his career, and betting on Campbell would be a huge gamble. I don't think they're oblivious to these things. The team has messed up with Ramey, plain and simple. His development has been stunted, and his relationship with the team has been damaged, but they need him. Coach Gibbs, the end of last season, said he'd be comfortable putting Campbell into a game. When are you finally going to accept the team doesn't need Ramsey anywhere near as much as you think they do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmw2301 Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 Campbell is the future, he's got to get some playing time to get any better. If we can get a good pick or a good player for Ramsey we need to let him go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeeZee Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 I've heard much talk about Patrick Ramsey being traded to upgrade the defense but I'm seriously wondering if people have really thought this out. I won't say Ramsey is the greatest Quarter back out there but he's arguably atleast a 6 or 7 on a scale of one to ten in overall ability. In other words he's a decent backup. It's my opinion that Brunnel will sit out somewhere around 4 games next season due to injury and I'm wondering if we really want to be in a scenario where we have to depend on Campbell to see us through it especially if the games have serious playoff potential. Improved Defense or not I wouldn't want the team to be put into this situation. I'm basically saying Patrick Ramsey is good insurance in an injury type scenario. I say we convince Ramsey to stay. Agree? Disagree? Ramsey is outta here. He's an interception machine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Tater Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 Given that it is not certain that our starter will go down and even if he does, another backup option may be good enough, I think it depends on how risk-averse the coaching staff is and how much confidence they have in selecting and preparing other backup options. My own thinking is that we'd want no less than a third (or maybe part of a package that lands someone like Abraham) and if we don't get it, PR stays. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJ_Skins Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 Coach Gibbs, the end of last season, said he'd be comfortable putting Campbell into a game. When are you finally going to accept the team doesn't need Ramsey anywhere near as much as you think they do. I think Coach Gibbs made those comments in light of the fact that Ramsey had let it be known he wants to be traded. I think there was a little wishful thinking involved, trying to make the best of a bad situation. All you have to do is look at the article they put up on the website the other day about Campbell. The fact that they included a direct quote of Gruden's assessment that Campbell needs three years before he'll be ready to play is a clear sign that there is not unambiguous confidence in Campbell being ready in the near term. Obviously, the snap-judgement, emotion based responses on both sides are: Ramsey feels he's been given a raw deal, and wants to be traded. Gibbs thinks if he wants to be traded, they will. The problem is that it leaves the team in a bind, and the reality is, Ramsey signed a contract. I just hope everybody involved thinks this through instead of acting on impulse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiefPowhatan17 Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 I think the only way to be fair to Ramsey is to send him somewhere where he will play. He does deserve to play in this league, not be a back up his whole career. I think it is a lose to loss someone who has playing experience and a gun, but to be fair to him, he needs to play somewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJ_Skins Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 I think the only way to be fair to Ramsey is to send him somewhere where he will play. He does deserve to play in this league, not be a back up his whole career. I think it is a lose to loss someone who has playing experience and a gun, but to be fair to him, he needs to play somewhere. Since when does "being fair" to a player trump what's best for the team? It's a business, and he signed a contract. Moreover, it would be just as fair, in fact far more fair, to keep him, and have an open competition in training camp for the starting job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ntotoro Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 I think Coach Gibbs made those comments in light of the fact that Ramsey had let it be known he wants to be traded. I think there was a little wishful thinking involved, trying to make the best of a bad situation. All you have to do is look at the article they put up on the website the other day about Campbell. The fact that they included a direct quote of Gruden's assessment that Campbell needs three years before he'll be ready to play is a clear sign that there is not unambiguous confidence in Campbell being ready in the near term.Obviously, the snap-judgement, emotion based responses on both sides are: Ramsey feels he's been given a raw deal, and wants to be traded. Gibbs thinks if he wants to be traded, they will. The problem is that it leaves the team in a bind, and the reality is, Ramsey signed a contract. I just hope everybody involved thinks this through instead of acting on impulse. The team isn't in a bind. They don't have to release Ramsey if they get anything less than what they think to be fair. They'd like to get value for him, considering this is the last chance, but they don't absolutely have to get rid of him regardless how much he or Sexton complain. They have nothing to stand on and the team has everything. What value is Gruden's remarks about this team worth? Zero. He doesn't see anything about this team. How can you possibly use him as an evaluator of our team's talent? You think Joe Gibbs' remarks are wishful thinking but take Gruden's "expertise" on our team to heart... ? That makes no sense. When it came down to it, he didn't even say that it would take Campbell three years to be NFL-ready. What he said was it might take a QB three years to understand the 'Skins' blitz package. Nowhere did he say Campbell would need three years to be ready. Sheesh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJ_Skins Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 The team isn't in a bind. They don't have to release Ramsey if they get anything less than what they think to be fair. They'd like to get value for him, considering this is the last chance, but they don't absolutely have to get rid of him regardless how much he or Sexton complain. They have nothing to stand on and the team has everything. I totally agree. I don't think there is anything they could get in return for trading him that would make up for the depth they lose at the QB position. What value is Gruden's remarks about this team worth? Zero. He doesn't see anything about this team. How can you possibly use him as an evaluator of our team's talent. You think Joe Gibbs' remarks are wishful thinking but take Gruden's "expertise" on our team to heart... ? That makes no sense. Why are you getting mad at me? The official website made a decision to include his comments in their own article. Why do you think they would do that? The clear message of the article was that hopes are high for Campbell, but he's not likely to start this coming year. That means if they get rid of Ramsey, it will undoubtedly be Brunell again...Brunell who did not hold up down the stretch last year, and heads into this year a year older, and with the wear from all the beatings from last year added to his lifetime total. They need somebody else on the roster, and it needs to be somebody who can really step in and play, not a Hasselbeck-type with serious limitations, like not being able to throw the ball more than 10 yards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ntotoro Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 Why are you getting mad at me? The official website made a decision to include his comments in their own article. Why do you think they would do that? Go back and read it again. He didn't say it would take Campbell three years to be ready, he said it might take any young QB three years to understand our blitz package. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJ_Skins Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 Go back and read it again. He didn't say it would take Campbell three years to be ready, he said it might take any young QB three years to understand our blitz package. He was talking about Campbell, though. Did he have to spell everything out? That was the pre-draft scouting report on him-- he has physical abilities, but he didn't come in NFL-ready. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirk Diggler Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 To me it's a no-brainer to just keep Ramsey and have an open competition for the starting job. I'm not aware of any free agent QBs who are available and would be a major upgrade over Ramsey, but maybe there is somebody. If so, they could consider trading Ramsey and signing that player. Otherwise, they've got to keep him. If there was a firmly entrenched starter and the team was set that would be one thing, but you've got one QB clearly on the tail end of his career, and another who hasn't taken a snap in a regular season game. You've got to stock the position as much as possible and let the best man win. But then I try think sanely, and this team doesn't have a great track record with being sane. Neither do a lot of its fans. What you have failed to realize and probably will never realize since you are as thick as a California Redwood is that there has been an open competition at QB for (going on) 3 years. This is Gibbs 3rd offseason. There have been 2 full seasons of games, in-season practices, offseason practices, mini-camps, QB camps, coffee talks, etc. Ramsey has had more opportunities to seize than just about any QB in Redskin history in his 4 seasons here. He hasn't seized them. End of story. Just like with Arrington (though Ramsey has handled things like a man vs. Arrington like a 12 year old) Ramsey has no one to blame but himself. We may not have the 99 Rams for a supporting cast but it aint the 91 Patriots either. The only thing that's "stunted" his growth is the fact that he's a slow learner. Or perhaps he's never going to be anything more than an average starter? Brunell may have maxed out this past season and it's fair to say that a mystery player like Campbell can't be expected to make this team better immediately. But to suggest that Ramsey is the QB to take us to the final 4 or beyond ignores the reality of the past 4 seasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ntotoro Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 He was talking about Campbell, though. Did he have to spell everything out? That was the pre-draft scouting report on him-- he has physical abilities, but he didn't come in NFL-ready. It was from the Senior Bowl last year. He said it would take Campbell, like any young QB, three years to understand the 'Skins' blitzing scheme. This was before Campbell became a Redskin, before he got under these Coaches, and especially before being shown anything at all about our D. What Jon Gruden said from a year ago matters zero to how Campbell is right now in February, 2006. Goodness... I can't wait to get rid of Ramsey just so this nonsense ends. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bryceb07 Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 How can it not be good for the organization. Getting something for something else that you NEVER use ? Sounds good to me. Patrick deserves a chance to play somewhere. That place is not in Washington Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Butz65 Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 This moves comes down to relative value. The Skins don't need Ramsey on the roster at this point. They can fill the #2 or #3 QB spot (depending on Campbell's development) with a veteran who would have a lower salary cap impact (there are planty on the market - some who have been successful as starters in the past). The best scenario would have the Redskins getting a mid-round pick in return. At this point I'd deal Ramsey in a heart beat if it would help land a quality WR or DE in the draft or via free agency (due to freeing up some cap room). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Butz65 Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 It was from the Senior Bowl last year. He said it would take Campbell, like any young QB, three years to understand the 'Skins' blitzing scheme. Thank goodness Campbell won't have to face our blitzing schemes! Most veteran QB's in the league don't understand them (ask Bledsoe or McNabb). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.