When Ramsey gets in ....

[CPstretch]

i actually am still a fan of laveraneus coles even though he was an *******. i almost hope for him and patrick to hook up for some TDs this year.

[SKINZFAN4EVER]

i actually am still a fan of laveraneus coles even though he was an *******. i almost hope for him and patrick to hook up for some TDs this year.

what is wrong with all you people. CHEER FOR ANOTHER??????

do I have to revoke all your cards?? :helmet: :point2sky :logo: :point2sky

[shallyshal]

When Ramsey get in for the preseason what will you do , BOO or cheer ?

I feel even though everyone knows he wasn't the right guy for us , he was a good sport the whole time.

I personally will cheer and hope he does well in New York

Especially since with him having to go through the same thing he went through in Washington all over again ....

( Jets having Pennington , and probably drafting Leinhart )

he is gonna hold the ball too long, eyeball coles the whole way, and get buried under the pass rush... same old, same old

[Johnny Punani2]

I will Boo.

Ramsey is a selfish turd that whined, cried, and wanted to be traded because he was worried he wasn't going to get to pass enough for his liking.

[CPstretch]

he is gonna hold the ball too long, eyeball coles the whole way, and get buried under the pass rush... same old, same old

yeah i assume this will happen...but i can always "cheer" for it to not happen

[Crazyhorse1]

I thought wisdom came with age but obviously I was wrong. Since you seem to know Coach Gibbs personally we would all appreciate hearing his insight regarding his thoughts on next years season.

Aditionally your dog must be a Dallas fan because that was the only insult I have ever heard him make...regarding Dallas fans being the ugleist fans in the NFL.

Clearly all opinions are welcome here, but since this is a Skins message board I must tell you that Joe Gibbs is highly respected (obviously). Slights against him are not taken lightly. Perhaps you are a massochist and enjoyed the Turner and Spurrier eras. We did not. Coach Gibbs will ressurect this franchise to it's former glory. You can enjoy it with us or continue to alienate yourself on this board. Most of the other posters here will explain this to you in a much more harsh manner. Enjoy next season.

If you were wrong about wisdom coming with age, you are probably wrong about other things as well. Here's an obvious thing you've made assumptions about regarding Gibbs: that he's seldom wrong because he's old, experienced, and very successful. Wrong. He's often wrong, as are most men: about politics, religions, human relations, business deals, tooth paste, football-- like other men. That's wisdom. Now, disregard what I've just said. Learn from experience, like the rest of us.

Here's more wisdom. Many of us on this site don't unfair remarks made about Ramsey or condemnations of his play without statistical proof, or mindless cliches like: 1) He didn't work out, 2) He didn't take advantage of his chances, 3) He was ruined by Spurrier, 4) He has happy feet, 5) He turns the ball over more than Brunell (untrue), and 5) He was beaten out last pre-season.

All of the above are predicated on the notion he played poorly here. That didn't happen; that's been shown repeatedly on this site, only to be instantly dismissed by someone making a statement of faith about Joe Gibbs, as if Joe Gibbs wanted someone justifying his decisions by turning on Ramsey with phony stats and observations.

Here's a news flash: You don't throw for over 5,600 yds and 32 TD's in the equivalent of 24 games if something's seriously wrong with your throwing motion.

In conclusion, here's more wisdom: Saying nice things about Ramsey now doesn't make up for the constant knocks he's received at the hands of some Redskin fans over the past year.

[Gamebreaker]

I'll do neither. I don't dislike Ramsey, I actually think he's a pretty good guy considering how much class he showed in DC, despite the circumstances. I'm not going to cheer for him, but I won't disrespect him either.

[Hail26]

I'll probably give him a nice ovation.

I'll give the first guy who sacks or picks him off a louder one, though.

or picks him off:dallasuck

[Enter Apotheosis]

Here's more wisdom. Many of us on this site don't unfair remarks made about Ramsey or condemnations of his play without statistical proof, or mindless cliches like:

1) He didn't work out

2) He didn't take advantage of his chances

3) He was ruined by Spurrier

4) He has happy feet

5) He turns the ball over more than Brunell (untrue)

5) He was beaten out last pre-season.

All of the above are predicated on the notion he played poorly here. That didn't happen; that's been shown repeatedly on this site, only to be instantly dismissed by someone making a statement of faith about Joe Gibbs, as if Joe Gibbs wanted someone justifying his decisions by turning on Ramsey with phony stats and observations.

Here's a news flash: You don't throw for over 5,600 yds and 32 TD's in the equivalent of 24 games if something's seriously wrong with your throwing motion.

In conclusion, here's more wisdom: Saying nice things about Ramsey now doesn't make up for the constant knocks he's received at the hands of some Redskin fans over the past year.

Spaced out for my own purposes. Cliche numbers 2-4 are just that, cliches... that are nearly impossible to prove or disprove. #1 is a statement that really doesn't say anything about Ramsey himself... it just means that he didn't quite fall into place under Gibbs and didn't work out with the new coaching regime.

Patrick Ramsey threw for 5,600 yards, 34 TDs, and 29 INTs as a Redskin (24 games started).

Mark Brunell threw for 4,200 yards, 30 TDs, and 16 INTs over the same time frame (24 games started) as a Skin.

So clearly #5(a) is not untrue. Brunell sacrifices a lot of potential plays and throws the ball away to avoid turnovers where Ramsey had a tendency to try and force balls into coverage (especially when going deep). As a result, Ramsey had more yardage but a significantly worse td:turnover ratio (1.17:1 vs. Brunell's 1.7:1). Personally, I tend to favor the Gibbs philosophy of turnovers being the critical factor in determining who wins the game. However, I know that it is entirely likely that a number of other people would prefer the additional yardage and long-ball ability of Ramsey.

Oh yeah... and also:

Mark Brunell threw for 6,400 yards, 34 TDs, and 27 INTs in his first 26 games starting.

That last one doesn't serve much of a purpose, but it does show how Brunell had vaguely similar stats to Ramsey over a similar timeframe. Of course, its hard to say that Ramsey will ever develop into the kind of QB Brunell was... he was released because he didn't suit Gibbs' vision of the here, the now, or the future.

No one has ever doubted Ramsey's throwing motion that I have seen. He has good mechanics but has had relatively poor decision-making skills. He is also remarkably durable and I don't believe anyone will dispute that.

True. However, people of this board like to pretend that Patten's presence took pressure off Moss, which only drawing double coverage would do.

Even if Patten was not extremely effective, he still had to be taken into consideration in defense's gameplans because of his speed and ability to make the play. He honestly didn't get enough looks from Brunell (or time in the offense, given his injury) for us to be able to judge his performance and accurately describe how he affected the coverage on Santana. It should be blaringly obvious, though, that teams should be FAR more concerned about Patten than either Thrash or Jacobs.

Patten had the potential to beat his coverage (especially in man), so teams had to make sure they had a backup plan (i.e. a safety deep). It was ludicrously easy for a CB to take out Thrash or Jacobs single-handedly, so they could devote more personnel strictly to Moss. The players on the field had one less guy to worry about, so it makes it easier for them to hone in on Cooley, Portis, and Moss. More weapons = less focus on any one player. This is common sense.

[dinzelwashington]

cheer.. he was a good counter part for brunell... no hate

[skins84]

cheer him, but i kind of hope he doesnt come around and turn into the next stan humphries/brad johnson/rich gannon/jay shroeder....

Trent Green

[BRAVEONAWARPATH]

cheer him, but i kind of hope he doesnt come around and turn into the next stan humphries/brad johnson/rich gannon/jay shroeder....

I actually hope he does.

[Major Harris]

True. However, people of this board like to pretend that Patten's presence took pressure off Moss, which only drawing double coverage would do. Thrash drew the same coverage Patten drew. Hence, Patten's disappearance didn't cause Brunell's drop off to Moss-- Brunell did.

The fact that Patten was never able to assist Moss in the first place was the primary reason Gibbs let Patten go on IR. He simply flopped. 22 catches in 9 games. Arkansas' Matt Jones, an ex-qb starting as a rookie for Carolina, had twice the catches and 5 TD grads. So did rookie TE Miller have twice the catches (plus 6 DT's). So did other rookies we paid no attention to in the draft.

Fact: We needed a second guy drawing two (a need now meant) and went for a role player instead.

what #2's do to take pressure off of #1's is present enough of a threat that teams think twice about doubling the #1. they don't have to draw double coverage, and they usually don't.

as far as patten being a flop, it's hard to argue w/ the numbers. i think some of that has to do w/ brunell not looking away from moss. some of it may be learning a new system. some of it was injury related.

also, i'm not sure we ignored matt jones. but he wasn't a #9, and he went before our pick at 26. he went earlier than predicted.

[Crazyhorse1]

Spaced out for my own purposes. Cliche numbers 2-4 are just that, cliches... that are nearly impossible to prove or disprove. #1 is a statement that really doesn't say anything about Ramsey himself... it just means that he didn't quite fall into place under Gibbs and didn't work out with the new coaching regime.

Patrick Ramsey threw for 5,600 yards, 34 TDs, and 29 INTs as a Redskin (24 games started).

Mark Brunell threw for 4,200 yards, 30 TDs, and 16 INTs over the same time frame (24 games started) as a Skin.

So clearly #5(a) is not untrue. Brunell sacrifices a lot of potential plays and throws the ball away to avoid turnovers where Ramsey had a tendency to try and force balls into coverage (especially when going deep). As a result, Ramsey had more yardage but a significantly worse td:turnover ratio (1.17:1 vs. Brunell's 1.7:1). Personally, I tend to favor the Gibbs philosophy of turnovers being the critical factor in determining who wins the game. However, I know that it is entirely likely that a number of other people would prefer the additional yardage and long-ball ability of Ramsey.

Oh yeah... and also:

Mark Brunell threw for 6,400 yards, 34 TDs, and 27 INTs in his first 26 games starting.

That last one doesn't serve much of a purpose, but it does show how Brunell had vaguely similar stats to Ramsey over a similar timeframe. Of course, its hard to say that Ramsey will ever develop into the kind of QB Brunell was... he was released because he didn't suit Gibbs' vision of the here, the now, or the future.

No one has ever doubted Ramsey's throwing motion that I have seen. He has good mechanics but has had relatively poor decision-making skills. He is also remarkably durable and I don't believe anyone will dispute that.

Even if Patten was not extremely effective, he still had to be taken into consideration in defense's gameplans because of his speed and ability to make the play. He honestly didn't get enough looks from Brunell (or time in the offense, given his injury) for us to be able to judge his performance and accurately describe how he affected the coverage on Santana. It should be blaringly obvious, though, that teams should be FAR more concerned about Patten than either Thrash or Jacobs.

Patten had the potential to beat his coverage (especially in man), so teams had to make sure they had a backup plan (i.e. a safety deep). It was ludicrously easy for a CB to take out Thrash or Jacobs single-handedly, so they could devote more personnel strictly to Moss. The players on the field had one less guy to worry about, so it makes it easier for them to hone in on Cooley, Portis, and Moss. More weapons = less focus on any one player. This is common sense.

Number 5 is certainly true. I didn't say Brunell had more interceptions than Ramsey. I said he had more turnovers. He had many more turnovers under Gibbs than Ramsey did-- Brunell has lost 9 fumbles, which added to interceptions makes him more likely to turn over the ball than Ramsey. By the way, fumbles give away more yardage than do interceptions which often amount to involuntary punts in re to yardage.

Nevertheless, the idea that Ramsey turns the ball over more than Brunell is erronerous, just another of the myths trotted out and believed without examination. Even you failed to see the obvious after I pointed it out. No fault of yours in particular-- just evidence of a negative Ramsey mindset that has settled in at Redskins park, probably in defense of Coach Gibbs.

Your comment that Ramsey has poor decision making skills is not consistent with his record, at least not without some factual/intellectual support. I can explain Brunell's superior interception/TD ratio for instance by pointing out that a lot of his TD passes are actually dinks, whereas Patrick passes deep, that Brunell's completion percentage is fattened by 50 useless and uncontested passes thrown to Coles for two yard gains. Actually, my statements above are too casual to mean much, but still they're much better backed with argument than yours, which wasn't backed at all. Once again, the mindset sets in.

By the way, I totally agree with most of your remarks and think your observations exceptional.

[Om]

Number 5 is certainly true. I didn't say Brunell had more interceptions than Ramsey. I said he had more turnovers. He had many more turnovers under Gibbs than Ramsey did-- Brunell has lost 9 fumbles, which added to interceptions makes him more likely to turn over the ball than Ramsey. By the way, fumbles give away more yardage than do interceptions which often amount to involuntary punts in re to yardage.

Nevertheless, the idea that Ramsey turns the ball over more than Brunell is erronerous, just another of the myths trotted out and believed without examination. Even you failed to see the obvious after I pointed it out. No fault of yours in particular-- just evidence of a negative Ramsey mindset that has settled in at Redskins park, probably in defense of Coach Gibbs.

I'll give you credit for one thing, brother. You're taking disingenuousness to new levels on ES.

The "negative mindset" you're throwing out here has zero to do with anything going on at "Redskins Park." What you're referring to is certain posters on a team message board who happen to feel differently about the reasons Patrick Ramsey is not longer a Redskins quarterback than you.

You're also suggesting Joe Gibbs somehow needs "defending." Which any rational reading of the bones suggests he does not. Gibbs has earned more benefit of the doubt insofar as judging quarterbacks to run HIS team than anyone here many, many, many times over. As you well know.

And yet you, and a dwindling handful of others, persist in trying to somehow make a case, through circuitious statistical manipulation and broad, unprovable generalizations, that Gibbs has made a mistake insofar as Brunell/Ramsey, and cannot see what you in your wisdom can. This despite the fact that Gibbs has turned this team around in two years from afterthought to a team on the doorstep of contending.

You got no case, counselor.

[Guest santana4prez]

Number 5 is certainly true. I didn't say Brunell had more interceptions than Ramsey. I said he had more turnovers. He had many more turnovers under Gibbs than Ramsey did-- Brunell has lost 9 fumbles, which added to interceptions makes him more likely to turn over the ball than Ramsey. By the way, fumbles give away more yardage than do interceptions which often amount to involuntary punts in re to yardage.

Nevertheless, the idea that Ramsey turns the ball over more than Brunell is erronerous, just another of the myths trotted out and believed without examination. Even you failed to see the obvious after I pointed it out. No fault of yours in particular-- just evidence of a negative Ramsey mindset that has settled in at Redskins park, probably in defense of Coach Gibbs.

Your comment that Ramsey has poor decision making skills is not consistent with his record, at least not without some factual/intellectual support. I can explain Brunell's superior interception/TD ratio for instance by pointing out that a lot of his TD passes are actually dinks, whereas Patrick passes deep, that Brunell's completion percentage is fattened by 50 useless and uncontested passes thrown to Coles for two yard gains. Actually, my statements above are too casual to mean much, but still they're much better backed with argument than yours, which wasn't backed at all. Once again, the mindset sets in.

By the way, I totally agree with most of your remarks and think your observations exceptional.

Well Brunell played alot more between the two years Gibbs has been here so give the same amount of time to Ramsey and he probably throws 20 ints in a season at least.

[Porterhouse12er]

Ramsey will fair well but i doubt he will ever be anythnig but average he is too incosistent and his arm is too strong for his brain

[MattGeorge85]

If you were wrong about wisdom coming with age, you are probably wrong about other things as well. Here's an obvious thing you've made assumptions about regarding Gibbs: that he's seldom wrong because he's old, experienced, and very successful. Wrong. He's often wrong, as are most men: about politics, religions, human relations, business deals, tooth paste, football-- like other men. That's wisdom. Now, disregard what I've just said. Learn from experience, like the rest of us.

Here's more wisdom. Many of us on this site don't unfair remarks made about Ramsey or condemnations of his play without statistical proof, or mindless cliches like: 1) He didn't work out, 2) He didn't take advantage of his chances, 3) He was ruined by Spurrier, 4) He has happy feet, 5) He turns the ball over more than Brunell (untrue), and 5) He was beaten out last pre-season.

All of the above are predicated on the notion he played poorly here. That didn't happen; that's been shown repeatedly on this site, only to be instantly dismissed by someone making a statement of faith about Joe Gibbs, as if Joe Gibbs wanted someone justifying his decisions by turning on Ramsey with phony stats and observations.

Here's a news flash: You don't throw for over 5,600 yds and 32 TD's in the equivalent of 24 games if something's seriously wrong with your throwing motion.

In conclusion, here's more wisdom: Saying nice things about Ramsey now doesn't make up for the constant knocks he's received at the hands of some Redskin fans over the past year.

Right this is coming from someone who thought we could trade Patten and some draft picks and end up drafting Vince Young. Your stats are self-serving and even when there compelling evidence to dispute your claims you just keep going on and on. I guess Alzheimers is setting in early...:doh:

[Jethrodsp]

I dont boo at games.

I will give Ramsey a nice greeting as Im sure everyone at FedEx will. I cant imagine any Redskins fan having anything bad to say about the guy outside of how good you think he is. He played hard when he was in and was a model citizen while Mark took brought us home to the playoffs.

[Jethrodsp]

Let it be known though that I dont think he will amount to a pro-bowl QB in the NFL.