WARNING: Another QB Thread (which backups would YOU have?

[bigyim]

...I know I should just ignore all the Ramsey devotees concerning how "weak" our team is at the QB spot, but it IS the offseason, & we have to have something to talk about.

Anyway, I think this merits another thread because quite a few people who aregue that we didn't do enough to address the backup QB position are so caught up in their own team that they don't realize how weak the backup QB is on every NFL team.

Look at our division. Any backup that you would swap for?

NYG-Hasslebeck, Lorenzen, Josh Harris

DAL-Drew Henson, Romo sits to pee

PHI-Garcia, Detmer

I might want to take Garcia over Collins, except that Collins has extensive experience in Saunders' offense. Other than that, that's about it.

Also, looking at the entire NFC, I see only a handful of situations where the team would be competitive if the starting QB went down:

ATL- Schaub was the subject of many rumors for teams looking for a starter.

CHI- You could consider Grossman or Griese as qualified starters...staying healthy is the problem (for both of them).

CAR-you lose a lot with Wienke vs. Delhomme, but at least he's won in the league

DET-they're starting over with Kitna & McCown, but I don't think there's a big dropoff between the 2.

GB-If Favre dosn't come back, this obviously changes, b/c they have bupkus behind Rodgers.

Furthermore, think about the AFC favorites if their starting QB went down... Would you like the Colts' chances to make the playoffs with Sorgi? How about NE with Matt Cassel? Denver with Preston PArsons? Miami with Cleo Lemon (?!!!?)

Almost all the backups around the league have substantial issues--youth/inexperience, ineffectiveness, learning a new system, etc. That's why they're backups. ANY team would have issues with being competitive if their starting QB went down.

I would argue that the Redskins, however, are one of the teams that have the least to worry about in this regard.

1. Gibbs & his system has a proven track record of taking castoff & project QBs and making them effective QBs on Superbowl teams.

2. the level of talent along the offense (skill players & linemen) that the Skins have can compensate for a backup QB finding his way.

3. The offensive game plan under Saunders can be tailored to be run-heavy and short-route passing if Campbell had to start- much like the Steelers assisted Rothlisberger during his rookie year by committing to the run & passing the ball to 2 primary options.

4. Collins has extensive experience in Saunder's offense, so there wouldn't be much "dumbing down" of the game plan.

DOes anyone out there argue this point? Which backup QB situation in the league would you say is better than ours?

[turtle]

In before close.

[bigyim]

Oh, I forgot that I liked what Garrard did for JAX when Leftwich went down. That's all that I can think of that would be on par with what we have here.

Turtle, what were you trying to say?

[terpfan]

Why would this be closed? I think he makes a pretty good point. Our backups really arent that bad in comparison. Technically if our starter goes down we are moving into the future (while maybe at a slight cost to the present), while most teams would be taking a huge step back.

[Peregrine]

I was completely unaware this was a matter of contention... I am what you might call a Ramsey devotee. I do not think we will have QB problems this year. I think our offense is set up so that any QB can be succesful in it. We have a top of the league defense and running game, and we have Al Saunders, and our good looking recieving core. Can anyone say Pittsburg(arguably they didnt have Saunders)? Rothlisberger never has to throw much at all and they win the superbowl, he was a sophmore.

Vick made the probowl. If that isnt a case for how incredibly weak the QB position is in the NFL right now, I dont know what is.

[ouvan59]

Frankly we don't really know what we have. I'm optimistic that Campbell will be good but we haven't really seen what he can do in a real game. Todd Collins has throw exactly 27 NFL passes since 1997. He knows the offense so that is a plus but I doubt many here can confidently say they know his strengths and weaknesses.

[Extreme]

In before close.

in after the repetatively lame and non contributing post boosting comment:D

the thing i see the most on ES is people, you being included, that like to jump on guys for posting rediculously stupid things that contribute absolutely nothing to a thread. i think there should be another group like the first one, but formed for non-contributors. we have a no new thread group, how about a lack of contribution group?

anyway, as for this post, i think our backup core is more solid than it's been in a while. although, i never thought Ramsey was a weak player, and never will. he was a ragdoll his whole time here, and always popped right back up, i love that in a player....especially a QB.

[bigyim]

ouvan, these are all valid points which have been brought up by others in this forum.

My point is that all teams have these question marks and, in comparison, our questions are less substantial than the other teams have with regards to the backup QB position. In pointing this out, I was hoping to alleviate some of the hand-wringing that is going on about "what happens if Brunnell is injured". That scenario is the worst-case for every team, but you can't sit here in March worrying about injuries, or esle it will drive you bonkers.

[Extreme]

ouvan, these are all valid points which have been brought up by others in this forum.

My point is that all teams have these question marks and, in comparison, our questions are less substantial than the other teams have with regards to the backup QB position. In pointing this out, I was hoping to alleviate some of the hand-wringing that is going on about "what happens if Brunnell is injured". That scenario is the worst-case for every team, but you can't sit here in March worrying about injuries, or esle it will drive you bonkers.

sorry to break it to you.....it's APRIL:doh: