The Case for Second-Chance Quarterbacks

[Oldfan]

And if I'm right I'm in good company, NFL coaches. Either way, there are supporters and non supporters to the opinion, just like anything in this world.

That's true, but it sounded to me like you were saying the case is closed.

But it does tell us that he's not a league caliber starting quarterback.

What are the chances of any other coach giving a Patrick Ramsey or a John Beck a real second chance? Pretty slim, right? It takes a stubborn SOB like you, me, or Mike Shanahan who sees something in a QB and is willing look like a fool to back up his opinion. How many NFL coaches are like that?

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

Of, if Vince Young ever suits up in the B&G, I'ma blaming you and this thread.

Just so as we're clear.

Right, now that's out the way, continue on.

Hail.

[Chump Bailey]

Ramsey threw a TD pass to Cooley in the first period of the Bears game that was called back because of a penalty. On the next play, Jansen found himself opposed by two blockers. He whiffed on both. Ramsey avoided one, the other took his head off. Patrick fumbled. Left the game. He could have come back and played, but Gibbs stuck with Brunell.

If the TD to Cooley had been allowed to stand, Patrick would have stayed in the game and Gibbs would have had to wait for another day to yank him for Brunell.

That's right - damn you have a good memory OF.

[KDawg]

That's true, but it sounded to me like you were saying the case is closed.

What are the chances of any other coach giving a Patrick Ramsey or a John Beck a real second chance? Pretty slim, right? It's takes a stubborn SOB like you, me, or Mike Shanahan who sees something in a QB and is willing look like a fool to back up his opinion. How many NFL coaches are like that?

Fair enough.

[DieselPwr44]

I think its funny how people acknowledge the dumpster fire that was our FO, they bash Zorn for his coaching, they acknowledge the lack of pass protection yet the still have such a lack of objectivity towards Jason Campbell ,who put up the same numbers in 2009 as Carson Palmer.

Then Campbell gets thrown into another terrible situation and puts up better numbers then our QB.

The guy had to be told by his coach via radio, how to lead his players in the huddle.

If you don't have that type of leadership ability by the time you get to this level, you'll never have it.

And if you didn't know this by now, NEWSFLASH: Carson Palmer is done. So nice comparison. Fitting comparison IMO.

[darrelgreenie]

What are the chances of any other coach giving a Patrick Ramsey or a John Beck a real second chance? Pretty slim, right? It's takes a stubborn SOB like you, me, or Mike Shanahan who sees something in a QB and is willing look like a fool to back up his opinion. How many NFL coaches are like that?

Great question/point right now I would say 3 but its 4 if you include an owner: Mike Shanahan, Chan Gailey, Josh McDaniels and Al Davis

[Chump Bailey]

Ramsey was never that good IMHO. He never displayed the toughness that Campbell did. .

Come on paloosa - Ramsey displayed ample toughness while he was here. JC's protection was bad, but it was freaking nonexistent for Patrick.

[Oldfan]

Of, if Vince Young ever suits up in the B&G, I'ma blaming you and this thread.

Just so as we're clear.

Right, now that's out the way, continue on.

Hail.

No way, Amigo!

I'm in John Beck's camp. He looks like he could run Mike's scheme. Vince doesn't.

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

Guys, for the sake of peace and harmony on the boards, can we not re-visit the Campbell era.

Please? I'll give out cookies if y'all promise to be good.

Hail.

[DieselPwr44]

Guys, for the sake of peace and harmony on the boards, can we not re-visit the Campbell era.

Please? I'll give out cookies if y'all promise to be good.

Hail.

So let it be written.........

[KCClybun]

I think its funny how people acknowledge the dumpster fire that was our FO, they bash Zorn for his coaching, they acknowledge the lack of pass protection yet the still have such a lack of objectivity towards Jason Campbell ,who put up the same numbers in 2009 as Carson Palmer.

Then Campbell gets thrown into another terrible situation and puts up better numbers then our QB.

That's what I've never understood about this fanbase.

The guy very clearly improved, every season he was with the team, even though this organization put complete crap around him. In 2009, with the team crumblling around him, with no run game, with no weapons, with NOTHING, he STILL put up a career best season. The team was put squarely on his shoulders with Portis and without Cooley, he was sacked 43 times and was hit God knows how many other, and he still managed 3,616 yards and 20 touchdowns and a 64.4 completion percentage. He had to be doing something right even though he had no talent around him,

Yet at every turn, for some reason unknown to anyone, the fanbase never liked the guy, and the organization never supported him and put a team around him...and it's all Jason Campbell's fault. We tried to replace the guy, we didn't put a line in front of him, we didn't put weapons around him...and it's Campbell's fault, because he made some questionable statements, and this fanbase can hold grudges with the best of them.

I mean, what reason did Mike have to get rid of Jason Campbell and get McNabb? That is one of the moves that really friggin' bugged me when we traded for Donovan. I think Jason Campbell would've done very well under Kyle's system, but every chance we could we tried to dump the guy.

Why were we trying to trade up and get Mark Sanchez in 2009? Why the hell were we looking into getting Jay Cutler? Campbell was coming off a good season, and the collapse of the football team and the season had less to do with him than it did organization disarray and a bad coach.

If Jason Campbell has success in Oakland---and I think he will---it'll be because the organization is actually going to put their support behind the guy. They dumped Tom Cable (who liked Gradkowski more than Campbell and benched Campbell) and now Hue Jackson is the coach, and he likes Campbell. His teammates like him, the fanbase is starting to warm to him a bit, and they're going to put a team around where he can succeed. Which is sort of what this whole thread is about.

But yeah; I don't get the Campbell hate. The fact he had four straight seasons of improvement despite all the crap going on around him seems to prove there was something else there.

Sorry for the rant, I know this has been rehashed a gazillion times, but it was just something that popped in my head when DG said it.

[darrelgreenie]

---------- Post added July-17th-2011 at 12:23 PM ----------

The guy had to be told by his coach via radio, how to lead his players in the huddle.

If you don't have that type of leadership ability by the time you get to this level, you'll never have it.

And if you didn't know this by now, NEWSFLASH: Carson Palmer is done. So nice comparison. Fitting comparison IMO.

You know I've never heard anyone credible knock Campbell's leadership not players, not coaches just the 'fans' from this forum

Okay so your counter is to proclaim that Carson Palmer is 'done' and I figure you thought he was 'done' in 2009 too?

Good to know.

By your claim Jason Campbell is below average but put up the same numbers as Palmer in 2009 which would at least make them average.

I don't know why its so hard for some people to admit that Campbell is at least average?

[Oldfan]

...I have always wondered what would have been had we gone after Brees. How different might our franchise be.

Without Sean Payton, Drew Brees's star would still shine , but not as brightly. We would have been better. Considerably better if we could have smartly-used those picks spent on Brunell, Campbell and McNabb.

[elkabong82]

The guy had to be told by his coach via radio, how to lead his players in the huddle.

If you don't have that type of leadership ability by the time you get to this level, you'll never have it.

And if you didn't know this by now, NEWSFLASH: Carson Palmer is done. So nice comparison. Fitting comparison IMO.

Except he mentioned 2009 Palmer, who took his team to 10-6 and won the AFC North, NOT Palmer now.

[addicted]

With good coaching, I think Patrick Ramsey could have been better than Jason Campbell, not an elite QB, but above average. However, that opinion is certainly debatable. The point that I’m making here is that his coaches really didn’t give him much of a chance to succeed even though we had a number one pick invested in him.

I believe that you can't really make this case for Ramsey because he was given 25 game starts. Do you really think that Ramsey would have needed 25 more starts to show that he could be a serviceable starter in this league and that with 25 game films to study you couldn't tell if he was any good? I don't. That's almost 2 full seasons of starting and he was given plenty of chances to show something and he didn't. Why continue to invest into a losing position? I think cutting bait and finding another guy was the right move to make.

On a poll in this forum taken when Ramsey was traded, two out of three members voted that Patrick Ramsey hadn’t been given a fair shot with this team.

And the fans are always right? How many approved of Albert Hanyesworth? What difference does this make at all? The fans are observers of the teams business but popularity means nothing. In fact our fans were so happy with Colt Brennan that we dumped a much better QB to keep him that those same Saints you mentioned about being smart with taking the risk of Brees thought better about. If we had kept the better QB of these two we would have our developmental guy on the roster now but we were stupid kept the much worse NFL ready QB and find ourselves without a QB now. Smart moves? No.

John Beck hasn’t been given much of a chance to succeed in his previous stops. Maybe Mike can do for him, what Spurrier and Gibbs did not do for Ramsey. Give him a real shot. Develop his skillset and adjust the scheme to fit his strengths.

This is the same tired argument that you and Greenie seem to believe to be true about Beck that I venomously disagree with. Why is this such a popular idea with you? Beck was given a shot to play in this league and sucked about as bad as you can. 5 Game starts with just a single TD pass in those games? Who can win like that in this league? That included a 3-0 home loss where he couldn't move his team into a FG scoring position? Then he goes to Baltimore who places him 4th on the depth chart. Baltimore knows how to find players in this league but thought that 3 other guys were better QB's then Beck. And even on our own team last season we didn't think anything of Beck to give him a single snap in the regular season. How do you supporters explain that? What happened to personal responsibility? What happened to letting your play dictate the snaps you get? That sir is 3 teams who have shown that they do not believe in Beck. Why in the hell should anyone? And why in the hell does anyone support this guy? Its mind numbing to me. I'd love to sink my teeth into some sort of argument to support Beck but the reoccurring theme here is that some of you think Beck is a victim and I don't see that at all. I hope he can do well and wish him nothing but success but seriously why do some of you think we can turn chicken poop into chicken salad? I don't get it.

The Tampa Bucs gave up on Steve Young. Bill Walsh traded the last pick in the fourth round for him. Young was lucky to get his chance to play with a well-run organization. I think there are lots of good QBs who haven't been given a real chance to succeed.

Steve Young was the highest paid player in the USFL, and Tampa used the very first pick on Young in that 1985 Supplemental draft on him passing on guys like Reggie White, our own Gary Clark and other very successful players. In his time in Tampa the team was awful, Young's record as starter was 3–16. In his 19 games, he threw for only 11 touchdowns with 21 interceptions while completing fewer than 55% of his passes.

The reason I bring this up is that Tampa paid a heavy price for Young and he was a disappointment for them. So they did the natural thing and moved on from him. To go from the very top of the mountain to a cast off 4th round pick is sinking pretty low in a short amount of time. Young was headed for a bust career until he landed in the sweet spot of backing up Montana. If we had paid that price for Young we would have deemed him a failure too and moved on. Who wouldn't? So while it's nice to think the Bucs didn't give him a chance the truth is he was given a chance in Tampa and he failed there miserably and landed in a great situation he made work. Tampa didn't hold Young back, Young was terrible. Like when Dallas went from Johnson to Switzer the Cowboys could have had any coach in there and been successful, I believe the same about the 49ers. They were stacked and loaded with talent. Young was very fortunate but he wasn't held back

The reoccurring theme is that some of you don't hold the player accountable for his own miserable play and make up excuses for it. Sorry but talks cheap and thinking that Beck and Young were victims is just silly

---------- Post added July-17th-2011 at 01:00 PM ----------

I don't disagree that perhaps we yanked the plug on Ramsey early, however, Ramsey has bounced from team to team in the NFL and has wound up being a starter for none of them. Does that necessarily tell us that he couldn't have succeeded as a Redskin QB if he had been given a longer rope? No. But it does tell us that he's not a league caliber starting quarterback.

Excellent observation and something that you simply cannot deny when trying to make a case for Ramsey.

If the player was so good why does he bounce around never cementing himself as a viable answer?

To me it's simple...you either take the opportunity you have and make something of it or kiss it goodbye because you can't live up to the expectation.

It's nothing personal against Ramsey, Beck, Campbell, or anyone but they all had "potential" and never delivered

Potential is just a new way of saying disappointment.

John Beck has only made one other stop in the NFL, and I think its foolish to give up on the guy without seeing what he has.

Becks been on the Ravens, Dolphins, and Redskins.

He went from being a high 2nd round draft pick for the Phins one season to 3rd on the depth chart to waived in 2 years in Miami. He didn't impress them at all

Then he went to Ravens who had a logjam at QB and they put him 4th on the depth chart behind Bulger, Flacco, and saddly Troy Smith

Then he was traded to us for a castoff Corner named Doug Dutch.

And we never once gave him a start either

Either a QB can play or he can't. If Beck could play then one of those teams would have figured it out and instead of having one foot out the door to unemployment he would cement himself into a teams plans. He never impressed any of those coaching staffs and as a result I refuse to have any faith in him at all until proven otherwise.

Signing a FA to come in would be a mistake. I'd rather take a ride with Beck and see what we have. Best case scenario, he has the trust of the team and wins some games. Worst case sceanrio is we stink out and get a high draft pick, which allows us to draft someone like Andrew Luck. I don't see the downside in starting Beck this season. At all.

I think it's just a matter of time until we do have a new QB on the roster. I don't see us not bringing in a FA this year.

[Tarhog]

I thought PR almost had his head ripped off by a Bears defender in that game, and had to come out because of an injury and Brunell took the spot and ran with it.

I was at that game covering for ES. Ramsey got crushed (and likely had a concussion) and Brunell had to go in. Could he have come back? Maybe. But the truth is, Gibbs inherited Ramsey on his return and although he said all the right things (that was just the way Gibbs operated), you could tell Gibbs was never sold on Ramsey. I've never quite understood the Ramsey-love. He was a great kid, with moderate talent (you have to have some talent to get drafted where he was), but he was never consistent, and time has shown that Gibbs made the right call. People beat on Brunell - but the guy got us into the playoffs and beyond. On his worst day, I think Brunell gave us a better chance to win than Ramsey ever did. Ramsey's done nothing since leaving here - zip. I think that speaks volumes.

Bottom line - Gibbs took a politically expedient opportunity to replace Ramsey with a guy he felt understood how to play the position better and gave the team a better chance to win. And it was the right decision.

[Going Commando]

Mike Shanahan likes second chance players in general and at the QB position he's had success with a few.

Tangent:

I've alway thought/said a bad organization can never have a "franchise" QB because they'll screw him up.

Its one of the reasons why I have a lot of respect for the career Campbell has put together.

He's been thrown into 2 of the worst situations in the NFL and has managed to survive and perform at a decent level despite the incompetency that has surrounding him for most of his career.

I think a QB's success is as /if not more dependent on their situation i.e. coaching staff/system, front office, surrounding talent then their own ability.

And I believe the talent gap bewtween most NFL QBs isn't as wide as most fans like to think.

I think it will continue to decrease as the rules make toughness less important.

I agree on almost all accounts but I don't think toughness will ever decrease in a meaningful way for QBs no matter what rule changes are enacted. Rules are also changed just to hold the status quo in response to the changing bodies of NFL athletes. I also think all forms of toughness are one of the most important factors in whether a QB succeeds or fails no matter his surrounding conditions.

A strong, big bodied (physically tough), smart (mentally tough) QB can carve out a respectable measure of success no matter how dreadful his surrounding circumstances. I think Jason Campbell proved this. Put a QB with those characteristics in a good situation (Matt Ryan, Tom Brady, or Jay Cutler for example) and that QB will be highly productive for several years running.

So in short, my position is that surrounding situation alone can't make a bust or else Jason Campbell never would have made it as long as he did. The prospect himself has to either have a physical or mental flaw too (poor health or lack of heart/guts/confidence).

Here's an aside: one of the reasons I liked Blaine Gabbert so much as a prospect was because he was a physically strong and tough and big bodied QB who was smart and seemed to have a great mental attitude. He's the type of player that can thrive in a bad situation. He did it at Missouri this season when you think about it. Fortunately, I think he fell into a pretty good one in Jacksonville (provided the FO stays the same, Del Rio is a 9th year coach who needs to win sooner rather than later).

---------- Post added July-17th-2011 at 02:47 PM ----------

And yet not one coach has seen him as a quarterback that they want to invest time in. It's quite possible he doesn't have the talent you think he has. That said, I agree with the last line. He didn't get a fair opportunity here.

Very few QBs who don't make it with the team that drafts them end up getting a real second chance. It could also be possible that Ramsey just never got the kind of opportunity that every young QB needs to solidify himself as a starter (leeway and solid support/faith from his coach as he has his growing pains).

For whatever reason, I think there is a real perception throughout the league that a QB who fails in his first stint after being drafted is damaged goods not worth the effort of reclamation. I think most coaches would rather spend a first round pick to get a talented rookie QB they can mold from square one than sign a cheap talented free agent QB in his mid 20's and coming off a failed gig with another team. Vince Young versus Cam Newton? I'm not saying I disagree with the sentiment even though I believe reclamation QBs can end up being pretty good. I'm just saying that I think the sentiment definitely persists within the league.

---------- Post added July-17th-2011 at 02:49 PM ----------

This gets away from the thrust of OFs purpose for the thread, but I was wondering who everyone's preferred second chance QB for the Redskins would be?

I don't prefer Grossman. I prefer Beck or even Vince Young if we sign him. I also wouldn't mind David Garrard either.

[KCClybun]

This is the same tired argument that you and Greenie seem to believe to be true about Beck that I venomously disagree with. Why is this such a popular idea with you? Beck was given a shot to play in this league and sucked about as bad as you can. 5 Game starts with just a single TD pass in those games? Who can win like that in this league? That included a 3-0 home loss where he couldn't move his team into a FG scoring position? Then he goes to Baltimore who places him 4th on the depth chart. Baltimore knows how to find players in this league but thought that 3 other guys were better QB's then Beck. And even on our own team last season we didn't think anything of Beck to give him a single snap in the regular season. How do you supporters explain that? What happened to personal responsibility? What happened to letting your play dictate the snaps you get? That sir is 3 teams who have shown that they do not believe in Beck. Why in the hell should anyone? And why in the hell does anyone support this guy? Its mind numbing to me. I'd love to sink my teeth into some sort of argument to support Beck but the reoccurring theme here is that some of you think Beck is a victim and I don't see that at all. I hope he can do well and wish him nothing but success but seriously why do some of you think we can turn chicken poop into chicken salad? I don't get it.

Because he was on a bad team. I mean, a really bad team. A worse team than we've had at any time during the same time period.

The argument people make for John Beck is that he really was never given a chance, like ever. He was forced to start to early due to organizational, media and fan pressure, and he went out as a rookie, and surprise surprise, he played like a rookie. And not only that, he played like a rookie on a bad football team. The guy had no talent around him. No offensive line, no weapons, barebones defense. You make it sound as though Beck single-handidly tanked the Dolphins season. They were a bad football team, period, and John Beck wasn't given any sort of fair shot. Not even close.

This idea that all rookie quarterbacks need to come in and be saviors right away or they suck is bogus, especially for a guy like Beck, who was given garbage to work with with a garbage organization and a garbage head coach and no help, and promptly played like the garbage he was surrounded with.

As for Baltimore...one, let's be real here. Beck wasn't bought in to come in and compete for a starting job. The whole reason he was there was because he was bought in to be a back-up. To say "Well if he was any good he would've stayed there!" ignores the fact that the Ravens had two quarterbacks that they'd actually drafted already on their roster in 2009, and that in 2010 they had a high paid back-up quarterback who they felt comfortable with. The Ravens released BOTH John Beck and Troy Smith because they were paying Marc Bulger and were comfortable with Joe Flacco.

Two, if we're going to be talking about the Ravens being "great at identifying talent", we had to talk about how they've been completely balls at identifying quarterbacks, both through the draft and through free agency. They finally hit on Joe Flacco, but the Ravens aren't exactly an example of finding or identifying solid quarterbacking talent. Not saying that John Beck is great, I'm just saying..

And Rex Grossman started three games because Mike had to determine if the team would look into resigning him. If Rex had sucked balls it would've been easier to insert John into the game, but since he at least performed adequately, there was no real reason to insert John into the game, especially when they were trying to figure out whether or not to give Rex a new contract. Mike likely felt comfortable with what he had with Beck, plus Beck signed an extension.

I mean, Mike traded for the guy, and then signed him to a three year extension. That speaks a lot to the faith that Mike must have in him, and that he felt safe with Beck in his back pocket. I don't think anyone is arguing he'll be some magical savior; just that he wasn't really given any sort of opportunity to prove whether or not he could start. From every scrap of video I've been able to hunt down of John's starts in Miami, the guy had nothing to work with. No one was getting open. The o-line wasn't blocking anyone. The run game was barely functional. He was a rookie quarterback on a bad team that played like a rookie quarterback on a bad football team.

Then the new regime came in, effectively tried to purge everything the old one had done, and Beck got washed away in the clean-up effort, even though he hadn't done anything wrong, and even though Parcells told Beck he reminded him of Romo sits to pee. (Who, ironically enough, wasn't a Parcells guy, but was a Sean Payton guy) Parcells more or less lied to John's face about being given a chance to compete to be the starter, and then Parcells got pissed that John got pissed that Parcells lied to him and then signed two other guys and then traded for another guy and buried John on the depth chart where he'd never be given an opportunity, which led to John getting released and ending up in Baltimore, who just drafted Joe Flacco and was going to let Troy Smith start this season.

I'm willing to see what John has to offer, because I don't see a downside to having him play at this point. He plays well, it works out for us. He doesn't play well, we draft a new guy, hopefully it works out for us. Because it just seems to me the guy has been given a raw deal by people.

It's always more fun to root for the underdog, anyway.

[KDawg]

I

I don't prefer Grossman. I prefer Beck or even Vince Young if we sign him. I also wouldn't mind David Garrard either.

John Beck.

I really like Tyler Thigpen, but I'm not quite sure he's a FA, so he'd require picks. If we could get him in a Doug Dutch type trade I'd be happy to have him on the roster, at bare minimum as a backup

Then either keep McNabb for a year, as a back up (if we don't get any good offers) and draft a QB to be the future in next years draft, or get rid of McNabb this year and resign Grossman to compete. We're not going to get a stud QB in FA this year.

[robotfire]

Do you recall what prompted Gibbs to yank PR from that Bears game? I have always been bothered by that. He was playing well if memory serves.

No he wasn't, and he looked awful all preseason.

[KCClybun]

If there's four years to free agency, then Thigpen is a free agent. I like Thigpen too. And Drew Stanton, who'd be a free agent. And Troy Smith, who I think is a free agent. And Matt Moore.

...I like a lot of guys who are young and could be "second chance quarterbacks".

[Est.1974]

OF - Always thought we traded away a future second rounder for Cooley.

Guess that'll make it look worse.

[Chump Bailey]

If there's four years to free agency, then Thigpen is a free agent. I like Thigpen too. And Drew Stanton, who'd be a free agent. And Troy Smith, who I think is a free agent. And Matt Moore.

...I like a lot of guys who are young and could be "second chance quarterbacks".

Stanton seems interesting as an option.

[KCClybun]

Stanton seems interesting as an option.

Personally, I'm all for having a quarterback who is secure enough in himself to do the Dougie knowing full well the internet will immortalize it forever.

[Chump Bailey]

Personally, I'm all for having a quarterback who is secure enough in himself to do the Dougie knowing full well the internet will immortalize it forever.

Not too many white dudes could pull that off as well as Drew either - if any.