No Excuses For Brunell

[Ignatius J.]

It's easy to think that brunell does a better job managing the game, and that despite ramsey's flashy arm, he's the better steward. The common reasoning goes along the lines of:

Brunell does a better job in gibbs field postition oriented approach. Given our excellent defense, it makes more sense to go with someone who doesn't turn the ball over as often.

This is, in my opinion, B.S. Ramsey was a bad QB yesterday. Brunell had no excuse for his performance and deserves to be benched in favor of a better QB.

I'm going to take a page from my buddy ASF and invent a statistic.

It's a modified drive length. In a field position battle, you'd like to have an offense that controls the ball. You want them to at least gain enough yardage so that after a punt you slowly chip away at thier position until you score. I conclude that in this attribute, ramsey and brunell are in a dead heat.

The modified drive length is the distance between the spot the offense takes posession of the ball from the spot the opposing offense takes the ball after the drive. Ramsey comes out ahead in this stat with 24.9 yards/drive. while brunell has 24.2 yards/drive, well within statistical error of ramsey.

I conclude that ramsey is the equal of brunell in terms of ball control offense. Because ramsey is more likely to improve over the course of a year due to his youth, I fail to see an argument for starting brunell.

Now, the counterargument might go along the lines of a field goal, which ramsey's turnovers precluded. In the case of this game, Hall's injury and the distances involved render the point moot. Field goals were not going to win this game, we needed touchdowns.

[halter91]

So basically your saying it's okay for Ramsey to throw 3 picks. Sure, Brunell had a lousy game, but how do you figure Ramsey is better. He should have thrown 1 of them balls way, instead he gets rid of it. How about the INT in the corner. He made a perfect pass to the Giants D back. He hit him in stride. I personally think they both stunk. The real question is does Hasselback gain any ground on the starting posotion?

[Pete]

Hasselbeck gains gorund if Brunell can't go next week. Brunell doesn't throw the pics because he rarely throws down field.

Ramsey was put in and had to play catch up at a time when he didn't have a solid running game to lean on. I guess Ramsey is just uneasy in the pocket. It surely has nothing to do with recievers being covered, or heavy blitzes comming causing him to make mistakes.

Now Brunell on the other hand, didn't want our O line to look too good, so he took a sack and fumbled, and scrambled a few times so their heads wouldn't get too big.

IMO. Ramsey was moving the team better then Brunell has shown thus far. He didn't seem as squirley in the pocket as many make him out to be. Sure, he made bad choices on throws, but given the score and time on the clock, you tend to take far more chances.

We need a passing game to make this work, and Brunell hasn't shown much. Hasselbeck isn't the answer. Getting Ramsey working with the first team is the road to take. I don't see Brunell getting better.

[BurgundyBomber]

OK, everyone is entitled to an opinion, but I fail to see how anyone can form one after the GIants game. Both QBs were HORRIBLE. If you move the team 90 yards and throw a tater for an INT and come away for no points, guess what, you stink.

If you throw dinks and doinks, convert a third down or two before you don't convert at the opponents' 40, guess what, you stink.

Netiher Ramsey nor Brunell showed much positive. I'll agree Ramsey has more upside simply because he's younger, but damn, where's his head at?!?

Brunell is obviously hobbled and we'll have to await the medical report, but barring that do I see evidence of a QB switch. No. But there's always the crowd that wants to switch QBs after every loss, or every half, or every quarter, and then halfway through the season they will have switched teams altogether.

[fansince62]

ignatious.....concur......brunell is great for handing the ball off (most of the time!)....but I don't see the upside to be frank. for an established vet who wsa a quality QB...he has looked pretty pathetic. if we aint pressing for the SB this year...find out now if PR has what it takes. might as well learn early on whether we are in a world of hurt or not.

brunell isn't moving the offense. he can't go downfield. he seems to be consistently throwing short or behiond the receiver (on crossing patterns). why did Jax say see ya? are his best days behind him?

[Riggo-toni]

Brunell is a horrible fit for Gibbs' offense. I was actually relieved when he left the game. He simply has no arm left. Watching him pass downfield gave me WaffleGator flashbacks. With Ramsey, we finally began driving downfield. He just needs to learn there are times when it's necessary to just throw the ball away. Throwing 3 INTs IS unacceptable, but if the O Line had given more protection and Gardner hadn't dropped the easy TD pass, the universal opinion on this board would be Ramsey is the team's new savior, yada yada yada.

When Brunell is in there, teams are stuffing the box to nail Portis and just daring us to beat them downfield, which Brunell has been incapable of doing. Gibbs did a good job of compensating for Brunell's inadequacies by running a couple of play action bootlegs.

I know Gibbs wants guys with character, but I think the Brunell acquisition is something that will haunt his 2nd tenure here. Think of how cheaply we could have gotten Kerry Collins, who would be a prototypical Gibbs QB on the field. Yesterday showed Warner has more left in the tank than Brunell. Again, Warner was available for chump change, and is a traditional vertical passer. Granted, given his recent history, I can see why the team would have been nervous about picking him up.

[barefoot]

A QB is only as good as his recievers. Not going to get into a Gardner debate because everybody had butter fingers. Coles had big drops, Gardner had Big drops. Portis had BIG drops. If half of the drops were completions we would have a W. These things are in our TEAM's control. That means our TEAM can fix them. in a 20-14 game you can't give 17 pts on TO's and win, but it is a fixable problem.

[Saqs]

I guess im the only one who wont put the onus soley on Gardner for that drop in the end zone. Yes. The ball hit him in the (outstretched) hands. But the ball was a HOT throw, far to the outside, to a wide open Gardner. It could have been a better thrown ball. But if you're in the NFL as a WR, you need to catch balls that you're able to get 2 hands on.

[Soliloquy]

Originally posted by Pete

Now Brunell on the other hand, didn't want our O line to look too good

Are you serious?

We need a :sarcasm: smiley!

[jbooma]

Ramsey was worse then Brunell yesterday so what you are saying is put Tim in.

[bulldog]

one question that has to be asked in this debate is whether given a starting assignment where the score is 0-0 and the pressure to win is spread evenly across the team and not just on the qb to produce, would Ramsey look better in this offense?

we are all judging on the preseason and what has happened in practice.

but what if Ramsey is just a gamer?

a guy that plays better with the ball in game action?

yes, he still has limitations and will make mistakes that Brunell might not.

but he may very well make a lot more positive gains as well.

[Saqs]

The score 0-0, I feel more comfortable with Brunell as the QB than Ramsey at this point. Period. Sure. Ramsey may hit on a few nice throws. But he'll erase those with a boneheaded play. He's consitantly shown that and hasnt improved on it.

Brunell is NOT our long term solution and Ramsey is NOT our short term solution. Brunell wins by default IMO.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

Saqs, I tend to agree with this.

Also, the pass should have gone to Coles anyway. He was more open in the back of the endzone.

Ramsey has a gun, but sometimes it's on the QB to make those passes more catchable.

Still, no excuse, a ball comes to you as an NFL WR, you catch it.

[MikeB]

Originally posted by halter91

So basically your saying it's okay for Ramsey to throw 3 picks. Sure, Brunell had a lousy game, but how do you figure Ramsey is better. He should have thrown 1 of them balls way, instead he gets rid of it. How about the INT in the corner. He made a perfect pass to the Giants D back. He hit him in stride. I personally think they both stunk. The real question is does Hasselback gain any ground on the starting posotion?

Dude, are you serious?

Ramsey has had no time in the system, played little in the preseason, and hasn't worked much with the starting O.

You expected him to step in an perform like a starting QB?

Give him some practice\playing time with the starters and he'd be much improved. Better than Brunell I believe.

[Art]

I think it's pretty remarkable we expect Ramsey or Brunell to look comfortable and calm after two games in a system they've never played before. I think we might benefit from time in the system and on the field before we draw conclusions about what upside there is or is not. But, that's just me.

[jbooma]

Originally posted by TD_washingtonredskins

Saqs, I tend to agree with this.

Also, the pass should have gone to Coles anyway. He was more open in the back of the endzone.

Ramsey has a gun, but sometimes it's on the QB to make those passes more catchable.

Still, no excuse, a ball comes to you as an NFL WR, you catch it.

I think the pass was supposed to go to Coles, which would be why Gardner was surprised to see it close to him.

[Thiebear]

Its like saying that because of Portis' fumbles at this point in the season there is no reason not to play Betts. Because due to the Fumble/TD ratio Betts is clearly the better back...

[DCMONEY]

I said from the beginning that I have no problem with obtaining a veteran QB but not at any cost. Unfortunately games are played off the field as well as on the field. By that I mean off season transactions. I hate to say it but look at Testaverde for the Cowbums. He's not lighting things up but he's not costing the Cowbums anything either. A veteran QB you would think look more seasoned than a young QB. Brunell was brought here for a 8.6 million dollar signing bonus and a 3rd round pick. He should at least look average if not better. People kept saying that Gibbs must've seen something on film that Brunell still has. Well lets hope that can come out soon, whatever it is. I have no problem with Gibbs when it comes to his X's and O's. His admin GM type skills I will question though. He didn't put together those Superbowl teams, he coached them. That honor went to Beathard and a little to Casserly. :2cents: :helmet: :logo: :wewantd:

[Pete]

Originally posted by Soliloquy

Are you serious?

We need a :sarcasm: smiley!

I thought I was being sarcastic enough not to need a smiley:laugh:

Originally posted by Saqs

The score 0-0, I feel more comfortable with Brunell as the QB than Ramsey at this point. Period. Sure. Ramsey may hit on a few nice throws. But he'll erase those with a boneheaded play. He's consitantly shown that and hasnt improved on it.

Brunell is NOT our long term solution and Ramsey is NOT our short term solution. Brunell wins by default IMO.

Saqs, I don't think Bull Dog was refering to the fans being comfortable, but Ramsey. At 0-0, your given time to get into a rythem, with far less pressure. If Ramsey gets the reps with the first team this week, as I expect he will, his comfort level will surely rise. Young QB's mess up, it's a fact of life. So, as to Bull Dogs question, yes, I think he would look better.

Art also brings up a good point in that each QB has less then 2 games under a new coach and system. Gibbs is the master, but he can't wave a wand and POOF, everything is perfecto.

[Trevor]

I said it when Gibbs named Brunell starter and I'll say it again now. The offense can only be so good with Brunell. He either doesn't have the arm strength to stretch the field or he is afraid to. The offense will not take off until Ramsey takes over and can shake his "force the ball" mentality. Until this happens(if it happens) the offense will be mediocre at best.