freakofthesouth Posted September 20, 2004 Share Posted September 20, 2004 Here's my take: a). It is completely abnormal for a Gibbs coached football team to commit 7 turnovers in a game. . Mark Brunell cannot get the ball down the field accurately, a crucial need for Gibbs' QBs. c). Ramsey, despite his mistakes (3 of them :doh:), deserves the benefit of the doubt. If certain WRs, who will remain nameless (cough! # 87! cough!) would simply 'catch the ball,' or 'do what you're paid to do,' say on the goal line, for instance, we win this game. Ramsey has not had time to get comfortable w/ this offense. At least one of his pics was a miscommunication between him and his WR. Yet, Ramsey got the ball downfield, a crucial part to this offense. d). The defense looked solid, and kept a game close, dispite an atrocious offensive collapse. They really only gave up one play, and how can you blame them, after being repeatedly pinned in our own territory. e). You can't blame Portis, though his two fumbles were untimely. The Giants simply 'contained' Portis, kept him between the tackles, and shut us down offensively, and completely. When they bring that many defenders agianst the run, it is the QB's job to stretch the field...something that Mark Brunell, though at times efficient and safe, is too cautious about. Conclusion: With all of these factors in mind, here's what I've concluded: -This is a Joe Gibbs football team. They will not collapse; hell...WE ALL KNEW HE WOULD START SLOW. This, hopefully, is the deepest part of the pit that we must climb out of. -I have become pro-Ramsey. The mistakes he made yesterday were a result of his lack of playing time w/ his WRs, IMO. Beyond that, did Portis get any runs when Ramsey was in? Not really. This allowed the Giants defense to key in on Ramsey, who is still a little shelled shocked from last season. Folks may cite Ramsey's preseason performance as lacking. But answer this- has Ramsey ever started strong in a game? He always has looked uncomfortable, and then settled as the game progresses, driving us down the field, etc. Moreover, I feel that his problems can be fixed, or coached...if he is starting, he will get reps w/ the starters, get on the same page w/ everyone, and will learn the ideas of 'throwing the ball away', or moving the pocket. To end this rant, Ramsey has the ability to be what this offense needs to be effective. We all now know, as well as every defense in the league, that if the QB cannot get the ball downfield, we are doomed for the season. But...7 TOs, and yet we still almost win it? That's OK by me, knowing Gibbs is in charge here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skins11 Posted September 20, 2004 Share Posted September 20, 2004 Good post. Yet some feel the need to make "Heath" Ramsey's middle name. You have to look past the statistics and actually watch the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted September 20, 2004 Share Posted September 20, 2004 Freak, One thing I don't understand about the Gardner bashing is that while he clearly missed a touchdown throw that could have made a difference in the game, he didn't make the terrible throw that lost points in that situation. And more, didn't we get down there in the first place because of an extraordinary play by Gardner? While I wouldn't say his two drops compensate for an exceptional play, I would say it's hard to blame Gardner for not getting points on a drive that only existed because of Gardner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted September 20, 2004 Share Posted September 20, 2004 I wouldn't mind seeing Patrick in there for the entire game vs. Dallas. You give him the ball without the need to play catchup (and with a full week with the starters) and I think he will do great. I think we have a great chance on Monday night to take this game from the Cowboys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buzzlightbeer81 Posted September 20, 2004 Share Posted September 20, 2004 Cant blame Gardner, if he hadnt made that amazing catch that got them to that point ramsey would never have gotten us down there anyway, he woulda thrown a pick before we sniffed the endzone. Ramsey should be the #3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skins11 Posted September 20, 2004 Share Posted September 20, 2004 Originally posted by buzzlightbeer81 Cant blame Gardner, if he hadnt made that amazing catch that got them to that point ramsey would never have gotten us down there anyway, he woulda thrown a pick before we sniffed the endzone. Ramsey should be the #3 Ok by the same logic, if Ramsey wasn't in the game, we would have never gotten down there since Brunell and Hasselbeck BOTH can't throw that far, and Brunell has already showcased a not so great passing game that is turnover-prone. Yet Ramsey should be the #3? :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freakofthesouth Posted September 20, 2004 Author Share Posted September 20, 2004 Yeah Art, I actually didn't mean to bash Gardner. It's just kinda seconde nature. There were a lot of crucial drops, by Portis, by Coles, and by Gardner, that did not help the cause. I did want to mention his amazing grab there, that did get us into the redzone. And Ramsey did make the mistake of throwing some pics down there, for certain. I feel like, in some respect, the playcalling when Ramsey was in was a bit flawed. I feel like, when we are on the goal line, why not try and run it in? While I do blame Ramsey for making the mistakes, I also think he has not been practicing w/ these guys, and considering the circumstances, he kinda shined a little. I also want to reiterate that 7 turnovers is highly irregular; it was almost like yesterday, we were just cursed...absolutely cursed. Yet we almost won, and that'a good sign, IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saqs Posted September 20, 2004 Share Posted September 20, 2004 I dont see how anyone can come to the conclusion, aside from maybe one of the picks, that Ramseys mistakes were due to him not being comfy with the offense. The possibility that LC ran the wrong route/was held is a real one. But the other 2 picks were just flat out bad decisions that have more to do with being smart with football than anything else. Ramsey even admitted as such in post game interviews when asked if the INTs had to do with his lack of reps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freakofthesouth Posted September 20, 2004 Author Share Posted September 20, 2004 True, Sags. That's great that Ramsey takes accountability. I love that. I also think that football smarts, like knowing when to make the play, ansd knowing when to throw it away, can be taught. That is something that he can learn. Natural talent, arm strength, and, ahem, 'balls', are intangibles. Brunell does not look to have that anymore, whereas Ramsey still appears to be a rough-around-the-edges, NFL force. edit: on a day of complete Murphy's Law, where everything that can go wrong, does, the fcat that Ramsey can come in and make an honest run, though not mistake free, speaks volumes to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted September 20, 2004 Share Posted September 20, 2004 Originally posted by freakofthenorth e). You can't blame Portis, though his two fumbles were untimely. The Giants simply 'contained' Portis, kept him between the tackles, and shut us down offensively, and completely. When they bring that many defenders agianst the run, it is the QB's job to stretch the field...something that Mark Brunell, though at times efficient and safe, is too cautious about. -I have become pro-Ramsey. The mistakes he made yesterday were a result of his lack of playing time w/ his WRs, IMO. Beyond that, did Portis get any runs when Ramsey was in? Not really. This allowed the Giants defense to key in on Ramsey, who is still a little shelled shocked from last season. Folks may cite Ramsey's preseason performance as lacking. But answer this- has Ramsey ever started strong in a game? He always has looked uncomfortable, and then settled as the game progresses, driving us down the field, etc. First off yes you can. Not only did he fumble twice, one holding the ball like a loaf of bread with 2 hands he made a terrible attempt at a block which lead to Brunell's fumble. No, you don't throw into double coverage once in the endzone blaming it on not playing, that is basic nfl you don't do it, that was a rookie mistake made by a 3 year old QB which = not good, the second or third pick (i lost count it was so fast) was even worse he threw while moving, which he doesn't do well, and he threw it up for grabs, while portis was wide open in the middle of the field. Those are not mistakes made from not playing or praticing, those are just dumb rookie mistakes. Makes you think if he even wants to stay here anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freakofthesouth Posted September 20, 2004 Author Share Posted September 20, 2004 I already addressed those points in another post Booma. Portis, and the rest of team, had a terribly unlucky day, mixed w/ poor execution. But, I'll say this- I want Ramsey to be the leader of this offense, and I hope that's the silver lining that comes out of this terribly disappointing loss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skins11 Posted September 20, 2004 Share Posted September 20, 2004 Originally posted by jbooma Makes you think if he even wants to stay here anymore. Please, this is a ridiculous comment. I guess Brunell wants out of here even more, since his screwups led DIRECTLY to Giants' points. I guess Portis hates Washington since he excessively celebrating, penalizing us. Oh yeah, one of his fumbles led DIRECTLY to a Giants TD. Why don't they just dress in blue? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Posted September 20, 2004 Share Posted September 20, 2004 Originally posted by jbooma Makes you think if he even wants to stay here anymore. Lamest post in the HISTORY of Extremeskins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skins11 Posted September 20, 2004 Share Posted September 20, 2004 Originally posted by Ghost of Nibbs McPimpin Lamest post in the HISTORY of Extremeskins. My way of saying it was longwinded, I like yours. :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted September 20, 2004 Share Posted September 20, 2004 Originally posted by ramseyskins Please, this is a ridiculous comment. I guess Brunell wants out of here even more, since his screwups led DIRECTLY to Giants' points. I guess Portis hates Washington since he excessively celebrating, penalizing us. Oh yeah, one of his fumbles led DIRECTLY to a Giants TD. Why don't they just dress in blue? Portis wasn't replaced in the offseason if I recall and how do you know do you talk to him all the time, he may not be happy we don't know. It was just a thought. I don't think it was as stupid as you saying a while back that Ramsey is better then Leftwhich, Carr, and Harrington?? Now which one is it. Thank you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted September 20, 2004 Share Posted September 20, 2004 I just wanted to take advantage of the Gardner bashing.... I've seen better hands on a clock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skins11 Posted September 20, 2004 Share Posted September 20, 2004 Originally posted by jbooma Portis wasn't replaced in the offseason if I recall and how do you know do you talk to him all the time, he may not be happy we don't know. It was just a thought. I don't think it was as stupid as you saying a while back that Ramsey is better then Leftwhich, Carr, and Harrington?? Now which one is it. Thank you :laugh: Are you seriously trying to use that debate we had backin the day to your favor, when you were clearly beaten down thoroughly over and over again? You offered weak arguments and I disproved each and every one of them: http://www.extremeskins.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=49497&perpage=15&&pagenumber=6 Yes, and I stand by the statement I made. And nothing is as stupid as the point you were trying to made just now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.