Skeletor The Invincible Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 Joe Gibbs will not be switching QBs. We will not see Patrick Ramsey in the next game unless Mark Brunell gets injured. Why, you ask? The answer is pretty simple, really: Continuity, of sorts. Why would Gibbs switch a quarterback in the middle of the year, right after a win? Why? Have you guys played organized football? Do you know what it's like when suddenly you have someone else in the huddle barking out orders? Do you know how it is when you have someone else throwing you the ball? Especially when it used to be a lefty, now it's a righty? We're still in playoff contention. We could turn the season around, WITH Brunell. I know. It's a difficult dream to have, but it's possible. Gibbs annointed him the starter and he'll stick with him because changing quarterbacks now would be a huge mistake. The demeanor and morale of the team would undoubtedly plummet. Think about every other time we have switched QBs mid-season. Morale has plummeted. I think Ramsey will eventually play. I'm certain of it. I'm all for it. He'll play when we are far out of playoff contention and are simply trying to get him experience in the system. I don't think Brunell will improve, but we may as well stop the moaning and groaning that comes after every game. Gibbs won't make a change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saqs Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 Good post. People have been saying this for the last few weeks now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ntotoro Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 I don't think Brunell will improve, but we may as well stop the moaning and groaning that comes after every game. Gibbs won't make a change. It took six weeks for people to figure this out? Still won't stop all the pouting and moaning from the armchair experts, though. Nick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skins26 Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 If he does change QB's we may hear something about a freak injury to Brunell, that he is healthy enough to be the #2 to guy but just cant start, if you know what I mean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 It IS a difficult dream to have but I kind of agree. If you factor in the extra week for many players to heal up (including Brunell and Coles) then I think we have some winnable games coming up. We could get close to .500 at the midway point of the year and then who knows? What if by that time our D is still playing well and our O can get us 21-24 PPG?? It's possible. Marty did it, so can Joe! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McMetal Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 I was talking to a Steelers fan this morning and he was saying how he and a lot of fans were actually hoping early in the season that Maddox would get hurt so Big Ben could get into the game. I'm sure there were probably a few Patriot fans thinking the same thing about Bledsoe before Brady took over. I would never wish injury on a Redskin, but if this cr*p continues it could really be the best thing for us. That way the Brunell apologists can quit worrying about their "continuity" and "sending messages" and the team can rally behind Pat and resuscitate this offense. Gibbs doesn't have to explain anything and the media can forego all the bashing about another high priced free agent bust. It's a disturbingly attractive scenario... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
riggins44 Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 Skeltor, while I agree with what you're saying...there was some interesting playcalling yesterday, which may say otherwise. In the second half, we reached the redzone with Portis running strong. Our next three plays were all runs. At that point we were in perfect position to run a play action pass (esp. on 1st down). That leads me that Gibbs didn't have the confidence in Brunell to attempt a pass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldenchild Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 I beg to differ. In fact, I think it's ridiculous to say that putting another QB in their will have anything but a positive effect on the team morale. Somehow I think that if Ramsey could do BETTER than Brunell, team morale would be just fine. I doubt the running game would suffer from having another QB handing the ball off, and it didn't seem last year that any of the guys had a hard time with Ramsey. If I were part of the passing game right now, I'd have a hard time seeing morale being any lower. Less than 100 yards in TWO STRAIGHT GAMES. That's pitiful. I don't care if you're playing against Da Bears of '85, that's still pitiful. And with Portis behind the QB and Coles and Gardner out wide, goodness gracious. I'm not sure whether Gibbs will make the change or not, but I completely disagree that it would hurt the team at all. What, is Ramsey going to throw for less than 90 yards a week? Is he going to hand the other team MORE than 7 points every single game? The ONLY way that Gibbs could keep Brunell in rightly is if those are true. It's as close to a fact as possible that throwing for more yards and giving the other team less points leads to a better chance of winning and a rise in team morale. The only reasons I can think of for why Gibbs would keep Brunell in are that either Ramsey looks awful in practice, Brunell looks amazing in practice against our good defense (and just somehow can't manage to do anything against any other team), Brunell is hurt and therefore is given the chance to battle through the injury (I think this is likely, just look at his throws), or Gibbs is extremely wary of throwing Ramsey into the fire and doesn't think he's ready yet. I REALLY REALLY REALLY hope that Ramsey is given the chance to become the starter over the bye, because if this continues there ain't no way in hell this team makes the playoffs. I have been a Brunell supporter until this game, but watching the guy stare to his left every play and then throw the ball fifteen yards up in the air and out of bounds, missing a WIDE open receiver, is just too painful for me. Either way, I'll support the team and the QB, and I have faith that Gibbs will make the right decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbear Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 How does Brunnels play thus far this season compare to the play of Mcnabb at the beginning of last year? I'm not saying I expect Brunnel to turn it all around and suddenly play like a stud as Mcnabb did last year. It's just that it's not unheard of for a team to find a groove after suffering through a horrible passing start. Ah well, my fingers are crossed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saqs Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 Good point about Mcnabb. I think i remember he threw for under 200 yards the first 8 games of the season last year. He was getting slammed from every angle imaginable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamebreaker Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 Actually, Ramsey probably hasn't seen much action even in practice. Only the starter gets the needed amount of reps to get ready for next weeks game. Ramsey probably gets very little action. The only exception would be the week before the Dallas game when Brunell wasn't expected to play, and Ramsey was being prepared like the starter all week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skins4eva Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 I agree with the original thread poster: Gibbs knows that good football starts with consistency. We won't see Ramsey unless Brunell goes down Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldskool Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 Salave’a, Noble or one of the other meat walls on the D line are going to have to “accidently” fall on Brunell during practice to get Ramsey in there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grimreaper36 Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 What, is Ramsey going to throw for less than 90 yards a week? Thing is, with Ramsey, he could make those yards in one pass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BleedinBurgundyandGold Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 I just dont see how our passing game could be any worse. Continuity? Doesn't it seem counter intuitive that when things are going bad, you dont change them in order to make them good? No! You change what isn't working (Brunell) in an attempt to right the ship. Come on guys Brunell is old, has no arm, and cant run. Why do we need to stick with him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posse81 Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 I think it's fairly obvious Gibbs won't make a change if we're winning, and maybe he shouldn't. But if Brunell continues to miss passes like the one to Coles yesterday when he was WIDE OPEN down the sideline, there is no reason I should stop moaning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
afparent Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 Well one thing we can hope for is Brunell has to get better the more snaps he takes. I have to believe he is not totally through. Maybe that is Gibbs rationale. The problem would be how many more games we lose before this happens Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molinger Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 Brunell, I believe the reason he is playing is to try to eliminate mistakes and have some stability. I am sure coach Gibbs believe Brunell is only a stop gap until the offense gets their feet under them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ænima Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 We're still in playoff contention. We could turn the season around, WITH Brunell. I know. It's a difficult dream to have, but it's possible.I thought we were being honest. There is no way we make the playoffs with Brunell starting. We are lucky to beat even the worst teams in the league right now! Maybe when we play a much better team, and we get blown out you Brunell supporters will finally realize that we have no hope with him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldskool Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 Originally posted by Ænima I thought we were being honest. There is no way we make the playoffs with Brunell starting. We are lucky to beat even the worst teams in the league right now! Maybe when we play a much better team, and we get blown out you Brunell supporters will finally realize that we have no hope with him. I hate to say it, but it might be against GB in 2 weeks.. Favre might throw 3 or 4 picks in that game against our secondary but he sure as hell is gonna throw at least 2 TD’s as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mookie0720 Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 Gibbs clearly does not have confidence in Brunell, and may not have wanted to leave him out to dry and look pathetic on that last drive where we ran out the clock with more than 2 minutes left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BleedB&G4life Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 Originally posted by TD_washingtonredskins It IS a difficult dream to have but I kind of agree. If you factor in the extra week for many players to heal up (including Brunell and Coles) then I think we have some winnable games coming up. We could get close to .500 at the midway point of the year and then who knows? What if by that time our D is still playing well and our O can get us 21-24 PPG?? It's possible. Marty did it, so can Joe! Yeah, and Marty did it with Tony Banks of all people.:doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ænima Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 Originally posted by Oldskool I hate to say it, but it might be against GB in 2 weeks.. Favre might throw 3 or 4 picks in that game against our secondary but he sure as hell is gonna throw at least 2 TD’s as well. Not to mention the td that our O will give to them. All GB has to do is score at least 20 points, and the game will be over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illone Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 Brunell did have a nice pass to Gardner for six and dove for a first down when needed. The guy can still make plays. He did throw a couple really ugly passes, from what I can remember of yesterday he missed a WIDE open coles down the left sideline and then later in the game a WIDE open Taylor Jacobs down the right sideline. Both passes should/could have gone for six. It was an ugly win yesterday, but I'll take it. What I wouldn't mind seeing more of is Brunell, Coles, and Gardner working together on the sidelines. Everytime I watch the Eagles play they show McNabb and TO working together on the sidelines talking about routes and zones, building chemistry with one another. Those guys are close friends and it shows out on the field. Maybe Brunell just needs to make friends with these guys. I think he has the arm strength and the accuracy to get the job done, he just isn't right now. He should have been able to lite up that Bears secondary but didn't:shrug: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsfan93 Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 Originally posted by riggins44 Skeltor, while I agree with what you're saying...there was some interesting playcalling yesterday, which may say otherwise. In the second half, we reached the redzone with Portis running strong. Our next three plays were all runs. At that point we were in perfect position to run a play action pass (esp. on 1st down). That leads me that Gibbs didn't have the confidence in Brunell to attempt a pass. That really doesn't prove anything. Could it be that maybe we kept running the ball because Portis was having success on the ground. In the other games, Gibbs would run play action because Portis was getting grounded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.