Gibbs quotes on Campbell.

[FS36]

Originally posted by Tommy-the-Greek

I still want to know what the cap implications would be if Brunnel retired? Could we offer him a position in the organization to pay him off the balance of what he would feel we owe him?

I've always thought that a team's cap does not take a hit at all when a player retires. They take the money they've been paid, and then it's as if the contract never existed.

Of course I could be wrong, but that's what I've been led to believe.

[Tommy-the-Greek]

I found the answer to the cap question if he retires and I don't like it. I am going to post the info in another thread. I found a link with alot of great info for cap dummy's like me.

[TheLongshot]

Originally posted by FS36

I've always thought that a team's cap does not take a hit at all when a player retires. They take the money they've been paid, and then it's as if the contract never existed.

Didn't we take a big cap hit when Deion retired?

Just a few things on what people have said here.

One thing I agree with Art with is that there is no good way to put a positive spin on this. I understand that we probably needed another QB to develop, but as soon as you spend multiple picks on a guy, the incumbant's job is in trouble. When you spend a high pick on a guy, you expect that he will play in the near future. Also, not nessicarily is the new guy the better guy. The worst case here is if Ramsey lights it up, and we can't afford to keep him, and Campbell doesn't turn out as well.

As I said in another thread, I have a hard time believing that the Skins will be able to keep Ramsey at the end of his contract, good nor not. If he's good, we haven't really respected him all that much, getting killed by Steve Spurrier and trying to replace him twice under Gibbs.

Personally, I would have rather have seen some guys who could help us win now, while picking up a developmental QB in the 3-4 round. (Hell, Adrian McPherson is still on the board.)

As you can tell, I don't like this.

Jason

[Tommy-the-Greek]

The answer is whatever part of the signing bonus is not included in this year's salary will be accelerated and the team will have to pay it.

[JRAB]

Originally posted by Gilgamesh

1. Coles was a cancer that had to be surgically removed. No one wanted him here, including many of the other players. Without surgery, his foot made him worth far less than he was being paid.

2. Pierce wanted more money than he was worth. He had one good season in Gregg Williams scheme and wanted more money than Marcus Washington, our best linebacker. We have to pay attention to the cap at some point.

3. Smoot was not evaluated as a priority by our defensive coaching staff and thus allowed to let go. Williams took free agents and off the street talent and turned our existing defense into on of the best in the league. He knows how to evaluated talent, and Rogers was the highest rated player on his board. I'll trust his judgement.

4. See #3.

5. We have no need at all for a pass catching tight end with Chris Cooley on the roster, one of the few bright spots we had on offense last year. Heath Miller actually would have been a total waste. Had Mark Clayton been available at #25, you might have had a better argukment for a WR here, but I'd much rather have a QB Gibbs sees as the potential to be perfect for his system on the roster than Roddy White.

As for next year's draft, we'll have an opportunity to reacquire a #1 if/when we trade LaVar to a team desperate for LB help. We don't need him or his attitude on this team with Williams here.

1. He played pretty good with that foot. If he would've suited up, all the fans would've been fine with him. The players had no problem with him, I don't think.

2. Pierce played extremely well and I'm not too sure he wasn't worth what NY paid him. He's young and very, very bright, and he played his heart out.

3. If Smoot wasn't deemed a priority then the CB spot was, because, don't know if you noticed, we just went out and spent the #9 pick overall to fill it. I don't think Williams had any problems with how Smoot played. We could've had both. Corner filled (Smoot) and impact DE (Merriman/Ware). I'm going to vomit when Ware starts racking up sacks and QB pressures for the Cowpukes.

4. See 3.

5. Roddy White and Heath Miller will both be outstanding players. I'm not alone on that. They both went round 1.

Great. We can get rid of Arrington. Probably for a LB with half his talent. That's just how I want to get the first rounder back.

That's the whole point. We're getting rid of talent to get talent.

The talent drain is a gushing hole in the Redskins dike... and the new talent is a slow trickle into the suddenly receding talent pool. We need to keep a few of the good players and then add to them.

Taking backups and letting startes go isn't the way.

Sorry so negative... But we're just making huge mistake after huge mistake. They aren't making a few personnel goofs... they are sinking a once proud franchise, and that isn't an exaggeration.

[wskin44]

I've read everyone's comments and here is what I believe:

Ramsey has two years left on his contract and two years to prove he can lead the team. Mechanically he has to learn to loft the ball over the LB's into the spaces in front of the safeties. He's not even average at this right now, which limits our play calling and every defense knows it.

After the next two years Ramsey & the Skins will either agree on his worth or they will part ways. The risk that either 1) Ramsey won't improve enough or 2) that they won't agree on his worth, is relatively high, at least 50/50. With that kind of risk at the QB postition you have to hedge your bet. That is what the Campbell pick does.

Campbell's strength is throwing the ball up and over and being very accurate with where it comes down. He is also significantly more athletic than Ramsey.

Apparently many GM's agree that Campbell is two years away from being ready, so Patrick shouldn't feel like Joe has a hook in his back pocket.

Finally, I believe that this proves (again) that Joe is committed for the long term. If he wasn't he would have taken a player who would have immediate impact.

[WVSkinsfan]

Does anybody know what his career stats were at Auburn?? He is a passing QB I hope??

[Sebowski]

Originally posted by Art

Here are some Gibbs quotes on Campbell. This is a release to the media that we will probably see and it was forwarded to me as a courtesy to provide to the site.

APRIL 23, 2005

HEAD COACH JOE GIBBS

I mentioned there were two corners on that board that we liked so there was a group there. Receivers and corners are sitting there that we liked.

Is he saying that drafting 2 CBs was a possibility? :doh: The only way I can make sense of this statement is that if Rodgers and Smith were both gone before 9, they had to think that the Packers might take Campbell They could take a CB there if Campbell is gone. Since Rodgers was still on the board they could take a CB at 9. It doesn't make that muchsense, but it is the only thing I can think of.

Originally posted by illone

Art,

Reading between the lines here I see Brunell being gone in a year or two. Campbell is insurance for the future.

Just a thought I had when I was downstairs scratching my head trying to figure everything out.

It makes sense that Gibbs would want someone he can groom for a couple years to fill in as the #2 save Ramsey plays great and lives up to potential. Truth be told I think Brunell has played his last down unless something crazy happens next season.

This is a blessing in disguise.

That may be exactly what the thinking behind the pick is, but I still think it sucks. You can get a backup QB for nothing in FA these days. Besides, Hasselbeck could have been that guy.

The picks stinks.

[illone]

Originally posted by Sebowski

That may be exactly what the thinking behind the pick is, but I still think it sucks. You can get a backup QB for nothing in FA these days. Besides, Hasselbeck could have been that guy.

The picks stinks.

If you agreed with the thinking behind the pick, then you wouldn't think it sucked.

Purging Brunell is exactly what 99% of the posters here want. If you look at the "worst QB" thread, Brunell is right up there.

Sure, you can get a backup QB for nothing, but can you get a potential franchise guy for nothing?

Gibbs is killing two birds with one stone here:

Backup QB for the future when Brunell is gone and a potential starter if Ramsey doesn't step up next year.

You don't find those guys everywhere, and if Campbell turns into the next Donovan McNabb I seriously doubt many here would complain.

[Gilgamesh]

Originally posted by JRAB

1. He played pretty good with that foot. If he would've suited up, all the fans would've been fine with him. The players had no problem with him, I don't think.

2. Pierce played extremely well and I'm not too sure he wasn't worth what NY paid him. He's young and very, very bright, and he played his heart out.

3. If Smoot wasn't deemed a priority then the CB spot was, because, don't know if you noticed, we just went out and spent the #9 pick overall to fill it. I don't think Williams had any problems with how Smoot played. We could've had both. Corner filled (Smoot) and impact DE (Merriman/Ware). I'm going to vomit when Ware starts racking up sacks and QB pressures for the Cowpukes.

4. See 3.

5. Roddy White and Heath Miller will both be outstanding players. I'm not alone on that. They both went round 1.

Great. We can get rid of Arrington. Probably for a LB with half his talent. That's just how I want to get the first rounder back.

That's the whole point. We're getting rid of talent to get talent.

The talent drain is a gushing hole in the Redskins dike... and the new talent is a slow trickle into the suddenly receding talent pool. We need to keep a few of the good players and then add to them.

Taking backups and letting startes go isn't the way.

Sorry so negative... But we're just making huge mistake after huge mistake. They aren't making a few personnel goofs... they are sinking a once proud franchise, and that isn't an exaggeration.

1. Coles caught a very large number of balls on screens and short routes. We we playing him to be a burner and a deep threat. He was, with his bad foot, neither of those.

2. Pierce's success was the result of his being able to take advantage of Gregg Williams' defensive scheme which drives traffic toward the MLB. His speed and intelligence were assets, but the system is what allowed him to be successful. If Williams thinks we can find an effective replacement with a better cap number, then so do I.

3. Agreed. Smoot was not the right CB for Williams' system (big, punishing hitter, able to blitz), so we found a better one. This would have happened sooner or later anyway, and if you are going to pay a lot for a corner, don't you want it to be the right corner?

4. Refrain

5. I'm not saying that Roddy White and Heath Miller are bad players (outstanding is a bit much at this point), I'm saying they were bad picks for us. The players we took were rated higher on our board overall, and they also fit more pressing needs, far more than a WR or TE would.

Lemar Marshall came in for LaVar last year and we didn't skip a beat. In fact, we were probably in better shape because we didn't have a player at WLB who was playing out of position trying to rely on his "instincts" or what used to work for him against lesser players in college. We're not just getting rid of talent to replace talent, we're getting rid of hard to coach, undisciplined malcontented underacheiving talent and replacing them with smart overacheivers who trust their coaches.

We're finally starting to do things right around here and take good high character guys who can work together instead of big names demanding big contracts who don't live up to their reputation. I just hope we keep up the good work.

[Art]

Originally posted by Sebowski

That may be exactly what the thinking behind the pick is, but I still think it sucks. You can get a backup QB for nothing in FA these days. Besides, Hasselbeck could have been that guy.

The picks stinks.

This is pretty funny. I don't know if you fall into the category of fan who constantly suggests the team needs a GM and that you build through the draft or not, but, somehow I suspect there are a legion of fans who read this and said, "That's right," and those are all the fans who constantly talk about building through the draft.

Oh, but a QB we can sign in free agency? Are there any other positions we don't need to worry about in the draft? Like kicker and punter. QB is as unimportant as kicker and punter, right?

Didn't the Redskins attempt to solve their QB issues last year outside of the draft by trading for Brunell?

Meanwhile, we sign a receiver in free agency who just played better than the likely performance of every rookie receiver in the league, but, we can't fill any needs at receiver in free agency. Sometimes I wonder .

[Kosher Ham]

1. The need for a WR is over-rated. With the enforcement of the rules, the need for a "Prototype WR" is lessened. Look at the Patriots as a perfect example of this. Like it or not the Pats Offense is similar in style to what Gibbs is characteristically known for. Mistake free, smart, QB protecting, hard nosed, grind it out football.

2. No Sebowski, IMO Gibbs was not saying that there was the possibility the Redskins would take 2 CBs. I think that Rogers was there #1 CB on the board (as he was mine as well), so in the event that he had not been there at 9 they would have taken Merriman, Mike Williams, Ware or some other player. But when it came to the #25 pick they had evaluated several players including CBs that would also fit in well.

3. Ramsey believe it or not is driving the Bus. He has the opportunity to control his own destiny for the most part. If he is successful, the Redskins will likely pony up and pay the man. If he still doesnt get it he will likely be traded to a team like Detriot, Miami or wherever next off-season.

4. Brunell retiring would be terrible for the Redskins cap-wise. We should all hope this does NOT happen. Let him get comfortable holding that clipboard and calling in plays.

5. Hasselbeck as Art says does seem like odd man out. 4 QBs ? Not likely. Hasselbeck believe it or not is not a very good QB at this point. Not even close. He is not Matt and never will be. His contract is not guaranteed, and his trade value at this point is next to nothing.

6. Hail to the Redskins.

[Cdowwe]

It just seems to me that we couldve picked someting better for the now term

[Art]

Originally posted by Cdowwe

It just seems to me that we couldve picked someting better for the now term

Also amusing. Since the trade with Denver, I've heard dozens of comments that the trade suggests we were playing for the now and not the future. Now, a move is made that doesn't immediately provide benefit on the field -- at least from an individual, statistical standpoint from the drafted player -- and, boy, wouldn't it be nice to make moves to help us more now?

And, if we want to be helped more now, obviously, we shouldn't really draft rookies at all. Rookies are too uncertain. Even the good ones rarely help a team THAT much right away. So, maybe we should just go with free agents who've proven they can play.

Oh, wait, no, that's not good either.

But, I THINK I understand the negative position now.

We MUST BUILD THROUGH THE DRAFT.

Only, NOT at QB.

And, we must not sacrifice the future by playing for the now.

Except when we take a player to help in the future.

It's all coming together.

[Tarhog]

Screw now, screw the future.

I wanted players who could help us last season.

That whole 6-10 gig was entirely unsatisfactory.

[Kosher Ham]

Originally posted by Tarhog

Screw now, screw the future.

I wanted players who could help us last season.

That whole 6-10 gig was entirely unsatisfactory.

So you are saying you wanted a QB and a LG ? Hmmm... The LG is coming tomorrow I believe.

[Gilgamesh]

What about moves that might help us in an alternate reality? Are really the only team that doesn't have scouts checking out other dimensions!?!?!?

[CHUBAKAH]

Originally posted by Tarhog

Screw now, screw the future.

I wanted players who could help us last season.

That whole 6-10 gig was entirely unsatisfactory.

Man your getting grumpy in your old age.

Happy birthday Bro!

:whippin:

[zoony]

Originally posted by SkinsandTerps

So you are saying you wanted a QB and a LG ? Hmmm... The LG is coming tomorrow I believe.

I think we get a couple of project Dlineman...

molinaro / wilson last year for Bugel projects... now it's GW's turn to have a few late rounders.

[zoony]

Originally posted by Tarhog

Screw now, screw the future.

I wanted players who could help us last season.

That whole 6-10 gig was entirely unsatisfactory.

Didn't notice till Chubakah pointed it out.

Happy Birthday!!

But if it's any consolation, I think you've always been grumpy.... it's nothing to do with your old age

[Sebowski]

Originally posted by Art

This is pretty funny. I don't know if you fall into the category of fan who constantly suggests the team needs a GM and that you build through the draft or not, but, somehow I suspect there are a legion of fans who read this and said, "That's right," and those are all the fans who constantly talk about building through the draft.

Oh, but a QB we can sign in free agency? Are there any other positions we don't need to worry about in the draft? Like kicker and punter. QB is as unimportant as kicker and punter, right?

Didn't the Redskins attempt to solve their QB issues last year outside of the draft by trading for Brunell?

Meanwhile, we sign a receiver in free agency who just played better than the likely performance of every rookie receiver in the league, but, we can't fill any needs at receiver in free agency. Sometimes I wonder .

I am niether of the fans you speak of. We don't need a GM. All that is is a title. Everything going through Gibbs is fine with me (that doesn't mean I ma fine with everything he does).

The Redskins tried and failed with the Brunell trade last year (I won't get into that again). That doesn't mean that we should give up on bringing in QBs via FA. You have to agree that QBs can be had in FA. Even young ones with bright futures (Drew Brees is on a one year deal).

I agree that we are not as bad off at WR as everyone thinks. I have been saying that for weeks. A post you have on another thread reads exactly like one I wrote a week or so ago. I also didn't think we were that bad at CB. I think that a better pass rush is all Walt Harris needs to be a more than adequate. We have Springs to cover the #1's. Harris just has to cover the 2nd options.

My problem with the pick is that I am too optimistic to see the bright side of it. No matter what happens, something is going to be a failure. Either Ramsey, or Campbell. Possibly both. It isn't like Ramsey is 32. If he pans out he can be our star for the next 10 years.

We could have filled two immediate and glaring needs. We did niether.

The only positive I can think of about the pick is that it is a sign that Gibbs is here to stay. I never really doubted it, but it is still good to be reminded that we are looking long term.

[D'Pablo]

Everything comes down to who Gibbs is comfortable with at the QB position. You can't be successful as a head coach if you're uncomfortable with the guy operating your offense. Ramsey was Spurrier's guy and Gibbs'.

On a side note, I think its awesome that we finally got a QB that has the prototypical measurables. Ramsey has a tough time seeing the field and you can tell... On top of this, he doesn't have the scrambling ability to expand his view.

[FS36]

Originally posted by D'Pablo

Everything comes down to who Gibbs is comfortable with at the QB position. You can't be successful as a head coach if you're uncomfortable with the guy operating your offense. Ramsey was Spurrier's guy and Gibbs'.

On a side note, I think its awesome that we finally got a QB that has the prototypical measurables. Ramsey has a tough time seeing the field and you can tell... On top of this, he doesn't have the scrambling ability to expand his view.

As much as I'd like to think Ramsey will step up and lead us to the SuperBowl, I seriously doubt we're ever going to see that. Everyone knows he has a cannon for an arm, but he's never really be able to add anything to that. He's a good guy too, and I'd like him to succeed, but I can't see it happening. The two things he lacks are the ability to read the coverage (leading him to lock onto one receiver), and the ability to place the pass. Mobility isn't a must, but he's lacking there too.

What really got me thinking about this was the fact that Gibbs sat him after he was already the starter for this team. He must have seen something in him last training camp that he really didn't like. As much as I'd like to root for Ramsey, I'm going to have to trust Gibb's eye for talent and ability. Yes, Gibbs said Ramsey is the starter this year, but what other option does he have?

To conclude, I'd like to say this is one point I wouldn't mind being proven wrong about next year.

[Art]

Sebowski,

First, I congratulate you on recognizing I was using your post to speak THROUGH you to other, less able minds here, and not jumping YOU. If only Calif...er others could have figured that out .

Second, no, I don't disagree with you that QBs can be had in free agency. I LOVE free agency. And, I'm sure you agree with me that EVERY position can be had in free agency. I was simply making comment on the position by many here that free agency bad, draft good, but, who today, are furious we did in the draft something we could do in free agency .

I don't depart at all from your statement that the problem with the Campbell pick is that it means something is going to be a failure. I thought I said similar words in an earlier post on this topic either in this thread or another.

Where I suppose I do have a problem with the specifics of your reply is where you say we could have filled two immediate and glaring needs and we did neither. I think this statement is troubling for several reasons.

Importantly because no players picked at any position today would have been certain to fill any immediate or glaring needs. I don't know what you view as the needs of the team entering this draft since you depart from the norm by believing corner and receiver were ok.

I assume you may have wanted defensive line or something.

But, after you tell me the positions you viewed as immediate and glaring needs -- since you don't apparently think receiver or corner falls within that -- we can discuss who could have filled those needs more deeply.

And while you do that, tell me exactly how you figure QB wasn't an immediate and glaring need that based on performance to date was inarguably the single biggest area of need on the team. Based on PERFORMANCE to date.

[Sebowski]

Originally posted by Art

Sebowski,

First, I congratulate you on recognizing I was using your post to speak THROUGH you to other, less able minds here, and not jumping YOU. If only Calif...er others could have figured that out .

Second, no, I don't disagree with you that QBs can be had in free agency. I LOVE free agency. And, I'm sure you agree with me that EVERY position can be had in free agency. I was simply making comment on the position by many here that free agency bad, draft good, but, who today, are furious we did in the draft something we could do in free agency .

I don't depart at all from your statement that the problem with the Campbell pick is that it means something is going to be a failure. I thought I said similar words in an earlier post on this topic either in this thread or another.

Where I suppose I do have a problem with the specifics of your reply is where you say we could have filled two immediate and glaring needs and we did neither. I think this statement is troubling for several reasons.

Importantly because no players picked at any position today would have been certain to fill any immediate or glaring needs. I don't know what you view as the needs of the team entering this draft since you depart from the norm by believing corner and receiver were ok.

I assume you may have wanted defensive line or something.

But, after you tell me the positions you viewed as immediate and glaring needs -- since you don't apparently think receiver or corner falls within that -- we can discuss who could have filled those needs more deeply.

And while you do that, tell me exactly how you figure QB wasn't an immediate and glaring need that based on performance to date was inarguably the single biggest area of need on the team. Based on PERFORMANCE to date.

The 2 galring needs as I see the: Pass rush, and a top-flight, grade A #1WR.

To be specific, Mike Williams or Shawne Merriman at 9.

At 25, best avaiable. If we went Williams at 9, then Dan Cody (who slipped way too far) or Matt Roth.

If we went Merriman at 9, then Marlin Jackson.

I think Rogers could end up proving to be a great pick (It is hard for me to see him being better than Mike or Merriman though). The Campbell pick has just got me in a negative state.

Campbell doesn't fill an immediate need because he can't contribute immediately. It is impossible to say that we will need a QB by the time he is ready (if he ever is. most QBs never are).