PDA

View Full Version : Official Ramsey Benched Thread


PennSkinsFan
09-14-2005, 10:14 PM
Ok, I moved the big one to archive, refer there. We need a new one that one was getting to big.

Don't know if you have seen it yet, new Post article on Ramsey

Link (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/14/AR2005091402196.html)

PennSkinsFan
09-14-2005, 10:18 PM
Well it is just like some of us thought, one offenseive player in the article stated that the interception was the fault of the receiver for running the wrong route. The unfortunate thing here is this...Brunell gives us the best shot to win now, but the one player who was not named is correct, Ram has a right to be angry because he prepared all off-season for this start, to lead this team, being told he had Gibbs confidence and that he was the 2005 QB, and he was yanked after just 26 snaps. That I do have a problem with. Gibbs takes pride in his word, yet in fairness to Pat, he was given the word tha this was his team this season and he never evenmadeit through 2 quarters. That has to hurt.

redskin_rich
09-14-2005, 10:25 PM
Ok, I moved the big one to archive, refer there. We need a new one that one was getting to big.

Don't know if you have seen it yet, new Post article on Ramsey

Link (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/14/AR2005091402196.html)
"It's just tough, especially since it's the first week," Cooley said. "He's been planning on starting for the season and it's tough the first week to just take the backup role.

"I would be [angry] right now. Personally, if I played and got ready all offseason and in one game [was benched], it would be hard for me to say, 'Okay.' But he's handling it fine."

One teammate said Ramsey was angry because he felt that Gibbs seemed bent on replacing him at the first opportunity.
Ramsey was intercepted once Sunday by the Chicago Bears and, according to another offensive starter who requested anonymity, that interception -- on Ramsey's second pass of the game -- occurred when a receiver ran the wrong route, adding to Ramsey's frustration about the decision.
Interesting, this better work out because if it doesn't, there could be a lot of divisiveness on the offensive players.

bwparker
09-14-2005, 10:25 PM
Well it is just like some of us thought, one offenseive player in the article stated that the interception was the fault of the receiver for running the wrong route. The unfortunate thing here is this...Brunell gives us the best shot to win now, but the one player who was not named is correct, Ram has a right to be angry because he prepared all off-season for this start, to lead this team, being told he had Gibbs confidence and that he was the 2005 QB, and he was yanked after just 26 snaps. That I do have a problem with. Gibbs takes pride in his word, yet in fairness to Pat, he was given the word tha this was his team this season and he never evenmadeit through 2 quarters. That has to hurt.
Thats the only thing that irks me about this. I felt Ramsey deserved until the bye week. But, se la vie, we move on. I think I'm starting to understand more what Gibbs is trying to do. I think it looks bad now, but we'll win in the future. I felt doomed to a 4-12 season monday night. Now I feel like the playoffs are possible if we can keep a positive turnover ratio. Thats why Patrick was benched and A. Brown was cut after such promising offseasons. They both have recently showed a propensity for slippery hands and/or bad decisions.

BigPlayJay
09-14-2005, 10:26 PM
Well it is just like some of us thought, one offenseive player in the article stated that the interception was the fault of the receiver for running the wrong route. The unfortunate thing here is this...Brunell gives us the best shot to win now, but the one player who was not named is correct, Ram has a right to be angry because he prepared all off-season for this start, to lead this team, being told he had Gibbs confidence and that he was the 2005 QB, and he was yanked after just 26 snaps. That I do have a problem with. Gibbs takes pride in his word, yet in fairness to Pat, he was given the word tha this was his team this season and he never evenmadeit through 2 quarters. That has to hurt.
3 drives and a fumble or int on each. Wrong route or not, Ramsey is a turnover machine now.

I don't ever recall hearing Gibbs say that "this was his team this season ".

You're right, it has to hurt Patrick, but such is life as an NFL QB. We have seen higher picks (Andre Ware, Akili Smith) get less of a chance than him.

Anyways, this thing isn't over by a longshot. I can very easily see Gibbs swtiching again if he thinks it will help the team win at some point.

akhhorus
09-14-2005, 10:26 PM
Can someone please tell me when Ramsey was givin a legitimate shot? I mean, a real, going into the season with confidence shot?

Rookie year: Came in during a game against the Titans (which were pretty hot, I think) and threw 2 or 3 TDs. Started the next game against the Saints and I beleive his first throw was an interception. The rest of the season went nowhere, because I believe SS went back to Wuerful or Mathews.

This doesn't count as a shot at the job, and is irrelevant, unless you want to analyze Ramsey as a Qb in general.


Sophmore year: We all remeber this all too well. Ramsey probably suffered more during this season than any other QB in NFL history. He got sacked I dont know how many times and got hit so much he's lucky to be alive. He always got up, never complained, and people here still call him a whiner.

No matter how much you want to blame Spurrier or the horrible Oline play, Ramsey had a shot at the job without pressure. And he didn't do very well(he had a nice run in the beginning, but fell apart quickly). This was Ramsey's first shot.


Third year: Gibbs is back and goes shopping for Brunell. The vet wins the starting job and plays HORRIBLY. He played so bad that ven my gf who knows nothing about football was screaming at the TV!! At the end of the season, Ramsey comes back in. He's promised the starting spot for next season.

First off, what had Ramsey done to prove to Gibbs in 2003 that he could be the unquestioned starter at QB? And Ramsey had the job for the last 8 games(7 starts). And despite having an uninspiring and inconsistant season, Gibbs named him the starter for 2005 right after the season ended. This season was Ramsey's 2nd shot at the job.

Fourth year: Ramsey has another rough preseason. When asked, Gibbs says that Ramsey is his man. Three drives into the first game, Ramsey gets hurt and is permanently benched.

This is Ramsey's 3rd shot. And he did NOTHING to keep it. He had a horrid preseason and started out even worse in the regular season. He obviously isn't progressing at all, and while Brunell looked awful in 04, he looked better at running the offense than Ramsey did in 05.

What do you want Ramsey to have? A total promise that he will be the starter no matter what for the whole season? He's had 3 years(and a preseason where he looked pathetic) to show anything as a QB, and while he shows a flash occasionally, he has not shown any consistancy in his play, nor any real improvement in his game since his rookie year. While I think Gibbs could have waited another week, I understand making this move now. Ramsey has shown nothing, and while Brunell is no Brett Favre, he showed that he wont turn the ball over nearly as much as Ramsey did. And when you have a team built around defense and running the ball, you cannot have a QB who throws stupid INTs or fumbles incessantly.

colkurtz
09-14-2005, 10:28 PM
Ramsey has started games in all four seasons. If he had done consistently well at any point in time, he could have iced the job [like Rothelsberger]for good. His backups (including Brunell) would have been getting cobwebs on their butts sitting on the bench.

Yet, Patrick has not progressed. In my opinion, he looks no better now than he did 3 years ago. He will be the backup this season and then become a journeyman QB on another team; and will be considered in Redskins history as another first round bust.

Mark Brunell has faded some but still has a fire to succeed and will surprise many out here who judge him solely based on the games of last season [when he was hurt]. I can tell you that defensive coordinator are far more worried about Mark Brunell than they ever were about Ramsey.

BigPlayJay
09-14-2005, 10:33 PM
Mark Brunell has faded some but still has a fire to succeed and will surprise many out here who judge him solely based on the games of last season [when he was hurt]. I can tell you that defensive coordinator are far more worried about Mark Brunell than they ever were about Ramsey.
You hit the nail on the head. Brunell gives us the best chance to win. Without the excssive turnovers (there will be some of course) the burden to win will be on the running game (which is vastly improved and has been overlooked this week) and the defense. These are our strengths and you can go a long way with that set up.

All we really need out of Brunell is a few key throws a game and don't mess up.

RedskinsVision
09-14-2005, 10:37 PM
i think Gibbs read Akh's blog about Ramsey and saw the 21 INT's and freaked out.

akhhorus
09-14-2005, 10:37 PM
Thats the only thing that irks me about this. I felt Ramsey deserved until the bye week. But, se la vie, we move on. I think I'm starting to understand more what Gibbs is trying to do. I think it looks bad now, but we'll win in the future. I felt doomed to a 4-12 season monday night. Now I feel like the playoffs are possible if we can keep a positive turnover ratio. Thats why Patrick was benched and A. Brown was cut after such promising offseasons. They both have recently showed a propensity for slippery hands and/or bad decisions.

What gives me hope is three things:
1-Brunell led the skins to an 8.30 minute drive against a pretty good defense. Thats half a bloody quarter for the defense to rest and recharge.
2-The running game really took off after Brunell came in. Yes, 8-9 in the box will hurt Portis and Betts' ability to run, but the speed of Moss and Patten has to concern Safeties even with Brunell in. The improved Oline will give Portis/Betts the holes they need to run. And playaction makes Brunell much better.
3-Building on the last thing: Moss and Patten have the speed to take a 9 yard deep slant(which we know Brunell can hit) 50+ yards. Moss' big catches so far with the skins in the preseason and regular season have been relatively short catches(even with Ramsey in) that he broke. Last year, with 50/50 and the Toe of Death, you could take a deep slant to the house, they didn't have the speed.

akhhorus
09-14-2005, 10:38 PM
i think Gibbs read Akh's blog about Ramsey and saw the 21 INT's and freaked out.

:lol1:

Skinz4lyfe
09-14-2005, 10:38 PM
Well it is just like some of us thought, one offenseive player in the article stated that the interception was the fault of the receiver for running the wrong route. The unfortunate thing here is this...Brunell gives us the best shot to win now, but the one player who was not named is correct, Ram has a right to be angry because he prepared all off-season for this start, to lead this team, being told he had Gibbs confidence and that he was the 2005 QB, and he was yanked after just 26 snaps. That I do have a problem with. Gibbs takes pride in his word, yet in fairness to Pat, he was given the word tha this was his team this season and he never evenmadeit through 2 quarters. That has to hurt.

:goodpost:

That might be the best post I've read since I've been on these boards. Couldn't have said it better myself. I know one thing is for sure. Like somebody said previously, if Gibbs is wrong on this one, it could open a pandora's box of issues and its possible that we could have dissention in the locker room.

colkurtz
09-14-2005, 10:43 PM
i think Gibbs read Akh's blog about Ramsey and saw the 21 INT's and freaked out.

Ramsey's lack of mobility and a tendency to hold the ball too long increased the sacks and occasional fumbles vs. Brunell. I think teams realized that by blitzing Ramsey:

a. He wasn't good at reading defenses, so he would miss it
b. He would hurry his throws and increase the chance of an INT, or get happy feet and throw poorly
c. They could sack him

Parcell's loved to blitz Ramsey for that reason.

GibbsFan
09-14-2005, 10:49 PM
Well it is just like some of us thought, one offenseive player in the article stated that the interception was the fault of the receiver for running the wrong route. The unfortunate thing here is this...Brunell gives us the best shot to win now, but the one player who was not named is correct, Ram has a right to be angry because he prepared all off-season for this start, to lead this team, being told he had Gibbs confidence and that he was the 2005 QB, and he was yanked after just 26 snaps. That I do have a problem with. Gibbs takes pride in his word, yet in fairness to Pat, he was given the word tha this was his team this season and he never evenmade it through 2 quarters. That has to hurt.

Football is a violent game. Physically demanding, but for the QB its also mentally demanding with a lot to read and think about quickly. Ramsey clearly held the ball too long on the first fumble when he should have thrown it away and we punt. With great D you have to play the field posistion game. Unfortunately for Ramsey he did'nt get much of an opportunity, but he has shown a rather large propensity to turn the ball over, Coach wants to beat Dallas so Ramsey is benched. Personally, I'd rather have a Coach who does what he thinks is best for the team to win no matter how the outcome looks. All this talk about Gibbs truthfulness, his first truth is to winning. The team's best effort to win, that is the real truth and must come first.

The INT was another high throw that could have been picked anyway. Ramsey has to be able to think on his feet fast enough on a play like that to adjust and throw the ball somewhere else or away. For a QB who stares down his receivers what happened on that play? Even if he is throwing to a spot he has to check routes before releasing the ball. But Gibbs never liked throwing to a spot so i don't think the wrong route totally gets him off the hook, because routes can have adjustments.

But for Ramsey he has to look at in an old school sort of way. He has to adopt a Unitas like toughness in his decison making, develop more touch and accuracy before he can elevate his game. I mention Unitas not because I liked him, but because he did'nt quit when he was cut, instead he came back and worked harder than ever to become what he was. Ramsey will have to do the same thing to be successful no matter what uniform he ends up wearing. But i would'nt mind him staying in B&G if he will just keep working and ready to seize the next opportunity. It will come again.

colkurtz
09-14-2005, 10:50 PM
:goodpost:

That might be the best post I've read since I've been on these boards. Couldn't have said it better myself. I know one thing is for sure. Like somebody said previously, if Gibbs is wrong on this one, it could open a pandora's box of issues and its possible that we could have dissention in the locker room.

Gibbs was in a "Catch 22". Many said [including poster here] that he needed to "show confidence" in Ramsey. He does so by making a statement that Ramsey is the starter for 2005. Ramsey is unimpressive to Gibbs starting in March, but Joe is obligated to give him every chance to suceed.

I see no team dissension --- unless you want a return of Norv or Spurrier style of coaching where fundamental footballs mistakes are never addressed on the team and mediocrity continues. Players now know what Gibbs priorities are - protect the football!

funnyperson1
09-14-2005, 11:00 PM
I personally think it may have been more fair to give Ramsey at least until the bye, but it is Gibbs reputation on the line and his decision to make...and I think he made the right one.

Who starts should not be determined by who played better last year, but who is playing better now, and that is clearly Brunell.0

Ramsey got more than his chance, and can people stop making excuses about his psyche? Honestly, if he can't handle the pressure of job competition, then he won't be able to handle the pressure of being a starting QB in the NFL. In this game, mental fortitude is just as important as physical talent, and I am not sure Ramsey has what it takes. Of course I am sure he'll prove me wrong by going to some other team and being a beast, but as much as it pains me...he is done in Washington.

Skinz4lyfe
09-14-2005, 11:07 PM
Gibbs was in a "Catch 22". Many said [including poster here] that he needed to "show confidence" in Ramsey. He does so by making a statement that Ramsey is the starter for 2005. Ramsey is unimpressive to Gibbs starting in March, but Joe is obligated to give him every chance to suceed.

I see no team dissension --- unless you want a return of Norv or Spurrier style of coaching where fundamental footballs mistakes are never addressed on the team and mediocrity continues. Players now know what Gibbs priorities are - protect the football!

I can go for that. But the way it was handled was not cool at all.

Also I don't see any dissension in the team either. I was saying it is a possibility if Brunell comes in, stinks up the joint, and Gibbs sticks w/him (like he did last year). It will be as clear as day who the coach wants to succeed. But if Brunell stinks then what do we do? Bring Ramsey back in? Campbell? I sure hope Gibbs' gut feeling is right on this.

ShaggySkins
09-14-2005, 11:28 PM
I can go for that. But the way it was handled was not cool at all.

Also I don't see any dissension in the team either. I was saying it is a possibility if Brunell comes in, stinks up the joint, and Gibbs sticks w/him (like he did last year). It will be as clear as day who the coach wants to succeed. But if Brunell stinks then what do we do? Bring Ramsey back in? Campbell? I sure hope Gibbs' gut feeling is right on this.

See this is what bugs me, WHO CARES IF ITS COOL OR NOT!?!?!?!

Listen did Gibbs do something that was probably a little unfair to Patrick? Yes he probably did. Joe Gibbs number 1 priority for this football team is to WIN games. Most people here agree that during the preseason Brunell moved the offense better and didn't turn the ball over. He led all 3 scoring drives aganist Chicago even if they were just FGs it was more then what Patrick did. IF the head coach makes the decision to start a new QB because it gives us the best chance to win then so be it. I've never seen so many people angry because a HOF Head Coach made a decision they he thought bettered the team. The number 1 priority for the team, fans, and Gibbs is to win football games plain and simple. If he thinks Brunell gives us a better shot then Brunell should start regardless of whether Ramsey has started 1 quarter or 15 games if he thinks that Brunell gives the team an advantage then he should start. The NFL isn't about being the nicest guy and giving everyone a fair shot, its about winning football games.

And if Brunell doesn't succeed then Ramsey will be brought back in. And for all of you that think Ramsey won't try hard because he doesn't have his confidence well realize that Ramsey will be playing for his NFL life. Patrick hasn't exactly set the league on fire in 3 years and if he wants to be traded he's going to have to bring back some value or he'll stay another year on the bench.

Skinz4lyfe
09-15-2005, 12:55 AM
See this is what bugs me, WHO CARES IF ITS COOL OR NOT!?!?!?!

Listen did Gibbs do something that was probably a little unfair to Patrick? Yes he probably did. Joe Gibbs number 1 priority for this football team is to WIN games. Most people here agree that during the preseason Brunell moved the offense better and didn't turn the ball over. He led all 3 scoring drives aganist Chicago even if they were just FGs it was more then what Patrick did. IF the head coach makes the decision to start a new QB because it gives us the best chance to win then so be it. I've never seen so many people angry because a HOF Head Coach made a decision they he thought bettered the team. The number 1 priority for the team, fans, and Gibbs is to win football games plain and simple. If he thinks Brunell gives us a better shot then Brunell should start regardless of whether Ramsey has started 1 quarter or 15 games if he thinks that Brunell gives the team an advantage then he should start. The NFL isn't about being the nicest guy and giving everyone a fair shot, its about winning football games.

And if Brunell doesn't succeed then Ramsey will be brought back in. And for all of you that think Ramsey won't try hard because he doesn't have his confidence well realize that Ramsey will be playing for his NFL life. Patrick hasn't exactly set the league on fire in 3 years and if he wants to be traded he's going to have to bring back some value or he'll stay another year on the bench.

I guess I'll have to disagree w/the masses on this one. IMO, Gibbs wasted his time hiring Musgrave and naming Ramsey the starter last season if he didn't have full confidence in him. He should have at least given him the same opportunity that he provided Brunell last year. 3 series? One of which should have been a TD drive (bad call ref) and another ending in an INT because of the WR running the wrong route? Who cares how Brunell performed in the preseason? The preseason is what it is. PRESEASON! Sure Brunell has had a successful career before he came to DC but in a "what have you done for me lately" league I'll take a young QB to develop over an older overpaid guy whose arm is weakening by the day any minute. Like I've said before I still believe that Gibbs realized that Ramsey is developing slower than he anticipated. But don't use a corny injury as an out to put Brunell in as a starter. Now all this said I do believe right now Brunell manages the game better but Ramsey can challenge the defense more w/his arm strength (especially in the red zone w/our short receivers). Should Brunell succeed I'll still feel the same way.

BIGSEF3
09-15-2005, 11:45 AM
Look at what I just read from SportsIllustrated.com (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2005/scorecard/09/15/truth.rumors.nfl/index.html)


If Redskins owner Daniel Snyder could turn back the clock, Patrick Ramsey would be the Miami Dolphins starting quarterback and A.J. Feeley might be one of the Eagles backups vying for playing time in case McNabb couldn't play. In the winter of 2004, the Dolphins offered Snyder and the Redskins a first-round pick for Ramsey. Snyder and the Redskins turned it down, and the next day, the Dolphins dealt a second-round pick to Philadelphia for Feeley.
-- NFL.com



I remember rumors that Miami was interested in Ramsey, but a 1ST ROUNDER?!?!! Good Grief!!! We could have drafted Campbell without giving up so much. No one's going to give us a first rounder now. What a waste!!

inevitable
09-15-2005, 11:47 AM
Blarg. Oh well, hind sight is 20/20. I think Gibbs said that in his interview yesterday. Can't focus on the past, only the present and future. I tend to agree when it comes to football.

akhhorus
09-15-2005, 11:52 AM
Look at what I just read from SportsIllustrated.com (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2005/scorecard/09/15/truth.rumors.nfl/index.html)


If Redskins owner Daniel Snyder could turn back the clock, Patrick Ramsey would be the Miami Dolphins starting quarterback and A.J. Feeley might be one of the Eagles backups vying for playing time in case McNabb couldn't play. In the winter of 2004, the Dolphins offered Snyder and the Redskins a first-round pick for Ramsey. Snyder and the Redskins turned it down, and the next day, the Dolphins dealt a second-round pick to Philadelphia for Feeley.
-- NFL.com



I remember rumors that Miami was interested in Ramsey, but a 1ST ROUNDER?!?!! Good Grief!!! We could have drafted Campbell without giving up so much. No one's going to give us a first rounder now. What a waste!!

But thats revisionist history to some extent. Maybe if the Skins hadn't have drafted Ramsey in 2002 and drafted Portis instead? We could do this all day.

JoeJacksonTaylor28
09-15-2005, 11:53 AM
See this is what bugs me, WHO CARES IF ITS COOL OR NOT!?!?!?!

Listen did Gibbs do something that was probably a little unfair to Patrick? Yes he probably did. Joe Gibbs number 1 priority for this football team is to WIN games. Most people here agree that during the preseason Brunell moved the offense better and didn't turn the ball over. He led all 3 scoring drives aganist Chicago even if they were just FGs it was more then what Patrick did. IF the head coach makes the decision to start a new QB because it gives us the best chance to win then so be it. I've never seen so many people angry because a HOF Head Coach made a decision they he thought bettered the team. The number 1 priority for the team, fans, and Gibbs is to win football games plain and simple. If he thinks Brunell gives us a better shot then Brunell should start regardless of whether Ramsey has started 1 quarter or 15 games if he thinks that Brunell gives the team an advantage then he should start. The NFL isn't about being the nicest guy and giving everyone a fair shot, its about winning football games.

And if Brunell doesn't succeed then Ramsey will be brought back in. And for all of you that think Ramsey won't try hard because he doesn't have his confidence well realize that Ramsey will be playing for his NFL life. Patrick hasn't exactly set the league on fire in 3 years and if he wants to be traded he's going to have to bring back some value or he'll stay another year on the bench.
I somehow agree. I'm a Ramsey supporter, but I'm Redskins passionate fanatic. If this is for the best of the team, so be it, I couldn't care less about Ramsey's (or anyone else) feelings.

The thing now is that I think that we have a better chance with Patrick, hopefully I'm wrong (and I probably am because I'm not in the HOF), but only time will tell.

skinsdude
09-15-2005, 12:03 PM
I don't understand why anyone thinks that Coach Gibbs should have waited until after the bye to pull Patrick. What do you think is more important, Coach Gibbs giving Patrick one more week to attempt to prove that he can move the offense or to win the Cowboys game? I don't think that making it look as though Coach Gibbs kept his word about Patrick being the starter is anywhere near as important as us winning our second straight game of the year against our division rival that owns us. This game is far too important to to not make a change if you think it is necessary just because it may hurt someone's feelings. I don't care whether it looks like Coach Gibbs broke his word or not, it's the right time for a change and he made it.

mexskins
09-15-2005, 12:05 PM
I have to agree with LT28. I like P Ramsey too but Im a Redskins Fan first.

I also think this team has a better chance with PR than MB but I have faith in Gibbs.

I think that Ramsey may have a shot again sooner than we think.

Lets support our team !!!!!

JoeJacksonTaylor28
09-15-2005, 12:07 PM
I have to agree with LT28. I like P Ramsey too but Im a Redskins Fan first.

I also think this team has a better chance with PR than MB but I have faith in Gibbs.

I think that Ramsey may have a shot again sooner than we think.

Lets support our team !!!!!
Hola compañero! Como viste el clásico? Me imagino que eres Chiva, no?
What are your thoughts about the Redskins' game?

mexskins
09-15-2005, 12:14 PM
Hola Amigo !!!

Good to read some Skins stuff from a fellow Mexican.

Man, This Qb soap opera has been with our team for a while now.

I still think that Gibbs still has it and will take us back to the place we belong.

Now, as far as the Mexican Soccer game, I think we were very lucky. The owner of Guadalajara looks like Daniel Snyder on his first 2 or 3 years with the team.

Your Team looks very strong.

Keep in touch and Hail to the Redskins !!!

Death_Venom
09-15-2005, 12:17 PM
No matter how much you want to blame Spurrier or the horrible Oline play, Ramsey had a shot at the job without pressure. And he didn't do very well(he had a nice run in the beginning, but fell apart quickly). This was Ramsey's first shot.

Spurrier was hardly fit to be a NFL coach-throw ANY QB in that same scenerio and they would have failed. So in reality that being put in situation that is destined to fail is not a really "a shot" at the being the starting QB.

BIGSEF3
09-15-2005, 12:25 PM
But thats revisionist history to some extent. Maybe if the Skins hadn't have drafted Ramsey in 2002 and drafted Portis instead? We could do this all day.

Its not really revisionist. This is a few months ago and Gibbs knew he didnt like Ramsey and preferred Brunell and he may have even had inklings about drafting Campbell. Its not like Gibbs could not have forseen this happening. Presently, it atleast appears that Gibbs was never comfortable with Ramsey, knew he wouldnt be "the guy" and was looking for an excuse to put Brunell back in. Gibbs may have publically supported Ramsey, but in hindsight, I think we can all see now what Gibbs knew all along - Ramsey wasnt going to get it done in Washington. So that begs the question, why didn't Gibbs take this trade? Was it because he really beleived in Ramsey at the time, or because he felt he was obligated to live up to his word and give ramsey a chance?

Warpath23
09-15-2005, 12:26 PM
I dont understand why everyone is so upset about this move. We still have both QB's and if one faulters the other will be called upon. The only mistake Gibbs made was giving Ram the job instead of letting the 2 compete for it. Brunell would have won this battle based off the preseason. I just see to many people trying to point fingers about whos right & whos wrong. I'm sure if Brunell faulters and Ram steps in and has a great year Gibbs will take that. And he'll be the 1st to admit he made a mistake..Let the stuff play out because it will...

whitskins
09-15-2005, 01:13 PM
Look at what I just read from SportsIllustrated.com (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2005/scorecard/09/15/truth.rumors.nfl/index.html)


If Redskins owner Daniel Snyder could turn back the clock, Patrick Ramsey would be the Miami Dolphins starting quarterback and A.J. Feeley might be one of the Eagles backups vying for playing time in case McNabb couldn't play. In the winter of 2004, the Dolphins offered Snyder and the Redskins a first-round pick for Ramsey. Snyder and the Redskins turned it down, and the next day, the Dolphins dealt a second-round pick to Philadelphia for Feeley.
-- NFL.com



I remember rumors that Miami was interested in Ramsey, but a 1ST ROUNDER?!?!! Good Grief!!! We could have drafted Campbell without giving up so much. No one's going to give us a first rounder now. What a waste!!

There's no point in bringing this up, if we made this trade Joe Gibbs would have been skewered in the exact same way. We give up on Ramsey after only two years in a horrible Spurrier system, then start Brunell, have no QB of the future, then Brunell sucks and who do we put in, Tim Hasselbeck?

Gibbs kept Ramsey because he thought the kid had a legitimate chance to improve and grow into a starting NFL quarterback. If Gibbs hated Ramsey all along then of course he would have traded him but he didn't because he gave him a shot to win the job from Brunell in 04 and then to solidify it without competition in 05. We had a young QB who we had spent a first round pick on only two years ago, why would Joe Gibbs make this trade unless he was clairvoyant?

There's no point in wondering what "could" have happened because it was never going to happen and if it did half of this board would be screaming and crying that Gibbs would have developed PR into a Pro Bowler right now.

akhhorus
09-15-2005, 01:55 PM
Its not really revisionist. This is a few months ago and Gibbs knew he didnt like Ramsey and preferred Brunell and he may have even had inklings about drafting Campbell. Its not like Gibbs could not have forseen this happening. Presently, it atleast appears that Gibbs was never comfortable with Ramsey, knew he wouldnt be "the guy" and was looking for an excuse to put Brunell back in. Gibbs may have publically supported Ramsey, but in hindsight, I think we can all see now what Gibbs knew all along - Ramsey wasnt going to get it done in Washington. So that begs the question, why didn't Gibbs take this trade? Was it because he really beleived in Ramsey at the time, or because he felt he was obligated to live up to his word and give ramsey a chance?

But the trade "offer" was from before the 2004 season. In hindsight, any one would have made that deal now, but we still had hopes that Ramsey would be a decent Qb. Its ridiculous to play the hindsight game, especially with draft picks.

skinfan43
09-15-2005, 03:33 PM
For those responding that Ramsey isn't being given a fair shake by Gibbs, will one of you please post exactly HOW LONG you think we can wait to see his development happen? If you know Gibbs at all, you know he wants the playoffs THIS YEAR. Want to scrap yet ANOTHER season if Ramsey is Mr. Baddecision Turnovers again this year? With cap situatuions, free agency etc, even this illustrious defensive unit won't be together that much longer, and we MUST try to become a playoff team NOW, not later, not still waiting for a FOURTH-YEAR QB TO "DEVELOP". It would be such a waste of one of the greatest defeneses we've ever seen here in D.C. to not do whatever we can NOW to win. Would any of you have truly felt comfortable with Ramsey in there with under 10min. to play in the Fourth?? We keep our plus/minus in the top 10, have great O-line play with Portis/Betts rushing, combined with our Freakish Defense, I believe we will be a playoff team NOW. You have to COMPLIMENT what is already great, namely our defense, by ball-control, turnover-free offense, IMO. It is necessary to continue to try to develop a downfield-passing element to our offense, but I personally want to keep WINNING while that keeps developing...