PDA

View Full Version : Does Campbell play or sit?


joethefan
09-28-2005, 08:23 AM
I have a serious argument here and I would like some clarity from you guys. It is the overall consensus that many people on this board would not like to see Jason Campbell play this year. It seems to me that many people are afraid that the Patrick Ramsey routine will repeat itself. Well I do understand how you feel. Hey, it's not like we have done really well by drafting Qb's in the first round. Remember Heath, I never thought I'd be writing that name..LOL, and Patrick hasn't really panned out like we thought he would). But let's real. Football is a learn on the job type game, you can study and do all the preparation you can. The fact of the matter is that you'll never really see what you see off the field until you're actually on it.

My son is not the QB he was three years ago, that wasnt because he sat on a bench watching the game, it was because he learned from his field experiences. Many of you will say that "Rypien sat on the bench for three years" I know that argument. But we have to come to the realization that Ramsey will be a memory next year and that'll end Danny's scouting fiasco. Let me remind you that Danny scouted Ramsey not our late coach SS, which was the wrong marriage from the beginning.

Having said that, I feel that the Skins are in a QB transition, the thing that I hate is that they are taking too long to act on it and the longer they wait, it seems the worse they may be. And it all goes back to Ramseys lack of play. To me, he messed the equation up by putting doubt in Joe's mind by his lack of play in Preseason. Remember Young starter trying to prove himself still, Veteran Backup, younger rookie waiting in the wings to take over. Now it's Veteran starter taking pain killers every monday, Young back up still trying to find his way and younger back up waiting for the older back up to get the hell out of town. I would just be happy when we make this transition to Campbell and stop procastonating on this.

Now looking at the schedule, it doesn't work out to Campbell's favor because we could still go to the playoffs if we do well in the last three games. So I would not be happy to throw him to the lions then, but at what point do we make the change and stick with it. This QB rollercoaster is killing me.

smoak
09-28-2005, 08:37 AM
I agree with the theory that you learn more by being in there. BUT. I do not want to see a rookie in there whaile we are in the playoff hunt. If we drop well below .500, then there is nothing left to lose, but until that time, Campbell can watch. He can earn his playing time in camp next season and start or sit on his own merit.

redskin_rich
09-28-2005, 08:39 AM
I don't understand the relevance of this thread right now. The obvious answer is, nobody knows when the kid will play. One thing I am pretty sure of is that he won't play this week.

joethefan
09-28-2005, 08:40 AM
Well remember Smoak we have 1 division win and if we get 4 disivion wins, we could still make the playoffs..possibly. It just may come down to the the second out of the three division games towards the end of the season.IMO

ArtMonk4HOF
09-28-2005, 08:40 AM
I think Campbell goes in only after it is a lock that we don't go to the playoffs or we lose 3-4 straight with Brunell and Ramsey. I didn't like the move in NY when Warner sat and Manning got the start. THey still had a chance to go to the playoffs before that move.

joethefan
09-28-2005, 08:47 AM
I don't understand the relevance of this thread right now. The obvious answer is, nobody knows when the kid will play. One thing I am pretty sure of is that he won't play this week.

Well Rich, I am making the point that it our QB situation is in limbo right now..If Brunell plays and gets hurt and Ramsey plays and stinks it up...his trade value will drop even more. Then Jason will be moved to Number 2 and many of you will say Campbell isn't ready. But my argument is that the only way he can get ready is to play...Look at Eli right now...played early took his lumps and is looking better.

I'm saying we need to stop generalizing Campbell, thinking he may not have the smarts or the ability to run this offense, after seeing that Pat can't.

hail2skins
09-28-2005, 08:50 AM
Why are we talking playoffs and we're only in week 3. Geesh. Let's get through half the season and then evaluate.

As for Campbell and this argument about should he sit or play. He should sit for now IMO. He should be studying the heck out of the playbook so that when he is on the field, he isn't thinking too much.

redskin_rich
09-28-2005, 08:55 AM
Well Rich, I am making the point that it our QB situation is in limbo right now..If Brunell plays and gets hurt and Ramsey plays and stinks it up...his trade value will drop even more. Then Jason will be moved to Number 2 and many of you will say Campbell isn't ready. But my argument is that the only way he can get ready is to play...Look at Eli right now...played early took his lumps and is looking better.

I'm saying we need to stop generalizing Campbell, thinking he may not have the smarts or the ability to run this offense, after seeing that Pat can't.
I would like to see Campbell play at some point this year but not any time soon. I am hoping we can get a good year out of Brunell.

smoak
09-28-2005, 09:00 AM
Well remember Smoak we have 1 division win and if we get 4 disivion wins, we could still make the playoffs..possibly. It just may come down to the the second out of the three division games towards the end of the season.IMO

Oh, I completely agree. I think we'll be around that 7-9 to 9-7 mark and I just can't see Campbell getting much work in this season.

That said, I trust the coaching staff if they decide to use him.

SimplyZ
09-28-2005, 09:00 AM
Scouts noted Campbell should take 2-3 years before he can play...its just how it is.

I think its a little ridiculous to make this thread. If we were in week 10 and 2-7 then i'd agree with the thought process...but for now...campbell is going to sit on the bench because he DOES NOT give us the best chance to win.

Ram11
09-28-2005, 09:01 AM
I would rather see Campbell then Brunell. lets get him in so we no what we got for next year.

smoak
09-28-2005, 09:01 AM
Why are we talking playoffs and we're only in week 3. Geesh. Let's get through half the season and then evaluate.

As for Campbell and this argument about should he sit or play. He should sit for now IMO. He should be studying the heck out of the playbook so that when he is on the field, he isn't thinking too much.

I'm only talking about playoffs in realtion to when Campbell plays. Had we started 0-2, I think there would be a better chance of seeing the young man earlier. Hopefully he stays on the bench and works hard to prepare for a run at starting in '06.

Sweepea436
09-28-2005, 09:02 AM
I agree with the theory that you learn more by being in there. BUT. I do not want to see a rookie in there whaile we are in the playoff hunt. If we drop well below .500, then there is nothing left to lose, but until that time, Campbell can watch. He can earn his playing time in camp next season and start or sit on his own merit.


But what if this guy could pull a Rothlesburger(sp)? If we wait until the season is gone to get this guy PT and he start getting us some wins, there will be 100 threads in here about us dropping the ball not starting him sooner. And lets be honest, players aren't going to be trying as hard if they know the playoffs are out of reach> They will make sure they stay healthy for the next year, so IMO, he wouldn't be learning the way he needed to be anyway.

That being said, I personally say wait until next year, but I can see where the arguement could be made to get him in there now. Comparing throwing this kid in to the fire is nothing like Ramsey in Spurriers offense. Joe knows the importance of protecting your QB

smoak
09-28-2005, 09:04 AM
But what if this guy could pull a Rothlesburger(sp)? If we wait until the season is gone to get this guy PT and he start getting us some wins, there wiull be 100 threads in here about us dropping the ball not starting him sooner. And lets be honest, players aren't going to be trying as hard if they know the playoffs are out of reach> They will make sure they stay healthy for the next year, so IMO, he wouldn't be learning the way he needed to be anyway.

That being said, I personally say wait until next year, but I can see where the arguement could be made to get him in there now. Comparing throwing this kid in to the fire is nothing like Ramsey in Spurriers offense. Joe knows the importance of protecting your QB

A Ben Rothwhateverhisnameis is so rare. One in every 200 QBs can play as well as 'burger did his rookie year, and even he had a sharp decline once he got to the playoffs.

joethefan
09-28-2005, 09:04 AM
Why are we talking playoffs and we're only in week 3. Geesh. Let's get through half the season and then evaluate.

As for Campbell and this argument about should he sit or play. He should sit for now IMO. He should be studying the heck out of the playbook so that when he is on the field, he isn't thinking too much.

The reason why I mentioned playoffs is because we do have 1 division win and it's been a while since we won our first divisional game with 5 more on the way. Also I mentioned playoffs because the last 3 games could have playoff implications. That's all.

CNYSkinFan
09-28-2005, 09:09 AM
I have two words for those who want Jason Campbell to play this year.....Carson Palmer. He is a stud now because he sat hios whole Rookie year and learned from Jon Kitna. Mark Brunell is our Jon Kitna. Campbell could not only sit this year, but next year as wwell if we make the playoffs this year and are in the hunt again next year. After that Brunell's contract requires us to part ways and the job is his.

Campbell is the QB ofn the future, the one we transition to when Brunell retires after a superbowl win.

joethefan
09-28-2005, 09:16 AM
I have two words for those who want Jason Campbell to play this year.....Carson Palmer. He is a stud now because he sat hios whole Rookie year and learned from Jon Kitna. Mark Brunell is our Jon Kitna. Campbell could not only sit this year, but next year as wwell if we make the playoffs this year and are in the hunt again next year. After that Brunell's contract requires us to part ways and the job is his.

Campbell is the QB ofn the future, the one we transition to when Brunell retires after a superbowl win.

Thank you for that response and it kinda cooled me down. Everyone else comments on why the thread was made but with no concrete evidence to support why he should sit. I just believe it's the player that makes it happen but I do appreciate your response beacuse it's a good one. But remember the reason why Palmer is successful is because he has a running game, two great recievers and a good defense.. I had to slip that in there...LOL

IowaSkinsFan
09-28-2005, 09:20 AM
I have a serious argument here and I would like some clarity from you guys. It is the overall consensus that many people on this board would not like to see Jason Campbell play this year. It seems to me that many people are afraid that the Patrick Ramsey routine will repeat itself. Well I do understand how you feel. Hey, it's not like we have done really well by drafting Qb's in the first round. Remember Heath, I never thought I'd be writing that name..LOL, and Patrick hasn't really panned out like we thought he would). But let's real. Football is a learn on the job type game, you can study and do all the preparation you can. The fact of the matter is that you'll never really see what you see off the field until you're actually on it.

My son is not the QB he was three years ago, that wasnt because he sat on a bench watching the game, it was because he learned from his field experiences. Many of you will say that "Rypien sat on the bench for three years" I know that argument. But we have to come to the realization that Ramsey will be a memory next year and that'll end Danny's scouting fiasco. Let me remind you that Danny scouted Ramsey not our late coach SS, which was the wrong marriage from the beginning.

Having said that, I feel that the Skins are in a QB transition, the thing that I hate is that they are taking too long to act on it and the longer they wait, it seems the worse they may be. And it all goes back to Ramseys lack of play. To me, he messed the equation up by putting doubt in Joe's mind by his lack of play in Preseason. Remember Young starter trying to prove himself still, Veteran Backup, younger rookie waiting in the wings to take over. Now it's Veteran starter taking pain killers every monday, Young back up still trying to find his way and younger back up waiting for the older back up to get the hell out of town. I would just be happy when we make this transition to Campbell and stop procastonating on this.

Now looking at the schedule, it doesn't work out to Campbell's favor because we could still go to the playoffs if we do well in the last three games. So I would not be happy to throw him to the lions then, but at what point do we make the change and stick with it. This QB rollercoaster is killing me.

Personally, I do not forsee a QB rollercoaster unless Brunell gets hurt. Secondly, I'm not prepared to sacrifice this season to get Jason Campbell some experience for future season.

We are 2-0. Why are we concerned about getting our 3rd stringer game experience?

EberKain
09-28-2005, 09:22 AM
I also, really dont get the point in this thread. Before the Dallas game Gibbs was quoted as saying that the team will start Brunell, and Ramsey will be backup. But if Brunell was to miss a series of games later in the season, then Cambell would start during those games, and Ramsey would back him up.

It seems a forgone conclusion that Ramsey is gone after this year. I think he will be around for the long-term, but I also think he is going to play that backup role, and not be a starter anywhere in the near future. He definitely has the arm, but he has shown nothing when it comes to playing smart football.

Oh, and by the time we get to those last three games, we will already have secured a playoff spot, those games will be for home-field. Playoff games in Fed-Ex, thats a beautiful thought.

bwparker
09-28-2005, 09:29 AM
I have two words for those who want Jason Campbell to play this year.....Carson Palmer. He is a stud now because he sat hios whole Rookie year and learned from Jon Kitna. Mark Brunell is our Jon Kitna. Campbell could not only sit this year, but next year as wwell if we make the playoffs this year and are in the hunt again next year. After that Brunell's contract requires us to part ways and the job is his.

Campbell is the QB ofn the future, the one we transition to when Brunell retires after a superbowl win.
Ding Ding. This is EXACTLY what I was going to write...good thing I read the whole thread first.

...don't know if Brunell is going to get us a SB, though.:rolleyes: But, if anybody can win a SB with Brunell at his current state, it Gibbs.

joethefan
09-28-2005, 09:30 AM
Personally, I do not forsee a QB rollercoaster unless Brunell gets hurt. Secondly, I'm not prepared to sacrifice this season to get Jason Campbell some experience for future season.

We are 2-0. Why are we concerned about getting our 3rd stringer game experience?

You are right I don't wish to sacrifice the season either but, I have to say that I'm tired of hearing and reading here and other places that Campbell won't be ready until 2 or 3 years and many people are still holding on to Ramsey, when he can't and hasn't gotten it done. But they are quick to doubt Jason as if his name is Patrick.

Cruising270
09-28-2005, 09:33 AM
Yeah I have to agree with Cambell riding the bench for now but not because it's the better way to bring up a QB, only because we are 2-0 and any rookie has to go through a learning curve. Lets keep Brunell for now and if we get out of the Playoff Hunt then go to Cambell.

I personally don't think it matters if a QB sits on the bench the 1st year or gets thrown into the fire because a good QB finds a way to win games. I think you either have it at the NFL level or you don't.

You get some that will get right in and amaze people - Big Ben
You have some that will play terrible the 1st year but then show much improvement the second year - Eli Manning
And as you mentioned then there are the ones like Palmer

I think these guys would have succeded any way they were brought up, you either have it or you don't.

bwparker
09-28-2005, 09:35 AM
You are right I don't wish to sacrifice the season either but, I have to say that I'm tired of hearing and reading here and other places that Campbell won't be ready until 2 or 3 years and many people are still holding on to Ramsey, when he can't and hasn't gotten it done. But they are quick to doubt Jason as if his name is Patrick.
We may have no reason to doubt Campbell, but we have little reason to have alot of faith in him also. He had one good season in College and barely played in the pre-season. Because I know so little about him, I'd expect typical rookie production out of him(if not worse because our offense is already stuggling). Typical rookie production sucks, so I don't want him in this year. Unless we are mathematically out of the playoff, of course.

joethefan
09-28-2005, 09:39 AM
Yeah I have to agree with Cambell riding the bench for now but not because it's the better way to bring up a QB, only because we are 2-0 and any rookie has to go through a learning curve. Lets keep Brunell for now and if we get out of the Playoff Hunt then go to Cambell.

I personally don't think it matters if a QB sits on the bench the 1st year or gets thrown into the fire because a good QB finds a way to win games. I think you either have it at the NFL level or you don't.

You get some that will get right in and amaze people - Big Ben
You have some that will play terrible the 1st year but then show much improvement the second year - Eli Manning
And as you mentioned then there are the ones like Palmer

I think these guys would have succeded any way they were brought up, you either have it or you don't.

Good post but know one seems to respond to the fact that Danny scouted Ramsey. When I found out that Ramsey wasn't Spurriers pick, I knew then it was gonna be rough for Ramsey.

joethefan
09-28-2005, 09:42 AM
We may have no reason to doubt Campbell, but we have little reason to have alot of faith in him also. He had one good season in College and barely played in the pre-season. Because I know so little about him, I'd expect typical rookie production out of him(if not worse because our offense is already stuggling). Typical rookie production sucks, so I don't want him in this year. Unless we are mathematically out of the playoff, of course.

I understand that..but if you have three OC's in four years, you would struggle too. I don't have alot of faith in him but my faith in him is higher than my faith in Ramsey. And that's not saying alot.

smoak
09-28-2005, 09:42 AM
I have two words for those who want Jason Campbell to play this year.....Carson Palmer. He is a stud now because he sat hios whole Rookie year and learned from Jon Kitna. Mark Brunell is our Jon Kitna. Campbell could not only sit this year, but next year as wwell if we make the playoffs this year and are in the hunt again next year. After that Brunell's contract requires us to part ways and the job is his.

Campbell is the QB ofn the future, the one we transition to when Brunell retires after a superbowl win.

While I tend to agree with your opinion, it isn't out of the realm of possibility to say that Palmer would have been better sooner had he started year 1. To be fair, I think each QB is going to be a different case and it is up to the coaching staff to know how to handle their young QB.

IowaSkinsFan
09-28-2005, 09:42 AM
i want to know whats up w/lavar is he in i future plans is he trade bate can someone tell me why he itsnt playing and he is making almost 8 million a year please someone tell me whats going on w/this picture

Please don't try to hijack threads. Keep your posts on topic. We have a thread on Lavar discussing your very question.

Please search the board for threads you want to discuss rather than trying to take a thread off topic.

Thanks for your cooperation.

bwparker
09-28-2005, 09:46 AM
You get some that will get right in and amaze people - Big Ben
You have some that will play terrible the 1st year but then show much improvement the second year - Eli Manning
And as you mentioned then there are the ones like Palmer

I think these guys would have succeded any way they were brought up, you either have it or you don't.
I think this is a bit of an oversimplification. These are three possible scenarios for the life cycle of a good QB. But the distribution is not evenly spread across all the scenarios. the "Big Ben" scenario is EXTREMELY rare. I can only think of two QBs ever who really qualify, Big Ben and Dan Marino.

Eli and Palmer have FAR more likely scenarios. Most QBs don't actually hit their full stride until their 4th year(which is why I didn't discount Ramsey, and still don't until the end of the year...the door is closing quick on him, though).

You are right that there is no one single TRIED AND TRUE method for creating great QBs. What is almost certain, with 99% of past QBs backing it up, rookies QBs don't lead winning teams. There was 20 years between Marino and Rothlesburger, and there will probably be few more before we see that again. Putting Campbell in with out a major injury to both the QBs in front of him is throwing the season away. Gibbs won't do that unless the season is lost anyway.

smoak
09-28-2005, 09:46 AM
I understand that..but if you have three OC's in four years, you would struggle too. I don't have alot of faith in him but my faith in him is higher than my faith in Ramsey. And that's not saying alot.

I don't agree that changes in the coaching staff are a reason/excuse to be unsuccessful. Is it a challenge? Absolutely! But some players seem to rise to the challenge. I like Campbell a lot, but I'm not in practice every day seeing his work ethic and ability. We just don't know what to expect from him, but the people whose opinions matter (coaches) se the young man every day. I trust their opinion.

joethefan
09-28-2005, 09:50 AM
I don't agree that changes in the coaching staff are a reason/excuse to be unsuccessful. Is it a challenge? Absolutely! But some players seem to rise to the challenge. I like Campbell a lot, but I'm not in practice every day seeing his work ethic and ability. We just don't know what to expect from him, but the people whose opinions matter (coaches) se the young man every day. I trust their opinion.

I got you...remember smoak I'm not advocating for Campbell to play yet...but I just think that Ramsey screwed us up by not putting confidence in Joe by winning the starting spot....

At least I got 1 wish: that Brunell started in Texas and as a result we won the game.

bwparker
09-28-2005, 09:51 AM
I understand that..but if you have three OC's in four years, you would struggle too. I don't have alot of faith in him but my faith in him is higher than my faith in Ramsey. And that's not saying alot.
You can't use the multiple co-ordinator excuse for Campbell's failings and then not use it for Ramsey too...thats just ludicrus.

KMDeMuth
09-28-2005, 09:53 AM
If we clinche a playoff spot and have any games left...play the kid.
If we have no chance of making the playoffs (brunell is failing)...play the kid.
If we have any chance of making the post season...Brunell stays.
If we have average to better (a stretch the past few years) play from the QB...Brunell stays.

All-in-all, I'd rather not play jason this year because he is a rookie and we dont want to take a big chance with something that cost us so much. If you go buy a mustang...you dont want to go blow it up, break it in slowly.

I can see Campbell having a fair shot in pre-season next year and showing alot of improvement. Possibly taking over halfway through next season or the season after. I cant see Gibbs siting him 3-4 years though, 1.5-2 years. I think there was more to us picking him then he is a good QB, 4 systems in 4 years, that takes a lot of learning and a guy with the tools we wish ramsey had upstairs. Give him a lil time and he'll do good for us. :)

Only change i would like to see is in the depth chart, where i disagree with most people. We should make Campbell our #2, show confidence in the kid right away, give him everything we can starting now. Ramsey is effectively done as a redskin, admit it. If Brunell goes down this year (hope he doesnt) then Campbell will see time. If he shows a huge rookie learning curve then we will adjust the depth chart accordingly that week. It's not as big a deal as people make it, but give the kid our confidence. My 2 cents.

joethefan
09-28-2005, 09:53 AM
You can't use the multiple co-ordinator excuse for Campbell's failings and then not use it for Ramsey too...thats just ludicrus.

Ramsey was the Pro...right. At least Jason won the starting jobs.Two different levels of football here.but I do understand your thought process.

joethefan
09-28-2005, 09:57 AM
Only change i would like to see is in the depth chart, where i disagree with most people. We should make Campbell our #2, show confidence in the kid right away, give him everything we can starting now. Ramsey is effectively done as a redskin, admit it. If Brunell goes down this year (hope he doesnt) then Campbell will see time. If he shows a huge rookie learning curve then we will adjust the depth chart accordingly that week. It's not as big a deal as people make it, but give the kid our confidence. My 2 cents.

Exactly, I say drop Ramsey to three to save him for a decent pick (hopefully) if He steps on that field, we run the risk of his value dropping.

hail2skins
09-28-2005, 09:57 AM
i want to know whats up w/lavar is he in i future plans is he trade bate can someone tell me why he itsnt playing and he is making almost 8 million a year please someone tell me whats going on w/this pictureThis thread is not about Lavar. Stay on topic please.

hail2skins
09-28-2005, 09:59 AM
Exactly, I say drop Ramsey to three to save him for a decent pick (hopefully) if He steps on that field, we run the risk of his value dropping.and when Campbell doesn't look good, we'll be going through all of this all over again. :banghead:

joethefan
09-28-2005, 10:01 AM
and when Campbell doesn't look good, we'll be going through all of this all over again. :banghead:

Well at least if Cambell doens't look good, he'l have an excuse ... what will be Ramseys?...

hail2skins
09-28-2005, 10:02 AM
Well at least if Cambell doens't look good, he'l have an excuse ... what will be Ramseys?...The same one you gave Campbell. What do you believe to be Campbell's excuse if he doesn't look good?

joethefan
09-28-2005, 10:04 AM
and when Campbell doesn't look good, we'll be going through all of this all over again. :banghead:

And also Mike this leads me back to why I wrote this thread...Ramsey's inability to Truely!!! Win and keep the starting job, put us in a bad situation. IMO.

joethefan
09-28-2005, 10:07 AM
The same one you gave Campbell. What do you believe to be Campbell's excuse if he doesn't look good?

Well most rookies other than Ben won't truely look good but at least he'll have the right to say "Hey I'm a rookie" and we'll all know that. But is Ramsey a rookie?....No, not to the league nor to this system...is he?

hail2skins
09-28-2005, 10:10 AM
I just hope that Campbell works out because if he doesn't, there's going to be alot of crying in Redskins Nation. Neither of them have proved anything in the NFL. Well, Ramsey has proved he can take a lick'n and keep on tick'n but Campbell hasn't even proven that.

I also believe you learn by playing in games but I feel you should learn the playbook before you are on the field. You don't need Campbell thinking about where is this guy supposed to be and where is that guy supposed to be while running a play. He should have all of that down before playing in a game. On the field, he should be learning to adjust to what defenses are showing/giving him. Learn how to read them and take advantage of them.

KMDeMuth
09-28-2005, 10:14 AM
And also Mike this leads me back to why I wrote this thread...Ramsey's inability to Truely!!! Win and keep the starting job, put us in a bad situation. IMO.

If/When Campbell plays this or next year I dont think he will have a bad first showing. Like in Auburn when he made a mistake, the coaches calmed him down and made him do it again. Short pass....throw another passing play at him. They built an offense around him and his RB's we hear so much about now and he had the 4th best passing effeciency in ncaa div 1 and went undefeated, first year in the system. We have the same style of run first/balanced offense he excelled in.

RTS-sports Draft... (http://www.rtsports.com/php/draft-guide-player.php?PN=11495) May 31 2005 1:01PM

The Redskins organization believes Campbell will be ready to play in the NFL in two years. He will enter his first training camp this summer third on the depth chart behind starter Patrick Ramsey and Mark Brunell.
Fantasy Impact: We wouldn't doubt it if Campbell claims the No. 2 spot before the season is over, but it does seem likely he won't get much playing time his rookie year. Unless the Redskins have a terrible season or Brunell stinks up the joint, Campbell won't see the field.

made one visible and highlighted change, but its still the same deal.

NFL Prospect Profile (http://www.nfl.com/draft/profiles/2005/campbell_jason)

joethefan
09-28-2005, 10:14 AM
I just hope that Campbell works out because if he doesn't, there's going to be alot of crying in Redskins Nation. Neither of them have proved anything in the NFL. Well, Ramsey has proved he can take a lick'n and keep on tick'n but Campbell hasn't even proven that.

I also believe you learn by playing in games but I feel you should learn the playbook before you are on the field. You don't need Campbell thinking about where is this guy supposed to be and where is that guy supposed to be while running a play. He should have all of that down before playing in a game. On the field, he should be learning to adjust to what defenses are showing/giving him. Learn how to read them and take advantage of them.

Mike I agree....but what has that lickn gotten us...Due to Danny's wonderful scouting.. a shell shocked QB that can not Run a Basic Joe Gibbs offense, who got beat out by a much older QB, twice.

hail2skins
09-28-2005, 10:17 AM
Well most rookies other than Ben won't truely look good but at least he'll have the right to say "Hey I'm a rookie" and we'll all know that. But is Ramsey a rookie?....No, not to the league nor to this system...is he?and why would a guy want to use the "I'm a rookie" excuse of they don't play well? Ramsey was a rookie in his first season under Spurrier, then he had to learn a totally new system the next season. He was beat out by Brunell who Gibbs wanted playing anyway. Ramsey did finish the season and was told he was the starter for next season. He didn't do well in the preseason this season but was it all his fault? Maybe, and maybe not. There were new receivers to get used to and a tweaked offense. Well, he went down in the first game to an injury and lost his job. Why did he lose his job? He didn't do anything that warranted being benched IMO. Brunell came in and we won the first game. The 2nd game of the season Brunell looked like crap except for 2 throws.

I recognize that Ramsey didn't perform well but I believe he shouldn't have lost his job that early. We gave a veteran QB half a season to prove his worth and he didn't we give a young guy half a game. I supported Gibbs all season long last year with staying with Brunell because I felt he knows what's best for us. I support him now for the same reason no matter who is playing QB. I just feel Ramsey got a bad deal.

Sweepea436
09-28-2005, 10:21 AM
I think what is comes down to is this - (For the most part) We have given our QB (whoever it is) the tools and suuport needed to win games. We gave Ramsey/Brunell the protection, targets, and run support they needed all preseason to show us that they can steer this machine and niether of them stepped up. Now you have to start looking at the kid and getting him ready. He's better off learning from a proven veteran with diminishing skills than a guy who is still trying to get his feet wet in the NFL himself. Keep Brunell in there the whole season if he can do it - if he can't you have to put in Campbell. I think we've shown that if this team is going to go to the playoffs, Brunell will have to get it done. So why waste more time on Ramsey if he's out the door? Worst that happens is he takes some lumps and has an idea of what he needs to do for the next season, best case, he come in and gets us some W's............ Nobody thinks he can lead us in to the post season....but nobody thought we'd come back on Dallass with 3 minutes left either.......

hail2skins
09-28-2005, 10:23 AM
Mike I agree....but what has that lickn gotten us...Due to Danny's wonderful scouting.. a shell shocked QB that can not Run a Basic Joe Gibbs offense, who got beat out by a much older QB, twice.How do you know he can't run a basic Joe Gibbs offense. He ran it last year when he came in for Brunell. The problem Gibbs had with Ramsey going into the offseason was his long ball and possibly his decision making. We heard him state publicly about the former but I don't recall hearing Gibbs mention his decision making. They worked on the long ball in the offseason by getting him to put more air under the ball. I don't know what, if anything, they did with his decision making process. Anyway, doesn't matter whose playing because it seems like we only throw short passes anyway except for the 2 bombs against Dallas. I believe if Ramsey is put in the right situation, he'll be very successful. I now know that it won't be in Washington.

Sweepea436
09-28-2005, 10:25 AM
I just hope that Campbell works out because if he doesn't, there's going to be alot of crying in Redskins Nation. Neither of them have proved anything in the NFL. Well, Ramsey has proved he can take a lick'n and keep on tick'n but Campbell hasn't even proven that.


I don't think you conceed the 2 spot to Ramsey because we know he can take a beating.

hail2skins
09-28-2005, 10:25 AM
I think what is comes down to is this - (For the most part) We have given our QB (whoever it is) the tools and suuport needed to win games. We gave Ramsey/Brunell the protection, targets, and run support they needed all preseason to show us that they can steer this machine and niether of them stepped up. Now you have to start looking at the kid and getting him ready. He's better off learning from a proven veteran with diminishing skills than a guy who is still trying to get his feet wet in the NFL himself. Keep Brunell in there the whole season if he can do it - if he can't you have to put in Campbell. I think we've shown that if this team is going to go to the playoffs, Brunell will have to get it done. So why waste more time on Ramsey if he's out the door? Worst that happens is he takes some lumps and has an idea of what he needs to do for the next season, best case, he come in and gets us some W's............ Nobody thinks he can lead us in to the post season....but nobody thought we'd come back on Dallass with 3 minutes left either.......If that's the case, then why didn't they trade him to the Jets when they know the Jets are desperate? That's right,
you need to QB's in this age of the NFL and maybe just maybe the coaches aren't ready to put Campbell in there yet.

hail2skins
09-28-2005, 10:26 AM
I don't think you conceed the 2 spot to Ramsey because we know he can take a beating.It's amazing no one sees the joke in that comment.:rolleyes:

joethefan
09-28-2005, 10:28 AM
and why would a guy want to use the "I'm a rookie" excuse of they don't play well? Ramsey was a rookie in his first season under Spurrier, then he had to learn a totally new system the next season. He was beat out by Brunell who Gibbs wanted playing anyway. Ramsey did finish the season and was told he was the starter for next season. He didn't do well in the preseason this season but was it all his fault? Maybe, and maybe not. There were new receivers to get used to and a tweaked offense. Well, he went down in the first game to an injury and lost his job. Why did he lose his job? He didn't do anything that warranted being benched IMO. Brunell came in and we won the first game. The 2nd game of the season Brunell looked like crap except for 2 throws.

I recognize that Ramsey didn't perform well but I believe he shouldn't have lost his job that early. We gave a veteran QB half a season to prove his worth and he didn't we give a young guy half a game. I supported Gibbs all season long last year with staying with Brunell because I felt he knows what's best for us. I support him now for the same reason no matter who is playing QB. I just feel Ramsey got a bad deal.

Do you think we would have won the Bears and the Dallas game with Ramsey?Remember 1 int and two fumbles with no points ...I hope your answer isn't what I think it is. Now that's not to say that Brunell did a hell of a job, but he did just enough to win those games. I don't think Ramsey would have done it. I have many Dallas fans that didn't want to see Brunell in that game. Luckily towards the end Brunell had enough to pull it together.

HAWGZHEAD
09-28-2005, 10:29 AM
He sits. There is no question.

hail2skins
09-28-2005, 10:34 AM
Do you think we would have won the Bears and the Dallas game with Ramsey?Remember 1 int and two fumbles with no points ...I hope your answer isn't what I think it is. Now that's not to say that Brunell did a hell of a job, but he did just enough to win those games. I don't think Ramsey would have done it. I have many Dallas fans that didn't want to see Brunell in that game. Luckily towards the end Brunell had enough to pull it together.Who knows whether we would have one the game or not Joe, who knows. If you do, can you give me the lucky lotto numbers for today. Whose to say he couldn't have come out and scored more than 9 points in the 2nd half. Like Brunell finally woke up against the Cowboys.

Sweepea436
09-28-2005, 10:37 AM
If that's the case, then why didn't they trade him to the Jets when they know the Jets are desperate? That's right,
you need to QB's in this age of the NFL and maybe just maybe the coaches aren't ready to put Campbell in there yet.

Well I honestly have no clue what we are asking for to give up Ramsey, but I'm pretty sure there is a number/player/pick out there. Maybe the Jets just didn't want to give it up. I can't speak as to the mindset of our F.O. - My opinion is that we gain nothing by keeping Campbell on the bench if Brunell goes down, but there is an upside. Experience, and the faint possibility of him stepping in and rolling. If you come in your first year, or your fourth year, you're going to make mistakes. It's an individual time table on how fast (if ever) they can adjust. One article on here said that there is no formula for QB sucess.....I agree. The only way we can see what he is truely made of it to get him in the game and let him watch his own mistakes on tape.

If Brunell stays healthy, you leave the kid on the bench until you think the time is right - but if he is going to be the QB of the future, give him the stage if #1 goes down. My point that if Ramsey isn't going to be wearing a Redskins uniform next year like most people think, than he doens't need a whole lot of snaps. We can try to fix what we're not going to have. If they keep him it should be for and emergency role only (see above words in bold)

HAWGZHEAD
09-28-2005, 10:40 AM
I say we put Campbell in when Joe Gibbs says it's time to put in Campbell.

hail2skins
09-28-2005, 10:40 AM
Well I honestly have no clue what we are asking for to give up Ramsey, but I'm pretty sure there is a number/player/pick out there. Maybe the Jets just didn't want to give it up. I can't speak as to the mindset of our F.O. - My opinion is that we gain nothing by keeping Campbell on the bench if Brunell goes down, but there is an upside. Experience, and the faint possibility of him stepping in and rolling. If you come in your first year, or your fourth year, you're going to make mistakes. It's an individual time table on how fast (if ever) they can adjust. One article on here said that there is no formula for QB sucess.....I agree. The only way we can see what he is truely made of it to get him in the game and let him watch his own mistakes on tape.

If Brunell stays healthy, you leave the kid on the bench until you think the time is right - but if he is going to be the QB of the future, give him the stage if #1 goes down. My point that if Ramsey isn't going to be wearing a Redskins uniform next year like most people think, than he doens't need a whole lot of snaps. We can try to fix what we're not going to have. If they keep him it should be for and emergency role only (see above words in bold)I don't believe the conversation with the Jets got to the compensation stage according to Cerrato. It last all but 10 seconds he said in an article.

Only time will tell whether Campbell will get playing time. I believe if Brunell were to go down now, it would be Ramsey. But if went down later in the season say like game 9 or 10, then it would be Campbell. Of course this all depends on the standings as well. (Notice I didn't say playoffs but implied it.)

joethefan
09-28-2005, 10:41 AM
I believe if Ramsey is put in the right situation, he'll be very successful. I now know that it won't be in Washington.

What is the right situation our offense with 11 and thier defense only rushing the passer with 3 people no DB's. The fact of the matter is that he can't see the field and it goes back to him being shell shocked in SS offense (Danny's scouting again).

We can't continue to say that give the right situation, when the right situation is he has two wr's that can catch, with an h back that can block and tackle, time on the Oline and a Running back that can do it. That to me is the right situation. Now if the play calling can get better, like recognizing when your wr's route is getting bit on, then we can get some things done.

hail2skins
09-28-2005, 10:41 AM
I say we put Campbell in when Joe Gibbs says it's time to put in Campbell.More thoughts on this would be appreciated. It's like you're commentating the thread.

hail2skins
09-28-2005, 10:44 AM
What is the right situation our offense with 11 and thier defense only rushing the passer with 3 people no DB's. The fact of the matter is that he can't see the field and it goes back to him being shell shocked in SS offense (Danny's scouting again).

We can't continue to say that give the right situation, when the right situation is he has two wr's that can catch, with an h back that can block and tackle, time on the Oline and a Running back that can do it. That to me is the right situation. Now if the play calling can get better, like recognizing when your wr's route is getting bit on, then we can get some things done.Joe, how do you explain the first 3 quarters of the Dallas game for Brunell? As you say, he had two good receivers and a running back. Are you the football god that knows everything football like you're giving in this thread. How do you know he won't succeed with another team? Have you looked into his future.

Sweepea436
09-28-2005, 10:47 AM
I don't believe the conversation with the Jets got to the compensation stage according to Cerrato. It last all but 10 seconds he said in an article.

Only time will tell whether Campbell will get playing time. I believe if Brunell were to go down now, it would be Ramsey. But if went down later in the season say like game 9 or 10, then it would be Campbell. Of course this all depends on the standings as well. (Notice I didn't say playoffs but implied it.)

Then you think Ramsey gives us a legitmate shot to make the playoffs if Brunell goes down early? (I'm assuming, don't shoot me) If yes, than that's a good logical opinion. I'm not going to try to discredit it. I used to be a big Ramsey supporter myself, but after the preseason/2 series I saw of him this year, my opinion has changed. I don't think he can lead us to the playoffs or further. SO in my mind we gain nothing by putting him in over Campbell should the situation arise. Even more so if we do get rid of him like the rumor mill suggests.

Sweepea436
09-28-2005, 10:51 AM
I say we (insert topic here) when Joe Gibbs says it's time to (repeat topic)

And I'm sure we will. The point of the thread is to give YOUR thoughts. I could go on any thread here and use this line. Now get back in there kid!! You're better than that!! :lol1:

hail2skins
09-28-2005, 10:51 AM
Then you think Ramsey gives us a legitmate shot to make the playoffs if Brunell goes down early? (I'm assuming, don't shoot me) If yes, than that's a good logical opinion. I'm not going to try to discredit it. I used to be a big Ramsey supporter myself, but after the preseason/2 series I saw of him this year, my opinion has changed. I don't think he can lead us to the playoffs or further. SO in my mind we gain nothing by putting him in over Campbell should the situation arise. Even more so if we do get rid of him like the rumor mill suggests.My theory is based on the coaches wanting to give Campbell more time on the sidelines as opposed to me thinking Ramsey gives us a better chance. I should have made that clearer. IMPO, I believe Ramsey would give us a better chance if we were still in contention as opposed to a rookie QB who hasn't played in a regular season game. Just my opinion.

hail2skins
09-28-2005, 10:52 AM
I say we (insert topic here) in when Joe Gibbs says it's time to (repeat topic)

And I'm sure we will. The point of the thread is to give YOUR thoughts. I could go on any thread here and use this line. Now get back in there kid!! You're better than that!! :lol1:Huh!!!!

Sweepea436
09-28-2005, 10:56 AM
My theory is based on the coaches wanting to give Campbell more time on the sidelines as opposed to me thinking Ramsey gives us a better chance. I should have made that clearer. IMPO, I believe Ramsey would give us a better chance if we were still in contention as opposed to a rookie QB who hasn't played in a regular season game. Just my opinion.

This is where we're butting heads. You believe that, I don't. Not without divine intervention. Bottom line for me is, I want to get back to being a respectable franchise. We've been trying to get it right again for over a decade now so I'm used to the aches and pains of mediocrity. If Ramsey isn't part of the future don't invest any more time on him than we have to.

** Though I sure wouldn't be angry Ramsey makes me eat my words

Sweepea436
09-28-2005, 10:57 AM
Huh!!!!
I tried to quote HAWGZHEAD but I messed it up. I was just giving him a hard time for the generic post. (Totally in jest HAWGZ, don't hurt me) :Peace:

hail2skins
09-28-2005, 10:58 AM
This is where we're butting heads. You believe that, I don't. Not without divine intervention. Bottom line for me is, I want to get back to being a respectable franchise. We've been trying to get it right again for over a decade now so I'm used to the aches and pains of mediocrity. If Ramsey isn't part of the future don't invest any more time on him than we have to.

** Though I sure wouldn't be angry Ramsey makes me eat my wordsno butting heads but difference of opinion. No problem. I believe he have gotten the organization respectable as whole, it just needs to be seen on the field.

Sweepea436
09-28-2005, 11:02 AM
no butting heads but difference of opinion. No problem. I believe he have gotten the organization respectable as whole, it just needs to be seen on the field.

That's what I meant. Agreed, we're respectable as far as the people we have wearing headsets, but we don't have all the pieces (players) yet.

joethefan
09-28-2005, 11:04 AM
Joe, how do you explain the first 3 quarters of the Dallas game for Brunell? As you say, he had two good receivers and a running back. Are you the football god that knows everything football like you're giving in this thread. How do you know he won't succeed with another team? Have you looked into his future.

First of all, Mike no, to answer your question..I'm no kind of god at all. So if that's is your interpretation of my thoughts in this thread, I can't apoligize for that. Secondly, if you look at the game we had badd field position the entire game..possibly limiting the playcalling. Thirdly, my point is what else can we give Ramsey?...And you're right. Personally, I would like to see him with another team. The only future I want to look into is Ramsey on another team. So I do look foreward to that. At least we agree on something....your evaluations of things are different from mine, which I respect, but don't turn this to be personal. These are only opinions ...

Skinz4lyfe
09-28-2005, 11:10 AM
Without going through the previous 4 pages in this thread I believe that Campbell should not play this year period. However there can be an argument made that he should play his first year (ex. the Mannings, Rothlisberger, Leftwich, and McNabb) there are equal arguments for letting him sit his first year or 2 (ex. Carson Palmer, Brady, Culpepper, Trent Green). Then you have the still struggling QBs that have played since their rookie year and are still waiting to "breakout" (Harrington, Carr, Boller, and Ramsey). The fact of the matter remains that there is no way we can tell when to play Campbell. Let's leave it up to Coach Gibbs (and Musgrave) to decide when he's ready. At least we have to tools to help him succeed: Portis running the ball and playmakers at the receiver position to go along w/an outstanding defense. Time will tell but the fact of the matter is that this will be Campbell's team in time.

hail2skins
09-28-2005, 11:13 AM
First of all, Mike no, to answer your question..I'm no kind of god at all. So if that's is your interpretation of my thoughts in this thread, I can't apoligize for that. Secondly, if you look at the game we had badd field position the entire game..possibly limiting the playcalling. Thirdly, my point is what else can we give Ramsey?...And you're right. Personally, I would like to see him with another team. The only future I want to look into is Ramsey on another team. So I do look foreward to that. At least we agree on something....your evaluations of things are different from mine, which I respect, but don't turn this to be personal. These are only opinions ...Nobody's making them personal Joe. You implied that Ramsey could not be successful anywhere because he has what he needs here to be successful and that's what I questioned. That's why I asked if you looked into his future and if you're the football god. No need to take it personal. I don't think you can say that he has everything he needs here to be sucessful and he isn't so he won't be successful anywhere else.

silverspring
09-28-2005, 11:14 AM
It would be different if cambell played a good chunk during pre-season, but he barely got any snaps. I think pre-season is a valuable time for rookie learning, but jason didn't get that this year. Because of that we are really throwing him into the wolves. There is no way we start him if ramsey is still on this team. Ramsey gives us the best chance to win at this point.

GWBlitzST
09-28-2005, 11:19 AM
Then you have the still struggling QBs that have played since their rookie year and are still waiting to "breakout" (Harrington, Carr, Boller, and Ramsey).
I feel like this draft class was an anomaly, simply garbage with glitter sprinkled on it. Harrington was hyped beyond belief, and Carr was a great college QB who needs to cut his hair and realize this is the big leagues. Tedford products are garbage, as we will see in the next generation, Aaron Rodgers, in the pros. Patrick Ramsey played for Tulane--other Tulane QB's? Shaun King and JP Losman. Garbage.

Back to the topic at hand: I feel like we should play Campbell when we take a 28 point lead into the fourth quarter. If it doesn't happen, then play him late in the season when we have either locked up or been eliminated from a playoff spot.

joethefan
09-28-2005, 11:22 AM
Nobody's making them personal Joe. You implied that Ramsey could not be successful anywhere because he has what he needs here to be successful and that's what I questioned. That's why I asked if you looked into his future and if you're the football god. No need to take it personal. I don't think you can say that he has everything he needs here to be sucessful and he isn't so he won't be successful anywhere else.

I just feel that Joe retooled and revamped this offense to fit Ramsey. Are we correct on that? And if you disagree, what else does he need here to be successful? We all saw in Preseason that he didn't do well after getting the tools in place...the line, wr's and had time to throw the ball. Everyone here wrote on how he held on the ball too long. The key is that if he wants to be a starter in this league, he has to be and remain consistant. I believe that if we were up 10-0 when he got hurt with no turnovers, he would have come back.

Sweepea436
09-28-2005, 11:26 AM
I don't think you can say that he has everything he needs here to be sucessful and he isn't so he won't be successful anywhere else.

I think this offense has 10 guys on it that a GOOD qb could come in and be sucessful with. With a better qb, the play calling is more open, defensive schemes change.......... I guess I;m saying if we get the right guy in therre we can do more things. And whatever team Ramsey goes to, he'll need the offensive scheme moulded to his abilities. He couldn't walk in and take over Peyton Mannings offense just because they have Marvin Harrison/Edge. Just like we wouldn't need to throw WR screens to try to loosen up a D if we had Tom Brady. No matter where Ramsey goes, at this point, he needs max protect, a good RB and nothing can help him with his inability to look anyone off........

joethefan
09-28-2005, 11:30 AM
I think this offense has 10 guys on it that a GOOD qb could come in and be sucessful with. With a better qb, the play calling is more open, defensive schemes change.......... I guess I;m saying if we get the right guy in therre we can do more things. And whatever team Ramsey goes to, he'll need the offensive scheme moulded to his abilities. He couldn't walk in and take over Peyton Mannings offense just because they have Marvin Harrison/Edge. Just like we wouldn't need to throw WR screens to try to loosen up a D if we had Tom Brady. No matter where Ramsey goes, at this point, he needs max protect, a good RB and nothing can help him with his inability to look anyone off........


good post.

tomlcollins
09-28-2005, 11:32 AM
Our offense needs a QB to be successful....that's all. We've got good enough receivers and excellent running backs to go with an average line.

I'm sticking to my original statement which is play Campbell right now. Get rid of Ramsey while we can get a 6th rounder for him (b/c at the end of the season we get nothing). He's a worthless back-up anyways, it's been proven. Yank Brunell and throw Campbell in there. Can't wait for the screams about yanking Brunell while we're winning......

Sweepea436
09-28-2005, 11:35 AM
good post.


Haha thanks!! 1 out of 294, I'll take it!! I get where you're coming from, just take me ten or so posts to say it right!

joethefan
09-28-2005, 11:36 AM
Our offense needs a QB to be successful....that's all. We've got good enough receivers and excellent running backs to go with an average line.

I'm sticking to my original statement which is play Campbell right now. Get rid of Ramsey while we can get a 6th rounder for him (b/c at the end of the season we get nothing). He's a worthless back-up anyways, it's been proven. Yank Brunell and throw Campbell in there. Can't wait for the screams about yanking Brunell while we're winning......

Now I wouldn't do that...not while we're winning. The season has to be gone...but I am in favor of making him the #2

joethefan
09-28-2005, 11:38 AM
Haha thanks!! 1 out of 294, I'll take it!! I get where you're coming from, just take me ten or so posts to say it right!

Well sometimes it takes me a while too....you're not alone.

tomlcollins
09-28-2005, 11:39 AM
Now I wouldn't do that...not while we're winning. The season has to be gone...but I am in favor of making him the #2

I completely see your side. I'm just having a hard time believing Brunell is going to play the rest of the season like he did the last three minutes of the Dallas game (otherwise known as one of the top five sporting moments of my life) :) I'm HOPING he can with all my heart, but it's doubtful in my gut at the moment.

CarMike
09-28-2005, 11:44 AM
My son is not the QB he was three years ago, that wasnt because he sat on a bench watching the game, it was because he learned from his field experiences.
Joe, with all due respect to your son, this isn't even close to the same situation. Of course a kid is going to get great experience by playing. But when you come to the NFL its a totally different game. Its better to let young Campbell watch and learn. Get his reps in practice. When its his time to play, he'll play. I'll trust coach Gibbs decision.

joethefan
09-28-2005, 11:46 AM
I completely see your side. I'm just having a hard time believing Brunell is going to play the rest of the season like he did the last three minutes of the Dallas game (otherwise known as one of the top five sporting moments of my life) :) I'm HOPING he can with all my heart, but it's doubtful in my gut at the moment.

If we have no "future playing" use for Ramsey after this season, I say we cut or losses and move on...

joethefan
09-28-2005, 11:47 AM
Joe, with all due respect to your son, this isn't even close to the same situation. Of course a kid is going to get great experience by playing. But when you come to the NFL its a totally different game. Its better to let young Campbell watch and learn. Get his reps in practice. When its his time to play, he'll play. I'll trust coach Gibbs decision.

You're right Mike, it was just an analogy.

Skinz4lyfe
09-28-2005, 11:54 AM
Our offense needs a QB to be successful....that's all. We've got good enough receivers and excellent running backs to go with an average line.

I'm sticking to my original statement which is play Campbell right now. Get rid of Ramsey while we can get a 6th rounder for him (b/c at the end of the season we get nothing). He's a worthless back-up anyways, it's been proven. Yank Brunell and throw Campbell in there. Can't wait for the screams about yanking Brunell while we're winning......

What do you mean we won't get anything for Ramsey after this season? I thought he was signed for the next 2 years. If that's the case then I believe we'll get at least a 4th round pick if not a 3rd. I'm hoping for a 2nd but realistically I don't see that happening.

But by yanking Brunell now I don't see the point. If Gibbs doesn't think the rookie is ready then he ain't ready.

tomlcollins
09-28-2005, 11:58 AM
What do you mean we won't get anything for Ramsey after this season? I thought he was signed for the next 2 years. If that's the case then I believe we'll get at least a 4th round pick if not a 3rd. I'm hoping for a 2nd but realistically I don't see that happening.

But by yanking Brunell now I don't see the point. If Gibbs doesn't think the rookie is ready then he ain't ready.

The day we get a 2nd rounder for Ramsey will be the same day h*ll freezes over. It will have to be a cold day to get a 4th.

Other teams aren't going to give us anything for him when they know that we are going to cut him loose b/c he's unhappy, anyways. We're not going to hold him to his contract, mark my words.

We should trade him right now, he's completely lost all worth to the organization.

Patrick
09-28-2005, 11:59 AM
JTF ........... man you know how to pick the threads don't you ..... lol!

IMO .......... Campbell sit until he's forced into action due to injuries this year and next. TBH, JC is a second tier QB even though he was drafted in the first round. I felt the same way about Ramsey his rookies season too and still feel that he's was forced into action way too early in his career. ......YEAH JC got a wonderful arm and moves well as a QB but he's NOT ready. Showed it pretty much in the last preseason game. HE NEEDS TIME!!!!!!

On the flip side of that - I think any chance we get to put him in a mop-up roll we should. That can be very valuable experience.

Just my 2 cents worth!

Sweepea436
09-28-2005, 12:05 PM
Now I wouldn't do that...not while we're winning. The season has to be gone...but I am in favor of making him the #2

I don't think the season has to be gone to play him. I'm saying play Brunell as long as he is able. If he goes down give the kid his turn. At this point I don't feel Ramsey gives us any more of a chance than Campbell does to make the playoffs in Brunells abscence. But the kid might suprise - you never know, but at least there is still the chance....

Skinz4lyfe
09-28-2005, 12:08 PM
The day we get a 2nd rounder for Ramsey will be the same day h*ll freezes over. It will have to be a cold day to get a 4th.

Other teams aren't going to give us anything for him when they know that we are going to cut him loose b/c he's unhappy, anyways. We're not going to hold him to his contract, mark my words.

We should trade him right now, he's completely lost all worth to the organization.

What makes you think we'll cut Ramsey? Sure the cap hit would be mimimal but why cut him when there are teams that would be willing to trade for him? IMO, Gibbs will not release Ramsey (without getting something in return) because he's the only other QB besides Brunell w/any experience. Again let's look back a couple of years ago when Miami tried to trade a 1st round pick for him (and were turned down). They were so desparate they gave up a 2nd round pick for AJ Feeley. Don't be so hasty to undermind the market of a young QB w/experience. Anything can happen in the offseason.

joethefan
09-28-2005, 12:09 PM
JTF ........... man you know how to pick the threads don't you ..... lol!



Patrick you know that I know how to stir the pot.....It brings out more intellectual love from the family....LOL. It's my job to not only have an opinion but to get enlightened by others. It also also gives me a look at things from so many angles...I like that.

Battle Cat
09-28-2005, 12:21 PM
I think that Brunell should play for now, because we are 2-0. But I truly believe that right now today Campbell can manage the game just like Brunell is asked to do. If after the end of the Dallas game he is asked to do more than it may take a little longer for Campbell to do that. But to do what Brunell did the first 3 quarters 1. Turn and hand the ball off to the back 2. Hit the tight end 3 throw hitches and combacks Campbell can do that right now. I will admit I was a Ramsey guy at first but hey whats done is done as far as Brunell and I support what ever the skins decide to do, but 2 passes and by the way Campbell throws the best deep ball out of the 3 qb's already trust me, but 2 throws doesn't mean Brunell is out of his funk and I am not trying to hate on Brunell but he did basicly make 2 impressive passes in 2 games. He has not proven anything yet. I think Gibbs is goign on the premise of the Ravens when they won the Superbowl. Defense run the ball a ton and don't turn i tover and try to hit the home run every now and then, but # 1 don't turn it over. On 3rd and 6 throw a 6 yard pass opn 3rd and 8 throw a 6 yard pass, and I do think Campbell can do that right now. I would take campbell and invest that 45 million in a TO,. Chad Johnson , Randy Moss, and a pass rushing DE and take Campbell next year. 45 million, can do allot with that besides manage a conservative offense.

hail2skins
09-28-2005, 12:38 PM
I just feel that Joe retooled and revamped this offense to fit Ramsey. Are we correct on that? And if you disagree, what else does he need here to be successful? We all saw in Preseason that he didn't do well after getting the tools in place...the line, wr's and had time to throw the ball. Everyone here wrote on how he held on the ball too long. The key is that if he wants to be a starter in this league, he has to be and remain consistant. I believe that if we were up 10-0 when he got hurt with no turnovers, he would have come back.I don't think Joe Gibbs retooled this team specifically for Ramsey when all he along he wanted Brunell in there. I can't agree on that, sorry. So you think Moss and Patten were only bought in for Ramsey's sake. That's hard to believe Joe. Well, Brunell hasn't lit it up with the same people that Ramsey had at his disposal and who knows if Campbell is going to do it.

hail2skins
09-28-2005, 12:40 PM
I think this offense has 10 guys on it that a GOOD qb could come in and be sucessful with. With a better qb, the play calling is more open, defensive schemes change.......... I guess I;m saying if we get the right guy in therre we can do more things. And whatever team Ramsey goes to, he'll need the offensive scheme moulded to his abilities. He couldn't walk in and take over Peyton Mannings offense just because they have Marvin Harrison/Edge. Just like we wouldn't need to throw WR screens to try to loosen up a D if we had Tom Brady. No matter where Ramsey goes, at this point, he needs max protect, a good RB and nothing can help him with his inability to look anyone off........So again, you all think Moss and Patten were bought in specifically for Ramsey when Gibbs wanted Brunell playing all along.

hail2skins
09-28-2005, 12:54 PM
I just feel that Joe retooled and revamped this offense to fit Ramsey. Are we correct on that? And if you disagree, what else does he need here to be successful? We all saw in Preseason that he didn't do well after getting the tools in place...the line, wr's and had time to throw the ball. Everyone here wrote on how he held on the ball too long. The key is that if he wants to be a starter in this league, he has to be and remain consistant. I believe that if we were up 10-0 when he got hurt with no turnovers, he would have come back.Another thing, since this offense was revamped to fit Ramsey and he's no longer our QB, then we should package him along with Moss and Patten and trade them since they were only bought in for Ramsey. :banghead:

Sweepea436
09-28-2005, 12:54 PM
So again, you all think Moss and Patten were bought in specifically for Ramsey when Gibbs want Brunell playing all along.


I never said they were brought in for anybody SPECIFICALLY. They are skilled players that can get open, catch the ball and make plays. A GOOD quarterback could do damage with these guys. We didn't get Moss/Patten because they are remakably skilled at the 2-yard, sidleline catch and go..... they could do more if we were able to do it. When we have taken stabs at going long we have missed more than we haven't. A QB with the skill/accuracy.poise whatever you want to call it, could average more than 11.whatever we are with this O. This isn't a Ramsey vs Brunell debate anyway, it's a why play Ramsey over Campbell pro-con. When it shifted to the players we have to help us win games, I made that comment. I feel that if you make all 3 of our QB's disappear for a minute, and put a top 10 QB in there w/2 years of getting used to the system. He'd do well. Just like Harrington can't get the ball to all the talent he has at receiver in Detroit. It's not that the Lions don't WANT to do more....they can't because of who they are hiking the ball to.

hail2skins
09-28-2005, 01:02 PM
I never said they were brought in for anybody SPECIFICALLY. They are skilled players that can get open, catch the ball and make plays. A GOOD quarterback could do damage with these guys. We didn't get Moss/Patten because they are remakably skilled at the 2-yard, sidleline catch and go..... they could do more if we were able to do it. When we have taken stabs at going long we have missed more than we haven't. A QB with the skill/accuracy.poise whatever you want to call it, could average more than 11.whatever we are with this O. This isn't a Ramsey vs Brunell debate anyway, it's a why play Ramsey over Campbell pro-con. When it shifted to the players we have to help us win games, I made that comment. I feel that if you make all 3 of our QB's disappear for a minute, and put a top 10 QB in there w/2 years of getting used to the system. He'd do well. Just like Harrington can't get the ball to all the talent he has at receiver in Detroit. It's not that the Lions don't WANT to do more....they can't because of who they are hiking the ball to.That comment was directed at Joe who said revamped for Ramsey. I believe we have better talent all around but that it wasn't specifically for Ramsey's sake. Gibbs has never won anything with a Top 10 QB and I don't believe it's required now.

tomlcollins
09-28-2005, 01:07 PM
What makes you think we'll cut Ramsey? Sure the cap hit would be mimimal but why cut him when there are teams that would be willing to trade for him? IMO, Gibbs will not release Ramsey (without getting something in return) because he's the only other QB besides Brunell w/any experience. Again let's look back a couple of years ago when Miami tried to trade a 1st round pick for him (and were turned down). They were so desparate they gave up a 2nd round pick for AJ Feeley. Don't be so hasty to undermind the market of a young QB w/experience. Anything can happen in the offseason.


If you think Patrick Ramsey will be with the Redskins at the start of the season next year then you are living in a fantasy world. Gibbs WILL release Ramsey whether or not he get's anything in return, although I'm sure the organization will try it's best to get something.
I guess GIBBS will never ever switch QB's in the first week either, right??
None of us have any idea what Gibbs will do for sure, but I'm pretty certain on this one. He's inflicted enough damage to Ramsey, he's not going to have the heart or the intention of making him sit in a situation he's not comfortable in (sitting back-up) any longer.

Sweepea436
09-28-2005, 01:22 PM
If you think Patrick Ramsey will be with the Redskins at the start of the season next year then you are living in a fantasy world. Gibbs WILL release Ramsey whether or not he get's anything in return, although I'm sure the organization will try it's best to get something.
I guess GIBBS will never ever switch QB's in the first week either, right??
None of us have any idea what Gibbs will do for sure, but I'm pretty certain on this one. He's inflicted enough damage to Ramsey, he's not going to have the heart or the intention of making him sit in a situation he's not comfortable in (sitting back-up) any longer.

He would if it was what was best for the team in his eyes. He's not herre to make friends, he's here to win games and turn the organization around.

That said - I agree 100% that he'll be gone before the 06/07 season rolls around :Peace:

bwparker
09-28-2005, 01:39 PM
I just feel that Joe retooled and revamped this offense to fit Ramsey. Are we correct on that? And if you disagree, what else does he need here to be successful? We all saw in Preseason that he didn't do well after getting the tools in place...the line, wr's and had time to throw the ball. Everyone here wrote on how he held on the ball too long. The key is that if he wants to be a starter in this league, he has to be and remain consistant. I believe that if we were up 10-0 when he got hurt with no turnovers, he would have come back.
You know who else was TERRIBLE in the pre-season (one of the lowest rated QBs) even though he was surrounded by a ton of talented quality players. I'll give you a hint: He's the HIGHEST rated QB in the NFL after three weeks.

Preseason production means nothing.

DoGood
09-28-2005, 01:46 PM
At least GIBBS knows better than Spurrier and wont leave Campbell subject to repetitive BEATINGS on every down.

Skinz4lyfe
09-28-2005, 02:19 PM
If you think Patrick Ramsey will be with the Redskins at the start of the season next year then you are living in a fantasy world. Gibbs WILL release Ramsey whether or not he get's anything in return, although I'm sure the organization will try it's best to get something.
I guess GIBBS will never ever switch QB's in the first week either, right??
None of us have any idea what Gibbs will do for sure, but I'm pretty certain on this one. He's inflicted enough damage to Ramsey, he's not going to have the heart or the intention of making him sit in a situation he's not comfortable in (sitting back-up) any longer.

I think you misinterpreted what I was trying to say. I wasn't saying that Ramsey will be here next year. I said Gibbs will not release Ramsey without getting something in return. I believe Ramsey will be gone by next year too but I do believe the FO will get something in return for him (probably a draft pick). Again, why release him when we can get something for him? Besides most people in the league know that we'll be shopping him around in the off-season but doubt we'll out right release him. I guess time will tell.

70chip-on-1
09-28-2005, 02:30 PM
I think he's too cheap to outright release him.... his salary is very low when he doesn't take snaps because of all the escalators in his contract. Also where could you find a QB that has been around the system for over a year... so cheap. almost impossible.

however if there is a trade thats attractive take it. But if there are no offers I say you keep em around for next year too.. he's cheap! and with players like lavar hogging up 8 figures of cap room you need to keep cheap guys around.

CarMike
09-28-2005, 02:47 PM
The day we get a 2nd rounder for Ramsey will be the same day h*ll freezes over. It will have to be a cold day to get a 4th.

Other teams aren't going to give us anything for him when they know that we are going to cut him loose b/c he's unhappy, anyways. We're not going to hold him to his contract, mark my words.

We should trade him right now, he's completely lost all worth to the organization.
:D

ryflan47
09-28-2005, 02:59 PM
:D
Guess we're gettin a 2nd rounder... :lol1:

Skinz4lyfe
09-28-2005, 03:36 PM
:D

:lol1: Good job CarMike! One thing I've learned about the Redskins is that there is no absolute! Many people (myself included) didn't think that we would trade Coles and take a $9 million hit but we did. There have been worse trades in the league so never say never. It may be far-fetched to expect a 2nd rounder for Ramsey but like I said there have been worse trades so don't totally rule it out.

HAWGZHEAD
09-28-2005, 04:33 PM
More thoughts on this would be appreciated. It's like you're commentating the thread.
I am saying that these threads are irritating. I think Joe gibbs knows what he is doing so why are we speculating on when the team should put in Campbell. There is no reason to even worry about this unless Brunell goes down, and if that does happen I have faith that Gibbs will make the right move.

HAWGZHEAD
09-28-2005, 04:41 PM
I tried to quote HAWGZHEAD but I messed it up. I was just giving him a hard time for the generic post. (Totally in jest HAWGZ, don't hurt me) :Peace:
It was a generic answer to a generic thread. Why are we even discussing this? It is like someone on this board knows more than Gibbs as to when and when not to start a QB. It's basically the same thread about Ramsey being benched and it comes down to people doubting Gibbs decision making capabilities. It may have not been intended to end up like this, but I knew it was going to when I read the title.

hail2skins
09-28-2005, 04:48 PM
I am saying that these threads are irritating. I think Joe gibbs knows what he is doing so why are we speculating on when the team should put in Campbell. There is no reason to even worry about this unless Brunell goes down, and if that does happen I have faith that Gibbs will make the right move.Yeah but this is a message board and speculation will happen. Over 50% of discussion on a message board is speculation. Threads about predictions, trade scenarios, etc.

HAWGZHEAD
09-28-2005, 05:02 PM
Yeah but this is a message board and speculation will happen. Over 50% of discussion on a message board is speculation. Threads about predictions, trade scenarios, etc.
Maybe it is just me but when as soon as I saw the title of this thread it made me angry just thinking of all the stupid arguing we did on the Ramsey threads. That is probably what caused me to put up the bad posts knowing that they would be bad and reflect my opinion of the whole thread. I know everyone is entitled to their own speculations and opinions so my opinion lies with the fact that Gibbs knows football and will place Campbell in the correct spot to become the QB that I think he can be.

D-Ruck #8
09-28-2005, 05:42 PM
I also, really dont get the point in this thread. Before the Dallas game Gibbs was quoted as saying that the team will start Brunell, and Ramsey will be backup. But if Brunell was to miss a series of games later in the season, then Cambell would start during those games, and Ramsey would back him up.

It seems a forgone conclusion that Ramsey is gone after this year. I think he will be around for the long-term, but I also think he is going to play that backup role, and not be a starter anywhere in the near future. He definitely has the arm, but he has shown nothing when it comes to playing smart football.

Oh, and by the time we get to those last three games, we will already have secured a playoff spot, those games will be for home-field. Playoff games in Fed-Ex, thats a beautiful thought.

Man I couldn't think how loud it would be in the playoffs. Anyway, whoever said the comment about Palmer sitting and then getting to start the next year, that would be the best case scenario in my opinion.

hail2skins
09-28-2005, 05:54 PM
Maybe it is just me but when as soon as I saw the title of this thread it made me angry just thinking of all the stupid arguing we did on the Ramsey threads. That is probably what caused me to put up the bad posts knowing that they would be bad and reflect my opinion of the whole thread. I know everyone is entitled to their own speculations and opinions so my opinion lies with the fact that Gibbs knows football and will place Campbell in the correct spot to become the QB that I think he can be.I know where you're coming from and you're not alone. That's what being a fan is all about.

joethefan
09-29-2005, 07:21 AM
You know who else was TERRIBLE in the pre-season (one of the lowest rated QBs) even though he was surrounded by a ton of talented quality players. I'll give you a hint: He's the HIGHEST rated QB in the NFL after three weeks.

Preseason production means nothing.

C'mon BW..we all know that we had high expectations on Ramsey after being called the starter...given all the first team reps and even hoping that he'll turn it around after the Raven's scrimmage, and most of us were not happy with his progress even after week 3 in preseason, with a dumbed down vanilla offense. I told many of you before, if Ramsey can't get it done then, we must cut our loses and move on, I said that last year. What else do you want for him? Is seems that he's not prepared to give it to you. He's proven that he holds the ball too long, stares down recievers and can't and pats his feet as if he's not comfortable in there...now please tell me that you haven't made that assessment as well and If you have, why should he be given back his starting spot?

BigPlayJay
09-29-2005, 07:39 AM
I have a serious argument here and I would like some clarity from you guys. It is the overall consensus that many people on this board would not like to see Jason Campbell play this year. It seems to me that many people are afraid that the Patrick Ramsey routine will repeat itself. Well I do understand how you feel. Hey, it's not like we have done really well by drafting Qb's in the first round. Remember Heath, I never thought I'd be writing that name..LOL, and Patrick hasn't really panned out like we thought he would). But let's real. Football is a learn on the job type game, you can study and do all the preparation you can. The fact of the matter is that you'll never really see what you see off the field until you're actually on it.

My son is not the QB he was three years ago, that wasnt because he sat on a bench watching the game, it was because he learned from his field experiences. Many of you will say that "Rypien sat on the bench for three years" I know that argument. But we have to come to the realization that Ramsey will be a memory next year and that'll end Danny's scouting fiasco. Let me remind you that Danny scouted Ramsey not our late coach SS, which was the wrong marriage from the beginning.

Having said that, I feel that the Skins are in a QB transition, the thing that I hate is that they are taking too long to act on it and the longer they wait, it seems the worse they may be. And it all goes back to Ramseys lack of play. To me, he messed the equation up by putting doubt in Joe's mind by his lack of play in Preseason. Remember Young starter trying to prove himself still, Veteran Backup, younger rookie waiting in the wings to take over. Now it's Veteran starter taking pain killers every monday, Young back up still trying to find his way and younger back up waiting for the older back up to get the hell out of town. I would just be happy when we make this transition to Campbell and stop procastonating on this.

Now looking at the schedule, it doesn't work out to Campbell's favor because we could still go to the playoffs if we do well in the last three games. So I would not be happy to throw him to the lions then, but at what point do we make the change and stick with it. This QB rollercoaster is killing me.I think you can make a strong case that QB's do better after sitting out or playing very little the first year. Look at Carson Palmer, Michael Vick, Daunte Culpepper, Steve McNair, Chad Pennington even Donovan sat out the first 2/3 of his rookie year. Those are all first round QB's that went on to play great. Then of course there are Tom Brady and Marc Bulger who weren't first rounders, but sat a year at least.
The flip side is David Carr, Joey Harrington, Patrick Ramsey, Kyle Boller, Quincy Carter, Tim Couch,Akili Smith and Cade McNown. All played right away and what do you think of those guys? Of course there are exceptions: Peyton Manning and Ben Rothlesburger have done well playing right away but I think the majority haven't.

I say all that to say this. I do not want to see Campbell in a game this year. The only way I would say he wshould take snap is if we are 100% out of the playoffs and there is no immediate pressure on him to be our savior. Shuler, Frerotte and Ramsey are good examples of what happens to a QB's head in the Washington pressure cooker. Lets give this kid Campbell a chance to be great!

Skinnydo
09-29-2005, 08:31 AM
Who cares whether or not Campbell stinks it up. He is the quarterback of the future and the future is now. So, if Burnell fails to win, skip with any thoughts of playing Ramsey and go with the big guy. Cut Ramsey now! He deserves better, and maybe he can find it elsewhere. If not, I am certain that he will be a "solid citizen" in his chosen world following football.

joethefan
09-29-2005, 08:58 AM
Who cares whether or not Campbell stinks it up. He is the quarterback of the future and the future is now. So, if Burnell fails to win, skip with any thoughts of playing Ramsey and go with the big guy. Cut Ramsey now! He deserves better, and maybe he can find it elsewhere. If not, I am certain that he will be a "solid citizen" in his chosen world following football.

Hey Welcome Skinny.

bwparker
09-29-2005, 11:11 AM
C'mon BW..we all know that we had high expectations on Ramsey after being called the starter...given all the first team reps and even hoping that he'll turn it around after the Raven's scrimmage, and most of us were not happy with his progress even after week 3 in preseason, with a dumbed down vanilla offense. I told many of you before, if Ramsey can't get it done then, we must cut our loses and move on, I said that last year. What else do you want for him? Is seems that he's not prepared to give it to you. He's proven that he holds the ball too long, stares down recievers and can't and pats his feet as if he's not comfortable in there...now please tell me that you haven't made that assessment as well and If you have, why should he be given back his starting spot?
It comes down to a difference of opinion. If Mark Brunell falters or gets injured Gibbs has a choice to make: Campbell or Ramsey.

IMO, the team is better off long term AND short term with Ramsey at QB. I think letting Campbell sit, pressure free, to learn the offense is better for him(and therefore the team's future). I feel far more comfortable with Ramsey in, rather than Campbell...for right now. So to me, there is no question. Campbell sits.

You, and others, obviously feel the exact opposite. That, right now, Campbell is better than Ramsey, for a better short term solution. AND that trial by fire is good way to build a QB, so it works long term as well.

We could debate this until the cows come home, but we are always going to come back to those basic premises, which we disagree on.

I have one caveat though. As the season wears on, Ramsey's window of opportunity is quickly closing. I said before the season started, Ramsey has THIS YEAR to prove that he can start for the Redskins. A completely unexpected switch in week one doesn't change that. Every game that passes is one less opportunity Ramsey has to prove himself to me. Alot of you have written him off entirely already, but I still feel the same way I did about him in the offseason. This YEAR is his last chance, and this year isn't over yet.

silverspring
09-29-2005, 11:19 AM
C'mon BW..we all know that we had high expectations on Ramsey after being called the starter...given all the first team reps and even hoping that he'll turn it around after the Raven's scrimmage, and most of us were not happy with his progress even after week 3 in preseason, with a dumbed down vanilla offense. I told many of you before, if Ramsey can't get it done then, we must cut our loses and move on, I said that last year. What else do you want for him? Is seems that he's not prepared to give it to you. He's proven that he holds the ball too long, stares down recievers and can't and pats his feet as if he's not comfortable in there...now please tell me that you haven't made that assessment as well and If you have, why should he be given back his starting spot?

Ramsey got 1.5 quarter, and he generally didn't look too good. But he did play good for a short period of time where he had several 3rd and longs and dug us out of the endzone.

Brunell started last game and didn't look good except for several plays. Sound familiar? Why should brunell keep his starting spot? No, reason except gibbs has a soft spot for him. 4 good plays and countless horrendous ones don't earn you a spot in my book.

They both don't look too good to me right now, and i would rather stick with youth. But they both have an exponentially better chance to succeed than cambell who barely even played in preseason.

redwolf1218
09-29-2005, 11:23 AM
Campbell is the better athlete, but Ramsey should know the system better. Brunell showed the importance of being able to make plays by buying time in the pocket, scrambling, rolling out, throwing on the run, and with that long 25 yard scramble on 3rd and 27, he basically kept the game alive. I could see Campbell making plays with his legs like that, but probably not Ramsey.

From today's Washington Post:

Free safety Sean Taylor stayed after practice to run pass routes and catch passes from rookie quarterback Jason Campbell under the watchful eye of quarterbacks coach Bill Musgrave, who also played pass defense on Taylor. . .

good to see these guys willing to put in extra work.

redskins_MA
09-29-2005, 01:26 PM
Campbell was a huge project when we took him. Go to Auburn's website and look at his '03 vs. '04 stats. A big reason he did so well in '04 was a new system. He was mediocre in his junior year with 2,200 yards in 13 games with 10 TD's and 8 INT's. Not to mention in big games he choked. Look at Auburn-USC... 12-26 1 INT 121 yds. GT, 20-32 1 INT 190 yds. Wisconsin... 10-22 1 INT 138 yds. Georgia...20-33 1 INT 178 yds. And I believe two picks against Bama who was either just off of or still on scholarship probation. Now in '04, to be fair, he stepped up big time. But that was, I believe, with a new coordinator and new system. I am continually confused by everyone who thinks the undefeated season Auburn had was a result of Campbell being a beastchild at the QB position. A lot of his success stemmed from the great running game that opened up his passing options. He had Carnell running for him. Now don't get me wrong. I loved his composure and decision making in '04... it is just very tough to imagine Campbell stepping in for at least another 2 years and being effective. And lastly, just because he was a four year starter, does not mean he was a good QB for four years. He was not. For two years he was just the best available. I hope for the best with him, and really do think he will turn into a good quarterback. That will not happen for at least two years though.

Sweepea436
09-29-2005, 01:30 PM
Campbell was a huge project when we took him. Go to Auburn's website and look at his '03 vs. '04 stats. A big reason he did so well in '04 was a new system. He was mediocre in his junior year with 2,200 yards in 13 games with 10 TD's and 8 INT's. Not to mention in big games he choked. Look at Auburn-USC... 12-26 1 INT 121 yds. GT, 20-32 1 INT 190 yds. Wisconsin... 10-22 1 INT 138 yds. Georgia...20-33 1 INT 178 yds. And I believe two picks against Bama who was either just off of or still on scholarship probation. Now in '04, to be fair, he stepped up big time. But that was, I believe, with a new coordinator and new system. I am continually confused by everyone who thinks the undefeated season Auburn had was a result of Campbell being a beastchild at the QB position. A lot of his success stemmed from the great running game that opened up his passing options. He had Carnell running for him. Now don't get me wrong. I loved his composure and decision making in '04... it is just very tough to imagine Campbell stepping in for at least another 2 years and being effective. And lastly, just because he was a four year starter, does not mean he was a good QB for four years. He was not. For two years he was just the best available. I hope for the best with him, and really do think he will turn into a good quarterback. That will not happen for at least two years though.

Holy Crap. Now YOU did your homework...... Guys like you make me not want to post........ show off. :lol1: :Peace:

vbskins
09-29-2005, 02:45 PM
where do i start? First off Brunell looked terrible last year. That was last year! We do not win the Dallas game with Ramsey in there. The accurate down feild throws and the long run, Ramsey has consistantly shown he cannot make either. Brunell does not make 1/4 of the mistakes that Ramsey does. If Ramsey were in the game we would have not been in the position to even win, because he would have turned the ball over several times and been sacked multiple times more than Brunell.

Ramsey has NO FUTURE in Washington! He is not a good quaterback and has never shown the ability to be a good quaterback, regardless of how long someone stood behind him(including the fans). Lets all realize this and move on.

That being said we may well need him again this year. And I think he could squeak out a couple of important wins for us if necessary. Plus he has alot to prove if he wants any chance to continue in this league. He will be gone next year and that is when Campbell gets his chance.

Gibbs would probably bring in Neil Odonell before Campbell would play before week 16

CowboyKilla
09-29-2005, 02:52 PM
Sit him one year, and next year Let it ride the kid plays.
Give Brunell if he fails/getshurt and Ramsey the opportunity this year. It may not be the best thing for the 06 season but it will set things up for stability in years 070809. In closing....who the hell knows?

joethefan
09-29-2005, 03:56 PM
Ramsey got 1.5 quarter, and he generally didn't look too good. But he did play good for a short period of time where he had several 3rd and longs and dug us out of the endzone.

Brunell started last game and didn't look good except for several plays. Sound familiar? Why should brunell keep his starting spot? No, reason except gibbs has a soft spot for him. 4 good plays and countless horrendous ones don't earn you a spot in my book.

They both don't look too good to me right now, and i would rather stick with youth. But they both have an exponentially better chance to succeed than cambell who barely even played in preseason.


I understand your thought process by sticking with the youth but I still do not believe we win those games with ramsey.

BIGSEF3
09-29-2005, 06:05 PM
When Campbell becomes our QB, i wonder if he can start doing those soup commercials instead of McNabb?

BIGSEF3
09-29-2005, 06:07 PM
I understand your thought process by sticking with the youth but I still do not believe we win those games with ramsey.

How can Brunell more or less single-handedly win the most emotional victory for the Redskins in the past decade, and after 10 days or so, we have people saying Ramsey, who's 3 possessions all resulted in fumbles and interceptions, be the better option at QB?

Are there certain people who just HAVE to root for the backup QB, no matter what the starter does?

Thats like saying that after 2 wins, we should have Burns be head coach instead of Gibbs.

GoDannyBoy
09-29-2005, 06:21 PM
I think that Campbell is going to having a better long ball to keep "D"s honest and he is pretty mobile. Gibbs should be drooling at the plays that he can run with Campbell. If Brunell goes down go with Campbell.

Although what do I know!

Biggie
09-29-2005, 06:28 PM
Next year, or 2007, when Campbell is starting, I will be drooling.

Not this year, though. Let me savor the future.

skins74
09-29-2005, 06:56 PM
It is too early to answer this question.

BigPlayJay
09-29-2005, 07:51 PM
Brunell started last game and didn't look good except for several plays. Sound familiar? Why should brunell keep his starting spot? No, reason except gibbs has a soft spot for him. 4 good plays and countless horrendous ones don't earn you a spot in my book.

You should go back and watch the dallas game again. Brunell played pretty well the whole game. He was under a ton of pressure too. He only had about three or four bad throws and one awful read on the pick. The rest of his throws were good.

The offense didn't produce more because of constant bad field position, lots of untimely penalties and poor offensive line play. I don't know how you could look at that game and say he doesn't deserve to be the starter right now. Your not being objective.

Brunell= 2-0. I'll take it.

BigPlayJay
09-29-2005, 07:57 PM
How can Brunell more or less single-handedly win the most emotional victory for the Redskins in the past decade, and after 10 days or so, we have people saying Ramsey, who's 3 possessions all resulted in fumbles and interceptions, be the better option at QB?

Are there certain people who just HAVE to root for the backup QB, no matter what the starter does?

Thats like saying that after 2 wins, we should have Burns be head coach instead of Gibbs.
The unabashed Ramsey supporters probably love him for his cannon arm and his standing in the pocket. He has had about 3- 5 good games in 3+ seasons and how many horrible ones?

I know, it's never his fault, it's always the protection, the coach or some great conspiracy unearthed by Len P. It's always the well if this hadn't happened............

If ifs and buts were candy and nuts we'd all have a Merry Christmas! Great QB's overcome the what if's!

Hate d' cowboys
09-29-2005, 09:47 PM
I don't understand the relevance of this thread right now. The obvious answer is, nobody knows when the kid will play. One thing I am pretty sure of is that he won't play this week.

WOW, Take it easy moody.

Hate d' cowboys
09-29-2005, 09:48 PM
You should go back and watch the dallas game again. Brunell played pretty well the whole game. He was under a ton of pressure too. He only had about three or four bad throws and one awful read on the pick. The rest of his throws were good.

The offense didn't produce more because of constant bad field position, lots of untimely penalties and poor offensive line play. I don't know how you could look at that game and say he doesn't deserve to be the starter right now. Your not being objective.

Brunell= 2-0. I'll take it.

TRUE

redskin_rich
09-29-2005, 10:37 PM
WOW, Take it easy moody.
I'm chill, I wasn't questioning the subject, I just didn't understand the timing. This seems to be more of a topic for after we have lost some games but hey, it generated a lot of discussion, so I was wrong.....I guess.

ConradCountry
09-30-2005, 12:22 AM
Campbell could play this year and be successful if we can get the offense and the run game running a little more smoothly and he could easily be plugged in like Big Ben was.

RoanokeSkin
09-30-2005, 10:38 AM
If Brunell fails to get the job done, then I would turn to Campbell and designate Ramsey as the emergency QB. As long as we are winning, he can sit and learn.

BIGSEF3
09-30-2005, 10:53 AM
If Brunell fails to get the job done, then I would turn to Campbell and designate Ramsey as the emergency QB. As long as we are winning, he can sit and learn.

Brunell was born to play this offense. He will not fail. The only way Brunell stops being our starter this year (and possibly even next) is if he gets hurt. There's just something about Brunell, when we first sign him i felt he was going to do great things here. Last monday may have been a high point, but it wasn't a fluke. Last season was a fluke. I beleive Mark Brunell is just getting started. If he takes us to the playoffs this year, I can easily see Gibbs starting him next year. And after that, well, maybe we could renegotiate his contract to keep him as a backup. If Vinny can still play at 41, who's to say Mark Brunell will be out of gas when he's only 36? He certainly didn't look like he was on his last leg Monday night. Thats for sure.

Patrick
09-30-2005, 01:35 PM
I'm chill, I wasn't questioning the subject, I just didn't understand the timing. This seems to be more of a topic for after we have lost some games but hey, it generated a lot of discussion, so I was wrong.....I guess.


Agree with you except more like a season instead of "some games".

silverspring
09-30-2005, 01:52 PM
You should go back and watch the dallas game again. Brunell played pretty well the whole game. He was under a ton of pressure too. He only had about three or four bad throws and one awful read on the pick. The rest of his throws were good.

The offense didn't produce more because of constant bad field position, lots of untimely penalties and poor offensive line play. I don't know how you could look at that game and say he doesn't deserve to be the starter right now. Your not being objective.

Brunell= 2-0. I'll take it.

I am sorry but I don't agree at all. He was under throwing, over throwing, holding the ball too long, watching as a db ran into him, he seemed to prefer double/triple coverages over the open man, throwing INT. Basically all the things we complain about ramsey for. By the second half I was holding my breath everytime he threw the ball. On top of that most of these over/unders were 10 yard passes which is inconceivable. Brunell looked like crap most of the game, you are crazy to think otherwise.

BIGSEF3
09-30-2005, 02:47 PM
I am sorry but I don't agree at all. He was under throwing, over throwing, holding the ball too long, watching as a db ran into him, he seemed to prefer double/triple coverages over the open man, throwing INT. Basically all the things we complain about ramsey for. By the second half I was holding my breath everytime he threw the ball. On top of that most of these over/unders were 10 yard passes which is inconceivable. Brunell looked like crap most of the game, you are crazy to think otherwise.

The difference between Ramsey and Brunell is that Ramsey had all offseason to work with these receivers and Brunell had 6 days. Oh, and you must not have watched the game because Brunell didnt look like crap, but the o-line sure as hell did.

But i guess you are one of those people that would prefer to be 1-1 with Ramsey right now than 2-0 with Brunell. Brunell has thrown 1 interception in 1-3/4 games and Ramsey had a fumble and INt in 1/4 of a game. You could make the argument that Ramsey could have thrown those 2 deep miracle balls to Moss, but you can't make the argument Ramsey would have scrambled for 25 yards on a 3rd and 27. Without that play, the game would have been over. We beat the cowobys because Joe Gibbs made the decision to go with Mark Brunell instead of Patrick Ramsey. Moss got all the credit, but we would not have won the game if Mark Brunell had not been our quarterback.

Arguing for Ramsey over Brunell at this point is just as rediculous as arguing Jimoh should start over Sean Springs or that Rod Gardner is a better receiver than Santana Moss.

silverspring
09-30-2005, 03:13 PM
The difference between Ramsey and Brunell is that Ramsey had all offseason to work with these receivers and Brunell had 6 days. Oh, and you must not have watched the game because Brunell didnt look like crap, but the o-line sure as hell did.

But i guess you are one of those people that would prefer to be 1-1 with Ramsey right now than 2-0 with Brunell. Brunell has thrown 1 interception in 1-3/4 games and Ramsey had a fumble and INt in 1/4 of a game. You could make the argument that Ramsey could have thrown those 2 deep miracle balls to Moss, but you can't make the argument Ramsey would have scrambled for 25 yards on a 3rd and 27. Without that play, the game would have been over. We beat the cowobys because Joe Gibbs made the decision to go with Mark Brunell instead of Patrick Ramsey. Moss got all the credit, but we would not have won the game if Mark Brunell had not been our quarterback.

Arguing for Ramsey over Brunell at this point is just as rediculous as arguing Jimoh should start over Sean Springs or that Rod Gardner is a better receiver than Santana Moss.

Bigsef you take things too far. Comparing Jimoh to Springs isn't even close to Ramsey and Brunell. That is just absurd. If you read my post you would see that my point was not that Ramsey should start or that ramsey looked great it was that Brunell didn't look good. Yes brunell dug us out of a hole and we got a lucky win, but honestly why were we in that hole to begin with? Ding. The answer 3 quarters of horrible offense including lots of bad qb play. Sorry, but in most nfl games having a horrible offensive outing except for 4 great plays isn't going to win football games.

Be realistic. Ramsey didn't look great. Brunell looked great for 5 minutes and other wise looked bad. Cambell is too inexperienced.

BIGSEF3
09-30-2005, 06:25 PM
Yes brunell dug us out of a hole and we got a lucky win, but honestly why were we in that hole to begin with? Ding. The answer 3 quarters of horrible offense including lots of bad qb play. Sorry, but in most nfl games having a horrible offensive outing except for 4 great plays isn't going to win football games.

Be realistic. Ramsey didn't look great. Brunell looked great for 5 minutes and other wise looked bad. Cambell is too inexperienced.


uhhhh, with the exception of the interception, Brunell has looked GOOD all season and GREAT for 5 minutes. Brunell did exactly what Joe Gibbs told him to do. It's not Brunells fault the line didnt protect him for those 5 sacks. It's not Brunells fault he didnt have a whole off-season of practice to get the timing down with these fast as hell receivers.

Brunell was not over and underthrowing receivers by 10 yards. If you watch the game again (and i watched it in its entirety twice and the ending like 4 or 5 times), Brunell was very very very close to connecting with his receivers throughout the entire game. We're talking INCHES, not yards off. And this, with less than a week to prepare. Brunell has for the most part played ERROR-FREE FOOTBALL. No one is saying Brunell is payton manning. But Brunell is doing exactly what Joe Gibbs wants his QB to do and that's not make mistakes.

Criticizing him after singlehandedly allowing us to beat a team that has owned us for a decade is just insane. After he single-handedly loses games for us, like Ramsey did with interceptions at the worst possible times last year, then you can criticize him....

But not after going 20 of 34, nearly 300 yards, and TD's in a victory that that has more emotional impact to me than any football game i have watched in my entire life. I know I haven't been around that long, but I know alot of people feel similarly. Even Joe Gibbs, who generally remains more or less emotionless in public, showed more emotion than I have ever seen a pro coach show. This was a resounding victory for the skins, more so than any we haven't had in over a decade.

After all the years of losing, especially to the cowboys, how can you criticize the man who made that game happen, not two weeks later. To me, it shows a lack of appreciation. Maybe i'm taking this too seriously, but that's how I feel.

Mark Brunell made this team beleive in themselves. The game was essentially lost. But he never gave up. And as long as he is here, this team will NEVER give up again. When it's all said and done, this will have been a turning point in the history of this franchise. If you're a Redskins fan, I don't see how you cannot LOVE Mark Brunell right now.

silverspring
09-30-2005, 06:48 PM
uhhhh, with the exception of the interception, Brunell has looked GOOD all season and GREAT for 5 minutes. Brunell did exactly what Joe Gibbs told him to do. It's not Brunells fault the line didnt protect him for those 5 sacks. It's not Brunells fault he didnt have a whole off-season of practice to get the timing down with these fast as hell receivers.

Brunell was not over and underthrowing receivers by 10 yards. If you watch the game again (and i watched it in its entirety twice and the ending like 4 or 5 times), Brunell was very very very close to connecting with his receivers throughout the entire game. We're talking INCHES, not yards off. And this, with less than a week to prepare. Brunell has for the most part played ERROR-FREE FOOTBALL. No one is saying Brunell is payton manning. But Brunell is doing exactly what Joe Gibbs wants his QB to do and that's not make mistakes.

Criticizing him after singlehandedly allowing us to beat a team that has owned us for a decade is just insane. After he single-handedly loses games for us, like Ramsey did with interceptions at the worst possible times last year, then you can criticize him....

But not after going 20 of 34, nearly 300 yards, and TD's in a victory that that has more emotional impact to me than any football game i have watched in my entire life. I know I haven't been around that long, but I know alot of people feel similarly. Even Joe Gibbs, who generally remains more or less emotionless in public, showed more emotion than I have ever seen a pro coach show. This was a resounding victory for the skins, more so than any we haven't had in over a decade.

After all the years of losing, especially to the cowboys, how can you criticize the man who made that game happen, not two weeks later. To me, it shows a lack of appreciation. Maybe i'm taking this too seriously, but that's how I feel.

Mark Brunell made this team beleive in themselves. The game was essentially lost. But he never gave up. And as long as he is here, this team will NEVER give up again. When it's all said and done, this will have been a turning point in the history of this franchise. If you're a Redskins fan, I don't see how you cannot LOVE Mark Brunell right now.

well i don't agree, but thats cool. i mean if for instance brunell was benched for that last quarter of the game and those 4 great plays didn't occur, you would have actually said he played a good game?

BIGSEF3
09-30-2005, 07:00 PM
well i don't agree, but thats cool. i mean if for instance brunell was benched for that last quarter of the game and those 4 great plays didn't occur, you would have actually said he played a good game?

Seeing as most good QB's don't have 4 GREAT plays a game, I don't see the point in eliminating them in evaluating play. If you took Tom Brady's 4 best plays away from every game, he would look pretty awful.

IowaSkinsFan
10-01-2005, 07:04 AM
Seeing as most good QB's don't have 4 GREAT plays a game, I don't see the point in eliminating them in evaluating play. If you took Tom Brady's 4 best plays away from every game, he would look pretty awful.

He went 12 for 12 in the 4th quarter against Pittsburgh. I don't believe that assessment at all.

bwparker
10-01-2005, 06:38 PM
Seeing as most good QB's don't have 4 GREAT plays a game, I don't see the point in eliminating them in evaluating play. If you took Tom Brady's 4 best plays away from every game, he would look pretty awful.
uhhhh, with the exception of the interception, Brunell has looked GOOD all season

Interesting....:rolleyes:

whitskins
10-01-2005, 07:03 PM
well i don't agree, but thats cool. i mean if for instance brunell was benched for that last quarter of the game and those 4 great plays didn't occur, you would have actually said he played a good game?

If those four plays never happened then Brunell wouldn't have played a "good" game but it wouldn't have been disasterous either. I think some people are taking our 3.5 poor offensive quarters against Dallas and judging them too closely to last season.

Last season, Brunell couldn't even throw the ball 15 yards, he looked like he should have been out of the NFL. His hamstring injury was clearly forcing him to throw off the back foot constantly. He was a disaster.

For 3.5 quarters against Dallas, Brunell was not very good, but he didn't get much help either. The guy will never beat a team all by himself. But if the O-line could protect him and we could get the run game working, he'll be fine. But Brunell did look much better in the entire game against Dallas than last year. Brunell had SEVERAL long passes that could have gone for very deep plays if they were not off by mere inches. Then Brunell finally got in synch with four minutes left and the rest is history.

I'm pretty confident with Brunell right now if he can get help from the rest of this offense. He can lead us to wins if he is well protected and we can run the ball, no question about that in my mind. And I think physically he looked MUCH better against Dallas than in 2004. When he sets into his groove, which I hope he has over the bye week, he'll be a really efficient QB.

forcefield58
10-01-2005, 07:19 PM
I am sorry but I don't agree at all. He was under throwing, over throwing, holding the ball too long, watching as a db ran into him, he seemed to prefer double/triple coverages over the open man, throwing INT. Basically all the things we complain about ramsey for. By the second half I was holding my breath everytime he threw the ball. On top of that most of these over/unders were 10 yard passes which is inconceivable. Brunell looked like crap most of the game, you are crazy to think otherwise.


I have to agree. At one point right before half time of the Dallas game I actually had a flashback to game 1 and thought Ramsey was in the game!!! Brunell just stood there a couple times and took the sack, probably afraid to throw the ball and risk an interception. Good grief, at least throw it away or try and run out of it. It's still too soon for Campbell though and I certainly don't want to see Ramsey in there. Brunell still gives the skins the best chance to win and if he doesn't TRY too hard he'll be OK, especially after seeing how our man Moss can get up the field. The only problem now will be that the Seahawks will double-team the poor guy the whole game.

21ppg=superbowl
10-01-2005, 09:00 PM
Brunell still gives the skins the best chance to win and if he doesn't TRY too hard he'll be OK, especially after seeing how our man Moss can get up the field. The only problem now will be that the Seahawks will double-team the poor guy the whole game.

I can't wait for the Seahawks to double team Moss. That's an ideal situaltion. You think Patten can't get up the field? He looked more consistent in the preseason than Moss, and he has the speed to break big plays. He's not as fast as Moss, but he's close.

Now throw in the fact that current our "third receiver," James Thrash, is second on the team in receptions and receiving yards (unless I'm mistaken). I'm no expert, but I'll bet that has something to do with the fact that Brunell spent most of the preseason working exclusively with the second stringers, one of which was Thrash (until Jacobs got hurt). Speaking of that Spurrier holdover, Jacobs was supposedly very impressive this summer before his latest injury. Who knows? Maybe this week he'll get some PT and his glass-jaw will only fracture, not shatter.I hear he's real fast, too.

As for the QB situation, Brunell doesn't turn the ball over like Ramsey does. In the preseason, Brunell had more pass attempts that Ram and ZERO picks. I don't care that he played against second stringers, he didn't throw an interception. Ramsey certainly can't make any similar claims.

Campbell should sit. As many of you have already said, we don't need him in there until the team can't make the postseason. I want Campbell to know every audible and check down before he's forced to face the complex, blitzing defenses of the modern NFL.

Paintedbird
10-01-2005, 10:44 PM
I would like to see Campbell play at some point this year but not any time soon. I am hoping we can get a good year out of Brunell.


I hope I can find diamonds in my butt.

BIGSEF3
10-02-2005, 12:40 AM
Interesting....:rolleyes:


Yes it is. While you are trying to find fault as seems to be in your nature, there is none to be found. Taking away one bad play make Brunell look good. Taking away his top 4 plays (or any other QB's top plays for that matter) would make them look bad.

Basically, what you find "interesting" insinuating an inconsistancy is actually proving my point - You can't take away the bad plays to make a QB look better or the good plays to make them look worse. What they do is what they do. And Brunell has won 2 games for us, and made some outstanding plays. Why should he be criticized for this?

ChiefPowhatan17
10-02-2005, 09:17 AM
Don't worry Campbell will have his day and will be our guy for several years to come, but I bet you won't see him unless both Brunell and Ramsey go down...
Just being honest.

Love the Truth
10-02-2005, 01:44 PM
Let Campbell take in the playbook his first year. It will also protect Campbell from being overscrutinized by the media & public.

QB spot has been getting a LOT of pressure. I don't believe a rookie QB gets any benificial experience running around trying to not get killed. You have to have a good enough offense where the rookie QB can work through play progressions. This offense would not be a nuturing offense for a rookie QB like Rothlesburger's Steelers or Marino's Dolphins.

X-Factor13
10-02-2005, 03:17 PM
Currently ladies and gentlemen, we are 3-0 yes, 3-0 with brunell playing for us most of the game. IDC WHAT YOU GUYS SAY MARK IS OUR QB UNTIL RETIREMENT DO US PART.

golongdude
10-02-2005, 03:52 PM
The rookie sits.
The vet plays and guides us to victory.


What don't people understand?

whitskins
10-02-2005, 03:52 PM
Mark Brunell had a very solid game. His INT was almost killer but it looked like he threw one way and Portis moved another, resulting in the tipped ball. Other than that I was really impressed, especially on third and long. Those three 3rd and ten conversions in overtime were INCREDIBLE! And how about his scramble? The few remaining Brunell haters need to finally own up and admit that Mark is this team's best QB. He is not a world beater but he's getting it done, GREAT JOB MARK!

Ibleedburgundy
10-02-2005, 05:52 PM
why is this thread so poplular? JC ain't gonna play this year.