PDA

View Full Version : Wednesday Morning QB Poll (Week 13)


BurgundyNGold
12-07-2005, 08:21 AM
Week 13 saw our Redskins finally win a game on the road. While it was not always pretty, the victory was complete as the Redskins ground game rolled over the Rams in St. Louis, keeing the Redskins slim playoff hopes alive for another week. Mark Brunell had another solid if not spectacular performance, going 14/21 for 156 yards and 1 passing TD.

What's your opinion on the Redskins starting QB? Here's how it works: Every week you vote for either "Approve", "Disapprove" or "Undecided". Remember, this question is a general feeling question, so it's not necessarily a result of the previous week's effort. I will then chart the results and post them as part of the next weeks poll. The polls will stay open until Saturday PM.

Ready, set ... vote!

Here is how YOU have voted this season:
http://img216.imageshack.
us/img216/9819/2005redskinqbpollresults124zm.th.png (http://img216.imageshack.us/my.php?image=2005redskinqbpollresults124zm.png)

dj_stouty
12-07-2005, 08:31 AM
APPROVE!

frankez99
12-07-2005, 08:34 AM
Approve 100%. Only a veteran like Mark would have pushed that ball out of the endzone for a safety instead of trying to pick it up or fall on it; thus resulting in a safety instead of a td for the Rams...plus, I don't get angry 1 iota when he throws the ball out of bounds when there is nothing downfield...the other qb's on our roster can learn from that.

Spence
12-07-2005, 08:35 AM
Approve, of course. It would be pretty difficult for a quarterback to play better in the second half against St. Louis than Brunell did. He threw eight passes. Completed all of them, one for a touchdown. What more do you want?

BurgundyNGold
12-07-2005, 08:40 AM
Approve, of course. It would be pretty difficult for a quarterback to play better in the second half against St. Louis than Brunell did. He threw eight passes. Completed all of them, one for a touchdown. What more do you want?
Uh, how about if he completed 9 passes for 2 TDs?

:D

Spence
12-07-2005, 09:01 AM
Uh, how about if he completed 9 passes for 2 TDs?Throwing eight passes and completing nine would make him the greatest quarterback of all time. Actually, I think it would make him some sort of demigod. Hmmm. Demigod at quarterback. Good way to go.

GolfFreak
12-07-2005, 09:15 AM
I actually put Disapprove. My logic was just that the Rams are ranked so low against the pass, but our passing game didn't have a better day. I suppose a lot of this has to do with our progress on the ground, but it's been this way for a few weeks now. I'm thrilled we won and don't really care how we do it (pass or run), just my gut reaction to the thread.

SkinsASchamps
12-07-2005, 09:23 AM
undecided. He improved and got himself out of disapprove for me but the win on sunday was due to running the ball and great D.

CNYSkinFan
12-07-2005, 09:23 AM
gotta approve here. Brunell manages the game and outs us in a position to win each and everyweek.

Ibleedburgundy
12-07-2005, 09:51 AM
With the way our running game was going we could have put Jeff George back there and still won the game by approximately 1 point. I still approve.

dj_stouty
12-07-2005, 10:02 AM
I actually put Disapprove. My logic was just that the Rams are ranked so low against the pass, but our passing game didn't have a better day. I suppose a lot of this has to do with our progress on the ground, but it's been this way for a few weeks now. I'm thrilled we won and don't really care how we do it (pass or run), just my gut reaction to the thread.

I personally can't criticise Brunell, simply because he did what was asked of him. He only threw the ball 21 times, so it would be hard to have a 300+ yard, 2TD day under those circumstances.

Just looking at the Rams game; I approve of the 66% pass completions, the 150+ yards of passing, the TD pass to Cooley, the 0 INTS, his 104.5 passer rating and the heads-up play to toss the ball through the endzone to twart a defensive touchdown.

For those interested:

Brunell is currently 3rd in the NFC in passer rating.
Brunell leads the NFL in fewest INTS thrown per Passing Attempt. (1.36% of attempts end in Interceptions, which is the lowest of his career)
Brunell is the first Redskin QB in well over 10+ years to connect on 70+% of his passes against the Eagles.
Despite the Redskins being 0-4 against AFC Teams, Brunell has not thrown a single INT in any of those four games.
Brunell has never thrown an INT while the Redskins held the lead.
Inside the Redzone, Brunell has completed 63.6% of his passes, with 11 TDs, 0 INTS and a crisp 114.1 passer rating.
Brunell has only thrown 1 INT on third down all season.
Brunell has only thrown 1 INT in the 2nd half all season.

BostonSkins
12-07-2005, 10:05 AM
Disapprove

He beat the Rams.

He fumbled again in a big spot.

Spence
12-07-2005, 10:10 AM
For those interested:

Brunell is currently 3rd in the NFC in passer rating.
Brunell leads the NFL in fewest INTS thrown per Passing Attempt. (1.36% of attempts end in Interceptions, which is the lowest of his career)
Brunell is the first Redskin QB in well over 10+ years to connect on 70+% of his passes against the Eagles.
Despite the Redskins being 0-4 against AFC Teams, Brunell has not thrown a single INT in any of those four games.
Brunell has never thrown an INT while the Redskins held the lead.
Inside the Redzone, Brunell has completed 63.6% of his passes, with 11 TDs, 0 INTS and a crisp 114.1 passer rating.
Brunell has only thrown 1 INT on third down all season.
Brunell has only thrown 1 INT in the 2nd half all season.That should end the debate. It won't, but it should.

GolfFreak
12-07-2005, 10:19 AM
I personally can't criticise Brunell, simply because he did what was asked of him. He only threw the ball 21 times, so it would be hard to have a 300+ yard, 2TD day under those circumstances.

Just looking at the Rams game; I approve of the 66% pass completions, the 150+ yards of passing, the TD pass to Cooley, the 0 INTS, his 104.5 passer rating and the heads-up play to toss the ball through the endzone to twart a defensive touchdown.

For those interested:

Brunell is currently 3rd in the NFC in passer rating.
Brunell leads the NFL in fewest INTS thrown per Passing Attempt. (1.36% of attempts end in Interceptions, which is the lowest of his career)
Brunell is the first Redskin QB in well over 10+ years to connect on 70+% of his passes against the Eagles.
Despite the Redskins being 0-4 against AFC Teams, Brunell has not thrown a single INT in any of those four games.
Brunell has never thrown an INT while the Redskins held the lead.
Inside the Redzone, Brunell has completed 63.6% of his passes, with 11 TDs, 0 INTS and a crisp 114.1 passer rating.
Brunell has only thrown 1 INT on third down all season.
Brunell has only thrown 1 INT in the 2nd half all season.

Wow ... great stuff. Points well taken.

GolfFreak
12-07-2005, 10:21 AM
Disapprove

He beat the Rams.

He fumbled again in a big spot.


That fumble was not due to him carry the ball out in the open, just fluke contact between him and Portis that knocked the ball out. Even though I chose disapprove too, it was not for that play. You have to give him props for taking the safety rather than letting the Rams recover for a TD -- would've been a completely different game if they get 7 then.

akhhorus
12-07-2005, 10:22 AM
That should end the debate. It won't, but it should.

I guess the beatings will have to continue until morale improves.....

Ibleedburgundy
12-07-2005, 11:50 AM
I personally can't criticise Brunell, simply because he did what was asked of him. He only threw the ball 21 times, so it would be hard to have a 300+ yard, 2TD day under those circumstances.

Just looking at the Rams game; I approve of the 66% pass completions, the 150+ yards of passing, the TD pass to Cooley, the 0 INTS, his 104.5 passer rating and the heads-up play to toss the ball through the endzone to twart a defensive touchdown.

For those interested:

Brunell is currently 3rd in the NFC in passer rating.
Brunell leads the NFL in fewest INTS thrown per Passing Attempt. (1.36% of attempts end in Interceptions, which is the lowest of his career)
Brunell is the first Redskin QB in well over 10+ years to connect on 70+% of his passes against the Eagles.
Despite the Redskins being 0-4 against AFC Teams, Brunell has not thrown a single INT in any of those four games.
Brunell has never thrown an INT while the Redskins held the lead.
Inside the Redzone, Brunell has completed 63.6% of his passes, with 11 TDs, 0 INTS and a crisp 114.1 passer rating.
Brunell has only thrown 1 INT on third down all season.
Brunell has only thrown 1 INT in the 2nd half all season.


And on top of that the some of the INT's he did throw were not his fault. One specific INT was David Patten's fault.

Your post did not address the fumbles though, which are every bit as bad as an INT. In an age where running QB's are emerging and difficult to compare to pocket passers, I think the fumble category is important.

Mark Brunell: 6 fumbles lost. Some of them could have been prevented by protecting the ball. Perhaps some of them were the fault of our O-line.

People always use the TD/INT ratio but I think the TD/give-away ratio represents the results a little better.

Brunell has 16 TD's and 11 turnovers. Still pretty damn good.

Skinz4lyfe
12-07-2005, 11:59 AM
He continues to put us in position to win week in and week out. I wholeheartedly approve!

dj_stouty
12-07-2005, 12:04 PM
And on top of that the some of the INT's he did throw were not his fault. One specific INT was David Patten's fault.

Your post did not address the fumbles though, which are every bit as bad as an INT. In an age where running QB's are emerging and difficult to compare to pocket passers, I think the fumble category is important.

Mark Brunell: 6 fumbles lost. Some of them could have been prevented by protecting the ball. Perhaps some of them were the fault of our O-line.

People always use the TD/INT ratio but I think the TD/give-away ratio represents the results a little better.

Brunell has 16 TD's and 11 turnovers. Still pretty damn good.

You are correct...the fumbles do hurt. Luckily, most of them did not lead to points scored against the Skins...two came on botched hand offs to Portis...and one in particular came on a 4th down play at the end of the game, so it didn't really matter if he dropped the ball or not.

I like showing his INT stats along with his efficiency stats, because it shows he makes things happen when he throws the ball.

I think the most important stats were the ones that showed Brunell hasn't thrown an INT in the Redzone or when the Skins have a lead. You can't ask for more than that.

Keino
12-07-2005, 12:16 PM
How in the world can anyone vote disapprove using last week as a barometer?

16 of 21 for 150+ and a TD and no INT's.

What has become obvious to me is that many who vote Disapprove have motives that go beyond the Redskins being in the best position to win the game.

Spence
12-07-2005, 12:19 PM
What has become obvious to me is that many who vote Disapprove have motives that go beyond the Redskins being in the best position to win the game.No doubt about it. A grossly misplaced loyalty to Patrick Ramsey is probably one of those motives.

keepramsey
12-07-2005, 12:41 PM
i voted undecided.
mainly because St luis pass def is atrocious. like somebody said before, even jeff goerge would have looked good the way we were running plays.
he did not impress me with his play. it was brunell like of him. mediocre at best. nothing spectacular. but got the job done.
and any QB with half a brain would have batted that ball out of the endzone.



kr

dj_stouty
12-07-2005, 12:45 PM
i voted undecided.
mainly because St luis pass def is atrocious.

If that is the case, then I guess you also disapprove of Portis and Rock's performances against the Ram's 30th ranked rushing defense?

Give me a break. (And some capital letters from time to time)

keepramsey
12-07-2005, 12:58 PM
If that is the case, then I guess you also disapprove of Portis and Rock's performances against the Ram's 30th ranked rushing defense?

Give me a break. (And some capital letters from time to time)





no, if there was a vote for them, i would have voted approve. they did a helluva job on sunday. way more than i expected from our running game. i thought portis might get a hundred, but cartwright too. that is just phenominal.and if yur interesteed in my opinion, carwright would fit this ofense better than potis.

and why you pick on my punctuation. dont you know i am just a kid. and you might hurt my feelings.



LOL


kr

HAWGZHEAD
12-07-2005, 01:06 PM
Approve. Brunell did his job and did it well, executing the plays called the way a QB should.



and why you pick on my punctuation.

Agree, I would have went for your lack of grammar skills lol.

keepramsey
12-07-2005, 01:12 PM
Approve. Brunell did his job and did it well, executing the plays called the way a QB should.





Agree, I would have went for your lack of grammar skills lol.




i know huh.


kr

dj_stouty
12-07-2005, 01:20 PM
no, if there was a vote for them, i would have voted approve. they did a helluva job on sunday. way more than i expected from our running game. i thought portis might get a hundred, but cartwright too. that is just phenominal.and if yur interesteed in my opinion, carwright would fit this ofense better than potis.

So you approve of Portis/Rock doing well against the 29th ranked Rush Defense, but you disapprove of Brunell doing well against the 30th ranked Pass Defense?

Doesn't make sense to me...

takebacktheskins5
12-07-2005, 01:27 PM
I personally can't criticise Brunell, simply because he did what was asked of him. He only threw the ball 21 times, so it would be hard to have a 300+ yard, 2TD day under those circumstances.

Just looking at the Rams game; I approve of the 66% pass completions, the 150+ yards of passing, the TD pass to Cooley, the 0 INTS, his 104.5 passer rating and the heads-up play to toss the ball through the endzone to twart a defensive touchdown.

For those interested:

Brunell is currently 3rd in the NFC in passer rating.
Brunell leads the NFL in fewest INTS thrown per Passing Attempt. (1.36% of attempts end in Interceptions, which is the lowest of his career)
Brunell is the first Redskin QB in well over 10+ years to connect on 70+% of his passes against the Eagles.
Despite the Redskins being 0-4 against AFC Teams, Brunell has not thrown a single INT in any of those four games.
Brunell has never thrown an INT while the Redskins held the lead.
Inside the Redzone, Brunell has completed 63.6% of his passes, with 11 TDs, 0 INTS and a crisp 114.1 passer rating.
Brunell has only thrown 1 INT on third down all season.
Brunell has only thrown 1 INT in the 2nd half all season.

Was there a stat about Brunell averaging 2 fumbles a game? And how they are alway inside our own or the opponent's 20 yard line?

Spence
12-07-2005, 01:34 PM
Was there a stat about Brunell averaging 2 fumbles a game? And how they are alway inside our own or the opponent's 20 yard line?Why would there be a stat for something that isn't true?

dj_stouty
12-07-2005, 01:38 PM
Was there a stat about Brunell averaging 2 fumbles a game? And how they are alway inside our own or the opponent's 20 yard line?

Nope.

2 fumbles per game would equal 24 total fumbles. Brunell has 1/4 that total.

Secondly, one of Brunell's fumbles happened on the Skins' 39 yard line vs. KC, a full 19 yards away from our 20.

Better luck next time.:sleeping:

Spence
12-07-2005, 01:42 PM
Patrick Ramsey has fumbled three times in 2005, despite having thrown only 18 passes. He fumbled six times and threw 272 passes in 2004. He fumbled five times and threw 337 passes in 2003. He fumbled eight times and threw 227 passes in 2002.

Mark Brunell has fumbled nine times and thrown 370 passes in 2005. He fumbled five times and threw 237 times in 2004. He fumbled once and threw 87 passes in 2003. He fumbled three times and threw 416 passes in 2002.

In other words, since 2002 -- the year Patrick Ramsey entered the NFL -- Mark Brunell has been no more likely to fumble than Patrick Ramsey. How often a quarterback fumbles is generally a function of how often he is sacked. The Redskins have given up 29 sacks this year, which isn't a very good number. In general, blame for a quarterback fumbling usually rests with the offensive line. Blaming a quarterback for fumbling when he's hit from the blind side by a linebacker who weighs 255 pounds is just silly.

MoeRedskins
12-07-2005, 01:56 PM
I approve but the fumbles need to be addressed. It wasn't his fault for pressure or anything, but this offense fumbles the ball entirely to much.

Keino
12-07-2005, 02:29 PM
I approve but the fumbles need to be addressed.

I thought Spence addressed the Fumbling issue quite well actually......;)

keepramsey
12-07-2005, 02:31 PM
So you approve of Portis/Rock doing well against the 29th ranked Rush Defense, but you disapprove of Brunell doing well against the 30th ranked Pass Defense?

Doesn't make sense to me...



because you are not reading my posts.
i dont thenk he did as good as he should have, therefor i voteed undee.
both portis and rock, IMO, did well.
maybe 200 yards from him and 2 td's would have persuaded me to vote differantly. till then, undecided.


kr

Keino
12-07-2005, 02:36 PM
because you are not reading my posts.
i dont thenk he did as good as he should have, therefor i voteed undee.
both portis and rock, IMO, did well.
maybe 200 yards from him and 2 td's would have persuaded me to vote differantly. till then, undecided.


kr

You wrote that he got the job done. So whats the disapproval about?

He completed 76% of the passes he attempted. That 3 out of every 4. He didn't need to throw for 200 yards and 2 TD's for the Skins to win. More importantly, he didn't do anything to lose the game. Thats why your vote makes no sense. Taken together with your screen name, it is hard to take you seriously.......seriously.

Spence
12-07-2005, 02:41 PM
You wrote that he got the job done. So whats the disapproval about?I think the screen name answers your question.

skinsfan811
12-07-2005, 02:45 PM
I've been up and down on him over the past few weeks.But I said approve.When he has a decent rusher behind him, he is forced to throw the ball ALOT less, and he is much more efficient.

I was really happy with this past week.He was even smart in his mistakes (when he mishandled a snap and threw it out of the endzone instead of letting the Rams back in it w/ a TD).Good job Mark:awesomewo.

Sonoma
12-07-2005, 02:55 PM
Undecided still, seems to me that he is not playing as well as he was at the beginning of the season. We all gave Patten [expletive deleted] for not doing anything but without him the passing game has looked terrible and can not stretch the field. I realize its not very hard to win in this leage when your run for 200+ yards and you have a great D like we don. But if a game comes down to Brunell having to throw I think we are screwed.

I like Brunell but he just seems to be lacking something maybe its a solid #2 reciever. I don't really know though I feel like we could get better production out of our qb. Brunell does seem to fumble at the worst times though, I saw someone made a stat Ramsey v Brunell fumbling. I don't remember Ramsey fumbling too much possibly throwing ints at the wrong time but not fumbling much. Brunell I hope gets back on track with the upcoming 3 divisional games and disproves me wrong but I just don't see him doing much if the game is dependant on him.

EDITED BY SPENCE
NOTE: DO NOT USE PROFANITY AT THIS WEBSITE

keepramsey
12-07-2005, 03:08 PM
You wrote that he got the job done. So whats the disapproval about?

He completed 76% of the passes he attempted. That 3 out of every 4. He didn't need to throw for 200 yards and 2 TD's for the Skins to win. More importantly, he didn't do anything to lose the game. Thats why your vote makes no sense. Taken together with your screen name, it is hard to take you seriously.......seriously.



look at my join date.
i have been a member here for over a year now. not exactly sure, but i just thnk ramsey has never been givin a fair shot at leading this team. that is strickly my opinion.
when JB came back, i was on my knees prayin to the football gods. they finally granted me a wish. i had to pinch myself when i heard it at first.
but when he signed brunell to a long term deal without even seeing if he had recovered from an injury that servere(bad first year here). i knew right then and there, ramsey was a gonner. last year he did mediocre with what ishhy rec. we had. i juts feel jaded by him not getting his full on chance, this year,to lead this team to the promise land. oh well, what could have been.



kr

akhhorus
12-07-2005, 03:38 PM
look at my join date.
i have been a member here for over a year now. not exactly sure, but i just thnk ramsey has never been givin a fair shot at leading this team.

:lol1:
Gibbs shouldn't have given him the starting job after his preseason performance. Ramsey has to earn the job, not just be handed it.And he's been given plenty of shots.

when JB came back,

JB?

i was on my knees prayin to the football gods. they finally granted me a wish. i had to pinch myself when i heard it at first.
but when he signed brunell to a long term deal without even seeing if he had recovered from an injury that servere(bad first year here). i knew right then and there, ramsey was a gonner. last year he did mediocre with what ishhy rec. we had. i juts feel jaded by him not getting his full on chance, this year,to lead this team to the promise land. oh well, what could have been.

kr

He got plenty of chances with Gibbs, he just failed to do anything with those chances.

ChiefPowhatan17
12-07-2005, 03:40 PM
He won so I approve.

vabeach_skinsfan
12-07-2005, 03:44 PM
look at my join date.
i have been a member here for over a year now. not exactly sure, but i just thnk ramsey has never been givin a fair shot at leading this team. that is strickly my opinion.
when JB came back, i was on my knees prayin to the football gods. they finally granted me a wish. i had to pinch myself when i heard it at first.
but when he signed brunell to a long term deal without even seeing if he had recovered from an injury that servere(bad first year here). i knew right then and there, ramsey was a gonner. last year he did mediocre with what ishhy rec. we had. i juts feel jaded by him not getting his full on chance, this year,to lead this team to the promise land. oh well, what could have been.



kr

Did you mean JG. Gibbs system is strictly predicated on the run. So he needs someone to manage the offense, not put the whole team on his back. Ramsey is too careless with the football. Tries to squeeze it in impossible places, which results in picks. I like Patrick, I think he's tough. But he hasn't realy progressed as a QB. I think when Ramsey threw that pick against Chicago in the season opener, Gibbs already new he was going to bench him. It was just convenient for him to make that decision since Pat got hurt.

keepramsey
12-07-2005, 03:46 PM
:lol1:
Gibbs shouldn't have given him the starting job after his preseason performance. Ramsey has to earn the job, not just be handed it.And he's been given plenty of shots.



JB?



He got plenty of chances with Gibbs, he just failed to do anything with those chances.



not with this years team.
that is my whole point. this years team is way better than last years. and if he did mediocre last year. i would assume he would do even better than last. just like brunell has improved. not because of his play, it is the same. well, he is completeing passes now instead of bowling them. but if ramsey was given the chance with this years team, i would think we would have a winning record. of coarse that is looking inot the what might have been crystal ball. teehee
and if anyone was given the job of starting QB it was brunell. and an injured one at that.


kr

Keino
12-07-2005, 05:47 PM
look at my join date.
i have been a member here for over a year now. not exactly sure, but i just thnk ramsey has never been givin a fair shot at leading this team. that is strickly my opinion.
when JB came back, i was on my knees prayin to the football gods. they finally granted me a wish. i had to pinch myself when i heard it at first.
but when he signed brunell to a long term deal without even seeing if he had recovered from an injury that servere(bad first year here). i knew right then and there, ramsey was a gonner. last year he did mediocre with what ishhy rec. we had. i juts feel jaded by him not getting his full on chance, this year,to lead this team to the promise land. oh well, what could have been.



kr

I disagree about Ram not getting a chance. In fact he had 2 very clear chances. First there was an open Competition. He lost. Nobody would debate that fact, he lost the QB competition. Brunell then plays badly (Partly due to the offense in general being bad, partly because he was more injured than he let on, and partly because he just stunk it up.) Ramsey is handed the keys, performs better than Brunell at his worst, but is very mediocre.
So Gibbs thi year takes a different approach. My guess is that he wanted to take some pressure off of Ram to see if he would perform any better. What does he do? He says Ram is the starter. All through OTA's, training camp, and pre-season, he hands the keys to Ram in what I believe was an attempt to give him confidence. How does Ramsey respond? Ramsey looks worse than he ever looked in this offense. Ramsey has had plenty of chances. He has failed to do much with any of them. He lost the job this year, it wasn't taken from him. I think that is a huge difference.

DoGood
12-07-2005, 05:56 PM
Mark didn't really do anything spectacular last sunday, but he didn't do anything disasterous either. Good play saving the TD. Approve.

P.S. Cooleys' a BEAST

akhhorus
12-07-2005, 06:57 PM
not with this years team.

Oh really? Want us to get you tapes of the preseason and the Chicago game? He had his shot. He failed miserably....again

that is my whole point. this years team is way better than last years. and if he did mediocre last year. i would assume he would do even better than last. just like brunell has improved. not because of his play, it is the same. well, he is completeing passes now instead of bowling them. but if ramsey was given the chance with this years team, i would think we would have a winning record. of coarse that is looking inot the what might have been crystal ball.

And what exactly did Ramsey do when he was the starter? How did that Preseason and Chicago game go? You are smoking crack if you think Ramsey would have beaten Seattle, Dallas, Philly or would have done any better than Brunell has. Ramsey hasn't shown that he can beat a competant defense, much less play QB in the NFL and he's has plenty of shots. Brunell has shown that he at least has as good an arm as Ramsey has, but he's much more accurate, takes less sacks and doesn't force the ball into quadruple coverage like Ramsey loves to. Go be a fan of Ramsey's and leave the Redskins fans alone

teehee
and if anyone was given the job of starting QB it was brunell. and an injured one at that.
kr

No, Ramsey was given the starting job and he blew his chance. So, will you go root for whatever team Ramsey is on since you love him so much? Aren't their other crappy Qbs for you to root for?

BurgundyNGold
12-07-2005, 07:53 PM
You wrote that he got the job done. So whats the disapproval about?

He completed 76% of the passes he attempted. That 3 out of every 4. He didn't need to throw for 200 yards and 2 TD's for the Skins to win. More importantly, he didn't do anything to lose the game. Thats why your vote makes no sense. Taken together with your screen name, it is hard to take you seriously.......seriously.
I think you might've gotten your numbers a bit crossed Keino. Ramsey was 14/21 last week, so that would give him a completion percentage of 67%. Still, anything over 60% is pretty darn good.

redskin_rich
12-07-2005, 07:54 PM
I approve.

Brunell managed the game very well. It was obviously a light day for him, mostly dump-offs to Cooley and Royal. There was a risky throw into coverage but Santana did his thing and went up to get it. I don't have a problem with forcing the ball occasionally, as long as it is for Moss or Cooley, who are approaching an elite level.

dj_stouty
12-07-2005, 08:34 PM
I think you might've gotten your numbers a bit crossed Keino. Ramsey was 14/21 last week, so that would give him a completion percentage of 67%. Still, anything over 60% is pretty darn good.

And I think you may have gotten your QBs mixed up! lol

BurgundyNGold
12-07-2005, 08:50 PM
And I think you may have gotten your QBs mixed up! lol
LMAO! I guess all this talk about Ramsey is getting to me. I can't imagine why there is so much talk about a guy who is not even playing. Brunell may not be Peyton Manning or Carson Palmer but neither is Ramsey.

akhhorus
12-07-2005, 09:35 PM
LMAO! I guess all this talk about Ramsey is getting to me. I can't imagine why there is so much talk about a guy who is not even playing. Brunell may not be Peyton Manning or Carson Palmer but neither is Ramsey.


Yeah, by the tone of some people here, you'd think Gibbs was starting Brunell over Peyton Manning(wait, some people here think he is Peyton Manning).

rskinsfan10
12-07-2005, 09:48 PM
Disapprove

He beat the Rams.

He fumbled again in a big spot.I have to ask, did you actually watch the game, or more specifically, did you see the fumble that you are criticizing him for?

LadyNRedskinsfan
12-07-2005, 10:40 PM
i approve. if you look at the turnovers that weren't his fault, mark's numbers would be even better.

bgforever
12-07-2005, 10:49 PM
As usual, I see the iddy bitty things that you just can't find all the time in stats or even is considered a big play. However, without these things,they lead to bigger negatives like 3 and out. On several occassions, I saw straight line shooting from Brunell on his passes. I call them zingers because it beats the defender there, and gives the receiver an extra step to get RAC yardage, even if he has to do a 180. These passes are like 5 yarders, turned into 11 yarders, 3 into first downs, and a flat pass by the RB turned into 5-8 yds.
It drives a defender batty because it keeps drives alive or sets up for easy converstions, yet keeps defenders guessing what's next.

Even if predictable, those tight secure passes are killers to a defense.

silverspring
12-07-2005, 11:19 PM
LMAO! I guess all this talk about Ramsey is getting to me. I can't imagine why there is so much talk about a guy who is not even playing. Brunell may not be Peyton Manning or Carson Palmer but neither is Ramsey.

Agreed. I am one of the biggest ramsey fans on the forum and I would love to see him playing, but people he hasn't played since the 1.5 quarter he started in the first game. We have argued these points over and over and I just don't see why the circle continues months later. All of us agree ramsey has a lot of room for improvement. Some of us think he was given a good fair shot to prove himself others, including myself, think he wasn't given a true shot. But cmon lets move on, cause unless brunell gets hurt we aren't going to see if ramsey can do it or at least not until he is traded and plays for another team.
This pole is about how you think brunell is playing, not how you think brunell is playing in the context of ramsey could be playing instead.

Anyways this week i answered undecided. I was disapprove last week after the losing streak cause i thought brunell along with the rest of the offense was playing poor. He played alright this week, but he didn't really do anything really good or really bad.

Also when comparing statistics of fumbles and INTs we can't realistically say this one did'nt count cause it wasn't his fault when putting it into context with other stats. Because then we aren't taking into account the ones that "weren't the qbs fault" when we comparing to other qbs. Everyone has stats that are a result of other players or situations that they can't control, but 10 years from now no one will remember those situations just like we don't remember the ones that weren't their fault 10 years ago , stats are stats.

SkinsKY
12-08-2005, 05:19 AM
That should end the debate. It won't, but it should.

You're right, those numbers are terrific.

Keino
12-08-2005, 08:19 AM
I think you might've gotten your numbers a bit crossed Keino. Ramsey was 14/21 last week, so that would give him a completion percentage of 67%. Still, anything over 60% is pretty darn good.

Yea...I was thinking he was 16 for 21, but either way, he played a terrific game...

Keino
12-08-2005, 08:35 AM
Silver Spring, I agree with most of what you say, however, I don't think one can assess approval or disapproval of the Starting QB situation without considering the alternatives to the current starter. While it is not BNG's intent with the question, it is certainly in my estimation, an inherent caveat to the question. For example, during the losing streak, if I felt there was a better alternative to the current starter, I would certianly vote disapprove.

By the same token, just looking at some answers here, it is clear, that some of the disapproval/undecided votes are because some feel that Ramsey offers a better alternative to the current starting situation.

akhhorus
12-08-2005, 09:08 AM
Silver Spring, I agree with most of what you say, however, I don't think one can assess approval or disapproval of the Starting QB situation without considering the alternatives to the current starter. While it is not BNG's intent with the question, it is certainly in my estimation, an inherent caveat to the question. For example, during the losing streak, if I felt there was a better alternative to the current starter, I would certianly vote disapprove.

I would like to add that Gibbs doesn't owe Ramsey a shot at starting at all, especially now when they're trying to make a playoff push. Ramsey has had the chances to be the starter here, and he'll failed each time.

keepramsey
12-08-2005, 09:46 AM
Oh really? Want us to get you tapes of the preseason and the Chicago game? He had his shot. He failed miserably....again



And what exactly did Ramsey do when he was the starter? How did that Preseason and Chicago game go? You are smoking crack if you think Ramsey would have beaten Seattle, Dallas, Philly or would have done any better than Brunell has. Ramsey hasn't shown that he can beat a competant defense, much less play QB in the NFL and he's has plenty of shots. Brunell has shown that he at least has as good an arm as Ramsey has, but he's much more accurate, takes less sacks and doesn't force the ball into quadruple coverage like Ramsey loves to. Go be a fan of Ramsey's and leave the Redskins fans alone



No, Ramsey was given the starting job and he blew his chance. So, will you go root for whatever team Ramsey is on since you love him so much? Aren't their other crappy Qbs for you to root for?



i may have joined when ramsey was being talked about as trade bait, but it doesnt mean i will follow him like a lost puppy. comonow.
i will allways be a redskins fan first.
but that doeesnt mean i wont follow his future. just like smoot, davis which i loved as a RB. kinda injury prone. even when thrash was on the eagles, i was like, hey there is little man making plays. why did we let him go?
i have a feeling it will be the same for my beloved, as far as your concerned, ramsey.

i have coencided, like the rest of the fan base here at HR, that he will be gone next year. i will change my screen name. no big deal.

and i am going to proove that i am one of the biggest supporters of this team. whoever our QB is or will be. i live in AZ, and will be attending the game as hogette. maybe you will se me on TV. i plan on going all out.
you ever do that A?
show the support your heart has?
this is as close to true support as it can get. well, maybe a superskin.............naw, i allready got a dress made.
if there is any other way. let me know.
i will consider anything.


kr

akhhorus
12-08-2005, 09:56 AM
i may have joined when ramsey was being talked about as trade bait, but it doesnt mean i will follow him like a lost puppy. comonow.
i will allways be a redskins fan first.
but that doeesnt mean i wont follow his future. just like smoot, davis which i loved as a RB. kinda injury prone. even when thrash was on the eagles, i was like, hey there is little man making plays. why did we let him go?
i have a feeling it will be the same for my beloved, as far as your concerned, ramsey.

You're the one who is defending Ramsey to the death and has a screen name saying they should keep him. Which is much different than any other name involving a player. And thank you for not bothing to defend Ramsey any more.....

i have coencided, like the rest of the fan base here at HR, that he will be gone next year. i will change my screen name. no big deal.

Plenty of people say that, plenty of people keep their names the same

and i am going to proove that i am one of the biggest supporters of this team. whoever our QB is or will be. i live in AZ, and will be attending the game as hogette. maybe you will se me on TV. i plan on going all out.
you ever do that A?
show the support your heart has?
this is as close to true support as it can get. well, maybe a superskin.............naw, i allready got a dress made.
if there is any other way. let me know.
i will consider anything.
kr

As much as I love SuperSkin, clothing doesn't make one a 'superfan' or a fan who goes all out.

keepramsey
12-08-2005, 10:04 AM
You're the one who is defending Ramsey to the death and has a screen name saying they should keep him. Which is much different than any other name involving a player. And thank you for not bothing to defend Ramsey any more.....



Plenty of people say that, plenty of people keep their names the same



As much as I love SuperSkin, clothing doesn't make one a 'superfan' or a fan who goes all out.


so then how should i go "all out"?
or better yet, how do you go all out?



kr

akhhorus
12-08-2005, 10:08 AM
so then how should i go "all out"?
or better yet, how do you go all out?



kr

I root for the team, not for specific players. That would be a good start for you.

keepramsey
12-08-2005, 10:19 AM
I root for the team, not for specific players. That would be a good start for you.


like i said. i wil be there screaming my lungs out at the cards game. whoever our QB is. it just so happens i love our team to the extent i will be dressed up as a hogette.
what, are you gonna critisize the hogettes now for their support of the team like you did superskinsfan?
that is why we dress up. becuase we are loyal to the team. not an individual. i could just wear a ramsey jersey. but that aint enuff to show my support, IMO.
rooting is the least i could do for ths team.

akhhorus
12-08-2005, 10:47 AM
like i said. i wil be there screaming my lungs out at the cards game. whoever our QB is. it just so happens i love our team to the extent i will be dressed up as a hogette.
what, are you gonna critisize the hogettes now for their support of the team like you did superskinsfan?

When did I criticize the Hogettes or SuperSkin? All I said was that dressing up doesn't make you a superfan. Don't try to make this about me.

that is why we dress up. becuase we are loyal to the team. not an individual. i could just wear a ramsey jersey. but that aint enuff to show my support, IMO.
rooting is the least i could do for ths team.

We'll see how strong your loyalty is when Ramsey gets cut/traded

keepramsey
12-08-2005, 11:12 AM
When did I criticize the Hogettes or SuperSkin? All I said was that dressing up doesn't make you a superfan. Don't try to make this about me.



We'll see how strong your loyalty is when Ramsey gets cut/traded

i would beg to differ. if superskinsfan was to not wear his outfit, would he be any differant than the next guy cheering for our team? we all end up with no voices after a game. but what makes us unique is the way we show our support.
Keino, as far as i am concerned. everyone that claims to be a skins fan should bring it every week of every year. that should be a given if you are a true fan of this or any team.
i am useing the edit button, because i think peeps just want to see this thread dye allready.

i was a skins fan before, and will be after ramsey leaves.
thank you very much. i aint going anywhere bro.



kr

Keino
12-08-2005, 11:16 AM
It aint the Costume that makes Superskin a superfan, it is the loyalty and commitment to bringing the noise every week of every year that makes Supe the fan he is.

akhhorus
12-08-2005, 11:24 AM
It aint the Costume that makes Superskin a superfan, it is the loyalty and commitment to bringing the noise every week of every year that makes Supe the fan he is.

Thank you. I can dress up like a cop, that doesn't make me a police officer.

akhhorus
12-08-2005, 11:27 AM
i would beg to differ. if superskinsfan was to not wear his outfit, would he be any differant than the next guy cheering for our team? we all end up with no voices after a game. but what makes us unique is the way we show our support.

It doesn't matter what you are wearing, if you're a fan, you could be dressed as Godzilla and still be as big a fan as a Hogette.


i was a skins fan before, and will be after ramsey leaves.
thank you very much. i aint going anywhere bro.
kr

We'll see. You seem to love him so much that I suspect you will turn on the skins for whatever team he goes to.

keepramsey
12-08-2005, 11:33 AM
It doesn't matter what you are wearing, if you're a fan, you could be dressed as Godzilla and still be as big a fan as a Hogette.




We'll see. You seem to love him so much that I suspect you will turn on the skins for whatever team he goes to.


no way bro. you got me all wrong.
i painted the inside of my livivng room bugundy.
the kitchen will be gold. had to beg my wifey for those colors. she is a bears fan.
i live redskin football.
it is my life.
was even thinking of haveing a custume paint job done to my car. and you got it, redskins theme.


but no matter what, i will allways be loyal to the redskins.
till death



kr

danny's stogie
12-08-2005, 11:39 AM
no way bro. you got me all wrong.
i painted the inside of my livivng room bugundy.
the kitchen will be gold. had to beg my wifey for those colors. she is a bears fan.
i live redskin football.
it is my life.
was even thinking of haveing a custume paint job done to my car. and you got it, redskins theme.


but no matter what, i will allways be loyal to the redskins.
till death



kr


I thought you said you were just a kid. Now you have a wife, a living room, a car, and a sense of mortality?

keepramsey
12-08-2005, 11:43 AM
I thought you said you were just a kid. Now you have a wife, a living room, a car, and a sense of mortality?


what is morality?

LOL

i just felt like i was being picked on like a kid. my way of tryin to keep it chill.
kinda hard to tell in cyber space if people are all serious and what not.


kr

chrisbcbu
12-08-2005, 11:55 AM
I thought you said you were just a kid. Now you have a wife, a living room, a car, and a sense of mortality?

That kinda threw me off as well. I remember his saying that too.

akhhorus
12-08-2005, 12:08 PM
no way bro. you got me all wrong.
i painted the inside of my livivng room bugundy.
the kitchen will be gold. had to beg my wifey for those colors. she is a bears fan.
i live redskin football.
it is my life.
was even thinking of haveing a custume paint job done to my car. and you got it, redskins theme.
but no matter what, i will allways be loyal to the redskins.
till death
kr

We'll see. And i thought you were like a teenager or something?

dj_stouty
12-08-2005, 12:34 PM
what is morality?

LOL

i just felt like i was being picked on like a kid. my way of tryin to keep it chill.
kinda hard to tell in cyber space if people are all serious and what not.


kr

Are you WJ2K?

keepramsey
12-08-2005, 12:46 PM
i am 29,
have a wife,
a house,
a car,
a truck,
a boat,
2 dogs,
5 cats,
and two turtles.
have followed the skins sinse i was a wee tyke. the superbowl against maimi is the first redskin memory i can recall. big #44 runnin right at me.


and i have no idea what WJ2K means/is. srry.



kr

Keino
12-08-2005, 01:06 PM
Are you WJ2K?

LMAO!!!!!

He didn't say he had a Bi-sexual Model wife nor did he say he painted the house his rich dad gave him while caring for his nephews who's parents were tragically killed in the WTC.....I'll give him the Benefit of the doubt.....

Spence
12-08-2005, 01:29 PM
Thank you. I can dress up like a cop, that doesn't make me a police officer.But it might get you a gig with the Village People and I read those cats are going to make a comeback.

BurgundyNGold
12-08-2005, 01:32 PM
But it might get you a gig with the Village People and I read those cats are going to make a comeback.
I'm thinking Akh would be the construction worker. He's already got his pants... :D

The Skinsinator
12-08-2005, 01:35 PM
I voted approve. Brunell did everything we could have asked for against the Rams. Most importantly, he won the game. When you consider the lack of a #2 and his td-int ratio you have to be satisfied. My only knock on him has been his fumblitis but that hasn't been a problem of late (knock on wood.)

dj_stouty
12-08-2005, 01:54 PM
i am 29,
have a wife,
a house,
a car,
a truck,
a boat,
2 dogs,
5 cats,
and two turtles.
have followed the skins sinse i was a wee tyke. the superbowl against maimi is the first redskin memory i can recall. big #44 runnin right at me.


and i have no idea what WJ2K means/is. srry.



kr

Do you also own a resort in Antigua?

akhhorus
12-08-2005, 02:08 PM
Do you also own a resort in Antigua?

(I spit out my water on this one)

And the flags are flying at halfstaff in France, CBS and the 101st Airborne.

skinsfan811
12-08-2005, 04:21 PM
i am 29,
have a wife,
a house,
a car,
a truck,
a boat,
2 dogs,
5 cats,
and two turtles.
have followed the skins sinse i was a wee tyke. the superbowl against maimi is the first redskin memory i can recall. big #44 runnin right at me.


and i have no idea what WJ2K means/is. srry.



kr

I wouldn't care if I didn't know what WJ2K meant (what does it mean???LOL) if I could call all of those things mine.BTW...dj_stouty, I wouldn't doubt the Antigua thing:lol1:.

keepramsey
12-08-2005, 04:26 PM
I wouldn't care if I didn't know what WJ2K meant (what does it mean???LOL) if I could call all of those things mine.BTW...dj_stouty, I wouldn't doubt the Antigua thing:lol1:.


well, i must be too old or too young to know what the heck yawl are talkin bout.

Antigua?
WJ2K?

skinsfan811
12-08-2005, 04:31 PM
well, i must be too old or too young to know what the heck yawl are talkin bout.

Antigua?
WJ2K?

Are you saying you don't know what Antigua is?Or are you saying that you don't understand why dj_stouty's saying that?Because...it's a vacation spot that's really nice.And dj_stouty was saying that you have alot of stuff...I wonder if he has that too???

And BTW...if I don't find out what WJ2K means, it'll drive me CRAZY trying to figure it out:lol1:.

keepramsey
12-08-2005, 04:38 PM
Are you saying you don't know what Antigua is?Or are you saying that you don't understand why dj_stouty's saying that?Because...it's a vacation spot that's really nice.And dj_stouty was saying that you have alot of stuff...I wonder if he has that too???

And BTW...if I don't find out what WJ2K means, it'll drive me CRAZY trying to figure it out:lol1:.


thanks fer the esplanation fer this dumb hick.



3 days till gametime. i cant wait!

Keino
12-08-2005, 05:46 PM
Wj2k is an inside joke that DJ and I share. It comes from a Fantasy Football league and message board we were both affiliated with. If DJ wants to elaborate, I will let him.......

X-Factor13
12-08-2005, 11:09 PM
how can you not approve? He's been doing great this year. Just think about where we were last year at this point.

dj_stouty
12-09-2005, 08:51 AM
Wj2k is an inside joke that DJ and I share. It comes from a Fantasy Football league and message board we were both affiliated with. If DJ wants to elaborate, I will let him.......

Nah...its more funny as an inside joke!

The Antigua joke refers to the resort JimReaper supposedly owns on the island. Thank you, Akh for recognizing it.