Quarterback Poll

[redskins56]

Here's a quick and easy question for you. Look at the options and tell me what you think.

[redskincity]

Bench Brunell. I dont know more than Joe about football, but I know its time to sit this chump down. I think the O-line is tired of blocking for Brunell. They get nothing out of it but jammed fingers and bruised up shins. Thats it no completions or nothing.

Look at Tampa, they benched BJ and Greise is lighting it up. :idea::idea::idea::idea::idea::idea::idea::idea::idea:

[Chris Luva Luva]

If anyone votes to keep Brunell in here, they need to be banned.

[wormer]

There is one certainty: Brunell is NOT the future of this franchise.

There is one near certainty: The 'Skins WILL NOT make the playoffs this year.

Given those two factors, the choice to move Ramsey in is obvious to me.

At least it will give us an idea if we should be hunting for another QB this off season.

I appreciate Gibbs' loyalty but I believe it's counter productive in this instance.

Sorry- I refuse to bow down to Gibbs like he is an all knowing deity. I have two words for you:

1. Desmond
2. Howard

That is all.

[Skinsfan55]

"Sorry- I refuse to bow down to Gibbs like he is an all knowing deity."

Well said my good man. Gibbs may have been the savior of the franchise once... but this Brunell business has me worried.

I like Gibbs, and all the success he brought the team, but sometimes you can't live in the past and you need to go out there and take a chance on a new coach... just like we did when we hired Gibbs the first time!

[pjp5]

I know you guys are saying that the danny should fire joe gibbs?????


Maybe you should be banned!!

[Skinsfan55]

Danny can't fire Joe Gibbs, it would be stupid...

I don't know as though Gibbs should have been hired in the first place.

It's like the conflict in Iraq. We shouldn't have gone in to begin with, but now that we are there we can't pull out until we're finished.

[REDEEMEDSKIN]

Patrick will have his time, for now, keep Brunell in there.

Quick question: what other teams have switched QBs this year, other than due to injury?

I don't think it is as common an ocurrence as you all would make it seem. As Skins fans, we've been accustomed to changing signal callers on a whim, and that has not gotten us anywhere. Why continue that trend?

Let's give the "HOF coach approach" to coaching a try, and see how it plays out. If that fails, Spurrier is still available, and we can start the QB carousel in Washington yet again.

[redskincity]

Patrick will have his time, for now, keep Brunell in there.

Quick question: what other teams have switched QBs this year, other than due to injury?

I don't think it is as common an ocurrence as you all would make it seem. As Skins fans, we've been accustomed to changing signal callers on a whim, and that has not gotten us anywhere. Why continue that trend?

Let's give the "HOF coach approach" to coaching a try, and see how it plays out. If that fails, Spurrier is still available, and we can start the QB carousel in Washington yet again.

Tampa Bay.

...and since they have switched QBs they are on a three game win streak.

They have a better vertical game and are more exsplosive with him at the helm.

...also with Brunnel at QB we are risking 'injury' to overall team morale.

[NC43Hog]

If our offense was just average we would be 6-2.

Bottom line - Brunell ain't getting it done.

Reminds me of when Theismann was playing so bad we all wanted him pulled - then he get's his leg broken and never plays another down. Schrader comes in and plays well in relief.

I would rather see Brunell sit than get hurt - but maybe a mild hamstring pull would facilitate a move. It's been since week 2 that Patrick has played and I think it's time Joe gave him another look.

Get this straight - if Bugs Bunny was our quarterback and we were winning it would be fine and dandy with me - this is nothing personal against Mark.

[JPFair]

I don't know as though Gibbs should have been hired in the first place

WOW!!!

[JPFair]

Everything I've read on this board today is a typical example of what people meant when they said would Joe Gibbs be able to adapt to the "new" NFL. The "new" NFL doesn't allow patience. The "new" NFL doesnt' allow a coach to do his job HIS way. Well, let me tell you, it SHOULD. And, if Joe Gibbs is going to go against the grain by doing it HIS way, then so be it. He's earned that right! He doesn't have to listen to the fans, the media, or anyone else for that matter. He's the HEAD COACH as well as TEAM PRESIDENT!

People are wanting his head eight games into a season all because of his decision to keep Brunell in there. I completely agree with Joe Gibbs keeping Brunell in there so far. When Joe Gibbs decided to coach the Redskins, I'd bet he took one look at this team and tried to figure out what was wrong with it. NO ONE can deny the fact that one of the biggest if not THE biggest problems we had was consistency in ANY form. What Gibbs saw was head coach after head coach, defensive coordinator after defensive coordinator, QB after QB, and an assortment of other inconsistencies. If in Joe Gibbs' attempt to gain some form of consistency, some fans are calling for his head, do we really think that that's going to make Joe Gibbs succumb to what the fans want? I would hate to think that Joe Gibbs would all of a sudden bench Brunell eight games into the season because Brunell isn't cutting it. He made a decision to put Brunell in as the starter, and he's going to go with it. Let's look at it this way: What if any one of us were promoted to a Supervisors job at our respective offices, and we were tasked with reorganizing an up to now failed and flawed system. What if we wanted to do certain things and delegate certain responsibilities to other employees! If after a few months on the job things weren't completely repaired, should we be fired or forced to re-assign those duties? Should we be fired?

Joe Gibbs has made ENORMOUS improvements in the Redskins already. Joe Gibbs is only a few months into his contract, and we're expecting him to change his entire approach to it? NOT GOING TO HAPPEN!!! When Gibbs named Brunell the starter, he didnt' have any asterisks next to it. He didn't place any conditions on Brunell, and he never will. Gibbs will do whatever it takes to right this ship, but he is a realist. If people think that Ramsey being a starter would miraculously make the Redskins a more competitive team are wrong. If people have the attitude that we have nothing to lose by seeing what Ramsey can do are effectively giving up on Joe Gibbs' system. NOT ONCE have we heard any of the players complaining. Even the defensive players are saying it's a TEAM LOSS when we lose. They're not blaming Brunell! Our own players are buying into Gibbs' system, yet some of the very fans that he covets are not. What kind of a message is that sending to Joe Gibbs?

I think it's important that fans be fans and coaches be coaches. Whatever happened to the outpouring of support that was in favor of Joe Gibbs after he came back? Is that gone just because Brunell is the QB after 8 games?

As fans, we can express our opinions and question decisions, but to question Joe Gibbs' approach after only eight games is wrong. I, for one, admire him for what he's doing. He's establishing consistency, he's getting respect from his own players, he's quited an otherwise boisteruos owner, he's got confident players in spite of a rough start to the season, and most importantly he's not letting the media or the fans tell him what to do and how to do it. If Gibbs wants Brunell in there, he's got my support. And furthermore, I'm not going to suggest that Ramsey would be better. Maybe he will, maybe he won't, but it's either Joe Gibbs' way or the highway!!

Joe Gibbs has forgotten more about how to run a football team than most of us will ever know!

I'm with you Joe!!!

[doroshjt]

NOT ONCE have we heard any of the players complaining. Even the defensive players are saying it's a TEAM LOSS when we lose.

its not in what they say but how they act. If you watch the sidelines when the offense is off the field, no one is standing near brunell, and he's not going around trying to fire up his team. He is not an inspiration to the team and won't be responsible for our wins. I see subtle signs of players not exactly supporting brunell, of course they'll never say it for fear of Gibbs, which is the correct thing to do. Brunells pads were popping out of his jersey last game and no one helped him put them back. Its all in the little things.

[trey53]

I see subtle signs of players not exactly supporting brunell, of course they'll never say it for fear of Gibbs, which is the correct thing to do. Brunells pads were popping out of his jersey last game and no one helped him put them back. Its all in the little things.

Fear? Don't you mean respect? Let's not confuse Gibbs with the frowning mercenary in little d. I also think that those "signs" are a pretty unreliable way of telling whether a team is supporting their QB. Brunell is, after all, a very nice guy.

I'm actually with JP on this whole subject, btw. Everyone seems to forget that Ramsey has NOT...I repeat NOT performed well this year. He lost the starting job in the preseason and threw three picks in his only action during the regular season. Does anyone on this board know how Ramsey looks in practice? No. Do I think that Brunell is playing well? Absolutely not. But the WRs aren't helping him out either. If it hits you in the hands you should make the catch. Do I trust Joe Gibbs enough to make the decision when it benefits the team? Yes.

Also: What happens if Gibbs makes the switch and Ramsey ends up throing three picks again? Where the heck does that put us? Same freakin boat except with more turnovers. I trust the coaching staff enough that they can make an educated decision on who to start. We need to be patient. Our beloved team had a myriad of problems. We got the man we had all been hoping for...let him work his magic. If we have to win Ravens style let's get to it.

[SkinsFan4Life]

Danny can't fire Joe Gibbs, it would be stupid...

I don't know as though Gibbs should have been hired in the first place.

It's like the conflict in Iraq. We shouldn't have gone in to begin with, but now that we are there we can't pull out until we're finished.

This is the stupidest post I've read on this board.

Just because you disagree with his decision, you are saying that he shouldn't "have been hired in the first place"? Did you express this feeling when Gibbs was hired back in January 2004?

[doroshjt]

But ramsey had a 141 yards in one half. Brunell has 3 games with more yards then that out of 7 complete games. I for one will take the INTs over 58 yards passing any day. Especially with our Defense shutting down the opponents they way have. And you blame the WRs dropping passes, but they did that too for ramsey, remember following the drop by gardner in the endzone he followed that up with an INT. Same thing happened to brunell in the packers game and the thrash penalty. Ramsey can move the ball down the field. Brunell can not. Its as simple as that.

[trey53]

Moving the ball with an interception at the end of it is about as useful as a punt except the other team can usually run it back further. And it isn't simple or Ramsey would be starting. Your argument about the D is eaxactly why Gibbs is starting Brunell instead of Ramsey. He is afraid Ramsey will turn it over like he did in the preseason and the Giants game. Brunell doesn't give the ball away as much, Portis can pound the ball and the D can stop the other team. I don't like that formula either, it definitely ain't pretty, but it is what we've got.

My argument isn't about who is the better QB, btw. It is about the fact that I trust Gibbs to make the right decision at the right time. I don't have a problem with sticking Ramsey in there...if and when Coach Joe Gibbs, the architect of the only true Redskins dynasty, decides he is ready and is a marked improvement over Brunell. Who here has more experience? Who here is closer to the situation right now with all of the facts at their fingertips?

[doroshjt]

If we count madden, I have more experience:)

All I can base my judgement on is performance I have seen, brunell this year and ramsey last year. Last year with NO protection, ramsey had much better numbers then brunell this year with the same receivers. Gibbs makes his choice but if we all agreed with every move the redskins made, this board would be quite boring.

[trey53]

If we count madden, I have more experience:)

Awesome!!! I'm an ESPN 2K freak myself...guess we have something else to debate.

Agreed. Its fun to debate the ins and outs and I can't say I'm happy with the lack of offensive production through the air.

[REDEEMEDSKIN]

I for one will take the INTs over 58 yards passing any day. Especially with our Defense shutting down the opponents they way have.

If, say, we DO throw several picks in a game, as is suggested by this post, that means our "shut down defense" is on the field longer. As the game wears on, our "shut down" defense would become more like a turnstile. As much as you like Ramsey and his high-risk cannon for an arm, you cannot for one second begin to justify 3 turnovers in a game. This isn't Madden; it doesn't work like that.

[doroshjt]

but as it stands now, we go three and out and the defense is on the field just as long.

[redskins56]

Patrick will have his time, for now, keep Brunell in there.

Quick question: what other teams have switched QBs this year, other than due to injury?

I don't think it is as common an ocurrence as you all would make it seem. As Skins fans, we've been accustomed to changing signal callers on a whim, and that has not gotten us anywhere. Why continue that trend?

Let's give the "HOF coach approach" to coaching a try, and see how it plays out. If that fails, Spurrier is still available, and we can start the QB carousel in Washington yet again.

I've given him 8 chances now, and I've listented to people like you asking for us to par the course. But at some point you gotta say, what in the hell are we looking to do here. We're one game outta first and we gotta do what's right. He's had half a year and not one decent game. Crap has hit the fan, and its time to do what isn't neccessarily the easy thing, but the right thing

[welch]

and its time to do what isn't neccessarily the easy thing, but the right thing

...and Gibbs will do the right thing, whatever that is in his professional judgement: whatever is needed to win. You will find the same thing, time after time, decision after decision, throughout all his years with the Redskins. (Probably throughout his years in NASCAR.)

Note: his professional judgement. No one works as hard as Gibbs in studying the film, studying the players, preparing his team for a game...unless it is one of his assistants, who work those hours alongside him.

I have two assumptions:

1) Joe Gibbs did not suddenly fall on his head and lose his mind.

2) Repeat assumption 1.

[die cowboys die]

doroshjt, you are my new hero, you have it exactly.

redeemedskin, i have an old-school style word problem for you, here goes:

The redskins start with the ball on their 20 and mark brunell as QB, and go INCOMPLETE, 5-yard run, INCOMPLETE for a 3-and-out followed by a punt of 40 yards, returned 5 yards. They are on the field for 2 minutes.

The redskins then bench brunell in favor of ramsey. the redskins get the ball at their 20 and drive to the opponents' 12 yard-line, where ramsey is intercepted in the endzone for a touchback. the drive takes up 7 minutes.

Q1: which has a greater net result in field position?
Q2: which has a greater result in time of posession?

A1: The ramsey drive gives the opponent the ball at their 20, compared to the brunell drive in which they get it at their 40. the ramsey drive thus gives us 20 extra yards in field position.

A2: The ramsey drive nets a gain of 5 minutes in time of posession. in this 5 extra minutes our stellar D sits resting on the sideline.

clearly the ramsey scenario is superior in every regard, even those non-quantifiable aspects like "morale". the team will be excited to be moving the ball, at least having a CHANCE at scoring offensively. additionally, at least 1/3 if not 1/2 (and this is being insanely pessimistic) of ramsey's tosses down in the redzone will actually go for TDs instead of INTs. not to mention that we could just run it in or kick a field goal, which would be enough to win games for us if we could get FGs consistently.

so i say, bring on the INTs! they will be accompanied by 250-350 yard passing games and many TDs, and a whole lotta gobbled up clock.

[redskincity]

Those are very hard questions for Patrick Ramsey haters.

I tried to put myself in their shoes and answer those very same questions and I found out it would be very very dumb to follow up with a, "we should keep Brunell spat."