The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

After 1 year, 2 things are clear. Thankfully Joe saw that the better QB got the opportunity when he (Joe) felt he was ready and we now see that Patrick can be a very good QB.

The other thing is that we think we might have been better off - but Joe did not make that decision. End of story and hypothesising!

Maybe Cleveland should have kept that absolutely hopeless coach called Bill who has to have the worst record in their franchise history.

Welch is correct in pointing out that who could tell that Mark would play that badly under Gibbs system.

This whole thing is a very tenuous and I am enjoying seeing the talent brought out from unexpected players again. This is what Joe does better than anyone.

I am willing to also let Gibbs do whatever he thinks is best with Brunell. I still would rather have Brunell next year than Vinny! We know who is starting for us next year but you cannot believe that we could be so lucky that Vinny is the pukes #1 QB!!!

I think we would possibly be in a worse position if Ramsey would have started, why?

1. Ramsey learned a lot from being on the bench, he clearly wasnt ready during the preseason, and WOULD NOT have played at the level he has been playing in the past few games.

2. That being said, Ramsey would have struggled and Joe would have been quicker to put Brunell in being that he is the vet that he would have wanted to put in the 1st go round.

3. Brunell would have still sucked in this false reality like he did in reality.

4. We'd be at this same point in the off-season with no clear QB. We'd be sitting her thinking about who to draft at QB instead of another pressing need.

5. Yea, it sucked having Brunell in there but I think in the long run it worked out best for us.

The Fatal Mistake was me spending 80 bones on a Brunell Jersey.

Good thing I pawned it.

Ramsey had a 52.2 QB rating in the preseason. 52.2

How in the world would Gibbs have chosen to start him over Brunell?? There is no way that starting Brunell was a mistake.

You could argue that Gibbs should have pulled Brunell during the bye week (even that would have been premature, b/c he only had 2 bad games in a row at that point) or after the Detroit game, but there is absolutely no feasible argument that Ramsey should have been named the starter from week 1.

I agree. Brunell, for all intents and purposes, was signed for his leadership and toughness. As it turned out, he was plenty supportive when his time came to step aside. Joe will be wiping the egg from his face on this deal for one reason only...he stuck by the man too long. As a man of his word, though...did he have a choice ? He gave Markie every opportunity to redeem himself on the field.
Unfortunately, he did not.

gundo wrote:Ramsey had a 52.2 QB rating in the preseason. 52.2

How in the world would Gibbs have chosen to start him over Brunell?? There is no way that starting Brunell was a mistake.

You could argue that Gibbs should have pulled Brunell during the bye week (even that would have been premature, b/c he only had 2 bad games in a row at that point) or after the Detroit game, but there is absolutely no feasible argument that Ramsey should have been named the starter from week 1.

actually, there is a very good argument to start ramsey from week 1:

brunell is old.

ramsey is young, and has shown great promise the past couple years.

end of argument. it makes little to interrupt the growth of your young "franchise QB" that way- especially during a coach's 1st season [back] with the team, when you're not likely to win much. brunell was a "win now" decision that backfired big time. yes, ramsey was bad in preseason but brunell was equally woeful.


in any case, i would've preferred ramsey be the opening day starter but was OK with brunell. however, ramsey's performance in the 1st NY game actually made me 100% certain that brunell needed to go and ramsey should be playing.

why? i know, he threw some really bad INTs. but hello people!! wake up!! he was trying to clean up brunell's MESS. when you are losing you have to try to force some things sometimes. not saying it was OK to make those throws, just putting it in perspective.

plus, he actually MOVED THE BALL. it was obvious right then and there that we would never move the ball without him in there at QB.


brunell should've been pulled long before the bye week, but at LEAST by then. it was basically inexusable to ever see him on the field after that. he had shown that he was washed up. by leaving him in there too long, we wasted the season.

die cowboys die wrote:actually, there is a very good argument to start ramsey from week 1:

brunell is old.

ramsey is young, and has shown great promise the past couple years.

end of argument.

Is that it? thats the best you could...

die cowboys die wrote:yes, ramsey was bad in preseason but brunell was equally woeful.

Player Att Comp Yds Comp % Yds/Att TD TD % INT INT % Long Sack/Lost Rating
Mark Brunell 46 26 295 56.5 6.4 1 2.2 1 2.2 61 1/3 74.1
Patrick Ramsey 58 26 277 44.8 4.8 0 0.0 1 1.7 44 1/7 52.2

the numbers say otherwise....

die cowboys die wrote:plus, he actually MOVED THE BALL. it was obvious right then and there that we would never move the ball without him in there at QB.

it was obvious the second game of the season?.... When we had won our first one?....

die cowboys die wrote:end of argument.

This is the part that reads good to me.