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

yupchagee wrote:

Dont ever compare people like Big Ben to Campbell, ever.

OK, Big ben has a super bowl ring. That was a team effort. I'm not disputing that he's a rising star, but to catagorically state that Campbell can't EVER be compared to him is absurd.

Exactly. JC set some records (such as completion percentage and passing efficiency) at Auburn; he's no slouch by any stretch. I feel he'll be a star in this league.

Edit: And both JC and Big Ben were first-rounders. It's certainly fair to expect great things from both.

Jason didn't come out of "nowhere" in his Senior year, 04. In 03 some polls had Auburn as the #1 team to start the season, they tanked mainly due to the OL coach being promoted to OC, but one of the reason they were predicted so high was Jason Campbell, along with (C Williams, R Brown, Karlos Dandsby and others). The point is you don't rank teams in the Top 5 without a proven QB.

As an Auburn fan, I believe you will extremely happy with Jason as a QB. As mentioned before, he has a gifted arm. The biggest draw back, was that he tends to be TOO confident in the pocket. It appears that now he is getting it out of there quicker than when he was at Auburn. Good Luck with him and Carlos.

Mursilis wrote:

yupchagee wrote:

PatrickRamsey wrote:

Fios wrote:Not unless Brunell goes out with an injury

YEa really, i mean Gibbs was so anti-Ramsey, theres no way he gives JC the job, Gibbs is like this, "Go with a veteran 90 percent of the time all the time"

Veteran QB>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Young QB

thats how he is.

Gibbs anti Ramsey? Who started at QB at the beginning of last season?
Assuming he was "anti Ramsey, what does that have to do with Campbell this year?

Gibbs isn't anti-Ramsey, he's anti-young QB. Ramsey got about 1.5 quarters as the starter in '05 before he was benched, whereas Brunell got, what, 9-10 games before he got the hook in '04? Huge difference.

Ramsey wasn't benched, he was injured. Brunell did so well that Gibbs stayed with him.

Dangerfield wrote:

Fios wrote:Not unless Brunell goes out with an injury

Or unless we start 2-4 and Brunell looks like he did in 2004.

Why would it matter if he looked like he did in '04? Gibbs waited waaaay too long to pull the plug on him.

I'm one of the idiots that is still a Ramsey fan. He's gone and I accept that. Thankfully though, we got Collins to fill in at #2. He's just been hiding waiting to explode.

I think that Campbell will start sometime and then finish the season. I would be happy to see him start sooner, rather than later. I know that Brunell is our guy, but he just doesn't look good and we all know he won't make it through the season. I guess we'll just wait and see who is healthy in a couple of weeks.

This is Saunders' offense now and when he thinks Campbell is going to be ready is when he (and Gibbs) will have Campbell as our QB.
Brunell is the QB at present because he has earned it but that will change when Saunders (and Gibbs) think that Cambell can both handle it and grow with the responsibility that comes with being our starting QB. That might be sooner than a lot of people think, but until then this offense will be a lot different and hopefully more successful than last year because of Saunders and because Gibbs brought him here to do that.

yupchagee wrote:Ramsey wasn't benched, he was injured. Brunell did so well that Gibbs stayed with him.

i'm sorry but that is complete bullplop and you know it. why are you intentionally convincing yourself of something you know is not true? brunell did not do "so well" during that bears game. in case you didn't notice, we scored 9 points. brunell was 8 of 14 for a whopping 70 yards. now, i'm not saying he was terrible, or even bad- he didn't throw any interceptions, and he didn't lose the game for us. i'm just saying that your assertion is not even close to reality.


i think a healthy brunell clearly gives us the best chance to win. but i have about 14% confidence in his ability to stay healthy all year. it simply hasn't happened for what, 3, 4 years in a row now? some earlier posts in this thread have pointed to his '05 stats as a whole, in his defense. they must not have been watching the games toward the end of the year, when he was clearly not healthy, and sorely ineffective.

i'm not throwing my hat in with the "start campbell" crowd just yet... i'm just saying, it's a legitimate debate.

die cowboys die wrote:

yupchagee wrote:Ramsey wasn't benched, he was injured. Brunell did so well that Gibbs stayed with him.

i'm sorry but that is complete bullplop and you know it. why are you intentionally convincing yourself of something you know is not true? brunell did not do "so well" during that bears game. in case you didn't notice, we scored 9 points. brunell was 8 of 14 for a whopping 70 yards. now, i'm not saying he was terrible, or even bad- he didn't throw any interceptions, and he didn't lose the game for us. i'm just saying that your assertion is not even close to reality.


i think a healthy brunell clearly gives us the best chance to win. but i have about 14% confidence in his ability to stay healthy all year. it simply hasn't happened for what, 3, 4 years in a row now? some earlier posts in this thread have pointed to his '05 stats as a whole, in his defense. they must not have been watching the games toward the end of the year, when he was clearly not healthy, and sorely ineffective.

i'm not throwing my hat in with the "start campbell" crowd just yet... i'm just saying, it's a legitimate debate.

I'm not saying that Campbell as starting QB isn't a legit issue. I'm saying that Ramsey left the game injured, I don't remember the details. I don't know what his health was the next few weeks. Ramsey also showed himself incapable of handling a rush. Brunell doesn't move like he once did, but his sack/100 attempts was a whole lot better than Ramsey's. I won't try to predict Brunell's health over the season except to agree that he has had injuries & that injuries to QB are extremely common. Based on what Gibbs has said about Campbell, I don't think he'd hesitate to use him.

Every starting QB controversy thread honestly makes me cringe.

Brunell is our guy. He proved his worth last year and Gibbs believes in him.

That's more than enough for me.

JPM36 wrote:Every starting QB controversy thread honestly makes me cringe.

Then you're taking it too seriously.

Brunell is our guy. He proved his worth last year and Gibbs believes in him.

Jon Kitna had a better year in '03 than Brunell had in '05, and he still got benched for Carson Palmer, and Palmer had a Pro Bowl year last year before that knee injury cut it short in the playoffs. Still, no one's doubting the wisdom of that move now. This is a 'what have you done for me lately' league. Brunell is the past; Campbell is the future.

yupchagee wrote:

die cowboys die wrote:

yupchagee wrote:Ramsey wasn't benched, he was injured. Brunell did so well that Gibbs stayed with him.

i'm sorry but that is complete bullplop and you know it. why are you intentionally convincing yourself of something you know is not true? brunell did not do "so well" during that bears game. in case you didn't notice, we scored 9 points. brunell was 8 of 14 for a whopping 70 yards. now, i'm not saying he was terrible, or even bad- he didn't throw any interceptions, and he didn't lose the game for us. i'm just saying that your assertion is not even close to reality.


i think a healthy brunell clearly gives us the best chance to win. but i have about 14% confidence in his ability to stay healthy all year. it simply hasn't happened for what, 3, 4 years in a row now? some earlier posts in this thread have pointed to his '05 stats as a whole, in his defense. they must not have been watching the games toward the end of the year, when he was clearly not healthy, and sorely ineffective.

i'm not throwing my hat in with the "start campbell" crowd just yet... i'm just saying, it's a legitimate debate.

I'm not saying that Campbell as starting QB isn't a legit issue. I'm saying that Ramsey left the game injured, I don't remember the details. I don't know what his health was the next few weeks.

Reportedly, Ramsey told Gibbs he was ready to go back in by the second half of the Chicago game, but wasn't allowed to do so. This whole business about his 'health' was a smokescreen.

Mursilis wrote:Reportedly, Ramsey told Gibbs he was ready to go back in by the second half of the Chicago game, but wasn't allowed to do so. This whole business about his 'health' was a smokescreen.

His mental health was the issue.

crazyhorse1 wrote:

Gibbs4Life wrote:Campbell will start for us this year bet on it.

I'd be a whole lot happier if we still had Patrick. Just don't trust Brunell as far as injuries go, and to keep his zip all season. Sorry, Campbell doesn't look ready yet. Maybe he'll improve at a faster rate if Pattten's benched when Campbell's out there. Campbell needs confidence. I would play him a lot in the next two games-- maybe three quarters each game, and get him used to throwing to our better wide receives.

Gibbs won't do that, of course-- because of chance of injury to wr's and Campbell, but mostly because he thinks Brunell's the guy. He's probably not. Sorry, again.

When will you realize that Ramsey can't cut it in this league? He couldn't get it done here, and he has looked horrible in preseason with the Jets! He can't even beat out Noodle arm for the starting job in NY. What makes you think he is better than Brunell?

sch1977 wrote:

crazyhorse1 wrote:

Gibbs4Life wrote:Campbell will start for us this year bet on it.

I'd be a whole lot happier if we still had Patrick. Just don't trust Brunell as far as injuries go, and to keep his zip all season. Sorry, Campbell doesn't look ready yet. Maybe he'll improve at a faster rate if Pattten's benched when Campbell's out there. Campbell needs confidence. I would play him a lot in the next two games-- maybe three quarters each game, and get him used to throwing to our better wide receives.

Gibbs won't do that, of course-- because of chance of injury to wr's and Campbell, but mostly because he thinks Brunell's the guy. He's probably not. Sorry, again.

When will you realize that Ramsey can't cut it in this league? He couldn't get it done here, and he has looked horrible in preseason with the Jets! He can't even beat out Noodle arm for the starting job in NY. What makes you think he is better than Brunell?

Let's not have another Ramsey/Brunell debate. Ramsey's gone, and that is the end of that, whether any of us like it or not.

Mursilis wrote:

JPM36 wrote:Every starting QB controversy thread honestly makes me cringe.

Then you're taking it too seriously.

Brunell is our guy. He proved his worth last year and Gibbs believes in him.

Jon Kitna had a better year in '03 than Brunell had in '05, and he still got benched for Carson Palmer, and Palmer had a Pro Bowl year last year before that knee injury cut it short in the playoffs. Still, no one's doubting the wisdom of that move now. This is a 'what have you done for me lately' league. Brunell is the past; Campbell is the future.

True, but Cincy had 40 + million tied up in Palmer;they needed to see if their investment would pay off. Ramsey has proven that he can't be a great starter at this level. I think he is a career backup

Mursilis wrote:

sch1977 wrote:

crazyhorse1 wrote:

Gibbs4Life wrote:Campbell will start for us this year bet on it.

I'd be a whole lot happier if we still had Patrick. Just don't trust Brunell as far as injuries go, and to keep his zip all season. Sorry, Campbell doesn't look ready yet. Maybe he'll improve at a faster rate if Pattten's benched when Campbell's out there. Campbell needs confidence. I would play him a lot in the next two games-- maybe three quarters each game, and get him used to throwing to our better wide receives.

Gibbs won't do that, of course-- because of chance of injury to wr's and Campbell, but mostly because he thinks Brunell's the guy. He's probably not. Sorry, again.

When will you realize that Ramsey can't cut it in this league? He couldn't get it done here, and he has looked horrible in preseason with the Jets! He can't even beat out Noodle arm for the starting job in NY. What makes you think he is better than Brunell?

Let's not have another Ramsey/Brunell debate. Ramsey's gone, and that is the end of that, whether any of us like it or not.

I completely agree! So why is a NY jet OB brought into the conversation?
This is Brunell's team for now, so let's get behind him

Lets bring him back!

Chris Luva Luva wrote:Lets bring him back!

Economically, it makes sense (for fans)! His 'skins jersey is really cheap right now!!

yupchagee wrote:

die cowboys die wrote:

yupchagee wrote:Ramsey wasn't benched, he was injured. Brunell did so well that Gibbs stayed with him.

i'm sorry but that is complete bullplop and you know it. why are you intentionally convincing yourself of something you know is not true? brunell did not do "so well" during that bears game. in case you didn't notice, we scored 9 points. brunell was 8 of 14 for a whopping 70 yards. now, i'm not saying he was terrible, or even bad- he didn't throw any interceptions, and he didn't lose the game for us. i'm just saying that your assertion is not even close to reality.


i think a healthy brunell clearly gives us the best chance to win. but i have about 14% confidence in his ability to stay healthy all year. it simply hasn't happened for what, 3, 4 years in a row now? some earlier posts in this thread have pointed to his '05 stats as a whole, in his defense. they must not have been watching the games toward the end of the year, when he was clearly not healthy, and sorely ineffective.

i'm not throwing my hat in with the "start campbell" crowd just yet... i'm just saying, it's a legitimate debate.

I'm not saying that Campbell as starting QB isn't a legit issue. I'm saying that Ramsey left the game injured, I don't remember the details. I don't know what his health was the next few weeks. Ramsey also showed himself incapable of handling a rush. Brunell doesn't move like he once did, but his sack/100 attempts was a whole lot better than Ramsey's. I won't try to predict Brunell's health over the season except to agree that he has had injuries & that injuries to QB are extremely common.

i can agree with you on all that

Mursilis wrote:

JPM36 wrote:Every starting QB controversy thread honestly makes me cringe.

Then you're taking it too seriously.

Brunell is our guy. He proved his worth last year and Gibbs believes in him.

Jon Kitna had a better year in '03 than Brunell had in '05, and he still got benched for Carson Palmer, and Palmer had a Pro Bowl year last year before that knee injury cut it short in the playoffs. Still, no one's doubting the wisdom of that move now. This is a 'what have you done for me lately' league. Brunell is the past; Campbell is the future.

I take everything Redskins too seriously, always have, always will.

Also I dont see how this comparison works at all. Palmer was the #1 overall pick in the draft and signed a contract worth WAY more than #25 pick Campbell.

Kitna did have a good year in '03 but he didn't get the Bengals into the playoffs, let alone win a playoff game, both of which Brunell did. You say Brunell is the past and Campbell's the future? Well, then who is the present? I say it's gotta be Brunell. Like you said, this is a what have you done for me lately league, and LATELY Brunell has thrown for 3,000 yards, posted a very solid 23/10 TD/INT ratio and taken us to the 2nd round of the playoffs. That's good enough for me to say we should keep a guy whose never taken an NFL snap on the bench.

I really don't understand how anyone who followed the Redskins in 2005 could be a proponent of benching Brunell for someone whose never taken an NFL snap.

crazyhorse1 wrote:

Gibbs4Life wrote:Campbell will start for us this year bet on it.

I'd be a whole lot happier if we still had Patrick. Just don't trust Brunell as far as injuries go, and to keep his zip all season. Sorry, Campbell doesn't look ready yet. Maybe he'll improve at a faster rate if Pattten's benched when Campbell's out there. Campbell needs confidence. I would play him a lot in the next two games-- maybe three quarters each game, and get him used to throwing to our better wide receives.

Gibbs won't do that, of course-- because of chance of injury to wr's and Campbell, but mostly because he thinks Brunell's the guy. He's probably not. Sorry, again.

Can't keep living in the past. Time to move on..

JPM36 wrote: Kitna did have a good year in '03 but he didn't get the Bengals into the playoffs, let alone win a playoff game, both of which Brunell did.

You're giving him far too much credit, and too little to the rest of the team. Brunell's line for that TB playoff win was 7-15, 41 yrds, 0 TDs, and 1 INT - that'd be a disaster for any other QB. He was about as big a part of that win as Trent Dilfer was a part of the Raven's playoff run the year they won the Super Bowl. Heck, numbers-wise, Brunell was actually better in the loss at Seattle than he was in the win at TB. And as far as Brunell taking us to the playoffs, that's more the team again. As I've already outlined (see my comparison to Bledsoe last year), Brunell was decent, but in no way exceptional, and clearly had some games where his age was apparent. Quincy Carter took a team to the playoffs, and he just got cut from the CFL!

I really don't understand how anyone who followed the Redskins in 2005 could be a proponent of benching Brunell for someone whose never taken an NFL snap.

I saw '04, the end of '05, and Brunell's last 5 years. He really seems like a decent, honest, honorable guy, but I don't see him lasting through this year. Hopefully, I'm just plain wrong about that, and he not only plays until the last down of the Super Bowl, but he has a Pro Bowl year doing it. If he's going to start (and he is), I'm going to root for him.

Mursilis- I was at the Tampa game. Believe me, you don't have to tell me how bad he was that day.

But the guy got us through to the playoffs last year. No, he didn't lead us there or win the games for us. But he DID make a lot of good throws and was generally the best Redskins QB since Brad Johnson in 1999. Brunell is not a great player by any means, but he is the best QB we have RIGHT NOW.

I have never once said that I am positive he will last through the 2006 season without getting hurt. But I do think the job is and should be his until he does go down. He earned it with his solid play last season.

JPM36 wrote:

Mursilis wrote:

JPM36 wrote:Every starting QB controversy thread honestly makes me cringe.

Then you're taking it too seriously.

Brunell is our guy. He proved his worth last year and Gibbs believes in him.

Jon Kitna had a better year in '03 than Brunell had in '05, and he still got benched for Carson Palmer, and Palmer had a Pro Bowl year last year before that knee injury cut it short in the playoffs. Still, no one's doubting the wisdom of that move now. This is a 'what have you done for me lately' league. Brunell is the past; Campbell is the future.

I take everything Redskins too seriously, always have, always will.

Also I dont see how this comparison works at all. Palmer was the #1 overall pick in the draft and signed a contract worth WAY more than #25 pick Campbell.

Kitna did have a good year in '03 but he didn't get the Bengals into the playoffs, let alone win a playoff game, both of which Brunell did. You say Brunell is the past and Campbell's the future? Well, then who is the present? I say it's gotta be Brunell. Like you said, this is a what have you done for me lately league, and LATELY Brunell has thrown for 3,000 yards, posted a very solid 23/10 TD/INT ratio and taken us to the 2nd round of the playoffs. That's good enough for me to say we should keep a guy whose never taken an NFL snap on the bench.

I really don't understand how anyone who followed the Redskins in 2005 could be a proponent of benching Brunell for someone whose never taken an NFL snap.

Another way the comparison breaks down is that we are paying Brunell the Palmer money and Campbell the Kitna wages.

JPM36 wrote:Mursilis- I was at the Tampa game. Believe me, you don't have to tell me how bad he was that day.

But the guy got us through to the playoffs last year. No, he didn't lead us there or win the games for us. But he DID make a lot of good throws and was generally the best Redskins QB since Brad Johnson in 1999. Brunell is not a great player by any means, but he is the best QB we have RIGHT NOW.

I have never once said that I am positive he will last through the 2006 season without getting hurt. But I do think the job is and should be his until he does go down. He earned it with his solid play last season.

Yeah, I'll agree with the best since Brad Johnson stuff. And "solid play" is a fair way to describe last season - he certainly hasn't "earned" a benching. I just happen to think JC can be at least as good, or better RIGHT NOW, but we can't KNOW until he plays in a real game, which won't happen if Brunell's healthy, so further discussion is moot. I checked the preseason stats and they've got exactly the same rating (44 - nothing special; Collins actually has a 58!) over two games, but that's just preseason. Anyway, I'll be pulling for Brunell out there since he's getting the call, and be comfortable knowing there's talent behind him. You've made a good case and kept it respectful, so and take care.

JSPB22 wrote:Another way the comparison breaks down is that we are paying Brunell the Palmer money and Campbell the Kitna wages.

But that doesn't really matter. You don't play the guy who makes the most - you play the guy who plays the best.

I only compared Kitna/Palmer to Brunell/Campbell because Cinncy took the gamble of playing the hot young rookie over the tried-and-true, good-but-not-great veteran, and it paid off. They may've done it because of the money, but for whatever reason, they did it and found out the Palmer could play in this league.