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

die cowboys die wrote:

1niksder wrote:The truth is Ramsey had 7 games last year and only left us praying he would eliminate his mistakes

you should either move to where you can actually watch the games, or get NFL Sunday Ticket in DirecTV. (i am assuming you don't get to see the games, since no one who did could possibly make such an ignorant statement so utterly divorced from reality). for those of us who actually watched the games (and don't live in some distorted fantasy-land), ramsey demonstrated that he is capable of competing at a high level against elite NFL defenses.

You know what they say about assuming I bet I've missed more games than you've seen and I've still watched more redskin football than you have. This is due to the fact that you have no concept of what you are watching....

I'll take the two QB out of context of the whole team thing.

Each pass Ramsey threw

Every pass by Mark

Ok genius .... What did you see?

thaiphoon wrote:

Thats just it, Ramsey hasnt been winning!

Neither has Brunell (at least not in a Redskins jersey) or any other Redskins QB for the past decade (except maybe one year with Brad Johnson). Very few QB's can win a game for you all by themselves. But alot of good and really good QB's will win consistently for you if the other players on offense do their jobs correctly and the coach has the right gameplan.

Brunell had 8 games in Washington, Ramsey had over 20. Ramsey has proven he cant win in this offense. Now thats not to say he cant win anywhere, but enough is enough. Gibbs doesnt think Ramsey is the man to lead this team, why the hell do you?

die cowboys die wrote:

1niksder wrote:The truth is Ramsey had 7 games last year and only left us praying he would eliminate his mistakes

you should either move to where you can actually watch the games, or get NFL Sunday Ticket in DirecTV. (i am assuming you don't get to see the games, since no one who did could possibly make such an ignorant statement so utterly divorced from reality). for those of us who actually watched the games (and don't live in some distorted fantasy-land), ramsey demonstrated that he is capable of competing at a high level against elite NFL defenses.

his only start in which he threw more than one INT was the final game against dallas. the stats:

VS. PHILLY: 1 INT
VS. PITTSBURGH: 1 INT
VS. NY GIANTS: 0 INT
VS. PHILLY AGAIN: 1 INT
VS. SAN FRANSISCO: 0 INT
VS. DALLAS: 2 INT
VS. MINNESOTA: 1 INT

it is not only okay but almost inevitable to the point of being EXPECTED for an NFL QB to throw 1 INT in a game. an occasional game with 2 INTs is not a big deal.

so once and for all, EVERYONE NEEDS TO SHUT THE HELL UP WITH THE WHOLE "RAMSEY IS A TURNOVER MACHINE" BULLCRAP. if you continue with it, you are only proving that you are incapable of forming an intelligent opinion.

And you need to get the hell over the fact that Ramsey is not our QB! Regardless of what any of us think, Gibbs knows just a wee bit more about football than we do. So all you Ramsey humpers support the team, not the individual

die cowboys die wrote:ramsey is not being "taught a lesson". that is an ignorant statement.

No. Yours is an ignorant statement. The other was an opinion.
Learn the difference.

tcwest10 wrote:

die cowboys die wrote:ramsey is not being "taught a lesson". that is an ignorant statement.

No. Yours is an ignorant statement. The other was an opinion.
Learn the difference.

It must be in the air...

BigPig wrote:Gentleman:

Ramsey is inconsistent. We are going into Dallas, which has a chip on their shoulders, it is in their house, and they are always up for this game! Simply stated, we need the best QB available that gives us the best chance of winning, which is Brunell.

I believe the JG is also trying to teach PR a lesson, and, if he is truly an NFl caliber QB, he will grasp it and come back stronger. If not, then he is not, nor will he ever be, a true NFL starting QB...Period!

I am not happy about the way this was handled, and I don't know what JG saw that caused him to yank him out so fast, but I trust he has his reasons.

I'm just laghing out loud at this one......you been drinking?

tcwest10 wrote:

die cowboys die wrote:ramsey is not being "taught a lesson". that is an ignorant statement.

No. Yours is an ignorant statement. The other was an opinion.
Learn the difference.

opinions can't be ignorant? what??? you might be able to argue that opinions aren't "right or wrong", but they can certainly be informed or ignorant! i'm amazed i even have to clarify this.

sch1977 wrote:Brunell had 8 games in Washington, Ramsey had over 20. Ramsey has proven he cant win in this offense.

ramsey has had over 20 games in washington, but he has only had 7 whole games in this offense. he went 3-4. 2 of the losses were to the NFC champions, and one of them was to a team that went 15-1!!! and he kept us close in all 3 of those games. so i fail to see your point.

ramsey has had over 20 games in washington, but he has only had 7 whole games in this offense. he went 3-4. 2 of the losses were to the NFC champions, and one of them was to a team that went 15-1!!! and he kept us close in all 3 of those games. so i fail to see your point.

Thanks - you beat me to the point I wanted to make. Ramsey got us just as many wins last year in 2 less games than Brunell did. Ramsey also kept us close in the most of the other games (except one I think). And Ramsey was doing it against the toughest part of our schedule. Our points per game increased when Ramsey was in at QB and I'd be willing to bet our yards per game did as well.

1niksder wrote:Each pass Ramsey threw

Every pass by Mark

Ok genius .... What did you see?

uh... was this somehow supposed to go counter to what i was already saying? the videos clearly show exactly what i wrote about extensively in another thread.

ramsey looked very shaky in his first 4 or 5 throws. no argument there. but then he got hot.

* he converted 3/5 3rd downs

* he hit some really sweet passes on routes that were actually longer than 10 yards

*he hit santana moss at over 20 yards in stride, leading him away from the defender (where it couldn't be intercepted), which helped moss get about 30 extra yards after the catch

* he threw a perfect TD pass to cooley (the same play that brunell later waited too long on and muffed)

* and most importantly, he learned from his earlier mistake! after the TD was nullified, he went back to pass, there was nothing open, and he pulled it down and ran! isn't that what we have all been clamoring for him to do? well, he did it! he learned his lesson! and don't tell me "on the next play he gave up a sack"-- that guy hit him practically as soon as he got the ball!

that's what i see, because that is what actually happened. what did you see?? you only saw his first 5 passes. then you closed your eyes. that was your mistake. you probably already had them half-closed after what you saw in the preseason, which seems to have made everyone forget about the fact that in 7 starts last year, ramsey played at a highly competitive level worthy of an NFL starter.

watching it again (which makes for the 5th time i've watched it, since i taped the game and have watched it 3 times), i also want to point out that on all but 3 or 4 passes, ramsey is clearly looking off to one side before he turns his head toward the guy he throws it to. he even added in a sweet pump fake to go along with this on the 50+ yard completion to moss. i see a lot of people here complaining that he "stares down" his receivers. well, sorry. he didn't do that on sunday.

In Ramsey's defense, die cowboys die wrote:
VS. PHILLY: 1 INT
VS. PITTSBURGH: 1 INT
VS. NY GIANTS: 0 INT
VS. PHILLY AGAIN: 1 INT
VS. SAN FRANSISCO: 0 INT
VS. DALLAS: 2 INT
VS. MINNESOTA: 1 INT

it is not only okay but almost inevitable to the point of being EXPECTED for an NFL QB to throw 1 INT in a game. an occasional game with 2 INTs is not a big deal.

I'm going to try to express this as simply as possible...

JOE GIBBS HATES TURNOVERS. PERIOD.

That is the reason Patrick is not in the game.

Joe Gibbs' wants to control the ball and wear down the team during the course of the game. He wants the defense to stay fresh, in order to go back out on the field and get the ball back.

ONE TURNOVER is ONE TOO MANY. End of story. It's not "EXPECTED" for your starting QB to throw a pick. It just isn't. No one drafts a number one saying "he throws picks ocassionally, but he's got a good arm."

Please.

BTW - the only times he didn't throw a pick last year, was when he played against teams that were in shambles. That's a real confidence builder there.



BEAT DALLAS!!!

REDEEMEDSKIN wrote:

In Ramsey's defense, die cowboys die wrote:
VS. PHILLY: 1 INT
VS. PITTSBURGH: 1 INT
VS. NY GIANTS: 0 INT
VS. PHILLY AGAIN: 1 INT
VS. SAN FRANSISCO: 0 INT
VS. DALLAS: 2 INT
VS. MINNESOTA: 1 INT

it is not only okay but almost inevitable to the point of being EXPECTED for an NFL QB to throw 1 INT in a game. an occasional game with 2 INTs is not a big deal.

I'm going to try to express this as simply as possible...

JOE GIBBS HATES TURNOVERS. PERIOD.

That is the reason Patrick is not in the game.

Joe Gibbs' wants to control the ball and wear down the team during the course of the game. He wants the defense to stay fresh, in order to go back out on the field and get the ball back.

ONE TURNOVER is ONE TOO MANY. End of story. It's not "EXPECTED" for your starting QB to throw a pick. It just isn't. No one drafts a number one saying "he throws picks ocassionally, but he's got a good arm."

Please.

BTW - the only times he didn't throw a pick last year, was when he played against teams that were in shambles. That's a real confidence builder there.



BEAT DALLAS!!!

one turnover is too many? you are a nazi! that is absolutely impossibly perfectionist. no QB on earth could play under that expectation.

die cowboys die wrote:
one turnover is too many? you are a nazi! that is absolutely impossibly perfectionist. no QB on earth could play under that expectation.

I think it really depends on the situation. Not all turnovers are created equal. At one extreme there are bonehead momentum-killing turnovers that are preventable, and at the other extreme there are last-play-of-the-half hail-mary jump-ball turnovers that nobody cares about.

If we are talking about turnovers that make you want to throw a brick at the TV, shout obscenities, hold your head in your hands in disbelief, and then cry . . . well, going through that once a week every week is too much!

Snout wrote:

die cowboys die wrote:
one turnover is too many? you are a nazi! that is absolutely impossibly perfectionist. no QB on earth could play under that expectation.

I think it really depends on the situation. Not all turnovers are created equal. At one extreme there are bonehead momentum-killing turnovers that are preventable, and at the other extreme there are last-play-of-the-half hail-mary jump-ball turnovers that nobody cares about.

If we are talking about turnovers that make you want to throw a brick at the TV, shout obscenities, hold your head in your hands in disbelief, and then cry . . . well, going through that once a week every week is too much!

i would actually have to agree with you there, snout. however, i think even if ramsey does that once a game, we would still end up in the positive overall with the good things he can do. i guess this is where i differ from a lot of the people on this board, and gibbs himself presumably.

...but the kid has not shown that he can carry this offense ! Nor could he carry Spurrier's offense !
He wants so badly to go long that he's overlooking all the short stuff. That's fine, if only you make that decision quickly. You wait around, hey...I don't care if the Hogs come out of retirement. You can't keep today's superfast defenses at bay forever, and you are gonna get yours.
He never learned to get rid of the ball if the play is busted. Heck, he's so wrapped up in planning the bomb that he doesn't always get the ball clean from center.
Patrick looks lost most of the time, man. Joe Gibbs may well have added a few years to Patrick's career with this move.

die cowboys die wrote:

tcwest10 wrote:

die cowboys die wrote:ramsey is not being "taught a lesson". that is an ignorant statement.

No. Yours is an ignorant statement. The other was an opinion.
Learn the difference.

opinions can't be ignorant? what??? you might be able to argue that opinions aren't "right or wrong", but they can certainly be informed or ignorant! i'm amazed i even have to clarify this.

You quoted it and still don’t get it TC called your statement ignorant he never said the other poster’s opinion was or wasn’t ignorant only that it was a opinion and not a statement. I’m amazed that you thought you were making something clear and you ‘re in a fog.

die cowboys die wrote:

1niksder wrote:Each pass Ramsey threw

Every pass by Mark

Ok genius .... What did you see?

uh... was this somehow supposed to go counter to what i was already saying? the videos clearly show exactly what i wrote about extensively in another thread.

ramsey looked very shaky in his first 4 or 5 throws. no argument there. but then he got hot.

* he converted 3/5 3rd downs

* he hit some really sweet passes on routes that were actually longer than 10 yards

*he hit santana moss at over 20 yards in stride, leading him away from the defender (where it couldn't be intercepted), which helped moss get about 30 extra yards after the catch

* he threw a perfect TD pass to cooley (the same play that brunell later waited too long on and muffed)

* and most importantly, he learned from his earlier mistake! after the TD was nullified, he went back to pass, there was nothing open, and he pulled it down and ran! isn't that what we have all been clamoring for him to do? well, he did it! he learned his lesson! and don't tell me "on the next play he gave up a sack"-- that guy hit him practically as soon as he got the ball!

that's what i see, because that is what actually happened. what did you see?? you only saw his first 5 passes. then you closed your eyes. that was your mistake. you probably already had them half-closed after what you saw in the preseason, which seems to have made everyone forget about the fact that in 7 starts last year, ramsey played at a highly competitive level worthy of an NFL starter.

3 of 5 third down converted to go with his two almost three turnovers and put up a donut on the scoreboard.

More than 10 yards must be a jab at our starting QB’s left arm. That TD he ey WASN’T perfect… or it would have counted. But you want use what-ifs OK

Brunell threw a 36 yard pass that Pass interference was called on…. So much for him no being able to throw over 15 yards. That was a ignorant statement anyway considering ey had a 25 yard catch that actually counted and he completed 1 for 15 yards out of the shotgun off a bad snap. There was a 35 yard pass to the endzone Moss and one for 22 to Royal.

You mentioned sacks… Brunell wasn’t

die cowboys die wrote:watching it again (which makes for the 5th time i've watched it, since i taped the game and have watched it 3 times), i also want to point out that on all but 3 or 4 passes, ramsey is clearly looking off to one side before he turns his head toward the guy he throws it to. he even added in a sweet pump fake to go along with this on the 50+ yard completion to moss. i see a lot of people here complaining that he "stares down" his receivers. well, sorry. he didn't do that on sunday.

Finally after how long…

die cowboys die wrote:one turnover is too many? you are a nazi! that is absolutely impossibly perfectionist. no QB on earth could play under that expectation.

Ask Antonio Brown … and no name calling

die cowboys die wrote: i would actually have to agree with you there, snout. however, i think even if ramsey does that once a game, we would still end up in the positive overall with the good things he can do. i guess this is where i differ from a lot of the people on this board, and gibbs himself presumably.

Ramsey’s picks always seem to give the offense the short field so most are potentially game changing. He had averaged a turnover a game this pre-season then had three bad series.

1niksder wrote:

die cowboys die wrote:

tcwest10 wrote:

die cowboys die wrote:ramsey is not being "taught a lesson". that is an ignorant statement.

No. Yours is an ignorant statement. The other was an opinion.
Learn the difference.

opinions can't be ignorant? what??? you might be able to argue that opinions aren't "right or wrong", but they can certainly be informed or ignorant! i'm amazed i even have to clarify this.

You quoted it and still don’t get it TC called your statement ignorant he never said the other poster’s opinion was or wasn’t ignorant only that it was a opinion and not a statement. I’m amazed that you thought you were making something clear and you ‘re in a fog.

Sometime you will have to explain to all of us the seemingly subtle difference between a statment and an opinion.

cvillehog wrote:

1niksder wrote:

die cowboys die wrote:

tcwest10 wrote:

die cowboys die wrote:ramsey is not being "taught a lesson". that is an ignorant statement.

No. Yours is an ignorant statement. The other was an opinion.
Learn the difference.

opinions can't be ignorant? what??? you might be able to argue that opinions aren't "right or wrong", but they can certainly be informed or ignorant! i'm amazed i even have to clarify this.

You quoted it and still don’t get it TC called your statement ignorant he never said the other poster’s opinion was or wasn’t ignorant only that it was a opinion and not a statement. I’m amazed that you thought you were making something clear and you ‘re in a fog.

Sometime you will have to explain to all of us the seemingly subtle difference between a statment and an opinion.

Sometimes a opinion is stated sometimes it's not

1niksder wrote:

cvillehog wrote:

1niksder wrote:

die cowboys die wrote:

tcwest10 wrote:

die cowboys die wrote:ramsey is not being "taught a lesson". that is an ignorant statement.

No. Yours is an ignorant statement. The other was an opinion.
Learn the difference.

opinions can't be ignorant? what??? you might be able to argue that opinions aren't "right or wrong", but they can certainly be informed or ignorant! i'm amazed i even have to clarify this.

You quoted it and still don’t get it TC called your statement ignorant he never said the other poster’s opinion was or wasn’t ignorant only that it was a opinion and not a statement. I’m amazed that you thought you were making something clear and you ‘re in a fog.

Sometime you will have to explain to all of us the seemingly subtle difference between a statment and an opinion.

Sometimes a opinion is stated sometimes it's not

You said he made a statement, not an opnion, but what he really did was state his opinion. Opinions can be informed or ill-informed (a.k.a. ignorant).

cvillehog wrote:You said he made a statement, not an opnion, but what he really did was state his opinion. Opinions can be informed or ill-informed (a.k.a. ignorant).

I said TC made a statement about statements and opinions but the conversation turn "ignorant" for no reason

That's my statement and I'm sticking to it.

1niksder wrote:

cvillehog wrote:You said he made a statement, not an opnion, but what he really did was state his opinion. Opinions can be informed or ill-informed (a.k.a. ignorant).

I said TC made a statement about statements and opinions but the conversation turn "ignorant" for no reason

That's my statement and I'm sticking to it.

I was responding to this....

die cowboys die wrote:

tcwest10 wrote:

die cowboys die wrote:ramsey is not being "taught a lesson". that is an ignorant statement.

No. Yours is an ignorant statement. The other was an opinion.
Learn the difference.

opinions can't be ignorant? what??? you might be able to argue that opinions aren't "right or wrong", but they can certainly be informed or ignorant! i'm amazed i even have to clarify this.

My point was why are you talking about what is ignorant or not when if anything it should be what's the difference between a statement and a opinion.

Confusing

Anythings better than more Ramsey / Brunell

1niksder wrote:

cvillehog wrote:You said he made a statement, not an opnion, but what he really did was state his opinion. Opinions can be informed or ill-informed (a.k.a. ignorant).

I said TC made a statement about statements and opinions but the conversation turn "ignorant" for no reason

That's my statement and I'm sticking to it.

it depends on what your definition of the word "is" is.

die cowboys die wrote:it depends on what your definition of the word "is" is.