RAMSEY

gregory smith · Post by **gregory smith** » Sun Mar 05, 2006 9:45 pm

Boy do I feel better now that Mr. Horse has set me straight! But seriousy, this is like beating a dead horse, I will not respond to "Hillary" again.

crazyhorse1 · Post by **crazyhorse1** » Sun Mar 05, 2006 11:19 pm

gregory smith wrote:Boy do I feel better now that Mr. Horse has set me straight! But seriousy, this is like beating a dead horse, I will not respond to "Hillary" again.

Come back when you don't have the urge to say the Ram has three times the number of interceptions he actually has.

crazyhorse1 · Post by **crazyhorse1** » Sun Mar 05, 2006 11:42 pm

Steve Spurrier III wrote:
crazyhorse1 wrote:Why would you not take pleasure and pride in the knowledge that his early career records are similar to those of Elway, Moon, Aikman, and others.

A sense of reality will do that to you.

Just out of curiosity, do you predict a Hall of Fame career for the Tim Rattays, Josh McCowns and Chris Simms of the world? Does any quarterback who is able to surpass John Elway's very unimpressive first four years qualify for Canton?

Nice twist, Steve; but I didn't predict the hall for Pat. 5600 yds in his first 24 games or the equivalent is auspicious, however; perhaps you'd like to go on record as saying it isn't, or that a team ought to bench a young guy who proves early on he can throw for 3000 yd seasons. Of course, after you make such a statement, don't expect any big offers in football. In Brunell's 13 year career, he's reached 3000 yds once. It's likely Ramsey's first 32 games will get him a two season mark close to 7000 yds.
In my opinion, people who follow the Skins have lost sight of what they have in proven production just going to waste. Its a curious madness, my friend. They knew, they forgot, they knew again, they forgot.
Meanwhile, Ramsey has continued on with by far the highest productivity of any Redskin of the last four years in spite of the fact he's played less than half the time. Why? Because he shuffles his feet? or because of some other lunatic cause that can't be found in the stats? You tell me what.

Steve Spurrier III · Post by **Steve Spurrier III** » Mon Mar 06, 2006 12:26 am

crazyhorse1 wrote:perhaps you'd like to go on record as saying it isn't, or that a team ought to bench a young guy who proves early on he can throw for 3000 yd seasons. Of course, after you make such a statement, don't expect any big offers in football.

Sometimes I wonder if you are being sarcastic, and you are just going to keep pimping Ramsey until everyone else gets the joke.

I don't understand why you have this fascination with the 3000 yard season. Any quarterback who starts an entire season is probably going to reach 3000 yards, or pretty close. In fact, David Carr was the only quarterback to start all 16 games in 2005 and not reach 3000 yards. So your saying that Ramsey has the potential to throw for 3000 yards is like saying he has the potential complete 50% of his passes. It's a landmark, just not a very impressive one.

Why don't you take a look at more than just Ramsey's yardage marks? Why not look at his attempts, completions, touchdowns and interceptions along with that yardage? If only there was a way that we could combine all of these numbers together to create one easy-to-use statistic. Maybe someday...

edit: vocabulary

Irn-Bru · Post by **Irn-Bru** » Mon Mar 06, 2006 1:09 am

Why don't you take a look at more than just Ramsey's yardage marks? Why not look at his attempts, completions, touchdowns and interceptions along with that yardage? If only there was a way that we could combine all of these numbers together to create one easy-to-use formula. Maybe someday...

That's crazy talk. It'd take a computer with at least. . . .three times the power of anything we currently have available to calculate those numbers all at once!

1niksder · Post by **1niksder** » Mon Mar 06, 2006 10:13 am

The Hogster wrote:People are playing the waiting game to see if we cut him. If we do then why trade? I think that will backfire though...we will cut people other than Pat to get down and then trade him.

I agree and Oakland is starting to look interesting

Chris Luva Luva · Post by **Chris Luva Luva** » Mon Mar 06, 2006 10:56 am

crazyhorse1 wrote:
Chris Luva Luva wrote:A QB could throw a perfect game... He could have 5 TDs and a 100% completion rate but if he throws a game losing pick what good did it do him? What good has Peytons records done to get him a ring? Ramsey isnt our starter because of stuff that the stats can't show.

Where's Brunell's ring? Remember Seattle?

Id pick a healthy Brunell over a healthy Patrick anyday. Patrick just doesn't have vision and pocket awareness. Id rather have Brunell throw it away than have Patrick throw into triple coverage. Id rather have a Brunell who can feel pressure and avoid it than a Ramsey who stands their like a stone. Brunell can throw the ball just as well as Ramsey but without 1000 interceptions.

Patrick could have been decent if he had a good coach teaching him something worth learning. He's too far gone, its too late, lets cut or losses and let him try to prosper somewhere else.

Mursilis · Post by **Mursilis** » Mon Mar 06, 2006 11:32 am

Chris Luva Luva wrote:Id pick a healthy Brunell over a healthy Patrick anyday.

At least this season, a healthy Brunell proved he still had some football left in him, but Gibbs also seems to prefer an injured Brunell over a healthy Ramsey, which got us the '04 season and a great but wasted effort by the defense.

Patrick could have been decent if he had a good coach teaching him something worth learning. He's too far gone, its too late, lets cut or losses and let him try to prosper somewhere else.

I don't believe that - QB's can improve thier game at any time if they get a shot and are willing to learn. Look at Brees, Gannon, Green, Hasselback, etc. All took time to reach thier current level.

Chris Luva Luva · Post by **Chris Luva Luva** » Mon Mar 06, 2006 11:36 am

Mursilis wrote:I don't believe that - QB's can improve thier game at any time if they get a shot and are willing to learn. Look at Brees, Gannon, Green, Hasselback, etc. All took time to reach thier current level.

What Patrick is lacking cannot be taught. What Patrick lacks is pocket awareness. If I had an oil rig and dragged it towards him he wouldnt feel it. A QB who cannot feel the rush will never be successful. The QB's you mentioned all have that one gift.

That one gift is one that was given to Jason, thats the main reason I place him above Patrick.

I said earlier he has no vision, I believe that could be remedied in time.

mulkey · Post by **mulkey** » Mon Mar 06, 2006 11:46 am

I usually try and stay out of the squabbles but this has gone far enough. "Chris luva luva" what are you saying. I agree to the point that Brunnel is the better seasoned of the two. But to say that you want to get rid of Ramsey is... well dumb if i must say it. He is a team player and you are not going to find a replacement for him that knows the system and can come off the bench and win for you consistently. Ramsey has that ability. What are you going to do, go out and get Kerry Collins and let this guy be our backup. It would take this rocket sceintist at least two years to get to Patricks level of understanding the system.
Look, next year Patrick is a free agent and if there is no cap we can replace him. Now is not the time.This would also give Campbell another year to grow. It's easy if you think about it. I'm not saying it won't happen but the price will have to be right.

Chris Luva Luva · Post by **Chris Luva Luva** » Mon Mar 06, 2006 11:54 am

1st of all I didn't say recently :lol:

, that we needed to get rid of today or this season. Infact I charge you with the task of finding where I said we need to rid oursevles of him immediately.

So you say this to me...

mulkey wrote:But to say that you want to get rid of Ramsey is... well dumb if i must say it.

Then you comeback and say that the price would have to be right?

mulkey wrote:I'm not saying it won't happen but the price will have to be right.

So you call me stupid for something and then come back in the same post and say that its cool if the price is right?

Where did I say we'd give him away for a bag of chips?

I believe you were replying to my last post which. I wholeheartedly believe Brunell is a better QB than Patrick is right now unlike some.

crazyhorse1 · Post by **crazyhorse1** » Mon Mar 06, 2006 12:15 pm

Chris Luva Luva wrote:1st of all I didn't say recently , that we needed to get rid of today or this season. Infact I charge you with the task of finding where I said we need to rid oursevles of him immediately.

So you say this to me...

mulkey wrote:But to say that you want to get rid of Ramsey is... well dumb if i must say it.

Then you comeback and say that the price would have to be right?
mulkey wrote:I'm not saying it won't happen but the price will have to be right.

So you call me stupid for something and then come back in the same post and say that its cool if the price is right?

Where did I say we'd give him away for a bag of chips?

I believe you were replying to my last post which. I wholeheartedly believe Brunell is a better QB than Patrick is right now unlike some.

Chris, I'm probably the biggest fan of Ramsey's on the site and I, too, in many way, believe that Brunell is a better quarterback than Ramsey. But, reality being what it is, why do you not factor in such as Brunell's record of having finished out a season only twice in 13 years, his age in general, his failure to finish the season in shape in four of the last five years, the obvious fact that he weakens as the season progresses, and his tendency to play extremely poorly when tired or hurt. You also seem to ignore Ramsey's outstanding record as a generator of yards for the skins (over 5,600 in the equivalent of 24 games with 34 TDs, 29 ints, only 12 fumbles, and a rating over 75.) I'd like your rational because I respect your opinions.

Chris Luva Luva · Post by **Chris Luva Luva** » Mon Mar 06, 2006 12:24 pm

Trust me I understand your point of view. I agree with some things and not others. Its cool.

mulkey · Post by **mulkey** » Mon Mar 06, 2006 12:31 pm

He's too far gone, its too late, lets cut or losses and let him try to prosper somewhere else.[/quote]

Chris I apologize if you think i was calling you stupid. I will assure you that is not the case. This is what i was refering to, and as far as me saying if the price is right. well we do have a few needs and depending on if we want to get anything in return for him is entirely a coaching decision. If we wait we will not receive anything for him. So, Is getting rid of Ramsey for a player or a pick better for the team. At this point and with the cap numbers were they are i would say No Way...

Chris Luva Luva · Post by **Chris Luva Luva** » Mon Mar 06, 2006 12:43 pm

mulkey wrote:
He's too far gone, its too late, lets cut or losses and let him try to prosper somewhere else.

Chris I apologize if you think i was calling you stupid. I will assure you that is not the case. This is what i was refering to, and as far as me saying if the price is right. well we do have a few needs and depending on if we want to get anything in return for him is entirely a coaching decision. If we wait we will not receive anything for him. So, Is getting rid of Ramsey for a player or a pick better for the team. At this point and with the cap numbers were they are i would say No Way...

I see where you thought I meant to cut him. I could have been a bit more clear, my comment basically meant this.

Ramsey imo doesn't have what it takes to head this offense.
Ramsey deserves to get a shot so in his and our best interest lets trade him if it'll better the team, if not lets wait a year. I was in the train of thought of the team using him as trade bait, so I was saying lets trade him already and let the kid grow.

I've said in numerous threads we need to obtain a 2nd/3rd round pick for the boy. If we can't get that then lets use him up till he leaves. :lol:

mulkey · Post by **mulkey** » Mon Mar 06, 2006 12:47 pm

I concurr with everything you just said.

SkinsJock · Post by **SkinsJock** » Mon Mar 06, 2006 12:55 pm

Chris Luva Luva wrote:.. we need to obtain a 2nd/3rd round pick for the boy. If we can't get that then lets use him up till he leaves.

This is why he will probably stay! Other teams think we are going to cut him anyway and I just do not see Gibbs as wanting to have a concern at this position. If we can get a 2nd/3rd pick thats fine but that is not happening right now IMO.

Gibbs would like to help Ramsey but we are not going to have just Campbell and Brunell. We need someone to replace Ramsey and despite what some think that is no easy deal. I think he's here for a little longer.

Chris Luva Luva · Post by **Chris Luva Luva** » Mon Mar 06, 2006 12:57 pm

I see Patrick sliding down to #3 if he stays. If we're debating whether or not Gibbs will start JC we be pretty assured that he'll AT LEAST be the #2 guy.

Mursilis · Post by **Mursilis** » Mon Mar 06, 2006 1:00 pm

SkinsJock wrote:
Chris Luva Luva wrote:.. we need to obtain a 2nd/3rd round pick for the boy. If we can't get that then lets use him up till he leaves.

This is why he will probably stay! Other teams think we are going to cut him anyway and I just do not see Gibbs as wanting to have a concern at this position. If we can get a 2nd/3rd pick thats fine but that is not happening right now IMO.

Gibbs would like to help Ramsey but we are not going to have just Campbell and Brunell. We need someone to replace Ramsey and despite what some think that is no easy deal. I think he's here for a little longer.

If no CBA extension is reached, it'd be pointless to keep a guy around for $1.7 million (I think that's his cap number) that isn't a starter and the coach doesn't even want in the game. How smart is it to have three QB's making starter-money while we've still got holes in other areas (2nd WR, for example)? This isn't the JKC days, when we could stockpile talent without consequences.

cvillehog · Post by **cvillehog** » Mon Mar 06, 2006 1:19 pm

Mursilis wrote:
SkinsJock wrote:
Chris Luva Luva wrote:.. we need to obtain a 2nd/3rd round pick for the boy. If we can't get that then lets use him up till he leaves.

This is why he will probably stay! Other teams think we are going to cut him anyway and I just do not see Gibbs as wanting to have a concern at this position. If we can get a 2nd/3rd pick thats fine but that is not happening right now IMO.

Gibbs would like to help Ramsey but we are not going to have just Campbell and Brunell. We need someone to replace Ramsey and despite what some think that is no easy deal. I think he's here for a little longer.

If no CBA extension is reached, it'd be pointless to keep a guy around for $1.7 million (I think that's his cap number) that isn't a starter and the coach doesn't even want in the game. How smart is it to have three QB's making starter-money while we've still got holes in other areas (2nd WR, for example)? This isn't the JKC days, when we could stockpile talent without consequences.

First of all, I don't think that is a ton to pay a back-up quarterback. Secondly, isn't the cap hit the same whether we keep him or not (at least until June 1, when the hit can be spread over two years)?

crazyhorse1 · Post by **crazyhorse1** » Mon Mar 06, 2006 7:11 pm

Chris Luva Luva wrote:
mulkey wrote:
He's too far gone, its too late, lets cut or losses and let him try to prosper somewhere else.

Chris I apologize if you think i was calling you stupid. I will assure you that is not the case. This is what i was refering to, and as far as me saying if the price is right. well we do have a few needs and depending on if we want to get anything in return for him is entirely a coaching decision. If we wait we will not receive anything for him. So, Is getting rid of Ramsey for a player or a pick better for the team. At this point and with the cap numbers were they are i would say No Way...

I see where you thought I meant to cut him. I could have been a bit more clear, my comment basically meant this.

Ramsey imo doesn't have what it takes to head this offense.
Ramsey deserves to get a shot so in his and our best interest lets trade him if it'll better the team, if not lets wait a year. I was in the train of thought of the team using him as trade bait, so I was saying lets trade him already and let the kid grow.

I've said in numerous threads we need to obtain a 2nd/3rd round pick for the boy. If we can't get that then lets use him up till he leaves.

I concur. I don't want to be taken to the cleaners by someone giving us a 4th rounder or worse for Ramsey. Frankly, the deal that makes the most sense to me is the one being bandied about concerning Abraham, though I hear the Jets are looking at someone else now.

SkinsJock · Post by **SkinsJock** » Tue Mar 07, 2006 9:22 pm

The Hogster wrote:Somebody will deal for Ramsey, they are just waiting it out since we may have to purge him anyway, but if not, look for the callers to fork over something for him.

Better to get him now than when he becomes a FA in the uncapped year.

What a DUFUS...demanding a trade now instead of playing next year and hitting FA in what might be an uncapped year.

I'm sorry - but I thought you might let us know where the link was to Ramsey "demanding a trade"? Did I miss this somewhere?

1niksder · Post by **1niksder** » Tue Mar 07, 2006 9:58 pm

cvillehog wrote:First of all, I don't think that is a ton to pay a back-up quarterback. Secondly, isn't the cap hit the same whether we keep him or not (at least until June 1, when the hit can be spread over two years)?

Ramsey's cap hit is $2.9M, $1.2M is salary so if he isn't here we save $1.7M

Oakland keeps coming up in some circles

crazyhorse1 · Post by **crazyhorse1** » Tue Mar 07, 2006 11:45 pm

Ramsey was rather pointedly not released today. What do you make of Gibbs hinting he might stay with skins. Did anyone hear the interview or read the statement?

tcwest10 · Post by **tcwest10** » Tue Mar 07, 2006 11:50 pm

I wonder if Joe thought there was gonna be something good coming from the Jets...and then Pennington re-signed.