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

The Washington Post has gone to great lengths to slam Spurrier for failing to protect the quarterback. How many times have we read about how Ramsey (and his confidence) got battered thanks to Spurrier's incompentence? How many times have we heard that Gibbs is great because he makes protecting the quarterback a top priority?

I don't doubt for a minute that Spurrier was incompetent, but I think the criticism against Spurrier is grossly exaggerated on this particular point. Let's look at the numbers:

According to the stats listed on Yahoo, under Spurrier (2002-2003) Ramsey was sacked 48 times and had 564 pass attempts, a ratio of .085. Under Gibbs (2004-2005) Ramsey was sacked 25 times and had 283 pass attempts, a ratio of .088. That's right: Ramsey is getting sacked more often under the Gibbs system, which supposedly puts a higher priority on the protecting the QB. Hmmm. If Gibbs is doing such a great job with the protection schemes, why is Ramsey getting sacked so often? Maybe because he is a glutton for punishment and is not getting rid of the ball like he has been told to do?

By way of comparison, Brunell was sacked 16 times under Gibbs in 251 pass attempts, a ratio of .064.

The more time Ramsey gets sacked, the more often he is going to fumble the football.

Its my opinion that Patrick lacks some of the skills that should be natural to a QB. His pocket prescence is virtually non existant. Im not blaming him for getting hurt but he's been known to take too many hits.

Chris Luva Luva wrote:Its my opinion that Patrick lacks some of the skills that should be natural to a QB. His pocket prescence is virtually non existant. Im not blaming him for getting hurt but he's been known to take too many hits.

Good Point! He just doesn't have the feel for pressure, thus, he will not naturally move to evade pressure. As such, SACK-A-MUNDO!

Snout wrote:The more time Ramsey gets sacked, the more often he is going to fumble the football.

* in his last 16 full games, ramsey has fumbled 10 times.

* in his last 16 full games, donovan mcnabb has fumbled 10 times.

* in his last 16 full games, daunte culpepper has fumbled 11 times.

* in his last 16 full games, michael vick has fumbled 18 times

* in his last full game, chad pennington fumbled 6 times


your argument is over.

die cowboys die wrote:

Snout wrote:The more time Ramsey gets sacked, the more often he is going to fumble the football.

* in his last 16 full games, ramsey has fumbled 10 times.
* in his last 16 full games, donovan mcnabb has fumbled 10 times.
* in his last 16 full games, daunte culpepper has fumbled 11 times.
* in his last 16 full games, michael vick has fumbled 18 times
* in his last full game, chad pennington fumbled 6 times
your argument is over.

Which argument are you referring to? The main point that I intended to make is that Ramsey has a tendency to take a lot of sacks regardless of the protection schemes, and that Spurrier has been wrongly slammed by the WP. And I made what I thought was an obvious observation tha the more a QB gets hit or sacked, the more likely he is going to fumble.

Never did I say that Ramsey fumbles the ball more than Michael Vick, Donovan McNabb, Daunte Culpepper or Chad Pennington. I'm not sure I understand why that is even relevant to the discussion. What is relevant is that Ramsey turns the ball over more than the coaching staff is willing to tolerate, and that he still has a habit to hold the ball too long -- which increases the likelihood of turnovers.

Is it acceptable for a QB to to turn the ball over 2-3 times every game through fumbles and/or interceptions? I guess as a coach I would have to consider a lot of factors, such as how many big plays my quarterback makes, whether he is the undiputed leader who has the confidence of the team, and how many of those turnovers were preventable and resulted from bad decisions. As we all know, Coach Gibbs put a lot of emphasis on the last factor, and rightfully so in my opinion.

He also gets sacked a lot cuz opposing defenses are JERKS

I have said this before, Ramsey is a coach athlete not a fulid creative athlete. He has the ability to be successful as long as he's in the correct system and has the correct players around him.

I could play QB in the NFL with that criteria...

Wysocki wrote:I could play QB in the NFL with that criteria...

Yes but in your case the correct system is the PS2 and the correct players are the Madden All Stars

Ramsey needs to work on his pocket presence.

http://www.the-hogs.net/forum/viewtopic. ... 9&start=16

Who decided the biggest loser contest is over? I demand satisfaction!

Fios wrote:

Wysocki wrote:I could play QB in the NFL with that criteria...

Yes but in your case the correct system is the PS2 and the correct players are the Madden All Stars

But both of my thumbs are broken so PS2 is out (I've always got an excuse)...

Fios wrote:Who decided the biggest loser contest is over? I demand satisfaction!

I did. I was the biggest loser of the biggest loser contest, ergo I can't even compete in a loser contest.

JansenFan wrote:

Fios wrote:Who decided the biggest loser contest is over? I demand satisfaction!

I did. I was the biggest loser of the biggest loser contest, ergo I can't even compete in a loser contest.

Actually, wouldn't the fact that you received no votes in a subjective poll centering on being a loser suggest that you are, in fact, not a loser? The voters decided, collectively, that you are a winner and therefore were not a logical choice

Snout wrote:The Washington Post has gone to great lengths to slam Spurrier for failing to protect the quarterback. How many times have we read about how Ramsey (and his confidence) got battered thanks to Spurrier's incompentence? How many times have we heard that Gibbs is great because he makes protecting the quarterback a top priority?

I don't doubt for a minute that Spurrier was incompetent, but I think the criticism against Spurrier is grossly exaggerated on this particular point. Let's look at the numbers:

According to the stats listed on Yahoo, under Spurrier (2002-2003) Ramsey was sacked 48 times and had 564 pass attempts, a ratio of .085. Under Gibbs (2004-2005) Ramsey was sacked 25 times and had 283 pass attempts, a ratio of .088. That's right: Ramsey is getting sacked more often under the Gibbs system, which supposedly puts a higher priority on the protecting the QB. Hmmm. If Gibbs is doing such a great job with the protection schemes, why is Ramsey getting sacked so often? Maybe because he is a glutton for punishment and is not getting rid of the ball like he has been told to do?

By way of comparison, Brunell was sacked 16 times under Gibbs in 251 pass attempts, a ratio of .064.

The more time Ramsey gets sacked, the more often he is going to fumble the football.

Nice post, Snout. I like the analyis you made.

Snout wrote:

die cowboys die wrote:

Snout wrote:The more time Ramsey gets sacked, the more often he is going to fumble the football.

* in his last 16 full games, ramsey has fumbled 10 times.
* in his last 16 full games, donovan mcnabb has fumbled 10 times.
* in his last 16 full games, daunte culpepper has fumbled 11 times.
* in his last 16 full games, michael vick has fumbled 18 times
* in his last full game, chad pennington fumbled 6 times
your argument is over.

Which argument are you referring to? The main point that I intended to make is that Ramsey has a tendency to take a lot of sacks regardless of the protection schemes, and that Spurrier has been wrongly slammed by the WP. And I made what I thought was an obvious observation tha the more a QB gets hit or sacked, the more likely he is going to fumble.

Never did I say that Ramsey fumbles the ball more than Michael Vick, Donovan McNabb, Daunte Culpepper or Chad Pennington. I'm not sure I understand why that is even relevant to the discussion. What is relevant is that Ramsey turns the ball over more than the coaching staff is willing to tolerate, and that he still has a habit to hold the ball too long -- which increases the likelihood of turnovers.

Is it acceptable for a QB to to turn the ball over 2-3 times every game through fumbles and/or interceptions? I guess as a coach I would have to consider a lot of factors, such as how many big plays my quarterback makes, whether he is the undiputed leader who has the confidence of the team, and how many of those turnovers were preventable and resulted from bad decisions. As we all know, Coach Gibbs put a lot of emphasis on the last factor, and rightfully so in my opinion.

uh, i'm having a hard time understanding your questions here. my points are obvious. you say that because ramsey has such poor pocket presence, he takes too many sacks, and therefore fumbles too much. i provided you with a list of several QBs who supposedly have great "pocket presence", ability to sense the rush and move around and buy time in the pocket, scramble, etc. yet all 3 of them have at least as many fumbles (if not a lot more) than ramsey. i also tossed in pennington's 6 fumble game to show that everyone has a "bad day at the office" sometimes.

ramsey does take a lot of sacks, no argument there. but, he does not fumble an inordinate number of times.

die cowboys die wrote:

Snout wrote:The more time Ramsey gets sacked, the more often he is going to fumble the football.

* in his last 16 full games, ramsey has fumbled 10 times.

* in his last 16 full games, donovan mcnabb has fumbled 10 times.

* in his last 16 full games, daunte culpepper has fumbled 11 times.

* in his last 16 full games, michael vick has fumbled 18 times

* in his last full game, chad pennington fumbled 6 times


your argument is over.

All those guys are running QBs. Of course they're going to fumble more! Show me how many times Manning and Tom Brady fumble as they are much more similar to the type of QB that Ramsey is.

Also, of all returning starting QBs from last year Ramsey had the 2nd worst int rate. He makes way too many turnovers.

Snout wrote:The Washington Post has gone to great lengths to slam Spurrier for failing to protect the quarterback. How many times have we read about how Ramsey (and his confidence) got battered thanks to Spurrier's incompentence? How many times have we heard that Gibbs is great because he makes protecting the quarterback a top priority?

I don't doubt for a minute that Spurrier was incompetent, but I think the criticism against Spurrier is grossly exaggerated on this particular point. Let's look at the numbers:

According to the stats listed on Yahoo, under Spurrier (2002-2003) Ramsey was sacked 48 times and had 564 pass attempts, a ratio of .085. Under Gibbs (2004-2005) Ramsey was sacked 25 times and had 283 pass attempts, a ratio of .088. That's right: Ramsey is getting sacked more often under the Gibbs system, which supposedly puts a higher priority on the protecting the QB. Hmmm. If Gibbs is doing such a great job with the protection schemes, why is Ramsey getting sacked so often? Maybe because he is a glutton for punishment and is not getting rid of the ball like he has been told to do?

By way of comparison, Brunell was sacked 16 times under Gibbs in 251 pass attempts, a ratio of .064.

The more time Ramsey gets sacked, the more often he is going to fumble the football.

Skins opponents rarely blitz Brunell because they don't fear his arm. The best way to defend against him is to lay back, concede the numerous dinks, and play zone against the deeper receivers. He doesn't have the arm strength to throw long or thread the seams. He tries to de-stabilize the zone by his movement, but can no longer throw well when moving. He's still got some zip left when he plants, but not enough to scare anyone or inspire taking chances with blitzes.
Raw stats such as you are using rarely have any hard truths in them. They are useful only as very crude indicators. Most sacks are caused by reasons other than holding the ball too long.

crazyhorse1 wrote:Most sacks are caused by reasons other than holding the ball too long.

I have never heard of a QB getting sacked after he has thrown the ball.

Snout wrote:The Washington Post has gone to great lengths to slam Spurrier for failing to protect the quarterback. How many times have we read about how Ramsey (and his confidence) got battered thanks to Spurrier's incompentence? How many times have we heard that Gibbs is great because he makes protecting the quarterback a top priority?

I don't doubt for a minute that Spurrier was incompetent, but I think the criticism against Spurrier is grossly exaggerated on this particular point. Let's look at the numbers:

According to the stats listed on Yahoo, under Spurrier (2002-2003) Ramsey was sacked 48 times and had 564 pass attempts, a ratio of .085. Under Gibbs (2004-2005) Ramsey was sacked 25 times and had 283 pass attempts, a ratio of .088. That's right: Ramsey is getting sacked more often under the Gibbs system, which supposedly puts a higher priority on the protecting the QB. Hmmm. If Gibbs is doing such a great job with the protection schemes, why is Ramsey getting sacked so often? Maybe because he is a glutton for punishment and is not getting rid of the ball like he has been told to do?

By way of comparison, Brunell was sacked 16 times under Gibbs in 251 pass attempts, a ratio of .064.

The more time Ramsey gets sacked, the more often he is going to fumble the football.

I haven't posted at all since Gibbs made his decision, because I didn't have anything good to say, and I'm not going to pretend that I'm going to stop watching football and rooting for the skins because of this -- just because I don't understand his decision. I'm posting now because, even though I happen to think Gibbs's decision is actually related to Ramsey's ability to read pre-snap blitzes and coverages, I have problems with your methodolgy and reasoning here.

First of all, you are using the wrong numbers, as I see it. Assuming your numbers for sacks and attempted passes are accurate, you actually need to add the two together to get the totall attempted passes because sacks aren't counted in the official number of attempts.

That gives us 8.1% for Ramsey and 5.99% for Brunell.

That brings me to my second problem, and that is the small difference between those two numbers. Less than 2.2% is not a statistically significant variation, especially for such a relatively small sample size.

In addition, Ramsey faced Philly twice and Pittsburgh once late in the regular season when both had top-five defenses and were well on their way to championship games.

Also, if your numbers include preseaon action, they are further diluted by the fact that Brunell faced 2nd, 3rd, and 4th string defenses, while Ramsey again faced some of the best defenses in the league.

In conclusion, while ability to read defenses surely played a role in Gibbs's decision to bench Ramsey, and while you are probably right that the Washington Post puts too much blame onto Spurrier for the failings of the team during his tenure (if that wasn't obvious by us going 6-10 last year under Gibbs, then I don't know what is!), I don't think the points you bring up in your post support that conclusion in a meaningful way.

I also don't see any credible evidence that Ramsey is a "sack machine" or a "interception machine" or anything else but a still-inexperienced 4th-year quarterback who has a great arm and a lot to learn.

crazyhorse1 wrote:

Snout wrote:The Washington Post has gone to great lengths to slam Spurrier for failing to protect the quarterback. How many times have we read about how Ramsey (and his confidence) got battered thanks to Spurrier's incompentence? How many times have we heard that Gibbs is great because he makes protecting the quarterback a top priority?

I don't doubt for a minute that Spurrier was incompetent, but I think the criticism against Spurrier is grossly exaggerated on this particular point. Let's look at the numbers:

According to the stats listed on Yahoo, under Spurrier (2002-2003) Ramsey was sacked 48 times and had 564 pass attempts, a ratio of .085. Under Gibbs (2004-2005) Ramsey was sacked 25 times and had 283 pass attempts, a ratio of .088. That's right: Ramsey is getting sacked more often under the Gibbs system, which supposedly puts a higher priority on the protecting the QB. Hmmm. If Gibbs is doing such a great job with the protection schemes, why is Ramsey getting sacked so often? Maybe because he is a glutton for punishment and is not getting rid of the ball like he has been told to do?

By way of comparison, Brunell was sacked 16 times under Gibbs in 251 pass attempts, a ratio of .064.

The more time Ramsey gets sacked, the more often he is going to fumble the football.

Skins opponents rarely blitz Brunell because they don't fear his arm. The best way to defend against him is to lay back, concede the numerous dinks, and play zone against the deeper receivers. He doesn't have the arm strength to throw long or thread the seams. He tries to de-stabilize the zone by his movement, but can no longer throw well when moving. He's still got some zip left when he plants, but not enough to scare anyone or inspire taking chances with blitzes.
Raw stats such as you are using rarely have any hard truths in them. They are useful only as very crude indicators. Most sacks are caused by reasons other than holding the ball too long.

That's bs - they stacked the box with Ramsey and Brunnell.

hkHog wrote:

crazyhorse1 wrote:Most sacks are caused by reasons other than holding the ball too long.

I have never heard of a QB getting sacked after he has thrown the ball.

To address the main question on this thread, I think Ramsey gets sacked so much because he takes way to long to pick out his receivers. If his first read is'nt there, he panics and loses control of himself and where the available receivers are...

cvillehog wrote:

Snout wrote:The Washington Post has gone to great lengths to slam Spurrier for failing to protect the quarterback. How many times have we read about how Ramsey (and his confidence) got battered thanks to Spurrier's incompentence? How many times have we heard that Gibbs is great because he makes protecting the quarterback a top priority?

I don't doubt for a minute that Spurrier was incompetent, but I think the criticism against Spurrier is grossly exaggerated on this particular point. Let's look at the numbers:

According to the stats listed on Yahoo, under Spurrier (2002-2003) Ramsey was sacked 48 times and had 564 pass attempts, a ratio of .085. Under Gibbs (2004-2005) Ramsey was sacked 25 times and had 283 pass attempts, a ratio of .088. That's right: Ramsey is getting sacked more often under the Gibbs system, which supposedly puts a higher priority on the protecting the QB. Hmmm. If Gibbs is doing such a great job with the protection schemes, why is Ramsey getting sacked so often? Maybe because he is a glutton for punishment and is not getting rid of the ball like he has been told to do?

By way of comparison, Brunell was sacked 16 times under Gibbs in 251 pass attempts, a ratio of .064.

The more time Ramsey gets sacked, the more often he is going to fumble the football.

I haven't posted at all since Gibbs made his decision, because I didn't have anything good to say, and I'm not going to pretend that I'm going to stop watching football and rooting for the skins because of this -- just because I don't understand his decision. I'm posting now because, even though I happen to think Gibbs's decision is actually related to Ramsey's ability to read pre-snap blitzes and coverages, I have problems with your methodolgy and reasoning here.

First of all, you are using the wrong numbers, as I see it. Assuming your numbers for sacks and attempted passes are accurate, you actually need to add the two together to get the totall attempted passes because sacks aren't counted in the official number of attempts.

That gives us 8.1% for Ramsey and 5.99% for Brunell.

That brings me to my second problem, and that is the small difference between those two numbers. Less than 2.2% is not a statistically significant variation, especially for such a relatively small sample size.

In addition, Ramsey faced Philly twice and Pittsburgh once late in the regular season when both had top-five defenses and were well on their way to championship games.

Also, if your numbers include preseaon action, they are further diluted by the fact that Brunell faced 2nd, 3rd, and 4th string defenses, while Ramsey again faced some of the best defenses in the league.

In conclusion, while ability to read defenses surely played a role in Gibbs's decision to bench Ramsey, and while you are probably right that the Washington Post puts too much blame onto Spurrier for the failings of the team during his tenure (if that wasn't obvious by us going 6-10 last year under Gibbs, then I don't know what is!), I don't think the points you bring up in your post support that conclusion in a meaningful way.

I also don't see any credible evidence that Ramsey is a "sack machine" or a "interception machine" or anything else but a still-inexperienced 4th-year quarterback who has a great arm and a lot to learn.

You must have been in love with Jeff George too. Let me guess, it wasn't his fault he sucked, he just never had the right system to hold his hand.

KPrince1975 wrote:You must have been in love with Jeff George too. Let me guess, it wasn't his fault he sucked, he just never had the right system to hold his hand.

What the hell are you even talking about?

What is the point of anyone taking the time to write a thought-out and reasoned post when all they get is petty snipes from unsavory people?