Why Brunell?

THE RAM · Post by **THE RAM** » Mon Oct 18, 2004 12:07 pm

I just can´t understand this, we have an excelent defense, tops of the NFL but we just don´t have an offense, last year at this time of the year we were 3-3 because we had a very poor defense but Ramsey was playing great, the skins were averaging around 23 points per game with no running game and a poor o.line.
I know Gibbs system is differnt than Spurriers but Ramsey needs and must see action, I can bet my life that we´ll average more than 14 pts a game with Ramsey at QB, I just hope Gibbs analysis this and considers putting Ramsey on, Brunell hasn´t passed more than 100 yards in the last two games and the defense of Chicago is a very bad one 8 for 22 36% of his passes were completed, he doesn´t has any arm strength, with this offense we aren´t going anywhere, specially that we receive Green Bay who just scored 38 points and Favre is getting hot.

USAFSkinFan · Post by **USAFSkinFan** » Mon Oct 18, 2004 1:59 pm

I agree... every game has been the same on offense... they give up as many points as they score... something has to change, but I think Gibbs is so afraid of messing with Brunell's confidence, that he won't pull him until we're out of it, and it's time to decide who's the QB of the future (this just in... it's not Brunell... it may not be Ramsey either with his lack of mobility and propensity to hang on to the ball too long, but we need to find out)

REDEEMEDSKIN · Post by **REDEEMEDSKIN** » Mon Oct 18, 2004 3:39 pm

USAFSkinFan wrote:...I think Gibbs is so afraid of messing with Brunell's confidence, that he won't pull him until we're out of it...

This may be the case, but, as I heard this morning on the radio, Joe may be aiding Ramsey's development by showing confidence in his starter. By leaving Brunell in, Joe's sending the mesaage to Ramsey that, once he gets the nod as the starter (other than to replace an injured starter), he's in for the long run, and he'll have the unwavering support of his coach.

To a Skins fan who's witnessed the QB carousel in the city since Joe ended his first stint, this may seem like a revolutionary concept, maybe even an offensive one, but, in the long run, our "future" (Ramsey) will be the better QB for it.

Hill66 · Post by **Hill66** » Mon Oct 18, 2004 3:52 pm

THE RAM wrote:..he doesn´t has any arm strength..

You are telling me...
He had Coles wide open on a fly, and severly under threw him...and yes the pass was also out of bounds. There was no rush getting to him, he just is past his prime.
Ramsey would've just easily drop a nice ball in there for a TD. Hell even Hasselbeck could've made that throw.

redskincity · Post by **redskincity** » Mon Oct 18, 2004 3:53 pm

I am waiting for receivers to come up short on their routes, cause they just know that the ball will not connect. So why try to run hard and risk pulling their hamstrings.?.

Chris Luva Luva · Post by **Chris Luva Luva** » Mon Oct 18, 2004 4:54 pm

This may be the case, but, as I heard this morning on the radio, Joe may be aiding Ramsey's development by showing confidence in his starter.

Interesting, as bad as I want Ramsey in right now, I can't blame Gibbs for doing this or even get upset about it.

Brandon777 · Post by **Brandon777** » Mon Oct 18, 2004 5:43 pm

Why Brunell?

Because Ramsey sucks.

air_hog · Post by **air_hog** » Mon Oct 18, 2004 6:11 pm

i dont get why we gave Brunell a Peyton Manning salary? He was okay, not great and now it seems he is at his worst. He's old and doesn't have an arm anymore. And we can't trade him because of his stupid salary.

Redskin in Canada · Post by **Redskin in Canada** » Mon Oct 18, 2004 8:00 pm

Chris Luva Luva wrote: Interesting, as bad as I want Ramsey in right now, I can't blame Gibbs for doing this or even get upset about it.

Agree 100%
Not yet.

redzone · Post by **redzone** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 8:09 pm

Because Ramsey sucks.

If you think Ramsey sucks, what word is left to describe the great (I can't find the wide open receiver in the red zone) Markster?

FastMedic · Post by **FastMedic** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 8:14 pm

redzone wrote:If you think Ramsey sucks, what word is left to describe the great (I can't find the wide open receiver in the red zone) Markster?

If you want to go back to 4 interceptions a game, then feel free to put ramsey back into the QB position.

redzone · Post by **redzone** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 8:25 pm

FastMedic wrote:
redzone wrote:If you think Ramsey sucks, what word is left to describe the great (I can't find the wide open receiver in the red zone) Markster?

If you want to go back to 4 interceptions a game, then feel free to put ramsey back into the QB position.

Are you referring to the famous Steve, let's protect our quarterback, Superior era, what's your point?

redskins-28 · Post by **redskins-28** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 7:47 am

FastMedic wrote:
redzone wrote:If you think Ramsey sucks, what word is left to describe the great (I can't find the wide open receiver in the red zone) Markster?

If you want to go back to 4 interceptions a game, then feel free to put ramsey back into the QB position.

Where are you getting these stats on Ramsey? He only had 9 ints ALL last season. So what if he had 2 against the Giants, that's one game and he trying hard to make the plays for us to win. At least he hasn't given up 6 points every single game this year as Brunell has, so far Brunell has either thrown an int or fumbled in every game that resulted in the opponents scoring a td.

trey53 · Post by **trey53** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 10:24 am

Where are you getting these stats on Ramsey? He only had 9 ints ALL last season. So what if he had 2 against the Giants, that's one game and he trying hard to make the plays for us to win. At least he hasn't given up 6 points every single game this year as Brunell has, so far Brunell has either thrown an int or fumbled in every game that resulted in the opponents scoring a td.

Ramsey actually had 3 interceptions vs the gints. Brunell has only thrown 3 ints ints this year. And let's not forget who LOST the job with some stellar preseason play. Brunell has a 69.8 QB rating this year as opposed to Ramsey's 55.6. Brunell's play has not resulted in a TD EVERY game...I think he escaped that fate vs little d and maybe the Browns. :wink:

Anyway, don't get me wrong, I don't think that Brunell has been playing well...far from it. I just trust Gibbs knows what he is doing and will start the best person each week. Brunell is bad but I have seen nothing from Ramsey this season that indicates he will be any better. Plus we need to be careful what we wish for or we might just get it...

Deadskins · Post by **Deadskins** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 3:28 pm

trey53 wrote:
Where are you getting these stats on Ramsey? He only had 9 ints ALL last season. So what if he had 2 against the Giants, that's one game and he trying hard to make the plays for us to win. At least he hasn't given up 6 points every single game this year as Brunell has, so far Brunell has either thrown an int or fumbled in every game that resulted in the opponents scoring a td.

Ramsey actually had 3 interceptions vs the gints. Brunell has only thrown 3 ints ints this year. And let's not forget who LOST the job with some stellar preseason play. Brunell has a 69.8 QB rating this year as opposed to Ramsey's 55.6. Brunell's play has not resulted in a TD EVERY game...I think he escaped that fate vs little d and maybe the Browns.
Anyway, don't get me wrong, I don't think that Brunell has been playing well...far from it. I just trust Gibbs knows what he is doing and will start the best person each week. Brunell is bad but I have seen nothing from Ramsey this season that indicates he will be any better. Plus we need to be careful what we wish for or we might just get it...

First of all, Ramsey has only played in that 1 game. Yes he had 3 INTs (though 1 was due to a non-call when Coles was held making his break for the ball, and another is not made if Gardner holds the ball or Dockery doesn't jump offsides at the 2 yard line), but Brunell also had an INT in that game. The only way Patrick can work out the problems he has (holds the ball too long, doesn't throw it away, needs to read defenses better) is game experience. You don't get that sitting on the sideline watching. I'm willing to put up with mistakes from Ramsey while he is learning. I'm not willing to put up with mistakes by Brunell, who has been in the league long enough to know better. Brunell has consistently thrown behind receivers, missed wide open receivers, failed to look off defenders (he never takes his eyes off his target receiver), and shown that he no longer has the arm strength to stretch the field.

redzone · Post by **redzone** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 7:37 pm

redskins-28 wrote:
FastMedic wrote:
redzone wrote:If you think Ramsey sucks, what word is left to describe the great (I can't find the wide open receiver in the red zone) Markster?

If you want to go back to 4 interceptions a game, then feel free to put ramsey back into the QB position.

Where are you getting these stats on Ramsey? He only had 9 ints ALL last season. So what if he had 2 against the Giants, that's one game and he trying hard to make the plays for us to win. At least he hasn't given up 6 points every single game this year as Brunell has, so far Brunell has either thrown an int or fumbled in every game that resulted in the opponents scoring a td.

That's right. Brunell's turnovers account for much more than the points scored against us. It takes potential points off the board, keeps our defence on the field longer and picks away at confidence in ourselves. These mental mistakes should not be happening to a vet like him.

redskincity · Post by **redskincity** » Thu Oct 21, 2004 7:17 am

Brunells turnovers work out just fine. It keeps our Defense off the field and keeps our offense on the field. It also affords the opponent the oppurtunity to win the game. :mrgreen:

Chris Luva Luva · Post by **Chris Luva Luva** » Thu Oct 21, 2004 4:43 pm

If you want to go back to 4 interceptions a game, then feel free to put ramsey back into the QB position.

Those shouldn’t be held against him too much for the simple fact that he was in a 100% passing situation.

If he was put into a game from the start where the balance would be 60% run, 40% pass he’d excel!!!!

Some of you need to get off of Brunells jock, his wife wouldn’t appreciate it too much.

1niksder · Post by **1niksder** » Thu Oct 21, 2004 6:34 pm

Chris Luva Luva wrote:
If you want to go back to 4 interceptions a game, then feel free to put ramsey back into the QB position.

Those shouldn’t be held against him too much for the simple fact that he was in a 100% passing situation.

If he was put into a game from the start where the balance would be 60% run, 40% pass he’d excel!!!!

Some of you need to get off of Brunells jock, his wife wouldn’t appreciate it too much.

A week of practice with the starting unit wouldn't hurt either

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

Why Brunell?

Why Brunell?

Re: Why Brunell?