Where are the apologies?

[sportscurmudgeon]

I just got home from a trip - - had to watch the game in a hotel bar last night. I fully expected to see at least three or four threads in here full of apologies from people who had accused Joe Gibbs of being a lying weasel and a backstabbing ne'er-do-well, but I can't seem to find them. OK, you may still not like the way he handled the situation, but he got it right.

Maybe it's my browser that can't find the threads here that would try to explain that Patrick Ramsey would not have made that 25 yard scramble in the 4th quarter because had he started then, he'd still be running to make it to the full 25 yards.

So, let me say it explicitly:


Joe Gibbs made a QB decision and it was the CORRECT one.

Joe Gibbs is not infallible but he appears to know just a tad more about QBs than the "Patrick Ramsey Fan Cub" officers.


Now let me make a prediction that will make me no friends among the Patrick Ramsey Fan Club officers and members:


Unless Brunell is incapable of playing, Patrick Ramsey will not take another meaningful snap all of this year.

Next year, Ramsey's status with the team will be determined exclusively by two things:


1. The economics of his contract.

2. The development of Jason Campbell. If Campbell is ready to be the #2 QB next year, Ramsey's contract is a bit expensive for a #3 QB


Absent injury to Mark Brunell, Patrick Ramsey's next start in a meaningful regular season NFL game will be in a different uniform.

[gortiz]

Way to come out blasting SCurm ... :headbange

[Daseal]

I'm sorry SC -- I can't excuse 3 1/4 of just horrible QBing with 3/4 of one. I feel Ramsey would have done better throughout the game and given us a win that wouldn't have stopped my heart three times! Brunell still doesnt have me sold till he can perform anywhere near the level of the 4th quarter more than once. We have 3 unproven QBs as far as Im concerned.

[Gmanc711]

Originally Posted by Daseal

I'm sorry SC -- I can't excuse 3 1/4 of just horrible QBing with 3/4 of one. I feel Ramsey would have done better throughout the game and given us a win that wouldn't have stopped my heart three times! Brunell still doesnt have me sold till he can perform anywhere near the level of the 4th quarter more than once. We have 3 unproven QBs as far as Im concerned.

Agreed. I'll defintely give Gibbs more props as a coach though, as far as how hard the guys play for him. If that were any other coach we've had in Washingotn, we would have packed it in, for sure. I still think our playcalling was a little suspect, but it is what it is. I'm not annoynting Brunell as anything other than another unproven guy at this point.

[celts32]

Originally Posted by Daseal

I'm sorry SC -- I can't excuse 3 1/4 of just horrible QBing with 3/4 of one. I feel Ramsey would have done better throughout the game and given us a win that wouldn't have stopped my heart three times! Brunell still doesnt have me sold till he can perform anywhere near the level of the 4th quarter more than once. We have 3 unproven QBs as far as Im concerned.

There is no evidence to suggest Ramsey would have moved the team last night. personally, I think he would have crumbled under the Cowboys blitz. Who knows how Brunell will play as the season progresses, but no matter how bad it seems Brunell is playing he never panics or loses confidence. That attitude helped him hang in there and make the plays at the end. I don't see anyway Ramsey would have made those throws at the end to win that game.

The cowboys were getting to the QB last night and Ramsey holds the ball to long as we know...that would have been a combination for disaster IMO.

[illdefined]

Originally Posted by celts32

There is no evidence to suggest Ramsey would have moved the team last night. personally, I think he would have crumbled under the Cowboys blitz. Who knows how Brunell will play as the season progresses, but no matter how bad it seems Brunell is playing he never panics or loses confidence. That attitude helped him hang in there and make the plays at the end. I don't see anyway Ramsey would have made those throws at the end to win that game.

The cowboys were getting to the QB last night and Ramsey holds the ball to long as we know...that would have been a combination for disaster IMO.

last season was clear and relevant evidence on how both Brunell and Ramsey play. much more so than any practice or preseason game, i think last night proved that. the only difference between this season and last seeason is a better line and Moss + Patten. you're right we DON'T really know how Ramsey would play with them. we only know he played better than Brunell with a WORSE offense.

[SmootSmack]

I understand that Ramsey played just 19 minutes of the regular season this year. However, he did play and he played during the preseason. From the last snap he took in the Vikings game last year until the last snap he took in the Bears game this year, did he get any better. Did he improve on things like not telegraphing his passes and not forcing plays that weren't there?

Personally, I didn't see any improvement and that, I think, is the problem most of us have with Ramsey. I want to see him do well, he is a Redskin after all, but I just don't see any progress in him. And I don't know what the answer is, throw him to the wolves, sit him on the bench, trade him. Anointing him the starter didn't work apparently.

On another note, how about that QB Class of 2002! Three QBs in the first round-Carr, Harrington, and Ramsey and all are seriously struggling.

[RedskinPete]

Originally Posted by Daseal

I'm sorry SC -- I can't excuse 3 1/4 of just horrible QBing with 3/4 of one. I feel Ramsey would have done better throughout the game and given us a win that wouldn't have stopped my heart three times! Brunell still doesnt have me sold till he can perform anywhere near the level of the 4th quarter more than once. We have 3 unproven QBs as far as Im concerned.

I have seen nothing that would say that Ramsey would have done better! I am sure he would have thrown the ball up for grabs when Brunell ran that 20+ run. For that matter has Ramsey ever had a run over 20 yards? You are right that the QB's we have are a big concern. But Brunell has been there and has done the job. Lets hope that he has something left! As for Ramsey he has never do anything and as look very bad. Campbell much to green!

[STPainmaker]

Originally Posted by Daseal

I'm sorry SC -- I can't excuse 3 1/4 of just horrible QBing with 3/4 of one. I feel Ramsey would have done better throughout the game and given us a win that wouldn't have stopped my heart three times! Brunell still doesnt have me sold till he can perform anywhere near the level of the 4th quarter more than once. We have 3 unproven QBs as far as Im concerned.

I agree completely with the above but Ramsey giving us a win....I don't buy it.

[ChounsMan]

No apology needed. The lack of offense for 3 quarters was a result of poor pass coverage ala Rabach & Dockery. Both were burnt several times on pure power rushing by the nose & end tackles.

Brunell never had a solid chance half the time to just sit & read the coverage, so maybe some of my fellow warpathers need to go back & watch the film & see how our coverage failed Brunell most of the game.

Portis's inability to get big plays only depleted our chances to pass the ball effectively. Think, the running game is not making it past the line or the LB's, so the S & FS can just sit on their heels & play 2 deep.


However, Parcells screwed himself into thinking the game was over in the 3rd Q & started backup RB's & conservative play calling. Just think how ridiculous that is, your up by only 2 TD's & think the game is over, so why not give your RB the rest of the evening off. DOH..!!!!

This wasn't won or lose by the QB position, it was through good play calling by Gibbs.

[illdefined]

Originally Posted by ChounsMan

No apology needed. The lack of offense for 3 quarters was a result of poor pass coverage ala Rabach & Dockery. Both were burnt several times on pure power rushing by the nose & end tackles.

Brunell never had a solid chance half the time to just sit & read the coverage, so maybe some of my fellow warpathers need to go back & watch the film & see how our coverage failed Brunell most of the game.

Portis's inability to get big plays only depleted our chances to pass the ball effectively. Think, the running game is not making it past the line or the LB's, so the S & FS can just sit on their heels & play 2 deep.


However, Parcells screwed himself into thinking the game was over in the 3rd Q & started backup RB's & conservative play calling. Just think how ridiculous that is, your up by only 2 TD's & think the game is over, so why not give your RB the rest of the evening off. DOH..!!!!

This wasn't won or lose by the QB position, it was through good play calling by Gibbs.

replace the word coverage with 'protection' and you may have something there. bad OLine play would effect Portis just as much though, and i doubt Dockery has much experience versus a Parcells 3-4.

[ladyfan06]

Originally Posted by Daseal

I'm sorry SC -- I can't excuse 3 1/4 of just horrible QBing with 3/4 of one. I feel Ramsey would have done better throughout the game and given us a win that wouldn't have stopped my heart three times! Brunell still doesnt have me sold till he can perform anywhere near the level of the 4th quarter more than once. We have 3 unproven QBs as far as Im concerned.

??????? What??? "Ramsey would have done better"....let's be realistic. One of the biggest, if not THE biggest plays of the game was Brunnell's run to make the 3rd and 27, a 4th and 2 play...Ramsey's scary ass would have thrown a INT or been sacked!

I COMPLETELY disagree!

[illdefined]

Originally Posted by ladyfan06

??????? What??? "Ramsey would have done better"....let's be realistic. One of the biggest, if not THE biggest plays of the game was Brunnell's run to make the 3rd and 27, a 4th and 2 play...Ramsey's scary ass would have thrown a INT or been sacked!

I COMPLETELY disagree!

while that's probably true in that situation, i think the general feeling among the people who remember Ramsey from last season is that we would have had more points (as in *some*) by the fourth quarter and wouldn't be in that position.

while i'm glad he can still scramble to avoid sacks, we shouldn't be relying on the legs of a 35 yr old QB for actual yards anyway.

but it's all academic at this point isn't it.

[railcon56]

Originally Posted by ladyfan06

??????? What??? "Ramsey would have done better"....let's be realistic. One of the biggest, if not THE biggest plays of the game was Brunnell's run to make the 3rd and 27, a 4th and 2 play...Ramsey's scary ass would have thrown a INT or been sacked!

I COMPLETELY disagree!

I Remember A Monday Night game When Ramsey Ran Around the Left End For About 30 yards to win that game for US..... How quickly we forget.... what was that game? Plus Patrick would have never had us in that desperate situation...and Portis would have run for 150 yards cause the defense would have had to play back... 1 half is not a fair chance... but brunell will go down and soon he's very fragile and we all know how tought Ramsey is ...so he will get his chance... Plus Ramsey wouldn't have slid short of the 1st down like brunell did ..he would have ran somebody over...

[saskin]

Originally Posted by railcon56@comcast.net

I Remember A Monday Night game When Ramsey Ran Around the Left End For About 30 yards to win that game for US..... How quickly we forget.... what was that game? Plus Patrick would have never had us in that desperate situation...and Portis would have run for 150 yards cause the defense would have had to play back... 1 half is not a fair chance... but brunell will go down and soon he's very fragile and we all know how tought Ramsey is ...so he will get his chance... Plus Ramsey wouldn't have slid short of the 1st down like brunell did ..he would have ran somebody over...

If Ramsey would've run them over why not move him to running back if he's that good? There's no way of telling what Ramsey would've done. Brunell did what he did, and he won, lets leave it at that.