Should we start a new quarterback?

Warpath · 11-27-2005, 10:35 PM

Im so tired of skins fans always calling for the backup quarterback to come in. I guess the grass is always greener. Like mentioned before in previous posts, Brunell is our starter and should remain so because he gives us the best chance to win. The skins are definitely not out of the hunt after both the Giants and Cowboys loss this week. Although the skins didnt gain any ground this week we still get to play all three in our division and 2 of them are at home. The 12th man was loud and proud today at the game, much better than last week vs Oakland. We win the next 2 on the road and anything is possible. It is hard to believe that we can win anything on the road considering we are 1-4 on the road. Either way you stick with Brunell, hes the starter and should remain there until he is hurt or the Skins lose 3 more games.

Longtimefan · 11-27-2005, 10:54 PM

Someone posted the same question just last week and the question then seems to meet with the same reaction it did then.

It's only wishful thinking because it is highly unlikely Gibbs will change QB's because there is no real reason too. The problems we're having are not because of the QB, so Gibbs will continue with Brunell as long as we have a chance, slight as it may be. Campbell will get his chance, but now is not the time.

SouperMeister · 11-27-2005, 11:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sniks

you cant blame brunnel for all these losses.We cant run the ball in the fourth quarter when we need to.nor stop anybody when we need to.

You hit the nail on the head Sniks. Teams that can't grind out clock with a 4th quarter lead by running the ball will lose more close games than not. As I posted in a different thread, Portis has not gotten stronger late in games. His skills are seemingly a poor fit here. I'll have Riggo, and his 3.8 average over a back like Portis any day. Riggo could be counted on to convert 3rd and 2 to keep the chains moving in the 4rt quarter. With Clinton, 3rd and 2 is a passing situation anymore. This season has unraveled since Portis failed on 3rd and 2 to ice the Tampa game. For the money he makes, Portis just isn't a money back in this system.

Daseal · 11-27-2005, 11:32 PM

Quote:

m so tired of skins fans always calling for the backup quarterback to come in. I guess the grass is always greener.

Maybe I missed it, but I don't think a majority of the people asking for the switch feel Campbell will be able to give us wins, but we would like to see what we have as our first round pick. It's more conceding that the season is over.

Schneed10 · 11-27-2005, 11:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daseal

Maybe I missed it, but I don't think a majority of the people asking for the switch feel Campbell will be able to give us wins, but we would like to see what we have as our first round pick. It's more conceding that the season is over.

I wouldn't concede that yet. We are 2 games out of first place in the NFC East, with 5 to go. 2 of those 5 are against the two division leaders. So we're still in the hunt, despite the fact that the team looks like it has no intestinal fortitude at the end of games.

I think we're a long shot but I don't want to see Campbell until we're mathematically eliminated. Even then I'm not sure it makes sense since Brunell will probably start for us next year too.

skinsguy · 11-28-2005, 12:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daseal

Maybe I missed it, but I don't think a majority of the people asking for the switch feel Campbell will be able to give us wins, but we would like to see what we have as our first round pick. It's more conceding that the season is over.

Problem is, let's say Campbell gets thrown in there this season to go out and play, and he makes rookie mistakes and is pretty much horrible, then people will be complaining about how Jason Campbell is a dud. Even if we decide to start him next year, fans would still say that about him more than likely. I do think it's good for a player to get experience on the field - I feel that is ultimately the only way of becoming a true NFL star. However, I think he is getting alot of useful experience by being on the sidelines and watching the stragedies develop and getting the mental aspects of the game embedded in his mind. I think that will make his "hands on" experience easier to cope with once he's out there on the field. I realize QBs like Ben and Eli have appeared to be light years ahead of their development, but I also believe that doesn't happen with every young player.

Sheriff Gonna Getcha · 11-28-2005, 03:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by skinsguy

Problem is, let's say Campbell gets thrown in there this season to go out and play, and he makes rookie mistakes and is pretty much horrible, then people will be complaining about how Jason Campbell is a dud. Even if we decide to start him next year, fans would still say that about him more than likely. I do think it's good for a player to get experience on the field - I feel that is ultimately the only way of becoming a true NFL star. However, I think he is getting alot of useful experience by being on the sidelines and watching the stragedies develop and getting the mental aspects of the game embedded in his mind. I think that will make his "hands on" experience easier to cope with once he's out there on the field. I realize QBs like Ben and Eli have appeared to be light years ahead of their development, but I also believe that doesn't happen with every young player.

What are you talking about? We're among the most patient fans in the league with quarterback development.

offiss · 11-28-2005, 04:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by skinsfan0201

I would like to see Ramsey start and get the proper opportunity that he deserves. Campbell is a Rookie still and should learn this season at the very least like the Cinnci (Carson Palmer / Heisman trophy winner) quarterback. If he is destined to be our quarterback he will prove it by the beginning of next season.

As much as I would like to see Ramsey in there, what would it really accomplish? He went in last year and won the starters job, and we all know what a bunch of window dressing that was, the guy could go 4-1 and Brunell will be back in there next season, so what's the point?

The Brunell experiement has basically been a waste, anyone really believe we would be worse off at this point in the season if Ramsey was starting? At the very least all things would be equal I don't really see them being worse.

With all the money these guys make it's hard to feel sorry for them, and I usually don't, but I can't help it when it comes to Patrick, I just feel he has been tagged teamed by Gibbs and Brunell unfairly for whatever reason.

skinsguy · 11-28-2005, 09:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ramseyfan

What are you talking about? We're among the most patient fans in the league with quarterback development.

LOL!

skinsttw · 11-28-2005, 10:09 AM

Stick with Brunell. He is the best QB on the team right now. Play out the season. The
NFC East is weak enough that we can still win the division. We do need to protect
the lead and put away the games late.

MTK · 11-28-2005, 10:11 AM

Repeat after me, Brunell is our QB.

Keep this in mind as we head in to next season, because the same will apply.

Anyone who thinks Brunell has been anything but a pleasant surprise this year is smoking some serious crack.

We're still a few players away. Just as we saw last year, there are many issues that have contributed to our slide, and it's not primarily on the QB.

Twilbert07 · 11-28-2005, 10:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Repeat after me, Brunell is our QB.

Keep this in mind as we head in to next season, because the same will apply.

Anyone who thinks Brunell has been anything but a pleasant surprise this year is smoking some serious crack.

We're still a few players away. Just as we saw last year, there are many issues that have contributed to our slide, and it's not primarily on the QB.

Yes, Brunell will be our QB next season. However, I was deeply concerned about a couple decisions he made yesterday - especially the lateral late in the game that could have gone to the Chargers. He just threw the ball up for grabs. He needs to play smarter than that.

VTSkins897 · 11-28-2005, 10:44 AM

its unlikely to see campbell until we are mathematically eliminated. however, at that point, even if brunell starts next year, i dont see the harm in putting the new guy in to see what he can do. brunell is not getting any older and certainly is not the future of this team.

Twilbert07 · 11-28-2005, 10:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VTSkins897

its unlikely to see campbell until we are mathematically eliminated. however, at that point, even if brunell starts next year, i dont see the harm in putting the new guy in to see what he can do. brunell is not getting any older and certainly is not the future of this team.

Exactly. The problem with Brunell is that he is old for a QB and will be a year older and slower next season.

(PS- If anyone is looking for tickets to this weekend's ACC championship game for below face value, please PM me.)

amorentz · 11-28-2005, 10:52 AM

We are still in the hunt, and should be sticking with who brought us there. It is not a good thing to toss a rookie into the game in his first season. Many other teams do it because they dont have the luxury of letting their rookie sit...trust me, most teams would rather let him sit for a year or two and learn the ropes. I for one am happy that we can let Campbell do that.

11-27-2005, 10:35 PM	#31
Warpath The Starter Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Potomac Falls, VA Age: 48 Posts: 1,762	Re: Should we start a new quarterback? Im so tired of skins fans always calling for the backup quarterback to come in. I guess the grass is always greener. Like mentioned before in previous posts, Brunell is our starter and should remain so because he gives us the best chance to win. The skins are definitely not out of the hunt after both the Giants and Cowboys loss this week. Although the skins didnt gain any ground this week we still get to play all three in our division and 2 of them are at home. The 12th man was loud and proud today at the game, much better than last week vs Oakland. We win the next 2 on the road and anything is possible. It is hard to believe that we can win anything on the road considering we are 1-4 on the road. Either way you stick with Brunell, hes the starter and should remain there until he is hurt or the Skins lose 3 more games.

11-27-2005, 10:54 PM	#32
Longtimefan Playmaker Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Germantown, Md. Posts: 4,832	Re: Should we start a new quarterback? Someone posted the same question just last week and the question then seems to meet with the same reaction it did then. It's only wishful thinking because it is highly unlikely Gibbs will change QB's because there is no real reason too. The problems we're having are not because of the QB, so Gibbs will continue with Brunell as long as we have a chance, slight as it may be. Campbell will get his chance, but now is not the time.

11-28-2005, 10:09 AM	#40
skinsttw Special Teams Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Richmond, VA Posts: 174	Re: Should we start a new quarterback? Stick with Brunell. He is the best QB on the team right now. Play out the season. The NFC East is weak enough that we can still win the division. We do need to protect the lead and put away the games late. __________________ Go skins!

11-28-2005, 10:11 AM	#41
MTK \m/ Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: NY Age: 52 Posts: 99,464	Re: Should we start a new quarterback? Repeat after me, Brunell is our QB. Keep this in mind as we head in to next season, because the same will apply. Anyone who thinks Brunell has been anything but a pleasant surprise this year is smoking some serious crack. We're still a few players away. Just as we saw last year, there are many issues that have contributed to our slide, and it's not primarily on the QB.

11-28-2005, 10:44 AM	#43
VTSkins897 Impact Rookie Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Richmond, VA Age: 41 Posts: 890	Re: Should we start a new quarterback? its unlikely to see campbell until we are mathematically eliminated. however, at that point, even if brunell starts next year, i dont see the harm in putting the new guy in to see what he can do. brunell is not getting any older and certainly is not the future of this team.

11-28-2005, 10:52 AM	#45
amorentz Special Teams Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Washington, DC Age: 44 Posts: 368	Re: Should we start a new quarterback? We are still in the hunt, and should be sticking with who brought us there. It is not a good thing to toss a rookie into the game in his first season. Many other teams do it because they dont have the luxury of letting their rookie sit...trust me, most teams would rather let him sit for a year or two and learn the ropes. I for one am happy that we can let Campbell do that.

Should we start a new quarterback?

Locker Room Main Forum