Falcons emulating Gibbs, with interest in Garcia?

[saden1]

Come on, It is not like Gibbs came up with the concept of having a veteran backup. Garcia is a very good QB and should have been signed already. Last year, the SF O-Line was just abysmal. They couldn't give him any time whatsoever.

I think he'll end up a cowboy because they sure as hell don't have a sound QB.

[Daseal]

Garcia has had some law trouble and really isn't a top tier QB. Apparently the phins orginization seems happy with AJ Feely.

Why shouldn't Vick go straight to Blank? When they bring someone in who wants your job, you'd get suspicious and a bit upset wouldn't you? I think you would. There should be a clear line on your team between starters and backups. Quarterback controverseys are bad. Gibbs better decide really fast this year who our starter is. I don't want any type of controversy. It can tear a team apart.

I hope he makes the right decesion and doesn't run Ramsey out of town.

[joecrisp]

Originally Posted by Daseal

Garcia has had some law trouble and really isn't a top tier QB.

Steve McNair had some trouble with the law, too, and that didn't stop people from voting him the league's co-MVP. I'm sure you're aware Garcia holds the Niners record for passing yards in a single season, a career TD-to-INT ratio of 2:1, and a career passer rating of 88.3 (good for 4th all-time, and better than that of Tom Brady, Daunte Culpepper, Donovan McNabb, Steve McNair, Brett Favre or Peyton Manning, by the way). How does that disqualify him as a top-tier quarterback?

Originally Posted by Daseal

Why shouldn't Vick go straight to Blank? When they bring someone in who wants your job, you'd get suspicious and a bit upset wouldn't you? I think you would. .

I'd be a little concerned if I were Vick, too. After all, Greg Knapp is the new offensive coordinator in Atlanta. Guess where he was last year, and who he coached the last five years?

Originally Posted by Daseal

There should be a clear line on your team between starters and backups. Quarterback controverseys are bad. Gibbs better decide really fast this year who our starter is. I don't want any type of controversy. It can tear a team apart.

I hope he makes the right decesion and doesn't run Ramsey out of town.

A quarterback controversy can be destructive on a team where the inmates run the asylum (see "Steve Spurrier era"), but Joe Gibbs has a way of keeping the peace in the locker room, and promoting harmony where there would otherwise be dischord. In this case, the quarterback competition will enhance the performance of both QBs, and if it is indeed a competition in the truest sense-- as Joe Gibbs swears it will be-- the team will benefit.

If Ramsey loses the competition and is unable to swallow his pride for the sake of the team, then the team is better off without him anyway. I like Ramsey, and I think he has a legitimate shot at being the starter this year (I know I'm in the miniscule minority on that one), but if Ramsey tries to undermine Gibbs' authority in the locker room, then he's not the man I thought he was, and he's got to go.

[Daseal]

I haven't forgotten Garcia's records, but he's also not my favorite QB. I've never liked him and I don't think I ever will.

I don't think Vick will ever get benched for Garcia because the fans would absolutly flip. Vick is the best thing that has ever happened to that franchise!

A quarterback controversy or competition whichever you want to call it will split the team, in my opinion. Some players will be pulling for one guy or another and could maybe not play as hard if the other guy is in. We know this shouldn't be the case, but it does happen. The team needs to know who the starter is early and I personally see Brunell as a mistake. Hard to gain much experience on the bench. He'll learn some from Brunell I'm sure, but I think Spurrier also taught him a lot about quarterbacking. Say what you will but Spurrier is an excellent QB coach.

Everyone knows I like Spurrier, I've defended him in every post and I'm not going to do it again. If you want to know my feelings just look through old posts and you'll find them.

Whoops, forgot the site crashed, well there's one with my opinion, that wraps it up. I also think Ramsey can beat Brunell out. If not Brunell is as tough as a wet paper bag so he'll play anyways, especially when Jansen, Ramsey's best friend lets a few guys loose!

[JWsleep]

Garcia is good, but a bit past prime, and his back is suspect. But he's played at an all-pro level in the NFL for years. He's a great QB, and would make an excellent backup to Vick.

And if they had to learn this from Gibbs, then I can see why he didn't want to coach there! C'mon, Vick goes down and their whole season collapese. If they aren't in the market for a backup, they should have their heads examined. (Oh, yeah: Note to Jets: You could probably use a backup too. Duh.)

[joecrisp]

Originally Posted by JWsleep

And if they had to learn this from Gibbs, then I can see why he didn't want to coach there! C'mon, Vick goes down and their whole season collapese. If they aren't in the market for a backup, they should have their heads examined. (Oh, yeah: Note to Jets: You could probably use a backup too. Duh.)

Okay, okay-- The title of the thread is obviously pissing people off, and distracting them from my primary question, which is: if the Falcons do in fact sign Garcia, does Rich McKay get warmly praised for spending big free agent dollars on a backup quarterback (who may, as some of you say, be past his prime), whereas Gibbs was roundly criticized for pulling off basically the same move? And while we're pointing out how obvious this move should be for the Falcons, isn't it equally important for the Redskins, who had their own problems with depth at quarterback last year? It should also be noted that, despite the Brunell signing, and the signings of several other key free agents, the Redskins actually have more cap room than the Falcons at this point. That being the case, how is this a good move for the Falcons, while the Brunell signing (aside from giving up a 3rd round pick) was bad for the Redskins?

[BrudLee]

Originally Posted by joecrisp

Okay, okay-- The title of the thread is obviously pissing people off, and distracting them from my primary question, which is: if the Falcons do in fact sign Garcia, does Rich McKay get warmly praised for spending big free agent dollars on a backup quarterback (who may, as some of you say, be past his prime), whereas Gibbs was roundly criticized for pulling off basically the same move? And while we're pointing out how obvious this move should be for the Falcons, isn't it equally important for the Redskins, who had their own problems with depth at quarterback last year? It should also be noted that, despite the Brunell signing, and the signings of several other key free agents, the Redskins actually have more cap room than the Falcons at this point. That being the case, how is this a good move for the Falcons, while the Brunell signing (aside from giving up a 3rd round pick) was bad for the Redskins?

The answer, obviously, is that Dan Snyder is involved in one of the tranactions. It amazes me how much animosity he has created. I know he has riled a few writers and executives, but the man is near universally disliked.

[Riggo44]

Any team that want's to win needs to quality QB's Gibbs knows this.So must some others around the league.
But Garcia is going to Tampa. End of story.

[azskinsfan2]

Vick is a running back in QB clothes. Without him running anytime any pressure is on him he wouldn't even be talked about as a great QB.
And if Jansen would ever even consider letting a defensive player get through intentionallly to clobber Brunnell just because he's a great friend of Ramsey's then if I was Coach Gibbs, I'd release Jansen on the spot. Personally I don't think Jansen would ever do such a thing. He's a die hard Skin too.

[joecrisp]

Originally Posted by saden1

Come on, It is not like Gibbs came up with the concept of having a veteran backup..

No, the idea of having a veteran backup is not a new one. It's as old as football. What is rare in the free agency era, and what has been the source of so much ridicule directed towards Gibbs, is the idea of paying top free agent dollars for a big-name, starter-quality veteran QB when a young, franchise QB appeared to be entrenched as the starter. Critics point to Gibbs' inexperience with the salary cap and free agency and call such a strategy foolish. They say, "Gibbs might have done that before (stockpiling QBs), but you just can't do that now-- not with the salary cap!" But suppose McKay were in fact to sign Garcia to a big-dollar contract similar to Brunell's. Would people throw as much criticism McKay's way as they did Gibbs, or is the move hailed as a stroke of genius-- despite it's salary cap implications-- simply because of McKay's reputation as a GM, and the Falcon's experience with the disastrous consequences of not having a talented backup QB?