Just watching the games my friend. I have heard stories about him being a bad fit personality wise for NY but I was basing those comments more on the way he plays Qb. He has no poise whatsoever, he locks unto his primary target and he cannot read D's if his life depended on it.. Granted he did have a rough start to his career playing QB for a Spurrier O but Joe Gibbs is rarely wrong when it comes to Qbs and it should tell you something that he was so eager to get rid of him and draft another QB in the first round.
Culpepper may be just as questionable as any of these QB's in the draft coming off that knee injury. he may not even be at full strength come august. and, according to you, trading picks away for Leinart is worth it because he may be great. you said picks would be "meaningless" compared to what Leinart can bring. So, it would make sense for them to move up and take Leinart versus trading a R2 for Culpepper. Yet, they didn't. Personally, I think they made the smarter move.
adding AJ Hawk doesn't make this a dominant D anymore than adding Davis makes this a dominant O. I'd rather see us start getting playmakers on the Offensive side of the ball to help our D. We're not going to contend for another couple of years anyway; let's begin putting the pieces in place now. cheers
i give Gibbs all the credibility in the world, but he's notorious for playing vet QB's; much like Herm favored all vets over young players with upside. cheers
I posted this yesterday.... Ramsey simply never had a real chance to develop. You have to throw out the Spurrier years (as far as his development goes). Spurrier was completely lost in the NFL. The Gibbs years are a whole different story. Yes, Gibbs gave him an opportunity to start, but there was never really a learning curve. First of all he had to learn a new offense, and pretty much got yanked because his numbers were not stellar. Brunell came in and put up slightly similar numbers (actually threw for fewer yards, had a much lower completion percentage, and threw fewer TDs) in more games. Yes, I know Ramsey threw a lot of ints that year (11). But he has more TD passes than interceptions in his short career. In fact, 2004 is the only time in his limited play that he threw more ints than TD's. In 2003 he saw his most extensive playing time (11 starts). He completed 53% of his passes, for 2166 yards 14 TD's and 9 picks. 75.8 percent QB rating. 34 of those passes were over 30 yards, 3 were over 40 yards. Not bad numbers by any means for a second year QB (who only saw 5 starts his rookie year). Keep in mind, the guy was running Spurrier's offense, had a suspect offensive line, and was getting absolutely destroyed (sacked 30 times in 11 games). I truely believe Gibbs wanted to come in, and have a veteran QB lead his team from the start. He's a legendary coach who did not want his legacy tarnished. IMO, coming in and grooming a young QB was no where on his immediate agenda. He couldn't pull Ramsey right away (because if Brunell started off the bat, and did a bad job, people would have said "the game has passed Gibbs by. He should've given Ramsey a chance"), so he started him for a while. When he made the change to Brunell, he really had nothing to lose. Ramsey wasn't exactly tearing it up (wasn't doing bad by any means either), and if Brunell didn't look completely horrible, no one could question him. He then begins to "Phase" Ramsey out. Campbell is drafted (a young guy who Mark could take under his wing), and names Brunell the starter. Ramsey was not content with riding the bench, and (IMO rightfully so) was shocked that he was pulled so quickly in the first place. The way I see it, Gibbs pretty much gave a "rookie" QB 7 starts, and decided that was enough. I consider Ramsey a rookie in Gibbs' inaugural year because it was his first season in a real NFL system.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l3ZrWRoaOZk that's in response to your "he has no poise whatsoever" remark.
Vernon Davis looked very impressive at the combine. But I say we take a QB regardless of aquiring Patrick Ramsey recently. Cutler is who we should focus on, not Leinart.
Its been a while since i posted(been without internet service for 3 weeks) and its good to be back. I love this kid VD. I've been all over him since his sophmore year. I personally wanted a premier TE the last couple of drafts and this kid looks like he can be the best prospect since TOGO. With that said, im pretty much happy with whoever we draft at that spot as long as it aint Cutler. Honestly we cant go wrong with Ferguson, Hawk, Mario Williams, Davis etc. But as a fan, I'd love to see Vernon Davis trample some Safetys and LBs while wearing green and white
i go to maryland and had the luxury of watchin him play for 2 seasons. he is unbelievable... he'll catch anything and it took 5 guys to bring him down on most occasions... he is also on top of EVERY SINGLE lifting record in the Maryland locker room... if we can drop to 8 or 9 we MUST get him
i thought the same thing; but i there's a chance the 49ers may take him at #6. i'd hate to miss out on Davis by one selection... that would sting. cheers
2 days ago on another thread (this one about drafting Leonard Pope at #29),I replied "Jets+TE+ 1st round= nausea". Not only that,you have the same avatar as me.Are you my...long..lost...brother?
Problem with your theory is it would have cost the Dolphins a hell of alot more to trade up for Leinart than it did to get Culpepper. Giving up a 2nd wouldn't have put them in sniffing position of Leinart.
What's the deal with Eric Johnson? I know he was injured last season, but he should have recovered by now no? If he is still on the shelf then Davis is a definate possibility.
You can't be serious, Jolley is horrible, Baker may leave as a a free agent and Driessen wHat what can you say about Driessen, he is about as nondescript as you can get at any position. While I would not draft a tight end in the first round, the Jets are far from ok at the position.
