The jets stole ramsey for a #6

***general counsel*** · -03-17-2006

Great great trade for the jets. huge upside, no downside at all.

ramming speed to all

general counsel

***tomahawk247*** · -03-17-2006

I was quite surprised the Redskins gave him up for so little, i thought they were asking for a fourth

***RamsFan16*** · -03-18-2006

Yea. The reason we didn't get him is because Frerotte is Linehans' man!

***tomahawk247*** · -03-19-2006

Id still much rather have Frerotte though. Having a guy that already knows the system and who wouldnt cost a draft pick is better then trading for a guy who would be coming in and having to learn

***Aquitted Killer*** · -03-19-2006

Originally Posted by tomahawk247

Id still much rather have Frerotte though. Having a guy that already knows the system and who wouldnt cost a draft pick is better then trading for a guy who would be coming in and having to learn

No doubt.

I'm kinda suprised that the Raiders didn't go after him at all. Looks like they'll be stuck with Brooks now.

**fred10licious** · -03-19-2006

the best part is freotte knows his role, to back up bulger. ramsey had a problem w/ being the back up to brunell in WAS this is WIN WIN WIN for the jets, skins and rams

***Bruce=GOAT*** · -03-20-2006

The Raiders will be screwed with Brooks as their starter and I am so glad that Ramsey is not on our team. Frerotte is a lot better than that scrub. I feel sorry for the Jets as always.

**Nick** · -03-20-2006

We haven't seen much from Ramsey, but ask me again in April when that sixth round pick comes around, and we'll see what QBs are available at that spot.

***moklerman*** · -03-20-2006

I agree that Ramsey is an unproven commodity at this point. While unproven, he's still got starting experience in the NFL so it's a good pickup for the Jets but not one that I'd want for the Rams.

As far as the Raiders being "screwed" if they go with Brooks, I'd have to disagree. As much as I'm not a fan of Brooks, he's a big improvement over Collins.