Opinions on Vinny & Eddie

[Chuck 54]

First, Vinny TEsteverde has never been a good QB in the NFL...his entire career has been one of an average QB at best with an above average arm. That above average arm is the reason he's been given many starting opportunities over the years...every coach has believed that with those talents, he'd eventually be a winner in the NFL. He's not a winner...he makes just as many silly, unadvised throws as many lesser QB's. He doesn't play like a veteran...he panics in the face of pressure, curling up, giving up the sack, or throwing a stupid pass that comes dangerously close to being intercepted...he also throws into coverage...this is on film and is the reason he'll eventually be replaced this year as the starter.

Vinny, like most NFL QB's, can look great and put up great numbers when the pass protection is perfect and his receivers are open; however, apply some pressure or have a receiver running into double coverage, and Vinny just throws the ball up there. He's qb'd 5 games this year...tell me how many times you've seen this veteran QB throw the ball away??? Brunell is struggling in Washington with worse receivers and worse OL blocking, yet I've seen him throw the ball away more in one game than I've seen Vinny do so in 5 games.

Vinny TEsteverde is NOT a good QB....whether he's the best chance we have of winning games has to be left up to Parcells and what he sees and thinks, and rightly so, but anyone who thought Vinny was going to take us to the playoffs this year was wrong...are we good enough to get to the playoffs if Parcells pulls this team together and gets them to play more disciplined? Yes, but I don't think Vinny will get the job done.

Second, while I never liked bringing Eddie George in, I also think he's being totally misused. EG has actually looked pretty good lately, and he does run hard and he does fall forward....however, the same complaint we have about the use of Rashard Lee can be appied to George...he's not being used enough. The only back we have who benefits from this "running back by committee" approach is Anderson...he's running well when the holes are there, and he's a pretty good receiver, but he sucks at blocking.

Eddie George is a rb, much like Emmitt and other tough runners, who gets better as the game wears on and he finds a rhythm...the OL also gets better the more they run block. I don't think EG is the type of back who can be in on 2-3 series in the first half, none in the 3rd quarter, and then "because he's fresh" be expected to take over the game in the 4th quarter.

I think EG should either be benched for Lee, or he should be the starting RB and get most of the carries on 1st and 2nd down...I'm not an EG fan, but I'd like to see him get at least 15-20 carries a game and see what he does. He's not going to be very effective being used the way he is right now...neither is Rashard Lee...and the OL probably feels no consistancy whatsoever with different backs with different styles running in every series.

Now, it's easy for anyone to ask "how dare you think you know better than Parcells...who do you think you are?" That stance is a cheap copout, imo... Every fan has a right to see that what we're doing doesn't really work and share an opinion.

Disagree with the opinions on Vinny and EG...that's your right, but please don't tell me I have no right to voice mine because I don't bow down to the almighty image of Parcells.

[Sarge]

First, Vinny TEsteverde has never been a good QB in the NFL...his entire career has been one of an average QB at best with an above average arm. That above average arm is the reason he's been given many starting opportunities over the years...every coach has believed that with those talents, he'd eventually be a winner in the NFL. He's not a winner...he makes just as many silly, unadvised throws as many lesser QB's. He doesn't play like a veteran...he panics in the face of pressure, curling up, giving up the sack, or throwing a stupid pass that comes dangerously close to being intercepted...he also throws into coverage...this is on film and is the reason he'll eventually be replaced this year as the starter.

Vinny, like most NFL QB's, can look great and put up great numbers when the pass protection is perfect and his receivers are open; however, apply some pressure or have a receiver running into double coverage, and Vinny just throws the ball up there. He's qb'd 5 games this year...tell me how many times you've seen this veteran QB throw the ball away??? Brunell is struggling in Washington with worse receivers and worse OL blocking, yet I've seen him throw the ball away more in one game than I've seen Vinny do so in 5 games.

Vinny TEsteverde is NOT a good QB....whether he's the best chance we have of winning games has to be left up to Parcells and what he sees and thinks, and rightly so, but anyone who thought Vinny was going to take us to the playoffs this year was wrong...are we good enough to get to the playoffs if Parcells pulls this team together and gets them to play more disciplined? Yes, but I don't think Vinny will get the job done.

Second, while I never liked bringing Eddie George in, I also think he's being totally misused. EG has actually looked pretty good lately, and he does run hard and he does fall forward....however, the same complaint we have about the use of Rashard Lee can be appied to George...he's not being used enough. The only back we have who benefits from this "running back by committee" approach is Anderson...he's running well when the holes are there, and he's a pretty good receiver, but he sucks at blocking.

Eddie George is a rb, much like Emmitt and other tough runners, who gets better as the game wears on and he finds a rhythm...the OL also gets better the more they run block. I don't think EG is the type of back who can be in on 2-3 series in the first half, none in the 3rd quarter, and then "because he's fresh" be expected to take over the game in the 4th quarter.

I think EG should either be benched for Lee, or he should be the starting RB and get most of the carries on 1st and 2nd down...I'm not an EG fan, but I'd like to see him get at least 15-20 carries a game and see what he does. He's not going to be very effective being used the way he is right now...neither is Rashard Lee...and the OL probably feels no consistancy whatsoever with different backs with different styles running in every series.

Now, it's easy for anyone to ask "how dare you think you know better than Parcells...who do you think you are?" That stance is a cheap copout, imo... Every fan has a right to see that what we're doing doesn't really work and share an opinion.

Disagree with the opinions on Vinny and EG...that's your right, but please don't tell me I have no right to voice mine because I don't bow down to the almighty image of Parcells.

You have NO RIGHT to voice that opinion.

Wait a minute, I agree with you.

Nice post Wayno.

[Hostile]

You have NO RIGHT to voice that opinion.

Wait a minute, I agree with you.

Nice post Wayno.
That was funny.

[Chuck 54]

You have NO RIGHT to voice that opinion.

Wait a minute, I agree with you.

Nice post Wayno.
My dislike for Parcells makes me an easy target, but I'm trying to keep my focus on the team...lol.

Right about now, I really would have preferred a younger guy like Dennis Green....I'm sharing that opinion openly in order to now draw in more responses, all of which will tell me how stupid I am....lol :D

[Hostile]

My dislike for Parcells makes me an easy target, but I'm trying to keep my focus on the team...lol.

Right about now, I really would have preferred a younger guy like Dennis Green....I'm sharing that opinion openly in order to now draw in more responses, all of which will tell me how stupid I am....lol :D
I like Denny Green. If we had not acquired Parcells I would not have minded him as our Head Coach. His teams learn how to win, he drafts really well. The only knock on him has been that he can't win it all. I don't think that is a permanent thing with him although he has a mountain to climb with the Cardinals.

[Clay_Allison]

First, Vinny TEsteverde has never been a good QB in the NFL...his entire career has been one of an average QB at best with an above average arm. That above average arm is the reason he's been given many starting opportunities over the years...every coach has believed that with those talents, he'd eventually be a winner in the NFL. He's not a winner...he makes just as many silly, unadvised throws as many lesser QB's. He doesn't play like a veteran...he panics in the face of pressure, curling up, giving up the sack, or throwing a stupid pass that comes dangerously close to being intercepted...he also throws into coverage...this is on film and is the reason he'll eventually be replaced this year as the starter.

Vinny, like most NFL QB's, can look great and put up great numbers when the pass protection is perfect and his receivers are open; however, apply some pressure or have a receiver running into double coverage, and Vinny just throws the ball up there. He's qb'd 5 games this year...tell me how many times you've seen this veteran QB throw the ball away??? Brunell is struggling in Washington with worse receivers and worse OL blocking, yet I've seen him throw the ball away more in one game than I've seen Vinny do so in 5 games.

Vinny TEsteverde is NOT a good QB....whether he's the best chance we have of winning games has to be left up to Parcells and what he sees and thinks, and rightly so, but anyone who thought Vinny was going to take us to the playoffs this year was wrong...are we good enough to get to the playoffs if Parcells pulls this team together and gets them to play more disciplined? Yes, but I don't think Vinny will get the job done.

Second, while I never liked bringing Eddie George in, I also think he's being totally misused. EG has actually looked pretty good lately, and he does run hard and he does fall forward....however, the same complaint we have about the use of Rashard Lee can be appied to George...he's not being used enough. The only back we have who benefits from this "running back by committee" approach is Anderson...he's running well when the holes are there, and he's a pretty good receiver, but he sucks at blocking.

Eddie George is a rb, much like Emmitt and other tough runners, who gets better as the game wears on and he finds a rhythm...the OL also gets better the more they run block. I don't think EG is the type of back who can be in on 2-3 series in the first half, none in the 3rd quarter, and then "because he's fresh" be expected to take over the game in the 4th quarter.

I think EG should either be benched for Lee, or he should be the starting RB and get most of the carries on 1st and 2nd down...I'm not an EG fan, but I'd like to see him get at least 15-20 carries a game and see what he does. He's not going to be very effective being used the way he is right now...neither is Rashard Lee...and the OL probably feels no consistancy whatsoever with different backs with different styles running in every series.

Now, it's easy for anyone to ask "how dare you think you know better than Parcells...who do you think you are?" That stance is a cheap copout, imo... Every fan has a right to see that what we're doing doesn't really work and share an opinion.

Disagree with the opinions on Vinny and EG...that's your right, but please don't tell me I have no right to voice mine because I don't bow down to the almighty image of Parcells.

Your comparison to Brunell is flatly absurd, I don't know how many times he's thrown it away, I do know what his completion percentage is, 51% and change. that and just over 5 yards per attempt, compared with Vinny going for over 7, leads to a QB rating of 69 (and change). Vinny has a QB rating in the low 80s.

Bonus Opinion, I would almost take Coles (who Parcells has praised as one of his best draft picks) and Gardner over Johnson and Glenn.

I am a little biased for VT because I saw the "Midnight Miracle" on Monday Night Football and when I think Testaverde I will always see that game in my mind.

Face it, VT is NOT the QB of the future, and there wasn't much we could have done to prepare for the unexpected release of Carter. At the time that we signed Vinny, Collins had not yet been released. We could have signed Kurt Warner, but no one had any reason to believe him any less washed up than Vinny at the time. I doubt you would have applauded that move, though I confess I wouldn't have liked that move any more or less than the Testaverde signing.

The fact is that while the QB situation was simplified by Carter's release, mercifully in my opinion, it also sabotaged any immediate moves at the QB position. If the drug situation had been known, and if Carter was released at the beginning of the year, I think we would have signed a more legitimate starter, and perhaps a veteran backup as well. I have to guess that since we actually showed interest in Collins, it would have been him.

At running back, I would have signed Duce Staley, then drafted Julius Jones. In my opinion, Richie Anderson was as good a short-yardage specialist as we needed, and better on the goal-line considering his recieving skills.

Nothing is served here by proving that hindsight is 20/20, and I really see little in terms of flaws in the decision making of Jerry Jones and Bill Parcells considering the situations those decisions were made in. I think alot of people forget how much has happened since the start of training camp, beginning with the release of Quincy Carter on a day in which I thought the big news item was going to be Witten running into Parcells in practice, and continuing through a litany of injuries.

[Clay_Allison]

I like Denny Green. If we had not acquired Parcells I would not have minded him as our Head Coach. His teams learn how to win, he drafts really well. The only knock on him has been that he can't win it all. I don't think that is a permanent thing with him although he has a mountain to climb with the Cardinals.

I'll go ahead and respond to this too. I really thought that when JJ signed Parcells that he would leave us at the altar like he did the Bucs. I was looking to Dennis Green to come in as the backup plan, as I still believe he would have. That is why I always have defended Jones' interview with Green as being more than just a racial technicality, (Green himself said it was more). I have to admit I would have been satisfied with the decison, though I would still be screaming for the head of Mike Zimmer.

[LaTunaNostra]

My dislike for Parcells makes me an easy target, but I'm trying to keep my focus on the team...lol.

I respect your admissions you have a personal dislike for the man - Bill is not for everyone. I don't think your honesty should make you an easy target, it does make you a respected debater.


Right about now, I really would have preferred a younger guy like Dennis Green....I'm sharing that opinion openly in order to now draw in more responses, all of which will tell me how stupid I am....lol :D

Green would have been the second best choice, imo.

On George- you are right, he is a runner who needs more carries to be effective, always has been.

If you listened to the Green Bay conference call linked to here, Bill said as much. He said he has not been patient enough with the running game, and he said it in response to a question about whether he was satisfied with Eddie's performance so far.

Eddie needs MORE carries, not fewer. I have felt that way all along.

As for Vin, he is what he is and won't change now. He needs that play action option. He can no more do it without a solid run game than Quincy could.

[Chuck 54]

Your comparison to Brunell is flatly absurd, I don't know how many times he's thrown it away, I do know what his completion percentage is, 51% and change. that and just over 5 yards per attempt, compared with Vinny going for over 7, leads to a QB rating of 69 (and change). Vinny has a QB rating in the low 80s.

Bonus Opinion, I would almost take Coles (who Parcells has praised as one of his best draft picks) and Gardner over Johnson and Glenn.

I am a little biased for VT because I saw the "Midnight Miracle" on Monday Night Football and when I think Testaverde I will always see that game in my mind.

Face it, VT is NOT the QB of the future, and there wasn't much we could have done to prepare for the unexpected release of Carter. At the time that we signed Vinny, Collins had not yet been released. We could have signed Kurt Warner, but no one had any reason to believe him any less washed up than Vinny at the time. I doubt you would have applauded that move, though I confess I wouldn't have liked that move any more or less than the Testaverde signing.

The fact is that while the QB situation was simplified by Carter's release, mercifully in my opinion, it also sabotaged any immediate moves at the QB position. If the drug situation had been known, and if Carter was released at the beginning of the year, I think we would have signed a more legitimate starter, and perhaps a veteran backup as well. I have to guess that since we actually showed interest in Collins, it would have been him.

At running back, I would have signed Duce Staley, then drafted Julius Jones. In my opinion, Richie Anderson was as good a short-yardage specialist as we needed, and better on the goal-line considering his recieving skills.

Nothing is served here by proving that hindsight is 20/20, and I really see little in terms of flaws in the decision making of Jerry Jones and Bill Parcells considering the situations those decisions were made in. I think alot of people forget how much has happened since the start of training camp, beginning with the release of Quincy Carter on a day in which I thought the big news item was going to be Witten running into Parcells in practice, and continuing through a litany of injuries.
Good post....and I agree....if CArter had stayed, we'd be a better team now, imo, but we'd be even further from making a real move for the future...because he wasn't very good.

Whenever I think of Vinny, I see him throwing int after int in a TB uniform....I just don't think he's a good QB....I don't question the fact that he was a backup forced into starting....I question whether he's truly our best chance of winning...if that's true, then 1. we aren't going to win many; and 2. the guys behind him must be far far far from ever being competitive.

[Clay_Allison]

I think you answered your own question with 2. The guys behind him are a ways from being competitive, Henson has not even won the backup job yet, and I really doubt Romo would do much more in terms of cool decision-making.

If I had been in Parcells' seat after the first preseason game, I'd have called Steve Buerlein and asked him if his shoulder was alright. Resulting in the oldest starter-backup combo ever, the class of '87 reunion.

[BUSDRIV3RDH]

As for Vin, he is what he is and won't change now. He needs that play action option. He can no more do it without a solid run game than Quincy could.

Dallas 5 Games in 2003 4-1
Dallas 5 Games in 2004 2-3 (W/additions of George, Keyshawn and an improved OL}

Seems to me Quincy was getting it done better without that "solid run game", amung many other missing things that VT has.

[BUSDRIV3RDH]

Henson has not even won the backup job yet.

Unproper assessment, Henson has not made "placekick holder" yet. He is very well above Romo in the competition for starting QB, don't fool yourself about that.

[twa]

While vinny was not my first choice at QB I do beleive he is a good QB and will help this team.EG is what he is and will not work the way Parcells is using him,the lack of commitment to the run is my biggest complaint.I am also tickled to death with us having Parcells ,he will get-r -done or die trying. :eek:

[BUSDRIV3RDH]

2. the guys behind him must be far far far from ever being competitive.

That's what scares me. What if that really is the deal that's going on. Which brings me right back to why the hell release Carter? Sure, one more slip up by him and he could've been suspended, but very least I think until a more viable option was found, he should have been kept on as atleast a back-up option.

What if the unthinkable does happen and Mr. Chronic Loser does get us into the playoffs...then goes down. Hell, I sure would feel better knowing we had an expieranced playoff QB in Carter riding the pine behind him.

[LaTunaNostra]

Dallas 5 Games in 2003 4-1
Dallas 5 Games in 2004 2-3 (W/additions of George, Keyshawn and an improved OL}

Seems to me Quincy was getting it done better without that "solid run game", amung many other missing things that VT has.
Seems to me Q was getting it done with a more effective defense.

[twa]

Seems to me Q was getting it done with a more effective defense.
How soon they forget :rolleyes:

[Hostile]

Dallas 5 Games in 2003 4-1
Dallas 5 Games in 2004 2-3 (W/additions of George, Keyshawn and an improved OL}

Seems to me Quincy was getting it done better without that "solid run game", amung many other missing things that VT has.
Easier schedule, better defense.

None of those things matter though I guess. :rolleyes:

Let it go already.

[ddh33]

I think that what Vinny has done here has been admirable. Brought in to be the #2 and stop-gap, he has been forced in to action. In the process, he's put up good stats and been a true pro. Unfortunately, he hasn't won as many as he has lost so far. Maybe that changes, but it better change soon. Otherwise, get the future on the field.

Eddie George has also been the consumate pro in Dallas. He hasn't complained about not getting the ball. He hasn't complained about his starting streak being snapped. Instead, he goes to the field and gives it all he has - which, admittedly, isn't as much after all the miles. However, I agree with those who believe that Eddie needs more carries - not less. Like all RBs, getting into a groove is important. People keep saying that Hambrick is better than George, but they are forgetting that Troy was getting more opportunities. My hope is that the Cowboys actually find themselves ahead in a few games so George can get more carries. I think that will help everyone.

[AMERICAS_FAN]

VTand EG are doing what they are suppose to be doing. They're not making a ton of plays and they're limiting their mistakes. In short, they are steady and average. In fact the better those around them play the better they play. Wow, this sounds exactly like the kind of production you would hope to get from your backups at any position. And you know what? That's what VT and EG were brought in to be - backups. And as backups, I'd say thewy're doing their jobs by coming in to fill the void at QB and RB left by Quincy Carter's implosion and Julius Jones' unfortunate injury.

AF

[Redball Express]

First, Vinny TEsteverde has never been a good QB in the NFL...his entire career has been one of an average QB at best with an above average arm. That above average arm is the reason he's been given many starting opportunities over the years...every coach has believed that with those talents, he'd eventually be a winner in the NFL. He's not a winner...he makes just as many silly, unadvised throws as many lesser QB's. He doesn't play like a veteran...he panics in the face of pressure, curling up, giving up the sack, or throwing a stupid pass that comes dangerously close to being intercepted...he also throws into coverage...this is on film and is the reason he'll eventually be replaced this year as the starter.

Vinny, like most NFL QB's, can look great and put up great numbers when the pass protection is perfect and his receivers are open; however, apply some pressure or have a receiver running into double coverage, and Vinny just throws the ball up there. He's qb'd 5 games this year...tell me how many times you've seen this veteran QB throw the ball away??? Brunell is struggling in Washington with worse receivers and worse OL blocking, yet I've seen him throw the ball away more in one game than I've seen Vinny do so in 5 games.

Vinny TEsteverde is NOT a good QB....whether he's the best chance we have of winning games has to be left up to Parcells and what he sees and thinks, and rightly so, but anyone who thought Vinny was going to take us to the playoffs this year was wrong...are we good enough to get to the playoffs if Parcells pulls this team together and gets them to play more disciplined? Yes, but I don't think Vinny will get the job done.

Second, while I never liked bringing Eddie George in, I also think he's being totally misused. EG has actually looked pretty good lately, and he does run hard and he does fall forward....however, the same complaint we have about the use of Rashard Lee can be appied to George...he's not being used enough. The only back we have who benefits from this "running back by committee" approach is Anderson...he's running well when the holes are there, and he's a pretty good receiver, but he sucks at blocking.

Eddie George is a rb, much like Emmitt and other tough runners, who gets better as the game wears on and he finds a rhythm...the OL also gets better the more they run block. I don't think EG is the type of back who can be in on 2-3 series in the first half, none in the 3rd quarter, and then "because he's fresh" be expected to take over the game in the 4th quarter.

I think EG should either be benched for Lee, or he should be the starting RB and get most of the carries on 1st and 2nd down...I'm not an EG fan, but I'd like to see him get at least 15-20 carries a game and see what he does. He's not going to be very effective being used the way he is right now...neither is Rashard Lee...and the OL probably feels no consistancy whatsoever with different backs with different styles running in every series.

Now, it's easy for anyone to ask "how dare you think you know better than Parcells...who do you think you are?" That stance is a cheap copout, imo... Every fan has a right to see that what we're doing doesn't really work and share an opinion.

Disagree with the opinions on Vinny and EG...that's your right, but please don't tell me I have no right to voice mine because I don't bow down to the almighty image of Parcells.

I agree about EG with your post.

I disagree about Vinny with your post.

Vinny was never brought in to start. We was brought in for two reasons.

1) he was supposed to mentor Q and Romo and Henson.

2) he was the only experienced guy Parcells could get who knew the offense, would put up with the mentor assignment, would sign for an amount that didn't require the team to commit more than a year and didn't command a huge salary and bonus like all the other QB's available.

After the implosion of the great Hutchinson and great Quincy QB experiments (all Jerry Jones fabrications and complete failures), Vinny is the logical choice to play.

Yes, he has weaknesses. Yes, he does make some throws that make you grab a pillow and throw it at the TV, but he also makes some very good throws that let you see he knows what he's doing. Also, you can clearly see he has a lot of confidence in his receivers and they in him. AB aside.

Compare that to years gone by with Quincy, who couldn't read coverages and never went down field more than 15 a throw or with Aikman in his later years when the team wasn't winning and he was obviuosly not comfortable with his WR's and often complained to them with gestures and lectures on field as to where they were supposed to be., etc.

Vinny excells in both areas.

And when you speak about EG, that's another story.

Actually, the success of both is sort of tying them at the waist.

If EG was running better, Vinny could use more playfakes to get receivers open and decrease the pressure defenses were putting on him.

If EG got more yardage, the defenses would have to start bringing safeties up to the line to stop the running attack and keep LB's and CB's in their areas of responsibilities instead of always blitzing, not respecting our running game.

EG is not the EG of old and it's not realistic to think he should be. JJones was supposed to be the guy, not EG. EG was supposed to get 10-15 carries to spell JJones and the others and to mentor JJones, too..as Vinny was supposed to be doing with the QB's.

Because of the injuries and the drug problems, the teachers are now the starters and it's not all working out on the field. And it may not.

But those guys calling for Henson and Lee to stepup and make significant contributions are asking for too much. At least at this point in the year. lee is basically a rookie with a knee injury from last year and I think Parcells is trying to let him slowly get back into it after sitting out last year.

Same thing with Henson. Parcells wants to let him learn and get his head back into football and not make the same mistakes they made with Hutch by not letting him sit and watch a year before playing him.

This makes total sense to me. Let the guys like Vinny and EG do what they can do and let the rest learn and follow. If some RB is going to take a beating with an OL that hasn't yet learned to switch b/w run blocking and pass blocking, let it be EG.

Same goes for the QB position. If the OL is having these problems, why put Henson back there to get hurt possibly..?

And lastly, what message would Parcells be sending the vets on the team that still feel the team has a chance to correct the season and get it going again..? If he puts henson in at this point, it's a flag of surrender on the season. Parcells will lose them, no doubt, for the rest of the season as they are surely going to pull back a little, too, trying to stay healthy for next year.

Parcells isn't going to do that, yet. maybe if the team is mathmatically eliminated from the playoffs, you'll see changes such as Vinny on the sidelines or Lee starting, but not now.

Parcells has already told us when things will play out.

After Thanksgiving.

By then we will know more. Then we'll see.

But for now, I can only agree with your points about EG but not about Vinny. i would like them to both succeed if possible.

Parcellswaterboy

[ibis]

I agree about EG with your post.

I disagree about Vinny with your post.

Vinny was never brought in to start. We was brought in for two reasons.

1) he was supposed to mentor Q and Romo and Henson.

2) he was the only experienced guy Parcells could get who knew the offense, would put up with the mentor assignment, would sign for an amount that didn't require the team to commit more than a year and didn't command a huge salary and bonus like all the other QB's available.

After the implosion of the great Hutchinson and great Quincy QB experiments (all Jerry Jones fabrications and complete failures), Vinny is the logical choice to play.

Yes, he has weaknesses. Yes, he does make some throws that make you grab a pillow and throw it at the TV, but he also makes some very good throws that let you see he knows what he's doing. Also, you can clearly see he has a lot of confidence in his receivers and they in him. AB aside.

Compare that to years gone by with Quincy, who couldn't read coverages and never went down field more than 15 a throw or with Aikman in his later years when the team wasn't winning and he was obviuosly not comfortable with his WR's and often complained to them with gestures and lectures on field as to where they were supposed to be., etc.

Vinny excells in both areas.

And when you speak about EG, that's another story.

Actually, the success of both is sort of tying them at the waist.

If EG was running better, Vinny could use more playfakes to get receivers open and decrease the pressure defenses were putting on him.

If EG got more yardage, the defenses would have to start bringing safeties up to the line to stop the running attack and keep LB's and CB's in their areas of responsibilities instead of always blitzing, not respecting our running game.

EG is not the EG of old and it's not realistic to think he should be. JJones was supposed to be the guy, not EG. EG was supposed to get 10-15 carries to spell JJones and the others and to mentor JJones, too..as Vinny was supposed to be doing with the QB's.

Because of the injuries and the drug problems, the teachers are now the starters and it's not all working out on the field. And it may not.

But those guys calling for Henson and Lee to stepup and make significant contributions are asking for too much. At least at this point in the year. lee is basically a rookie with a knee injury from last year and I think Parcells is trying to let him slowly get back into it after sitting out last year.

Same thing with Henson. Parcells wants to let him learn and get his head back into football and not make the same mistakes they made with Hutch by not letting him sit and watch a year before playing him.

This makes total sense to me. Let the guys like Vinny and EG do what they can do and let the rest learn and follow. If some RB is going to take a beating with an OL that hasn't yet learned to switch b/w run blocking and pass blocking, let it be EG.

Same goes for the QB position. If the OL is having these problems, why put Henson back there to get hurt possibly..?

And lastly, what message would Parcells be sending the vets on the team that still feel the team has a chance to correct the season and get it going again..? If he puts henson in at this point, it's a flag of surrender on the season. Parcells will lose them, no doubt, for the rest of the season as they are surely going to pull back a little, too, trying to stay healthy for next year.

Parcells isn't going to do that, yet. maybe if the team is mathmatically eliminated from the playoffs, you'll see changes such as Vinny on the sidelines or Lee starting, but not now.

Parcells has already told us when things will play out.

After Thanksgiving.

By then we will know more. Then we'll see.

But for now, I can only agree with your points about EG but not about Vinny. i would like them to both succeed if possible.

Parcellswaterboy...well said,look I'm Vinny fan and he can make you nuts...terrific passes and bonehead plays often in the same game..ok ok same drive...he made me throw up all over my date during that 5 pick debacle against Penn State...he's personally been responsible for beach houses for more than a few of the Steeler DB's over the years...BUT...he's my man...the Class,the Integrity,the Leadership..and and the flat out beauty of watching him play when he's on...

[Chuck 54]

Dallas 5 Games in 2003 4-1
Dallas 5 Games in 2004 2-3 (W/additions of George, Keyshawn and an improved OL}

Seems to me Quincy was getting it done better without that "solid run game", amung many other missing things that VT has.
Let's not overlook that Carter had a much much better defense playing when he was on the sideline too.

[Redball Express]

Let's not overlook that Carter had a much much better defense playing when he was on the sideline too.

Actually..I think you hit the nail on the head about bringing the defense into the equation.

If you look at the overall play of the offense of this year vs. last year..it's comparable..except for the flip-flop of the passing being better this year than last but last year's running game being more consistant than this year's.

The Pts/game is about the same so the real difference is the defense.

So far, they haven't played like last year's unit. That definitely makes the offensive problems magnified. And any mistake, offensively, defensively or on special teams leaves little room to recover.

We got spoiled last year with the job they did. Pure and simple. And we are making a mistake thinking with 4-5 new starters in the base defense and even more in the nickle packages..

..that the defense will be the same.

So good point. It's still a team sport and both sides of the ball have to play for 60 minutes.

Parcellswaterboy

[SuspectCorner]

Seems to me Q was getting it done with a more effective defense.
and a LESS effective O-line, no possession WR, and hambrick as the feature back. thin...

[ravidubey]

Dallas 5 Games in 2003 4-1
Dallas 5 Games in 2004 2-3 (W/additions of George, Keyshawn and an improved OL}

Seems to me Quincy was getting it done better without that "solid run game", amung many other missing things that VT has.

Vickless Atlanta, Giants on the brink of a total meltdown, Penningtonless-Martin overworked Jets, Rogerless Hapless Detroit, and Pathetic Arizona.

Give me that insanely easy schedule any year! Heck the team that was the worst of the lot at the time, Atlanta, was the team that beat us and outcoached Tuna!

Compare with:

Contending Vikings, Average Cleveland, Ridiculous Washington, resurgent New York, and solid and improving Pittsburgh.

The teams that beat us have 4 losses between them!

[Nors]

Let's not overlook that Carter had a much much better defense playing when he was on the sideline too.


Look at Time of posession! We ran the ball much more with QC. We had I'd guess a 5-6 minute TOP decrease this year under VT and the more pass happy offense!

Is our defense worse off with no RCB addressed in offseason? It should be Law that a team could be sued for negligence on not acting on, Yes we are a tick off but we are talking Edwards?

Fact is we play a wuss 4-3 deep cover 2. With our D on the field with undersixed OLB's and Interior DT's (Glove, Carson). That translates to more points allowed.

No one listens - we are a better team giving it to Tham/George 20-25 times a game. Control the clock and keep D off field!

[Redball Express]

Look at Time of posession! We ran the ball much more with QC. We had I'd guess a 5-6 minute TOP decrease this year under VT and the more pass happy offense!

Is our defense worse off with no RCB addressed in offseason? It should be Law that a team could be sued for negligence on not acting on, Yes we are a tick off but we are talking Edwards?

Fact is we play a wuss 4-3 deep cover 2. With our D on the field with undersixed OLB's and Interior DT's (Glove, Carson). That translates to more points allowed.

No one listens - we are a better team giving it to Tham/George 20-25 times a game. Control the clock and keep D off field!

I would agree with that evaluation as well. TOP does make a huge difference because the defense is out on the field much longer and our defense does wear down being undersized.

This has really always been the case over the years. Even back in the SB years. We got away with the defensive scheme of being a smaller, quicker team because our offense always controlled the TOP and scored more points when they had the ball.

This helped the defense a bunch as teams had to abandon game plans of running the ball alot on us to instead play catchup. This simplified the defense as they could pretty much just rush the passer and mix up their cover packages and win.

Our defense is being exposed because of the offense being employed, no doubt. And TOP is part of the answer to the problems.

Good point.

Parcellswaterboy