"Start Henson!"??? NOW I'm confused...

[Nav22]

Everybody seems to be screaming for Parcells to throw Henson in now, right?

But isn't that exactly what we did NOT want to do this season?

Wasn't everybody saying that's how we messed up Chad Hutchinson, who hadn't played in 4 years- by playing him in his rookie year, before he was ready, and "stunting his growth"?

Henson hasn't played in 3 years. Why are the rules different for him?

"Because he could've been a #1 pick! Because he has more potential than Hutchinson did!"

But...he still hasn't played the game in 3 years. If he was even close to being ready, why was he our 3rd QB for almost this entire season? Why isn't anybody afraid of "stunting his growth"?

Either...
A) the pain of this 3-5 start is blocking some people's rational perspectives, or
B) the "growth stunting" factor is BS and people (including JJ) used it as an excuse to defend a QB who simply didn't have what it takes.

Maybe a little of both.

(No I'm definitely NOT defending Vinny. But I don't know if starting Henson would really be the wisest choice right now, especially if the "growth stunting" possibility is real.)

[Kangaroo]

Everybody seems to be screaming for Parcells to throw Henson in now, right?

But isn't that exactly what we did NOT want to do this season?

Wasn't everybody saying that's how we messed up Chad Hutchinson, who hadn't played in 4 years- by playing him in his rookie year, before he was ready, and "stunting his growth"?

Henson hasn't played in 3 years. Why are the rules different for him?

"Because he could've been a #1 pick! Because he has more potential than Hutchinson did!"

But...he still hasn't played the game in 3 years. If he was even close to being ready, why was he our 3rd QB for almost this entire season? Why isn't anybody afraid of "stunting his growth"?

Either...
A) the pain of this 3-5 start is blocking some people's rational perspectives, or
B) the "growth stunting" factor is BS and people (including JJ) used it as an excuse to defend a QB who simply didn't have what it takes.

Maybe a little of both.

(No I'm definitely NOT defending Vinny. But I don't know if starting Henson would really be the wisest choice right now, especially if the "growth stunting" possibility is real.)

I was expecting QB ball to be are qb but he is not and I can not stand to watch Vinny anymore.

If not Henson then Romo but no more Vinny (hell he makes wish we had qball back) He has been in the league 20 years and makes the same mistakes most rookies do.

[4lifecowboy]

plain and simple. The season is close to being a wash. If Henson is going to start next year, he may as well get his experience now vs next year, when we could possibly be more competative.

[blindzebra]

Everybody seems to be screaming for Parcells to throw Henson in now, right?

But isn't that exactly what we did NOT want to do this season?

Wasn't everybody saying that's how we messed up Chad Hutchinson, who hadn't played in 4 years- by playing him in his rookie year, before he was ready, and "stunting his growth"?

Henson hasn't played in 3 years. Why are the rules different for him?

"Because he could've been a #1 pick! Because he has more potential than Hutchinson did!"

But...he still hasn't played the game in 3 years. If he was even close to being ready, why was he our 3rd QB for almost this entire season? Why isn't anybody afraid of "stunting his growth"?

Either...
A) the pain of this 3-5 start is blocking some people's rational perspectives, or
B) the "growth stunting" factor is BS and people (including JJ) used it as an excuse to defend a QB who simply didn't have what it takes.

Maybe a little of both.

(No I'm definitely NOT defending Vinny. But I don't know if starting Henson would really be the wisest choice right now, especially if the "growth stunting" possibility is real.)

Two different players. Two different people. Two different backgrounds. Two different situations. Two different coaching staffs.

Henson is not Hutchinson.

[TruBlueCowboy]

I originally wasn't for Henson starting this year but I also thought a bad year for this team would be 7-9 or 8-8. I never expected to be worried about another 5-11 season. :( Might as well throw Henson out there and give him a conservative gameplan with the best chance for winning.

[Dale]

Before the season, many felt it was necessary to play Henson at some point this year. Otherwise, we'll be entering next season with our starting quarterback having never played a game, which is potentially a recipe for disaster if we are planning to even consider contending for a playoff berth.

The difference when we inserted Hutchinson into the lineup was that we were being told the move was made based on performance, and that Coslet felt Hutchinson gave us a better chance to contend. Thus, Hutch wasn't being compared to other rookie quarterbacks, rather he was expected to not only perform better than Quincy, but perform at a level capable of getting us in playoff contention.

If we start Henson, it won't be because Parcells thinks he's better than Testaverde. It will be because we realize this season is over for all intents and purposes, and we are playing for 2005. A whole different set of expectations and pressure will be placed on Henson than was placed on Hutchinson for that reason alone. Certainly people will expect Henson to show something, but I suspect people will be more willing to accept 'rookie mistakes.'

And on the Hutchinson note, recall Quincy was placed in a similar predicament as a rookie. We released the veteran Tony Banks because, we were told, Quincy was basically better. So Quincy, from the get go, was expected to carry this team to postseason contention as a rookie.

Again, Henson wouldn't shoulder those expectations if inserted into the lineup in future weeks.

As far as being thrown to the wolves so early, laying expectations aside, well, every quarterback has to play at some point. It doesn't really matter if he plays this year or next for the first time, because he'll have to take his bumps and bruises some time. Might as well be now so next season isn't a wash before it even begins.

[Tenkamenin]

I don't want to see Henson in either, I think the success of Ben Rothelisberger may have something to do with why people want Henson in. I remember reading a few poster saying "Well look at Ben, why can't Henson play?" blah type of post.

[SuspectCorner]

I don't want to see Henson in either, I think the success of Ben Rothelisberger may have something to do with why people want Henson in. I remember reading a few poster saying "Well look at Ben, why can't Henson play?" blah type of post.
only a fool would expect henson to "deliver" the team this season. that's what worries me.... jk... sane fans realize playoff aspirations went out the window today. we are officially playing for next year. roethlesberger has a GOOD team around him. no such predicament here. roll henson out and let's see what this baby can do. it's best to get a headstart on next year. any more questions?

[davidyee]

Everybody seems to be screaming for Parcells to throw Henson in now, right?

But isn't that exactly what we did NOT want to do this season?

Wasn't everybody saying that's how we messed up Chad Hutchinson, who hadn't played in 4 years- by playing him in his rookie year, before he was ready, and "stunting his growth"?

Henson hasn't played in 3 years. Why are the rules different for him?

"Because he could've been a #1 pick! Because he has more potential than Hutchinson did!"

But...he still hasn't played the game in 3 years. If he was even close to being ready, why was he our 3rd QB for almost this entire season? Why isn't anybody afraid of "stunting his growth"?

Either...
A) the pain of this 3-5 start is blocking some people's rational perspectives, or
B) the "growth stunting" factor is BS and people (including JJ) used it as an excuse to defend a QB who simply didn't have what it takes.

Maybe a little of both.

(No I'm definitely NOT defending Vinny. But I don't know if starting Henson would really be the wisest choice right now, especially if the "growth stunting" possibility is real.)


...why anyone would think it wiser to start Henson later???? What wolves are you worried about that aren't in the NFL from week to week?

We still have to play Philly two times this season. Does anyone here really believe that Philly will roll out their puppy dogs in the second game just because we put Henson behind the center?

He's gonna get his butt rolled over by any defensive line he qbs against. If he can't handle it, then we just have another Hutch/QC deal again.

Geez, it's not like we are going to play the Carolina Panthers from now to the end of the season. This is the NFL here, and if he wants to show what he can do there is no better time than next week.

By the time the Bears roll into town does anyone believe our offensive line will do a better job protecting him? Now is the time.

[BlueStar22]

Because we are a society that wants instant results. We want instant gratification. We don't want to wait for anything. We want, what we want, NOW! No matter the cost. I too don't understand, why people want to make the same mistake. I see we haven't learned anything from the Hutch experiment. True, Henson may be a more talented guy, but I don't want to chance it. I'd rather wait until the Seattle game, then let Henson start. That way he'd have a whole 10 days to get ready.

It would be just plain stupid to throw him out there on Monday Night against a pissed off Philly team. Not to mention RayLew and the Ravens defense the next week. It would be nice to see him against the Bears but that Thanksgiving game is not nearly enough time for Henson to be ready. I say, put him in against Seattle, IF, we're going to play the guy this year.

I'd rather see Romo because if Henson is the guy, we still need a backup QB. Maybe Romo could be that guy. And why throw Henson in there when his only help is Keyshawn and Witten? I think Rothlisberger is going to be a good one but it doesn't hurt to have Burress, Ward, Randle-EL, and Duce Staley out there with you.

[SuspectCorner]

Because we are a society that wants instant results. We want instant gratification. We don't want to wait for anything. We want, what we want, NOW! No matter the cost. I too don't understand, why people want to make the same mistake. I see we haven't learned anything from the Hutch experiment. True, Henson may be a more talented guy, but I don't want to chance it. I'd rather wait until the Seattle game, then let Henson start. That way he'd have a whole 10 days to get ready.

It would be just plain stupid to throw him out there on Monday Night against a pissed off Philly team. Not to mention RayLew and the Ravens defense the next week. It would be nice to see him against the Bears but that Thanksgiving game is not nearly enough time for Henson to be ready. I say, put him in against Seattle, IF, we're going to play the guy this year.

I'd rather see Romo because if Henson is the guy, we still need a backup QB. Maybe Romo could be that guy. And why throw Henson in there when his only help is Keyshawn and Witten? I think Rothlisberger is going to be a good one but it doesn't hurt to have Burress, Ward, Randle-EL, and Duce Staley out there with you.
as i stated earlier, henson is a QB not a faberge egg. the pass protection is decent this year. take advantage of it and get the kid some reps ASAP. or maybe we haven't given vinny enuff time to mature....

[BlueStar22]

as i stated earlier, henson is a QB not a faberge egg. the pass protection is decent this year. take advantage of it and get the kid some reps ASAP. or maybe we haven't given vinny enuff time to mature....
he is kinda a faberge egg. Think about it. The guy has played in just 8 football games since HIGH SCHOOL. The NFL ain't the Big 10. Ryan Young, former offensive lineman and Parcells guy (i hate that term) hosts a post-game show and he mentioned talkiing to a few guys (Newman in particular) and he mentioned that Henson looks like he has something, but he's not ready. Confidence is everything in a young player. Again, why throw him out there with Keyshawn and Witten his only option. How long before defense start to scheme for Witten? Then what do you do? Randal Williams? Caught his first pass in 4 years but he dropped two. Young QB's that have no help almost always struggle.

[SuspectCorner]

he is kinda a faberge egg. Think about it. The guy has played in just 8 football games since HIGH SCHOOL. The NFL ain't the Big 10. Ryan Young, former offensive lineman and Parcells guy (i hate that term) hosts a post-game show and he mentioned talkiing to a few guys (Newman in particular) and he mentioned that Henson looks like he has something, but he's not ready. Confidence is everything in a young player. Again, why throw him out there with Keyshawn and Witten his only option. How long before defense start to scheme for Witten? Then what do you do? Randal Williams? Caught his first pass in 4 years but he dropped two. Young QB's that have no help almost always struggle.
i'm not denying that you make a compelling argument. receiver depth is nonexistant. the eagles will be angry and will no doubt vent on the boys. but i see nothing other than fear preventing the team from playing henson. nothing is to be gained from starting vinny. it's just a wasted opportunity to get the kids on the team, all of them, some valuable experience that will benefit them next season. the QBs can be protected if we commit to running the ball and pick our spots in the passing game. seriously, are we still approaching this MNF game on a win/lose basis? what is to be gained even if vinny were to pull off the miracle? dallas better take every opportunity available to them RIGHT NOW to prpare henson for the next campaign. holding him back for the bears game is mollycoddling him. this league is REAL and defenders have ill intent toward QBs. he needs to start dealing with the concept from "jump".

[blindzebra]

he is kinda a faberge egg. Think about it. The guy has played in just 8 football games since HIGH SCHOOL. The NFL ain't the Big 10. Ryan Young, former offensive lineman and Parcells guy (i hate that term) hosts a post-game show and he mentioned talkiing to a few guys (Newman in particular) and he mentioned that Henson looks like he has something, but he's not ready. Confidence is everything in a young player. Again, why throw him out there with Keyshawn and Witten his only option. How long before defense start to scheme for Witten? Then what do you do? Randal Williams? Caught his first pass in 4 years but he dropped two. Young QB's that have no help almost always struggle.

Henson played in 20-odd games at Michigan. All young QBs struggle, he's going to struggle if he starts next week or next year, but with two 1st rd picks and cap room isn't it better to get a jump start on those struggles.

[crazylegs]

Everybody seems to be screaming for Parcells to throw Henson in now, right?

But isn't that exactly what we did NOT want to do this season?

Wasn't everybody saying that's how we messed up Chad Hutchinson, who hadn't played in 4 years- by playing him in his rookie year, before he was ready, and "stunting his growth"?

Henson hasn't played in 3 years. Why are the rules different for him?

"Because he could've been a #1 pick! Because he has more potential than Hutchinson did!"

But...he still hasn't played the game in 3 years. If he was even close to being ready, why was he our 3rd QB for almost this entire season? Why isn't anybody afraid of "stunting his growth"?

Either...
A) the pain of this 3-5 start is blocking some people's rational perspectives, or
B) the "growth stunting" factor is BS and people (including JJ) used it as an excuse to defend a QB who simply didn't have what it takes.

Maybe a little of both.

(No I'm definitely NOT defending Vinny. But I don't know if starting Henson would really be the wisest choice right now, especially if the "growth stunting" possibility is real.)

I don't know how it's going to "mess-up" Henson if you tell the guy "hey, the season is ka-put go out and learn something".

As long as he doesn't get hurt, how could you possible hurt his development? He wouldn't even have to learn the whole play book, just play what he knows and dump VT in when needed. :cool:

[Bluefin]

...why anyone would think it wiser to start Henson later???? What wolves are you worried about that aren't in the NFL from week to week?

We still have to play Philly two times this season. Does anyone here really believe that Philly will roll out their puppy dogs in the second game just because we put Henson behind the center?

He's gonna get his butt rolled over by any defensive line he qbs against. If he can't handle it, then we just have another Hutch/QC deal again.

Geez, it's not like we are going to play the Carolina Panthers from now to the end of the season. This is the NFL here, and if he wants to show what he can do there is no better time than next week.

By the time the Bears roll into town does anyone believe our offensive line will do a better job protecting him? Now is the time.
The wisdom, IMO, is that waiting a few weeks would buy Drew Henson time.

Time to start taking equal snaps with Vinny Testaverde in practice and for the staff to start formulating a game plan for the "Hope" to follow.

Time to get Henson in against the Eagles or Ravens late in the game just to get the "first time" experience over with. Henson might only hand the ball off, just let him feel what it's like to be on the field in a regular season game before asking him to come out and start.

Then Henson could receive the majority of practice snaps the week leading up to his first start, which might point to the week after Thanksgiving as the target date.

I hoped the team would remain competitive enough this year to avoid having to even consider the Drew Henson question.

That didn't happen.

Henson needs to play to try and get some useful information out of this season.

But he doesn't need to be patted on the butt and thrown to the wolves, whether he's one himself or not.

Set a date and formulate a plan to prepare Henson for it as best you're able.

Then let the bullets fly where they may.

[Dale]

This is just my opinion, but mental toughness is of utmost importance for quarterbacks in the National Football League, and I don't really think one's mental toughness can be altered by sitting on the bench a few more weeks. Certainly preparation can be improved by learning the game, but ultimately you have to get on the field and prove to yourself that you can do it.

For a guy like Ryan Leaf, I don't think it would have made a bit of difference if he had sat on the bench for a year or two. He would have eventually faced adversity, and his lack of character would have shone through. Likewise, a guy like Aikman took a beating for several years, but his confidence wasn't shaken.

If Henson plays this year, or waits until 2006 to play his first professional game, he'll still face adversity at some point. How he reacts to that is something that (IMO) is intertwined in his character, and we won't know about that until he finally gets on the field.

While he might know the playbook better next year, if he hasn't been on the field, adjusting to the speed of the game and to blitzing defenders will still be nearly as big a problem to handle as it would be this year. It might give him an advantage, but then again, so would the experience of having started a few games before being named the full-time starter with the expectation of leading this team to the playoffs.

If he starts now, the expectations are off. The season will be deemed over by media and fans. If he starts for the first time next year, people will expect a playoff-contending team froma first-year starting quarterback...or else. That, too, seems like a recipe for disaster.

When you get right down to it, starting at quarterback in this league is difficult no matter how hard you try to dumb the situation down. Babying players will only get you so far.

[Bluefin]

This is just my opinion, but mental toughness is of utmost importance for quarterbacks in the National Football League, and I don't really think one's mental toughness can be altered by sitting on the bench a few more weeks. Certainly preparation can be improved by learning the game, but ultimately you have to get on the field and prove to yourself that you can do it.
I agree with you on this.

Mental toghness is something a player either has or doesn't have.

One can't go to the corner store and buy a two liter bottle on mental toughness.

It's innate to the player just like having an internal "quarterback clock" is or having a nose for the ball as a defender.

Good coaches, IMO, can find ways to help players who have these traits develop them further, but they can't just instill them in the athletes whenever the need arises.

And as much as I think formulating a battle plan for Henson will help things in this tough period, it's also important to think of the team.

For some of the veterans, this may be their final ride with the Cowboys or in the NFL, they will not be quick to jump aboard the "Start Henson" bandwagon.

Replacing a veteran, even on a team with a losing record, is always a delicate thing.

This isn't Madden football.

Parcells has to figure out the best time to announce he's going with youth to the players. No matter how he spins it to them, it means we're playing for next year and some are going to resent that.

I guess that's why Big Bill is paid the way he is.

I don't envy him the apparent task in front of him.

[Redball Express]

Everybody seems to be screaming for Parcells to throw Henson in now, right?

But isn't that exactly what we did NOT want to do this season?

Wasn't everybody saying that's how we messed up Chad Hutchinson, who hadn't played in 4 years- by playing him in his rookie year, before he was ready, and "stunting his growth"?

Henson hasn't played in 3 years. Why are the rules different for him?

"Because he could've been a #1 pick! Because he has more potential than Hutchinson did!"

But...he still hasn't played the game in 3 years. If he was even close to being ready, why was he our 3rd QB for almost this entire season? Why isn't anybody afraid of "stunting his growth"?

Either...
A) the pain of this 3-5 start is blocking some people's rational perspectives, or
B) the "growth stunting" factor is BS and people (including JJ) used it as an excuse to defend a QB who simply didn't have what it takes.

Maybe a little of both.

(No I'm definitely NOT defending Vinny. But I don't know if starting Henson would really be the wisest choice right now, especially if the "growth stunting" possibility is real.)

I think your simple answer is..yes..start him.

And give Romo some starts, too.

The dynamics have changed considerably concerning how and when to get Henson some experience. Q is gone, the season is out of control and to salvage anything of value out of the remaining games for this team..

..it's time to move forward with answering the biggest question the team has..QB.

Dallas HAS TO FIND OUT if Henson has ability under fire.

With two #1 draft picks..they need to know if they will have to use one on a QB still.

And they may. Henson maybe the future..the near one or the far one.

We don't know still.

Also, same with Romo. Eventhough he's hypothetically the #3 now, we still don't know about him. Behind center, in a game, he maybe the better player.

We just don't know.

You need to play them both and we need to know.

No more fancy stratgies. No more protecting the investments in the QB's.

We need to know if we have players or just potential players.

Not knowing leaves us drifting along with next year's draft looming and more questions than answers.

DE/DT, CB and WR , RB are now huge holes on this team. We may have the QB and the RB, but we need them to play and see. We don't have 4 #1's to fill these holes. Just 2 of them.

We need answers.

They need to play.

Later.

Parcellswaterboy

[Sarge]

The problem is the running game more than anything. GET EG out of there.

He is a waste of our time. He's gone after this year anyways.

Give Lee a shot at least.

This has been one BAD job by Bill Parcells. How can playing Lee HURT the team??????? - we have no running game as it is.

EG is so slow it is agonizing to watch.

[MichaelWinicki]

The problem is the running game more than anything. GET EG out of there.

He is a waste of our time. He's gone after this year anyways.

Give Lee a shot at least.

This has been one BAD job by Bill Parcells. How can playing Lee HURT the team??????? - we have no running game as it is.

EG is so slow it is agonizing to watch.

Time to start the GROEG campaign.

[twa]

I say start Vinny at philly,if he continues to struggle send in Henson or Romo and let the future begin.I might be in the minority here but I wouldn't mind seeing what the staff see's in Romo :D

[Hollywood Henderson]

I agree Sarge...Vinny isn't to blame when teams will always know that EG poses NO THREAT....

However, perhaps the best time to play Hensen would be WITH the return of J.Jones?

That AND after the canning of that complete clueless fool who looks like Squiggy...

[starfrombirth]

Time to start the GROEG campaign.

I thought we had this club going already? :mad:

[crazylegs]

I think your simple answer is..yes..start him.

And give Romo some starts, too.

The dynamics have changed considerably concerning how and when to get Henson some experience. Q is gone, the season is out of control and to salvage anything of value out of the remaining games for this team..

..it's time to move forward with answering the biggest question the team has..QB.

Dallas HAS TO FIND OUT if Henson has ability under fire.

With two #1 draft picks..they need to know if they will have to use one on a QB still.

And they may. Henson maybe the future..the near one or the far one.

We don't know still.

Also, same with Romo. Eventhough he's hypothetically the #3 now, we still don't know about him. Behind center, in a game, he maybe the better player.

We just don't know.

You need to play them both and we need to know.

No more fancy stratgies. No more protecting the investments in the QB's.

We need to know if we have players or just potential players.

Not knowing leaves us drifting along with next year's draft looming and more questions than answers.

DE/DT, CB and WR , RB are now huge holes on this team. We may have the QB and the RB, but we need them to play and see. We don't have 4 #1's to fill these holes. Just 2 of them.

We need answers.

They need to play.

Later.

Parcellswaterboy

Wouldn't it be a laugh if we sent Henson in next week and god forbid he won a game? I wounder what that would do for his confidence?