New Projects Galore

[Crown Royal]

After perusing today's threads, I have found a common theme that I find very confusing. Many seem to feel that it is absolutely imperative to improve QB play by aqcuiring big names like Brees or Hasselback via FA/trade, or new prospects in the first round, such as Smith, Rogers, or Leinart (if he declares), and take on a new project at QB.


When did the current project end? There seem to be 3 rather consistent trains of thought on the current handling of our QBs-

1- Parcells is a poor coach who plays favorites. For some unknown reason, he believes that Testaverde is the second coming of Unitas and refuses to play talent like Henson, who, after a 3 year hiatus, would still do better than Testaverde who is now and always has been the worst QB to ever play the game of football (Carter aside, of course).

2- Parcells' refusal to play Henson (or Romo, for that matter), is because it has already been decided that that neither have the talent to cut it as an NFL quarterback. Therefore we should cut ties now, do everything to get a new QB who we can either win with immediately or start grooming (grooming is getting old, by the way).

3- Parcells simply does not know QBs the same as he knows RBs, wouldn't recognize talent if he saw it, doesn't know that a QB absolutely needs to play to get experience and that any time he does not play is wasted time.

Why don't we look at the 4 possible reality -

Parcells can cite players like Ryan Leaf, Chad Hutchinson, Rick Mirer, etc., and feel that not EVERY QB is immediately ready to play, rather that it is better to slowly introduce them to the NFL by riding them on the bench and practicing them in the system.

Perhaps he feels that Henson does have immense talent, albeit very raw talent, which needs to be bridled outside of competition, before he ready to compete. To give him good habits, break the inconsistencies, show him NFL style defenses,, etc....in a controlled environment.

Maybe he can cite players like Chad Pennington, who rode the bench for a while and then came in to play effectively, Carson Palmer, who after a season behind Kitna, finished his first starting season strong (albeit, a shaky start). He also remembers players like Stauback who played in TC for 4 years and then only played alternating series before playing full time.

It works both ways - for each Roethlisberger, there is a Donovan McNabb. For each Marino, there is a Steve Young.

One project at a time, folks - chain your ankles to the ground, that way knees don't jerk as hard.

[Crown Royal]

go drown yourself
Sorry - forgot the thought police were out.

[Dale]

No need for personal attacks, mbanx.

I addressed some of this privately to you, CR, but I did want to make one additional comment.

I think the problem with our current quarterback situation is that our project at quarterback, Drew Henson, is hailed as the quarterback of the future. The same was done for Quincy, and for Chad to a lesser extent.

Therein lies the problem. We're relying on projects at the position, and are placing the expectations and pressure on them that are usually saved for first-round picks.

That's why I think it's going to be time to bite the bullet in the near future, and finally take a quarterback in the first round (though I don't think this is the year to take that plunge). Projects at the position usually become successful when those expectations aren't initially placed on them; they're able to walk into the starting role because of injury, and not before they're ready because the team is expecting them to become the next "Troy Aikman."

Now, don't get me wrong, Henson has all the talent. But he's still a project after his time away from the game. We remain uncertain how long it will be before he shakes off the rust, and then we don't know how long to devote to him once he is starting. Do we give him two years before making a judgment call on him? Three years? One full season, and then he's out? Or will his first five-game stretch of poor play result in the hook?

That's the problem with projects. How long is too long? And how short a hook is simply not giving them enough time? With top picks, you have a financial commitment to the player. Without that financial commitment, it becomes difficult to give the player several years to develop.

[Crown Royal]

No need for personal attacks, mbanx.

I addressed some of this privately to you, CR, but I did want to make one additional comment.

I think the problem with our current quarterback situation is that our project at quarterback, Drew Henson, is hailed as the quarterback of the future. The same was done for Quincy, and for Chad to a lesser extent.

Therein lies the problem. We're relying on projects at the position, and are placing the expectations and pressure on them that are usually saved for first-round picks.

That's why I think it's going to be time to bite the bullet in the near future, and finally take a quarterback in the first round (though I don't think this is the year to take that plunge). Projects at the position usually become successful when those expectations aren't initially placed on them; they're able to walk into the starting role because of injury, and not before they're ready because the team is expecting them to become the next "Troy Aikman."

Now, don't get me wrong, Henson has all the talent. But he's still a project after his time away from the game. We remain uncertain how long it will be before he shakes off the rust, and then we don't know how long to devote to him once he is starting. Do we give him two years before making a judgment call on him? Three years? One full season, and then he's out? Or will his first five-game stretch of poor play result in the hook?

That's the problem with projects. How long is too long? And how short a hook is simply not giving them enough time? With top picks, you have a financial commitment to the player. Without that financial commitment, it becomes difficult to give the player several years to develop.
I feel also that the safest bet in acquiring a franchise caliber QB is to find pedigree in the first round of the draft. Unfortunately, there is no exact science to obtaining good QB play - there are a multitude of ways that teams have done so historically.

I believe timing is the key item right now - I was sceptical of Henson, but after seeing him practice this summer, I was very encouraged. He seemed to have the poise that Hutchinson lacked - although it was in practice. If he can mentally get back to the QB position, we have quite possibly found a very good player. But because of the fragility of the situation, we must find the appropriate time to find out. I can't say how long to go with him at QB, or when. I can say that I agree he was not ready to play a down this season.

As for next, I have no clue. That depends on him more than anything else. I am not, however, prepared to stimie (sp?) his possible progression just to bite the bullet now and obtain a new project. I would rather see this one through to the end. I think that we have yet to do so with the QBs you mentioned - Quincy outed himself before we could build on what he did last season, Hutch was doomed from the beginning (my opinion due to the circumstances he was brought in and then thrust into the starting role).

I feel that for the first time in a decade we are relaxing and logically doing what is necessary. The project is still young, and will take time before we know what to do next.

[notherbob]

Good post, Dale.

What do you think of the idea of bringing Vinnie back as the backup since he should require fewer practice reps than any new QB they could bring in if the intent is to give the kid QBs enough reps for them to develop their skills? It seems to me that if it is the intent to develop Drew and Tony, then they need all the reps they can get and any new QB that is brought in will require a LOT of reps to get to know the system and the players. I kinda like the idea of Romo going to NFL Europe; maybe we can see if he has anything worth developing.

[Dale]

As for next, I have no clue. That depends on him more than anything else. I am not, however, prepared to stimie (sp?) his possible progression just to bite the bullet now and obtain a new project. I would rather see this one through to the end.

I agree. If we're serious with Henson, then we have to be also be seroius in our development of him. The Cowboys must be true to the process, and not put a project like him in a position to fail. I think you have to be a heckuva lot more careful with a guy like him than you do a guy like Eli, who had to wait half a year before he even started.

I think the true test in Henson's development will regard how committed we are to developing him. Will we run at the first sign of failure?

[Eskimo]

I agree with some of what you are saying here CR.

Henson's physical ability is amazing - the type of ability that comes along once every 5 years or so. The reason though why I like Henson so much is I remember the competitor he was in college - the poise, the confidence, the leadership. In the limited opportunities he has had here, I think all those qualities are still there.

If we drafted a first-round QB next year, he will be behind where Henson is going to be come next TC. Henson will have had close to 21 months working on his QB skills and 16 months working with the Cowboys staff. I also don't think there is a QB out there that is going to be as good as Henson will be.

[Dale]

Good post, Dale.

What do you think of the idea of bringing Vinnie back as the backup since he should require fewer practice reps than any new QB they could bring in if the intent is to give the kid QBs enough reps for them to develop their skills? It seems to me that if it is the intent to develop Drew and Tony, then they need all the reps they can get and any new QB that is brought in will require a LOT of reps to get to know the system and the players. I kinda like the idea of Romo going to NFL Europe; maybe we can see if he has anything worth developing.

IF Parcells thinks Drew or Tony will be the guy, then I think the decision to re-sign Testaverde -- a veteran who knows the system and should embrace the role as mentor -- is a smart move. However, if Parcells remains skeptical of Henson, I fail to see any purpose Vinny Testaverde serves with the Dallas Cowboys.

[StateCollegeCowboy]

IF Parcells thinks Drew or Tony will be the guy, then I think the decision to re-sign Testaverde -- a veteran who knows the system and should embrace the role as mentor -- is a smart move. However, if Parcells remains skeptical of Henson, I fail to see any purpose Vinny Testaverde serves with the Dallas Cowboys.

I think what we do with Vinny this offseason will be the key to what Parcells thinks of the young QBs. I mean, I know that everybody hates the Idea of Vinny being the opening day starter next year, but there would be some revealing truth to his actions.

Everybody could see that Vinny was wearing down during the season. I know that Parcells could see this too (although some posters will beg-to-differ). It is very unlikely that Vinny will last a whole season again, much less perform at an above average level till the end of the season. At some point with Vinny starting, we'll have to go with the backup and if we go with Vinny/Henson/Romo next year, that tells me that he believes in the young guys and that one of them will step in as the starter.

Bill, in general, knows what he is doing with players. He makes mistakes, but he is not this dumb coach who doesn't have a clue as to what he is doing. The guy is highly reguarded for a reason and it sure isn't for his looks.

If he gets a QB in the draft or signs a young veteran during the offseason to a long term deal, then you know he hasn't liked what he has seen with Henson/Romo. If Vinny comes back for a year, then Henson/Romo are very much in the plans.

[Crown Royal]

One more point against drafting QB this year....

We already have this year's third invested in QB. I would rather run with that project than have 2 from the same draft....

[Dale]

I think what we do with Vinny this offseason will be the key to what Parcells thinks of the young QBs. I mean, I know that everybody hates the Idea of Vinny being the opening day starter next year, but there would be some revealing truth to his actions.

Everybody could see that Vinny was wearing down during the season. I know that Parcells could see this too (although some posters will beg-to-differ). It is very unlikely that Vinny will last a whole season again, much less perform at an above average level till the end of the season. At some point with Vinny starting, we'll have to go with the backup and if we go with Vinny/Henson/Romo next year, that tells me that he believes in the young guys and that one of them will step in as the starter.

Bill, in general, knows what he is doing with players. He makes mistakes, but he is not this dumb coach who doesn't have a clue as to what he is doing. The guy is highly reguarded for a reason and it sure isn't for his looks.

If he gets a QB in the draft or signs a young veteran during the offseason to a long term deal, then you know he hasn't liked what he has seen with Henson/Romo. If Vinny comes back for a year, then Henson/Romo are very much in the plans.

Great post, BC. Parcells is going to whiff on some moves, but he's not a man that moves forward without some sort of plan in place.

[Dale]

One more point against drafting QB this year....

We already have this year's third invested in QB. I would rather run with that project than have 2 from the same draft....

Agreed. Bringing in another rookie this year would be akin to signing Hutch during Quincy's second season. I don't know that either quarterback would have properly developed without the other on the roster, but I think the presence of both certainly didn't help their development. They were not amicable with one another and lacked a veteran presence to turn to their entire stay with the Cowboys (I don't count the few months Banks was here to 'develop' Carter nor the few months Vinny was a Cowboy while Chad was still here).

Another project this off-season would merely compound the problem. UNLESS Parcells is ready to ditch Henson and draft a guy in the first round, which I don't even think is a remote possibility. But trying to develop both would be a colossal error.

[Crown Royal]

Agreed. Bringing in another rookie this year would be akin to signing Hutch during Quincy's second season. I don't know that either quarterback would have properly developed without the other on the roster, but I think the presence of both certainly didn't help their development. They were not amicable with one another and lacked a veteran presence to turn to their entire stay with the Cowboys (I don't count the few months Banks was here to 'develop' Carter nor the few months Vinny was a Cowboy while Chad was still here).

Another project this off-season would merely compound the problem. UNLESS Parcells is ready to ditch Henson and draft a guy in the first round, which I don't even think is a remote possibility. But trying to develop both would be a colossal error.
I hated the Hutch signing the second it happened. You brought a guy in to back you up, you are our project still and we want you to be our future....but we are gonna play him more. Oh yeah - he fits Coslet's system more than you - no biggy, though, right? (Not a knock on Hutchinson - but that was an ill-fated move, even moreso than the Quincy reach in the draft).

Also - if we draft a 1st round QB this year - he will get paid more than Henson. Who is the project, then?

[Trag3344]

sometimes i just feel like we're not even a professional football team. i mean these players are supposed to be the best of the best. they are supposed to be professionals. the problem here is since our qb situation is so hit and miss, why in the world would you throw out a 3rd round pick for a guy who chose baseball over football (like the 2 others before him did quincy and hutch) and on top of that he hasn't played football in 3 years. 3 years people.. thats a LONG TIME, TOO LONG! and he wasn't a fulltime starter for even a full year in college.

we are in the big leagues, you can't sit around and pamper a baseball player for 5 years and hope he plays good against the best defenses in the world. in essence we're selling our entire team short with henson. letting the likes of vinny lead the team, to wait for maybe the most unknown qb prospect to ever return to football.

i dont care what henson did 3 years ago, that was 3 years ago. warner was a superbowl mvp 3 years ago, look at him now. things change. why not bite the bullet now and get a guy like alex smith from utah with our first pick? seriously. im sick of hoping these insane baseball project qb's pan out, in fact i've given up on them.

[Crown Royal]

sometimes i just feel like we're not even a professional football team. i mean these players are supposed to be the best of the best. they are supposed to be professionals. the problem here is since our qb situation is so hit and miss, why in the world would you throw out a 3rd round pick for a guy who chose baseball over football (like the 2 others before him did quincy and hutch) and on top of that he hasn't played football in 3 years. 3 years people.. thats a LONG TIME, TOO LONG! and he wasn't a fulltime starter for even a full year in college.

we are in the big leagues, you can't sit around and pamper a baseball player for 5 years and hope he plays good against the best defenses in the world. in essence we're selling our entire team short with henson. letting the likes of vinny lead the team, to wait for maybe the most unknown qb prospect to ever return to football.

i dont care what henson did 3 years ago, that was 3 years ago. warner was a superbowl mvp 3 years ago, look at him now. things change. why not bite the bullet now and get a guy like alex smith from utah with our first pick? seriously. im sick of hoping these insane baseball project qb's pan out, in fact i've given up on them.
There is no such thing as a sure thing, especially at QB. And players often times leave football to return - see the military academies. Note - that is uncommon at QB - however, if Henson pans out, we have payed very cheaply for a quality QB, one who happened to look very good, at least worth a 3rd to take a shot.

2 draft picks in one draft on a QB is a stretch - especially a 1st and 3rd.

As for biting the bullet and taking someone like Alex Smith - he is, IMHO, not much more of a sure thing. He may be a very good player, but there is risk involved there as well. Utah's offense looks a LOT like BYU's of the 80s...Ty Detmer didn't exactly light the NFL up.

When the Henson project is over, then I will be prepared to start the next one. But I am not ready to have 2 at a time (again).

[Trag3344]

we can only hope that we can still pawn henson off to a team desperate for a qb.. for a 3rd rounder. he's had a full year of nfl grooming, if he's all that he should be i'll gladly take our 3rd rounder back now. please be a draft day trade.

[Hostile]

IF Parcells thinks Drew or Tony will be the guy, then I think the decision to re-sign Testaverde -- a veteran who knows the system and should embrace the role as mentor -- is a smart move. However, if Parcells remains skeptical of Henson, I fail to see any purpose Vinny Testaverde serves with the Dallas Cowboys.Interesting take. Keeping Vinny is merely a sign that there is faith in one or even both of the young QBs. My guess it would be in Henson since they have already said Romo is headed to Europe.

My only caveat to this would be if Vinny is such a mentor, make him the QB Coach and sign a veteran who is younger to be the starter. He can mentor just as easily in that way and hopefully we get better QB play. Of course since I don't think Vinny is very good I worry about what he is teaching the kids.

[Dale]

Keeping Vinny is merely a sign that there is faith in one or even both of the young QBs.

It just has to be. Simple logic dictates this, because if it's not, then the front office is just asleep behind the wheel on this decision.

Why return a subpar 41-year old quarterback with two terrible backups with no future (again, looking at this from the opposite angle that the same group of quarterbacks return despite Parcells thinking lowly of Henson and Romo)? At the very least, if Parcells isn't impressed by Henson, a free agent with some ability and potential will be brought in. If a Brees, Hasselbeck, or some other young quarterback with an upside is signed, then I think that's a tell-tale sign for Parcells' vision of Henson's lack of future.

But, as you said, if the same three return, Parcells has to have a plan for Henson . . . or Jerry is making him have a plan for Henson (as he petitioned for Parcells to keep Chad and Quincy around his first year here). I sure hope it's not the latter, because if Parcells isn't truly on board with the move, the team is doomed during his tenure. A coach like Parcells, who thrives on control, can't be hamstrung at the quarterback position while someone else is making the choices there.

And this isn't just an indictment on Jerry if this were the case. Heck, he's the GM and owner, and I can see why he'd want to have a say. It's also an indictment on Parcells if he would coddle to such a decision despite (in his mind) knowing it's the wrong move to make.

[Dale]

My only caveat to this would be if Vinny is such a mentor, make him the QB Coach and sign a veteran who is younger to be the starter. He can mentor just as easily in that way and hopefully we get better QB play. Of course since I don't think Vinny is very good I worry about what he is teaching the kids.

Vinny certainly has a level of skill or else he would not have been a Heisman winner and have lasted 18 (soon-to-be 19) years in this league. With that said, he has clearly had some huge deficiencies as a player, but a lot of times it's those players that make the best teachers.

Guys like Troy, Emmitt and Deion, I think, often can't relate fully to guys who don't have that elite level of talent. As "talented" as Vinny is to have stayed in the league so long, he's had enough problems to where I think he has a good grasp on what to tell young quarterbacks what NOT to do.

Don't get me wrong. I doubt he's some super teacher at the position, but I think he can probably offer some solid advice -- both on how to handle the bad times, the pressure and certain mechanically or film based tid bits.

[Hostile]

Vinny certainly has a level of skill or else he would not have been a Heisman winner and have lasted 18 (soon-to-be 19) years in this league. With that said, he has clearly had some huge deficiencies as a player, but a lot of times it's those players that make the best teachers.

Guys like Troy, Emmitt and Deion, I think, often can't relate fully to guys who don't have that elite level of talent. As "talented" as Vinny is to have stayed in the league so long, he's had enough problems to where I think he has a good grasp on what to tell young quarterbacks what NOT to do.

Don't get me wrong. I doubt he's some super teacher at the position, but I think he can probably offer some solid advice -- both on how to handle the bad times, the pressure and certain mechanically or film based tid bits.I agree on elite level guys usually not making good Coaches because they cannot relate.

I like the idea that keeping Vinny is a sign that they think the future of the franchise is on the team. Makes re-signing Vinny a little more platable for me even though the very idea makes me want to retch.

[lspain1]

I agree on elite level guys usually not making good Coaches because they cannot relate.

I like the idea that keeping Vinny is a sign that they think the future of the franchise is on the team. Makes re-signing Vinny a little more platable for me even though the very idea makes me want to retch.


Folks, the qb situation is viewed as important to so many here precisely because it takes some time to develop a young (or new) qb. And history shows us that it is a hit or miss process. Elite qbs do not always develop out of high first round picks. But sometimes they do. The Giants decided the pedigree and talent of Manning was so high the odds were very good. I agree with them in spite of Eli's difficulties this season.

So what should the Cowboys do now? Regardless of the multiple points of view expressed above....WE WILL NOT KNOW IF HENSON CAN PLAY UNTIL HE PLAYS!!!! We can argue about Vinny's value to the Cowboys (or Hasselbeck...or ?), but the truth is we need to know if Henson can be the guy. Romo really counts as a project as well. How are we going to find out about him? Will NFLE tell us anything? It did about Hutch.

We have so many other problems to solve this year, I just can't see spending a lot of money or a draft pick on that position. It is BP's job to make sense out of this situation. Assuming the Carter situation came about just at the start of training camp, I have to cut BP some slack on this but that slack has now ended. We had better decide this winter what the path forward at qb is going to be. While the season we had can not be laid completely at the feet of our qb this season, I believe that Vinny made more poor decisions and more poor throws as the season progressed. If "winning now" means that we start Vinny again then I guess I am on the side of "let's win later."

I believe that Cowboy moves on the FA market will be very telling on how our FA sees the qb position. I'll make my prediciton that BP is going to go into training camp expecting Henson to win the qb battle with whoever else he has. So no Hasselbeck to Dallas.

[Phrozen Phil]

What we're seeing is the reality of rebuilding a team. It appears to be happening slower than we'd like, but there does appear to be a plan in place. We now know what our running game looks like. We have some adjustments to make to the O-Line, but there is talent there. We have a solid TE and, hopefully, Campbell returns healthy. Our QB question may have been influenced by the injuries to our WR's, but it may also have something to do with Henson not being "ready" by Parcell's definition. Our WR's are decent, when healthy, but Morgan remains an enigma. Next Year's TC will tell the tale with him.

The defense is more of a question mark. We still don't have the pass rush we need, the CB's are painfully thin talent-wise, and we need a real FS in the worst way. Teams can run against our D-Line, and the debate about the effectiveness of our LB's rages on here.

My point is that the QB debate may not even be the primary off-season concern for this team. Jones' approach to free agency will tell us if he feels he can improve the team via that route or if he's (God forbid) happy with the talent he has. THe real issue may be the ever-arising debate as to Jones' skills as a GM. In recent yers he's been found wanting..... :(