I know I know, we do not need another one

[BHendri5]

Roger Staubach on Q.CARTER

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In terms of a quarterback controversy, the current one in Cowboys camp is nothing like the one in 1971 when Tom Landry was so torn between Roger Staubach and Craig Morton that he alternated them every play.

Can you imagine Bill Parcells doing that? Quincy Carter plays on first down because if he gets in trouble he can scramble. Then on second-and-long, rocket-arm Drew Henson comes in and throws downfield. Then on third-and-long, Vinny Testaverde takes over to make a veteran, clutch play.

Well, maybe not.

The quarterback soap opera will generate a lot of heat when the Cowboys open training camp next month, and like everyone else, the greatest quarterback in Cowboys history is fascinated by the possibilities.

We caught up with Staubach at a charity baseball game in Frisco on Saturday night and asked a few questions:

How do you assess the quarterback situation?

"Well, I'm not in the thick of it personally, but it looks like they are going to give Quincy the chance to see if he can build on last year. If he doesn't, it sounds like Vinny's going to come in and get Drew Henson ready for the future."

What would you like to see?

"I hope Quincy continues to show the progress that he did last year and ratchets it up again this year. If he does, I think he's the guy. If you look at his history, since he's been here, he never complains. He just says, 'I'm going out there and do my job.' That's his attitude, and I sure like his attitude."

Quincy has taken a lot of criticism since he has been here. Do you think he's deserved it?

"I think he's shown a lot of class and shown that he can do a lot of good things on the field. You've just got to kind of put it all together and take it to the next level. I think he has positioned himself to do that."

If the Cowboys start a 40-year-old quarterback, is that a bad sign for their program?

"Not really. It depends on how things turn out with the running back position and how the offensive line holds up. Bill Parcells has put a lot of ingredients together. If you look at the New England Patriots, Tom Brady came into his own, but they had a lot of holes. They won because they played together as a team. Parity really does give the Cowboys a chance, especially if they pull together on defense. They need to get a little lucky on offense, but it's not all about the quarterback. Teams have won with the [Trent] Dilfers of the world, so you don't have to always have the [John] Elways or [Joe] Montanas."

But if Quincy gets beat out by a 40-year-old quarterback, that wouldn't seem to bode well for his future, would it?

"Well, he was benched before and he came back. But no. That would not be good. And even if he does start, it doesn't look like they're going to give him the second and third chances they did in the past. It's going to be interesting to see how he reacts. I'd like to see him succeed. I'm pulling for him."
__________________

[Doomsday101]

Roger Staubach on Q.CARTER

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In terms of a quarterback controversy, the current one in Cowboys camp is nothing like the one in 1971 when Tom Landry was so torn between Roger Staubach and Craig Morton that he alternated them every play.

Can you imagine Bill Parcells doing that? Quincy Carter plays on first down because if he gets in trouble he can scramble. Then on second-and-long, rocket-arm Drew Henson comes in and throws downfield. Then on third-and-long, Vinny Testaverde takes over to make a veteran, clutch play.

Well, maybe not.

The quarterback soap opera will generate a lot of heat when the Cowboys open training camp next month, and like everyone else, the greatest quarterback in Cowboys history is fascinated by the possibilities.

We caught up with Staubach at a charity baseball game in Frisco on Saturday night and asked a few questions:

How do you assess the quarterback situation?

"Well, I'm not in the thick of it personally, but it looks like they are going to give Quincy the chance to see if he can build on last year. If he doesn't, it sounds like Vinny's going to come in and get Drew Henson ready for the future."

What would you like to see?

"I hope Quincy continues to show the progress that he did last year and ratchets it up again this year. If he does, I think he's the guy. If you look at his history, since he's been here, he never complains. He just says, 'I'm going out there and do my job.' That's his attitude, and I sure like his attitude."

Quincy has taken a lot of criticism since he has been here. Do you think he's deserved it?

"I think he's shown a lot of class and shown that he can do a lot of good things on the field. You've just got to kind of put it all together and take it to the next level. I think he has positioned himself to do that."

If the Cowboys start a 40-year-old quarterback, is that a bad sign for their program?

"Not really. It depends on how things turn out with the running back position and how the offensive line holds up. Bill Parcells has put a lot of ingredients together. If you look at the New England Patriots, Tom Brady came into his own, but they had a lot of holes. They won because they played together as a team. Parity really does give the Cowboys a chance, especially if they pull together on defense. They need to get a little lucky on offense, but it's not all about the quarterback. Teams have won with the [Trent] Dilfers of the world, so you don't have to always have the [John] Elways or [Joe] Montanas."

But if Quincy gets beat out by a 40-year-old quarterback, that wouldn't seem to bode well for his future, would it?

"Well, he was benched before and he came back. But no. That would not be good. And even if he does start, it doesn't look like they're going to give him the second and third chances they did in the past. It's going to be interesting to see how he reacts. I'd like to see him succeed. I'm pulling for him."
__________________

I just hope this debate can be put behind us once and for all and hopefully this will be the season that determines it. For good or bad the question of who will lead the Cowboys at QB needs to be ansewered. I still have major question marks with Carter but willing to sitback and let it play itself out

[LaTunaNostra]

Roger Staubach on Q.CARTER

It's going to be interesting to see how he reacts. I'd like to see him succeed. I'm pulling for him."


Well I should hope so.

Q's been hawking Roger's throwback jersey, and all.

Carter wore a Staubach throwback jersey to the set of Best Damn Sports Show Period and it looked good on him.

http://www.nfldraftblitz.com/cowboys8.23.03.htm

A former QB rooting for a current one, well, darn how revolutionary.

And Sarge, link? Author? Paper? Unless it's classified, that is. :D

As for Staubach, once a class act, always one.

[Charles]

Well I should hope so.

Q's been hawking Roger's throwback jersey, and all.

Carter wore a Staubach throwback jersey to the set of Best Damn Sports Show Period and it looked good on him.

http://www.nfldraftblitz.com/cowboys8.23.03.htm

A former QB rooting for a current one, well, darn how revolutionary.

And Sarge, link? Author? Paper? Unless it's classified, that is. :D

As for Staubach, once a class act, always one.

Carter still has a long way to go. I doubt Roger Staubach's will sway many opinions.

There will always be reasons to bash Carter, even if he gets over the hump and wins the Superbowl. Troy won 3 superbowls and he still has many critcs amongst Cowboy fans.

If Carter is lucky enough to lead the team to the NFC Championship and lose, he'll be considered the next Danny White or Kordell Stewart.

I think most fans actually enjoy the QB debates in an addictive sick kind of way :confused:.

I enjoy looking at past QB debates (@ Cowboys.net -archives) during the summer.

Look at my signature. Carter and the Cowboys met those standards (or expectations) during the 2003 season. I am not surprised that the same poster hopes are placed squarely on the shoulders of a player that hasn't proven anything on the NFL level.

[Nors]

Roger Staubach on Q.CARTER

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In terms of a quarterback controversy, the current one in Cowboys camp is nothing like the one in 1971 when Tom Landry was so torn between Roger Staubach and Craig Morton that he alternated them every play.

Can you imagine Bill Parcells doing that? Quincy Carter plays on first down because if he gets in trouble he can scramble. Then on second-and-long, rocket-arm Drew Henson comes in and throws downfield. Then on third-and-long, Vinny Testaverde takes over to make a veteran, clutch play.

Well, maybe not.

The quarterback soap opera will generate a lot of heat when the Cowboys open training camp next month, and like everyone else, the greatest quarterback in Cowboys history is fascinated by the possibilities.

We caught up with Staubach at a charity baseball game in Frisco on Saturday night and asked a few questions:

How do you assess the quarterback situation?

"Well, I'm not in the thick of it personally, but it looks like they are going to give Quincy the chance to see if he can build on last year. If he doesn't, it sounds like Vinny's going to come in and get Drew Henson ready for the future."

What would you like to see?

"I hope Quincy continues to show the progress that he did last year and ratchets it up again this year. If he does, I think he's the guy. If you look at his history, since he's been here, he never complains. He just says, 'I'm going out there and do my job.' That's his attitude, and I sure like his attitude."

Quincy has taken a lot of criticism since he has been here. Do you think he's deserved it?

"I think he's shown a lot of class and shown that he can do a lot of good things on the field. You've just got to kind of put it all together and take it to the next level. I think he has positioned himself to do that."

If the Cowboys start a 40-year-old quarterback, is that a bad sign for their program?

"Not really. It depends on how things turn out with the running back position and how the offensive line holds up. Bill Parcells has put a lot of ingredients together. If you look at the New England Patriots, Tom Brady came into his own, but they had a lot of holes. They won because they played together as a team. Parity really does give the Cowboys a chance, especially if they pull together on defense. They need to get a little lucky on offense, but it's not all about the quarterback. Teams have won with the [Trent] Dilfers of the world, so you don't have to always have the [John] Elways or [Joe] Montanas."

But if Quincy gets beat out by a 40-year-old quarterback, that wouldn't seem to bode well for his future, would it?

"Well, he was benched before and he came back. But no. That would not be good. And even if he does start, it doesn't look like they're going to give him the second and third chances they did in the past. It's going to be interesting to see how he reacts. I'd like to see him succeed. I'm pulling for him."
__________________

I think QC will be our starter and get the job done this year.
Plan B means the season is down the toilet.

[Hollywood Henderson]

It seems Roger's memory is slipping a bit in his age...

He doesn't remember Carter sulking & whinning when Hutch beat him out the year before last?

The odds are against Carter...While mobile, he doesn't run well and he often coughs up the ball without being hit by carring it like a loaf of bread....

We all know he isn't a good passer and he doesn't read defenses...

No, Vinny seems like a better starter this year, while Hensen gets ready to be a star!

[LaTunaNostra]

Carter still has a long way to go. I doubt Roger Staubach's will sway many opinions.

And it shouldn't. But RS seems to see something in Q many don't.

I think he's got considerable talent, although right now he doesn't qualify as much more than a tease. Bill has to harness it in a way that doesn't necessarily play to Carter's play making ability. All last season I felt like geez, the straightjacket approach. Even Bill used that word near season' send in a press conference, "it's not like I've got a straightjacket on him". Well he did, and that sometimes worked to our advantage, sometimes not.

Many if not most of the picks Q threw last season were out of hubris, imo. He wants to freelance and be the man, like in college. Tuna's got years of sloppy mechanics and free lancing to stomp out of him. His decision making is not as bad as some seem to think. I think it's his fricking ego that makes him want to play like he did in school....make something happen. Like Vinnie did for so so many years, Carter looks like he is putting too high a value, too much confidence, on a particular skill. Vin thought due to his arm he could gun it anywhere, anytime, to any spot and beat the D. And so he had an abysmal TD:INT ratios for years.

But Vinnie, once he met up with Tuna, LEARNED. If Q is so stubborn (and I suspect this is a trait of his, he's humble but obstinate about his belief in his ability..has had to be) that he just will not stop trying to make things happen that aren't there, then Bill's gonna ring the gong on him.

http://photos.imageevent.com/hermsherald/key/parcellsgong.jpg

And that will be it.

Roger Staubach can say all he wants about ability to comeback....but once Tuna gives up on a QB, I don't believe he's coming back. Not as a STARTER.

That said, I'm with Roger.

I'm pulling for him. 100 percent.

[Jimz31]

It seems Roger's memory is slipping a bit in his age...

He doesn't remember Carter sulking & whinning when Hutch beat him out the year before last?

The odds are against Carter...While mobile, he doesn't run well and he often coughs up the ball without being hit by carring it like a loaf of bread....

We all know he isn't a good passer and he doesn't read defenses...

No, Vinny seems like a better starter this year, while Hensen gets ready to be a star!

Get over it dude.....that was TWO freakin' years ago.....going on three.

I suppose you are going to bring up his 4 INT game as well....how long ago was that again? Like he's the only QB to throw 4 INT's a game.

Sheesh! :rolleyes:

[BHendri5]

It seems Roger's memory is slipping a bit in his age...

He doesn't remember Carter sulking & whinning when Hutch beat him out the year before last?

The odds are against Carter...While mobile, he doesn't run well and he often coughs up the ball without being hit by carring it like a loaf of bread....

We all know he isn't a good passer and he doesn't read defenses...

No, Vinny seems like a better starter this year, while Hensen gets ready to be a star!


Hutch beat him out? When? And this coughing up the ball thang when did that start?
It is not Roger's memory that is bad.

[Hostile]

Look at my signature. Carter and the Cowboys met those standards (or expectations) during the 2003 season. I am not surprised that the same poster hopes are placed squarely on the shoulders of a player that hasn't proven anything on the NFL level.
ROTFLMFAO

I said a couple of weeks ago that you seem obsessed with my opinion on the matter and you denied it. Yet you dug back nearly a year to find a quote by me to take a dig. ;) Congratulations. I bow to your superiority at archives. :rolleyes: I love it that you chose one where I was sarcastic towards myself. Beautiful.

I stand by my feelings then, and I stand by them now. 217 points scored in 2002 was not good enough reason for me to have faith in the offense. 289 points on the season in 2003 breaks down to 18.1 points per game, and is less than we scored in 2000, the first year of our 5-11 trilogy. If our offenses were so bad those 5-11 years, why are we even thinking our 2003 offense was any better than the 2000 version which scored 294 points? It doesn't work both ways.

Our defense was #2 in the whole NFL in 2003 by only allowing 260 points. That is a great stat. If an offense scoring only 29 points more than that number is acceptable to you, then by all means enjoy. Less than 3 TDs per game on average concerns me, and it will from now until I take a dirt nap, and it does not matter who the QB or any other position on the team are. I simply will never be satisfied with that stat. NEVER. Get used to it or don't. I could give a crap.

You want to know why we went from 5-11 to 10-6? I'll tell you why. Because the offense increased from a pathetic 217 points scored in 2002 to a tepid 289 points scored in 2003. That is a 72 point positive improvement. The defense bettered itself from a horrid 329 points allowed in 2002 to a respectable 260 points allowed in 2003. That is a 69 point positive improvement.

When your team improves by 141 points over two statistics you will add some wins. Does that mean both offense and defense were good? Not in my book. The fact remains we had 6 games decided by 7 points or less. An area that concerns me. We had 5 games where the offense scored less than 14 points. An area that concerns me.

I was not completely satisifed with the defense. I want more sacks, I want more takeaways, I want teams to score even less. However, I will be the first to tell you that when teams score only 260 points on the defense, overall I am pretty pleased.

On offense I am looking for around 330 points or better in order to feel comfortable. I'd like to be up there near 400 points scored. Silly me.

You call 289 points sufficient scoring? 289 is good for you? Well, good for you. It's not near good enough for me and I have my suspicions that the team isn't all that comfortable with it either. Might be why the offense got an off season overhaul, while the defense added a DE.

[blindzebra]

So Roger likes Carter's attitude. The so-called haters have praised Carter's attitude and work ethic.

Roger hopes Carter builds on last year and ratchets it up. Sounds like Carter needs to improve in Roger's mind.

Roger does not think he'll get another chance if he does not improve, and Vinny will take over and Drew will be the next QB.

This is not a ringing endorsement. This is a Cowboy hoping a player does well.

[BHendri5]

So Roger likes Carter's attitude. The so-called haters have praised Carter's attitude and work ethic.

Roger hopes Carter builds on last year and ratchets it up. Sounds like Carter needs to improve in Roger's mind.

Roger does not think he'll get another chance if he does not improve, and Vinny will take over and Drew will be the next QB.

This is not a ringing endorsement. This is a Cowboy hoping a player does well.


Reads like an endorsement to me, and the reporter that wrote it.

[BHendri5]

Quincy Carter has his faults and he made his share of mistakes on the field, but he also made his share of plays as well.

The NFL tracks "big plays" at the skill positions. A big play is a run or pass that generates 20 yards or more.

Carter had 48 big plays during the regular season.

Only Marc Bulger (59), Trent Green (54) and Matt Hasselbeck (54) had more 20+ yard passing plays than Carter.

Bulger had Marshall Faulk behind him. Faulk had a down year, but he still managed 818 ayrds on 209 carries, a 3.9 average, 10 rushing touchdowns and 5 20+ yard runs.

Green had Priest Holmes in his backfield, Holmes had 1420 yards on 320 carries, a 4.4 average, 27 touchdowns and 6 20+ yard runs.

Hasselbeck had Shaun Alexander taking carries, Alexander had 1435 yards on 326 carrie, a 4.4 average, 14 touchdowns and 9 20+ yard runs.

Carter had Troy Hambrick in his backfield. T-Ham had 972 yards on 275 carries, a 3.5 average, 5 touchdowns and 3 20+ yard runs.

Only Faulk had fewer yards than Hambrick and he still scored 10 rushing touchdowns despite the reduced role.

Hasselbeck had 26 touchdowns and 15 interceptions.

Green had 24 touchdowns and 12 interceptions.

Bulger had 22 touchdowns and 22 interceptions.

Carter had 17 touchdowns and 21 interceptions.

Interestingly, only Green hit the desired 2:1 touchdowns to interceptions ratio out of the four.

Just some stats to think about.

[blindzebra]

Reads like an endorsement to me, and the reporter that wrote it.

Of course it does to YOU, but we all know what credibility that brings.

[BHendri5]

Of course it does to YOU, but we all know what credibility that brings.


Credibility? Boy, let it go. You need people to agree with you, don't you?

I don't, never have and never will.

[blindzebra]

Credibility? Boy, let it go. You need people to agree with you, don't you?

I don't, never have and never will.

Good for you, since it so rarely happens. :D

[Tio]

Why do defend Carter no matter how bad his play hurts our team and look on the downside of terence newman???

[BHendri5]

Good for you, since it so rarely happens. :D

Go find some kids.

[blindzebra]

Go find some kids.

I should. They'd be more of a challenge to debate with; I wonder where the nearest pre-school is?

[BHendri5]

Why do defend Carter no matter how bad his play hurts our team and look on the downside of terence newman???


First off, let me say this, I look at both players, as players that will take this team back to the top.

Brief answer: Time, maturity and coaching will take care of all the bad plays that a player makes early in his career, and as long as he recognizes his mistakes, and he keeps getting better, I'll stand behind him. Just like Newman will play not make the same mistakes he did last season.
You know what, I believe if last season was Newman's last year in college, he would have had a lot more ints, and knock downs, I believe he will be aggressive this season, you will not see that timidity, you will see more Ints and more knock downs.

[BHendri5]

I should. They'd be more of a challenge to debate with; I wonder where the nearest pre-school is?

Nope that is too advanc for you, try the local hospital nursery. LOL

[blindzebra]

Nope that is too advanc for you, try the local hospital nursery. LOL

Might I suggest you try the moment of conception, then.

[aikemirv]

First off, let me say this, I look at both players, as players that will take this team back to the top.

Brief answer: Time, maturity and coaching will take care of all the bad plays that a player makes early in his career, and as long as he recognizes his mistakes, and he keeps getting better, I'll stand behind him. Just like Newman will play not make the same mistakes he did last season.
You know what, I believe if last season was Newman's last year in college, he would have had a lot more ints, and knock downs, I believe he will be aggressive this season, you will not see that timidity, you will see more Ints and more knock downs.

I have only one question then, Why are you still standing behind Carter then?

He did not learn from his mistakes as last year went along.

He did not get better as the year progressed.

He had some of his worst games when we had a strong running attack.

[blindzebra]

I have only one question then, Why are you still standing behind Carter then?

He did not learn from his mistakes as last year went along.

He did not get better as the year progressed.

He had some of his worst games when we had a strong running attack.

He only takes stock in what HE SEES, not what everyone else sees. CBNIRAQ is a super/coachfan, that is privy to game plans, play calls, film breakdowns and has first hand knowledge of the inner workings of Parcells heart and mind.

So we mere fans should bow down to his greatness. :rolleyes:

[Charles]

ROTFLMFAO

I said a couple of weeks ago that you seem obsessed with my opinion on the matter and you denied it. Yet you dug back nearly a year to find a quote by me to take a dig. ;) Congratulations. I bow to your superiority at archives. :rolleyes: I love it that you chose one where I was sarcastic towards myself. Beautiful.


I guess I must have taken your quote or post out of context. Here is the link to the thread in question.....http://mazevo.com/mazevo/sm.x?c=dallascowboys&f=dallascowboysmain&m=15076&mstart=20

How exactly were you sarcastic towards yourself? (This should be very
interesting)




I stand by my feelings then, and I stand by them now. 217 points scored in 2002 was not good enough reason for me to have faith in the offense. 289 points on the season in 2003 breaks down to 18.1 points per game, and is less than we scored in 2000, the first year of our 5-11 trilogy. If our offenses were so bad those 5-11 years, why are we even thinking our 2003 offense was any better than the 2000 version which scored 294 points? It doesn't work both ways.

Our defense was #2 in the whole NFL in 2003 by only allowing 260 points. That is a great stat. If an offense scoring only 29 points more than that number is acceptable to you, then by all means enjoy. Less than 3 TDs per game on average concerns me, and it will from now until I take a dirt nap, and it does not matter who the QB or any other position on the team are. I simply will never be satisfied with that stat. NEVER. Get used to it or don't. I could give a crap.

You want to know why we went from 5-11 to 10-6? I'll tell you why. Because the offense increased from a pathetic 217 points scored in 2002 to a tepid 289 points scored in 2003. That is a 72 point positive improvement. The defense bettered itself from a horrid 329 points allowed in 2002 to a respectable 260 points allowed in 2003. That is a 69 point positive improvement.

When your team improves by 141 points over two statistics you will add some wins. Does that mean both offense and defense were good? Not in my book. The fact remains we had 6 games decided by 7 points or less. An area that concerns me. We had 5 games where the offense scored less than 14 points. An area that concerns me.

I was not completely satisifed with the defense. I want more sacks, I want more takeaways, I want teams to score even less. However, I will be the first to tell you that when teams score only 260 points on the defense, overall I am pretty pleased.

On offense I am looking for around 330 points or better in order to feel comfortable. I'd like to be up there near 400 points scored. Silly me.

You call 289 points sufficient scoring? 289 is good for you? Well, good for you. It's not near good enough for me and I have my suspicions that the team isn't all that comfortable with it either. Might be why the offense got an off season overhaul, while the defense added a DE.

You did not prefix your opinion with stats at the time. You surmised your long winded post with the following statement……………..

TooHostile
Saddletramp

Posted on
2003/07/07 - 16:27:10

Posts: 156
Joined: 2003/01/12

I will grant you higher scrutiny for the QB. In return grant me the right to think Carter hasn't measured up. I'm not going to change my mind. I'm not going to change who I am. I am not going to be hypocritical.

I expect a lot out of Chad Hutchinson this year. Or Carter if he does in fact win the job. If they don't measure up then I think we are all goign to be lamenting for years that we passed up Byron Leftwich when he was on our board. I got to be honest with you amigo, I don't want to think that way. Therefore, I expect clear and noticeable improvement which in my mind means scoring and winning.

Carter didn't measure up to my standards because we didn't score or win. It is really as simple as that for this overly opinionated, outspoken jerk.

Fair enough?..........................................



Those were the standards set by TooHostile aka saddletramp prior to the 2003 season.

That was on July 7th 2003. Carter eventually won the starting job. The Cowboys offense eventually scored more than 2002 offense and the 2003 team eventually won more than the 2002 team.

Fast forward to June 2004. The standards you set have been met, but the IMPROVEMENT aren’t good enough. You would rather struggle with Henson.

You claim I am obsessed. I am obsessed. I obsessively notice inconsistencies in opinions from many posters over years of posting.

There is nothing wrong with raising the bar. The bar should be raised every year or players won’t develop, but it’s pretty clear Carter will never meet your standards. You see more hope in a player who hasn’t proven he can play in the NFL, and conveniently revise standards set a year ago to justify your opinion.

[BHendri5]

Might I suggest you try the moment of conception, then.


You're dismissed, see ya!

[BHendri5]

I have only one question then, Why are you still standing behind Carter then?

He did not learn from his mistakes as last year went along.

He did not get better as the year progressed.

He had some of his worst games when we had a strong running attack.


Because, what you posted is not the truth. Oh, and anything that kid zebra says sarcastic about me, it is the truth believe it.

[blindzebra]

I guess I must have taken your quote or post out of context. Here is the link to the thread in question.....http://mazevo.com/mazevo/sm.x?c=dallascowboys&f=dallascowboysmain&m=15076&mstart=20

How exactly were you sarcastic towards yourself? (This should be very
interesting)




You did not prefix your opinion with stats at the time. You surmised your long winded post with the following statement……………..

TooHostile
Saddletramp

Posted on
2003/07/07 - 16:27:10

Posts: 156
Joined: 2003/01/12

I will grant you higher scrutiny for the QB. In return grant me the right to think Carter hasn't measured up. I'm not going to change my mind. I'm not going to change who I am. I am not going to be hypocritical.

I expect a lot out of Chad Hutchinson this year. Or Carter if he does in fact win the job. If they don't measure up then I think we are all goign to be lamenting for years that we passed up Byron Leftwich when he was on our board. I got to be honest with you amigo, I don't want to think that way. Therefore, I expect clear and noticeable improvement which in my mind means scoring and winning.

Carter didn't measure up to my standards because we didn't score or win. It is really as simple as that for this overly opinionated, outspoken jerk.

Fair enough?..........................................



Those were the standards set by TooHostile aka saddletramp prior to the 2003 season.

That was on July 7th 2002. Carter eventually won the starting job. The Cowboys offense eventually scored more than 2002 offense and the 2003 team eventually won more than the 2002 team.

Fast forward to June 2004. The standards you set have been met, but the IMPROVEMENT aren’t good enough. You would rather struggle with Henson.

You claim I am obsessed. I am obsessed. I obsessively notice inconsistencies in opinions from many posters over years of posting.

There is nothing wrong with raising the bar. The bar should be raised every year or players won’t develop, but it’s pretty clear Carter will never meet your standards. You see more hope in a player who hasn’t proven he can play in the NFL, and conveniently revise standards set a year ago to justify your opinion.

Almost half of the point increase came from FGs, 23 in 2003 to 12 in 2002. The defense got better, the coaching was better, and Cundiff was a lot better. All contributed to that win total and point increase.

Did we score more? Yes. Did we win more? Yes, but was Carter directly responsible for the increase? No. Are 18 points a game good enough? No.
Does your personal attack on Hostile have a point? NO!

[aikemirv]

Because, what you posted is not the truth. Oh, and anything that kid zebra says sarcastic about me, it is the truth believe it.

Week15 vs Washington - we had 222 yds rushing- QC was 10/24 for 108 yds - 5 completions as dumpoff to Anderson

Week 14 vs Philly - we had 150 yds rushing - 15/24 for 93 yds - 7 comp to Anderson - none to WR

3 int vs MIami

3 Int vs NE

3 Int vs NO

All in the last half of the season.

[calico]

I would agree with Staubach on this one.

[Hostile]

I guess I must have taken your quote or post out of context. Here is the link to the thread in question.....http://mazevo.com/mazevo/sm.x?c=dallascowboys&f=dallascowboysmain&m=15076&mstart=20

How exactly were you sarcastic towards yourself? (This should be very
interesting)

I need to explain everything to you? I called myself an "overly opinionated, outspoken jerk" and you don't think I was being sarcastic? Okay, then I was just practicing alliteration.

Free advice...when someone pokes fun at themselves by being critical they are probably being sarcastic. Except me, I just practice repetitive sounds for all the poetry I write. :rolleyes:

You did not prefix your opinion with stats at the time.

Fact: I rarely do. I don't use stats often at all. They are boring to me most of the time. I figure we are all fans, therefore we should know the stats. I think an offense scoring 217 points or 289 points should automatically concern fans of the team.

I'd put this to onomatopoeia but a word just escapes me at the moment.

You surmised your long winded post with the following statement……………..

TooHostile
Saddletramp

Posted on
2003/07/07 - 16:27:10

Posts: 156
Joined: 2003/01/12

I will grant you higher scrutiny for the QB. In return grant me the right to think Carter hasn't measured up. I'm not going to change my mind. I'm not going to change who I am. I am not going to be hypocritical.

I expect a lot out of Chad Hutchinson this year. Or Carter if he does in fact win the job. If they don't measure up then I think we are all goign to be lamenting for years that we passed up Byron Leftwich when he was on our board. I got to be honest with you amigo, I don't want to think that way. Therefore, I expect clear and noticeable improvement which in my mind means scoring and winning.

Carter didn't measure up to my standards because we didn't score or win. It is really as simple as that for this overly opinionated, outspoken jerk.

Fair enough?..........................................



Those were the standards set by TooHostile aka saddletramp prior to the 2003 season.

I suppose there was a relevant point there. I was too busy looking for rhyme schemes and evidence that 217 points scored was good enough so I should be overwhelmingly geeked about 289 points.

I had high expectations for Hutchinson? Someone please take the whip out of my hands. I appear to be lashing these players way too hard for some people's tastes. The proper thing to do is for me to realize 217 points is evidence of something. If only Keats were alive to point this out to me. Or would Whitman be a better choice?

Where is my copy of Dead Poet's Society? I need sustenance and guidance. To suckle at the breast of hope.

That was on July 7th 2002.

I know that was an unintentional error. You meant 2003. I know that.

Carter eventually won the starting job. The Cowboys offense eventually scored more than 2002 offense and the 2003 team eventually won more than the 2002 team.

Fast forward to June 2004. The standards you set have been met, but the IMPROVEMENT aren’t good enough.[quote]

Please forgive me. I was desperately searching for the iambic pentameter flow and I guess I miss the point of your rehashing what I clearly maintained. Correct, I was not happy with 217 points in 2002. Correct, I was not happy with 289 points in 2003. I thought I had established that as crytal clear by saying from now until dirt nap time I won't be happy with that few points. Would a sonnet version help? Damn, and I really liked the dirt nap free verse. Sniff, sniff...

[quote]You would rather struggle with Henson.

You have evidence of where I have said that? I don't think I ever said that. In fact, I know for a fact that prior to us acquiring him that when I was talking about him or Phillip Rivers I said I would even live through Q starting all of 2004 as long as we are building towards the future. I said it more than once.

Now, I have maintained that he will be better. So far, I have not been proven wrong on that since he has not received his shot yet. I have maintained that since Parcells insists he has a shot in 2004 that he really does. I have said that he will struggle but through struggles you grow.

You claim I am obsessed. I am obsessed. I obsessively notice inconsistencies in opinions from many posters over years of posting.

Well, now you can eliminate me from that obsession because my opinions clearly haven't wavered have they? I still maintain a level of hope and expectation for the team and the players, and it is static rather than fluid.

It was always proof in the 3rd year, now it is proof in the 4th year. No wonder I seem dizzy to you. I've got sea sickness from the ever moving horizon that is the expectation level you want to assign me.

There is nothing wrong with raising the bar. The bar should be raised every year or players won’t develop, but it’s pretty clear Carter will never meet your standards. You see more hope in a player who hasn’t proven he can play in the NFL, and conveniently revise standards set a year ago to justify your opinion.

Wow.

There is nothing wrong with raising the bar. The bar should be raised. But I am wrong for raising the bar. Damn, I'm good. I had no idea I had that kind of pull.

I think I feel a haiku coming on.

[Hostile]

Almost half of the point increase came from FGs, 23 in 2003 to 12 in 2002. The defense got better, the coaching was better, and Cundiff was a lot better. All contributed to that win total and point increase.

See, I can learn from stats. I hate kickers, so naturally I don't look at their stats. At least 33 of the 72 points improvement was a better Cundiff on field goals. How many more XPs did he make?

Now, I grant you the offense got him in position to improve. Doesn't change the fact that I just got a lesson.

Did we score more? Yes. Did we win more? Yes, but was Carter directly responsible for the increase? No. Are 18 points a game good enough? No.
Does your personal attack on Hostile have a point? NO!

For the record, I did not view it as a personal attack on me. Just want that made clear.

[Charles]

Almost half of the point increase came from FGs, 23 in 2003 to 12 in 2002. The defense got better, the coaching was better, and Cundiff was a lot better. All contributed to that win total and point increase.

Did we score more? Yes. Did we win more? Yes, but was Carter directly responsible for the increase? No. Are 18 points a game good enough? No.
Does your personal attack on Hostile have a point? NO!

I seem to recall LaTuna stating that Hos is a little bit too sensitive. If he doesn't want his opinions challenged then he should keep them to himself.

Are you his big brother? I don't think he needs you to fight his battles.

Blindzebra we go back to the renegade days. Will you consider it a personal attack if I went back and detailed some of your inconsistencies and flip-flopping opinions?

I find it (archives) more interesting than rehashing QB debates over and over again. I have had debates with many posters. I doubt either side will convince the other. The play on the field will speak for itself. Hos simply wanted increased scoring and more winning. Mission accomplished.

[Hostile]

I would agree with Staubach on this one.
That signature picture is absolutely awesome.

[Hostile]

I seem to recall LaTuna stating that Hos is a little bit too sensitive. If he doesn't want his opinions challenged then he should keep them to himself.

Are you his big brother? I don't think he needs you to fight his battles.

Blindzebra we go back to the renegade days. Will you consider it a personal attack if I went back and detailed some of your inconsistencies and flip-flopping opinions?

I find it (archives) more interesting than rehashing QB debates over and over again. I have had debates with many posters. I doubt either side will convince the other. The play on the field will speak for itself. Hos simply wanted increased scoring and more winning. Mission accomplished.
Mission accomplished?

Now I know. 289 points is sufficient to make you happy.

Just so I know where the cutoff would have been, if we had scored 218 and had 6 wins, would you still be satisfied?

I need to establish a point where you feel we are at crescendo.

[blindzebra]

I seem to recall LaTuna stating that Hos is a little bit too sensitive. If he doesn't want his opinions challenged then he should keep them to himself.

Are you his big brother? I don't think he needs you to fight his battles.

Blindzebra we go back to the renegade days. Will you consider it a personal attack if I went back and detailed some of your inconsistencies and flip-flopping opinions?

I find it (archives) more interesting than rehashing QB debates over and over again. I have had debates with many posters. I doubt either side will convince the other. The play on the field will speak for itself. Hos simply wanted increased scoring and more winning. Mission accomplished.

You'd need to find them to point them out. ;)

[MichaelWinicki]

I think I feel a haiku coming on.


Gesundheit Hostile.

[Hostile]

Gesundheit Hostile.
Do you have a tissue? Poetry always makes me all misty eyed.

[BrAinPaiNt]

Get over it dude.....that was TWO freakin' years ago.....going on three.

I suppose you are going to bring up his 4 INT game as well....how long ago was that again? Like he's the only QB to throw 4 INT's a game.

Sheesh! :rolleyes:


While I normally do not care for Hollywoods posts, because he is on one side of the extreme on these issues IMO, he was addressing what roger said.

If you look at his history, since he's been here, he never complains

Now he plainly says....if you look at his history, since he has been here, he never complains.

Now he did not say that he does not complain any longer, he does not say he has never complained in this past season....he clearly says since he has been here (aka with the Dallas Cowboys).

Other then that I really had no problem with what Roger says...he hopes the young man does well, he wants him to do well...but he also knows that he may not have many more chances.

[Charles]

I need to explain everything to you? I called myself an "overly opinionated, outspoken jerk" and you don't think I was being sarcastic? Okay, then I was just practicing alliteration.

Free advice...when someone pokes fun at themselves by being critical they are probably being sarcastic. Except me, I just practice repetitive sounds for all the poetry I write. :rolleyes:



Well prior to making fun of yourself or being sarcastic you made the same statement ( or standard). Maybe you missed it . Here it is again:
"
I expect a lot out of Chad Hutchinson this year. Or Carter if he does in fact win the job. If they don't measure up then I think we are all goign to be lamenting for years that we passed up Byron Leftwich when he was on our board. I got to be honest with you amigo, I don't want to think that way. Therefore, I expect clear and noticeable improvement which in my mind means scoring and winning."
.....................

Where you being sarcastic throughout the entire thread???????????



Fact: I rarely do. I don't use stats often at all. They are boring to me most of the time. I figure we are all fans, therefore we should know the stats. I think an offense scoring 217 points or 289 points should automatically concern fans of the team.

Excuse the bluntness, then why the f..... did you bring the stats up. I didn't!!!! I just mentioned the standard you brought forth last year....." I expect clear and noticeable improvement which in my mind means scoring and winning.

On one hand you state that you don't use stats, but on the other hand the stats are very important to justify your opinion. I get it only when they serve your purpose. I was happy enough to leave it at .............[i]" I expect clear and noticeable improvement which in my mind means scoring and winning, thus Mission Accomplished.


You have evidence of where I have said that? I don't think I ever said that. In fact, I know for a fact that prior to us acquiring him that when I was talking about him or Phillip Rivers I said I would even live through Q starting all of 2004 as long as we are building towards the future. I said it more than once.

Well let me jog your memory.....

http://cowboyszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2870&page=3&pp=15&highlight=Henson

My dog in the hunt is Henson. I admit it, I am a quarterback elitist. I want the guy who has the most upside and talent to be the QB. I see that player as Henson. Will there be growing pains? Yes, and the sooner we get over them the better. I think by the time the season rolls around a lot of posters and fans will be excited.


Basically, because I believe Henson has more upside, I would rather endure his growing pains. Wouldn't that equate to preferring to struggle with Henson????

Later dude. I am leaving work. I'll log back on in about 2hrs.

[BrAinPaiNt]

Well prior to making fun of yourself or being sarcastic you made the same statement ( or standard). Maybe you missed it . Here it is again:
"
I expect a lot out of Chad Hutchinson this year. Or Carter if he does in fact win the job. If they don't measure up then I think we are all goign to be lamenting for years that we passed up Byron Leftwich when he was on our board. I got to be honest with you amigo, I don't want to think that way. Therefore, I expect clear and noticeable improvement which in my mind means scoring and winning."
.....................

Where you being sarcastic throughout the entire thread???????????

Doesn't seem like he was being sarcastic during the whole post...but then again I did not see him claim he was being sarcastic through the WHOLE thread....after all he did point out the one part at the end of it as being the sarcastic part he was referring too.

Also notice the part you put in bold from his post (and also have in your sig as a way to push some buttons) He said scoring and winning...but he ALSO said...clear and noticeable improvment.

Now you two can argue on what both of you think of clear or noticeable improvement...yet chances are you will not convince him that you know more of what he means by what he wrote....then again that is just me speculating.





Excuse the bluntness, then why the f..... did you bring the stats up. I didn't!!!! I just mentioned the standard you brought forth last year....." I expect clear and noticeable improvement which in my mind means scoring and winning.

Why do you feel the need to cuss (even if it is by board standars by just using the first letter)...why do you let this get you so riled up that you have to go back...find posts of a poster, put it in your sig line to show the world and push buttons, and then get upset to the point that you have to make it a point to use those words (as I pointed out earlier of how you were within guidelines). I have noticed you did this on the other thread that I first moved to the smack forum...and then closed...MAINLY because of your actions.

You need to simmer down some and quit getting so darn riled up.

On one hand you state that you don't use stats, but on the other hand the stats are very important to justify your opinion. I get it only when they serve your purpose. I was happy enough to leave it at .............[i]" I expect clear and noticeable improvement which in my mind means scoring and winning, thus Mission Accomplished.

Funny how MANY people use some stats when it suits them...and do not use them when it does not....I see many people do this...I may be wrong but I would go out on a rope and imagine you have done the same in the past.

As far as the other part of your quote...I addressed that earlier.



Well let me jog your memory.....

http://cowboyszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2870&page=3&pp=15&highlight=Henson

My dog in the hunt is Henson. I admit it, I am a quarterback elitist. I want the guy who has the most upside and talent to be the QB. I see that player as Henson. Will there be growing pains? Yes, and the sooner we get over them the better. I think by the time the season rolls around a lot of posters and fans will be excited.


Basically, because I believe Henson has more upside, I would rather endure his growing pains. Wouldn't that equate to preferring to struggle with Henson????

Later dude. I am leaving work. I'll log back on in about 2hrs.

So you are mad because he does not feel the same about QC who is entering his 4th year....yet you did not feel the same about Hutch after his short time, and seem to get upset about Hos like Henson?

Odd.

One last thing...for someone that says he does not care for the QC debates....you sure do find your way to them quite often...and to be honest from my perspective you get way too riled in them and in some ways negate any good points you may make because of the way you start acting while getting riled.
Now that is just an observation...not a rip on you.

[junk]

Man, I read the last page, forgot what this thread was about during Qcard and Hostile's lover's spat and had to go back to the first page.

That being said, I do think Carter will be the starter this year. However, I don't think he has shown the noticeable improvement or skills needed to be a great QB. I am very glad there are young QBs being groomed behind him and I am very glad a vet option was brought in (even it was not my favorite).

What I don't understand is this die hard support for the guy. I am not against replacing ANY position if it gives the team a better shot of winning. That includes the likes of Roy Williams, Jason Witten or Terence Newman. If anybody thought the QB play of last year was above average or even "good", they must have watched a different team than me.

I hear numerous examples of how it takes players longer to develop, need a supporting cast or need the right system to develop. I agree with some of this. QC's supporting cast wasn't very good. However, I believe the offense was geared towards QC's strengths and he regressed as the season progressed. I can deal with the learning curve of becoming an NFL QB. It is not an easy job and I know QC is working his tail off at doing it. I have to give him credit for that. However, I just don't think he has shown those "flashes of greatness" that I want to see. I haven't seen the cool under pressure performance of Montana or Brady. The quick release of a Marino. The uncanny accuracy of an Aikman. The arm strength and win at all costs attitude and leadership of a Farve. I haven't seen the 300+ yard games or the high number of TDs compared to INTs. I don't need to see all of that. I would like to see some of that and see it more than once in a blue moon.

[Hostile]

Well prior to making fun of yourself or being sarcastic you made the same statement ( or standard). Maybe you missed it . Here it is again:
"
I expect a lot out of Chad Hutchinson this year. Or Carter if he does in fact win the job. If they don't measure up then I think we are all goign to be lamenting for years that we passed up Byron Leftwich when he was on our board. I got to be honest with you amigo, I don't want to think that way. Therefore, I expect clear and noticeable improvement which in my mind means scoring and winning."
.....................

Where you being sarcastic throughout the entire thread???????????

I love ya man. You are the funniest person I debate with on a regular basis. Not being sarcastic. Being truthful. I think for the most part you enjoy it too unlike some who take the back and forth personally. I think you take me way too personally, but then you're not alone. Most people don't enjoy being shot down in flames all the time. :D

Now let's disect inconsistencies...

In my very first post to you in this thread I deleted out everything else you said and focused in on how badly you wanted your signature line acknowledged. Lo and behold, a quote by me.

The quote by me had deleted out all of the other stuff that I said in 2003 to focus on one little statement and then a jab at myself.

Yet somehow all of that irony of the similarity of what we have done has escaped you and you conclude (falsely) that I now claim the whole post of 7-7-03 as sarcastic. Dude......

Seriously, you don't see the irony of that? Do you honestly think I went back to the other forum to discover it was me who said that? Do you think I had any idea until you posted the rest what else I had said in that post? Did you think I would not know upon whom you obsess?

Excuse the bluntness, then why the f..... did you bring the stats up. I didn't!!!! I just mentioned the standard you brought forth last year....." I expect clear and noticeable improvement which in my mind means scoring and winning.

On one hand you state that you don't use stats, but on the other hand the stats are very important to justify your opinion. I get it only when they serve your purpose. I was happy enough to leave it at .............[i]" I expect clear and noticeable improvement which in my mind means scoring and winning, thus Mission Accomplished.

I love this stuff. Did I say I NEVER use stats? No, I said I RARELY use stats? When do I use them? Oh usually when something that I said, that appears obvious to me, clearly hasn't registered as to why I would say it.

For example. In 2003 I did not use stats when saying that I expected improvement. After a team has scored 217 and given up 329, I really didn't think I had to. That is a fault of mine, failing to see how others might not draw logical conclusions.

Fast forward to today. I see the notice me plea about the sig line, find it funny, figure you need clarification, and I reply using stats to CLARIFY what was meant in 2003. It is still rare that I do that.

Well let me jog your memory.....

http://cowboyszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2870&page=3&pp=15&highlight=Henson

My dog in the hunt is Henson. I admit it, I am a quarterback elitist. I want the guy who has the most upside and talent to be the QB. I see that player as Henson. Will there be growing pains? Yes, and the sooner we get over them the better. I think by the time the season rolls around a lot of posters and fans will be excited.

So, if I say I'll support Carter in 2004 MULTIPLE TIMES leading up to the actual acquisition of Henson, it gets trumped by a SINGLE POST admission that my dog in the hunt is Henson? Is that what your gripe boils down to? Kind of like how pictures in my sig line were evidence of a deep seated and abiding hatred that bordered on psychosis and neurosis. Oliver Stone eat your heart out. I can create conspiracy theories out of thin air baby.

Okay let me explain it to you this way and I'll hope it makes Maalox stock drop in the District. Call the gastroenterologist, your ulcer having days over me are through if I pull this off.

I like Drew Henson as the long term answer to this football team. I am in no hurry to get him in the saddle. At the same time, I hope he's so good that Parcells tells him to saddle up. If he starts in 2004 I will be thrilled because I think it will mean he impressed the Dallas Cowboys an awful lot to be given that kind of honor. An honor that was bestowed upon Carter as well. Hmm.

If he doesn't start in 2004 it won't change the fact that he is my dog in the hunt. I'll still be pulling for him every game to have shown enough to be worthy of the honor. That does NOT mean that at any time in 2004 I will be rooting for any player to fail or get injured so that he gets this shot.

I want him to earn it. I want him to be so good he blows these stupid arguments out of the water. I want him to be the end of this silly debate once and for all. He is the only player at that position on this team that I see the potential to accomplish that.

I want this team to succeed. I believe you have better chances to succeed when you acquire and play better players. This is exactly why I was excited when we signed Marcellus Wiley and said goodbye to Jeff George's tormentor, Ek. This is exactly why on draft day I was hoping beyond all hope that we were drafting Steven Jackson, why when I heard we might try to get back into the first to acquire Kevin Jones I was hopeful, and why when we finally did acquire Julius Jones I spent the rest of the night reading every scrap I could find on him.

I care about this team much more than individual players and I openly admit I am an elitist when it comes to the quality of the players. If that makes me a bad person then it makes me a bad person. I feel no need to apologize for wanting the very best or for saying that I want the very best. Especially since I say it at every position and that fact can not be disputed so saying it about QB doesn't make me a hypocrite even one little iota no matter how many butts it chaps.

My basic belief is that not all football scouts, media, and sources are 100% wrong about every player they report on. You know, the "Mediots?" Occasionally these people who are paid to have opinions and make statements about player's potential do actually hit the bullseye.

I love the hypocrisy of how a glowing report on Carter from the 2000 Sporting News is evidence that he has what it takes to succeed in the NFL, but the same publication missed the boat on Drew Henson. How convenient.

I will live with Vinny Testaverde in 2004 if I have to. If you look closely at my signature line and search the archives for my comments on Vinny you might get the idea that I am not too crazy about him as the option. Doesn't change the fact that if he ends up as our QB he will have me pulling for him as hard as I possibly can.

I will live with Tony Romo in 2004 if I have to. I admit, I will be scratching my head wondering how it happens that he is on the field, but if that's who Big Bill throws out there, so be it.

I will live with Chad Hutchinson in 2004 if I have to. Guess what? What I said about him in 2003 still apllies. I have "high" expectations for him and for the team. My expectations have not wavered or waffled. You want waffles go to Belgium. You won't find me altering history to reflect that Chad Hutchinson was good enough and just needs more time, because he wasn't. If he was he would have got it done. Period.

And yes, I will live with Quincy Carter in 2004 if I have to. Guess what? What I said about him in that post in 2003 still stands too. I have "high" expectations for him and the team.

None of that changes the fact that I think Drew Henson will be the best QB of the bunch, and that, in and of itself, makes him my dog in the hunt. If we had drafted Byron Leftwich in 2003 I have serious doubts Drew Henson would be my dog in the hunt even if I believed for one minute that he would even be in the hunt with Leftwich here.

Why in 2003 did I bring him up at all? Because we passed on him. I think he may have been the most mechanically sound QB in the draft since Peyton Manning and we passed on him. Usually that means I raise my expectations of the guy I think a player would have replaced. For reference please see my comments on how I think Pete Hunter better be able to step up his level of play.

Basically, because I believe Henson has more upside, I would rather endure his growing pains. Wouldn't that equate to preferring to struggle with Henson????

I guess it doesn't matter how many times I said I hope Henson doesn't see the field in 2004. There is a part of me that actually does hope he plays. The part that says if he does it means he is the best option we have.

Later dude. I am leaving work. I'll log back on in about 2hrs.

Well, I killed part of that 2 hours and I'm not even out of ammo.

[BrAinPaiNt]

For the record Hos...that last post was just way to long...let's shorten those babies up a tad :p

[Hostile]

Man, I read the last page, forgot what this thread was about during Qcard and Hostile's lover's spat and had to go back to the first page.
LMAO

Qcard and I go way back. We actually respect each other. Well, I respect him and assume he respects me. We've talked about doing a game together the next time I am out to DC to see family.

We do tend to have some nice knock down drag outs. I appreciate that after the domestic violence he always drops the charges.

[Hostile]

For the record Hos...that last post was just way to long...let's shorten those babies up a tad :p
Yeah but it had sex bro. :D

[BrAinPaiNt]

Yeah but it had sex bro. :D


I am not George Michaels and I darn sure am not singing I want your sex to ya :p

[Hostile]

I am not George Michaels and I darn sure am not singing I want your sex to ya :p
Every party has to have a pooper and you're the big turd. :p

[Hostile]

Doesn't seem like he was being sarcastic during the whole post...but then again I did not see him claim he was being sarcastic through the WHOLE thread....after all he did point out the one part at the end of it as being the sarcastic part he was referring too.

I guess people can discern the point upon which I was sarcastic because you nailed it.

Also notice the part you put in bold from his post (and also have in your sig as a way to push some buttons) He said scoring and winning...but he ALSO said...clear and noticeable improvment.

Yet another direct hit. I'm not so hard to translate after all

Now you two can argue on what both of you think of clear or noticeable improvement...yet chances are you will not convince him that you know more of what he means by what he wrote....then again that is just me speculating.

I think it's safe to say that him convincing me that I don't know what I meant is about as likely me winning the lottery given the fact that I have never bought a ticket. You'll get the exact same odds on the two happening.

[LaTunaNostra]

I just practice repetitive sounds for all the poetry I write. :rolleyes:


I'd put this to onomatopoeia but a word just escapes me at the moment.

If only Keats were alive to point this out to me. Or would Whitman be a better choice?

Where is my copy of Dead Poet's Society? I need sustenance and guidance. To suckle at the breast of hope.

Please forgive me. I was desperately searching for the iambic pentameter flow and I guess I miss the point of your rehashing what I clearly maintained.


I think I feel a haiku coming on.

English Majors! ;)

[Hostile]

English Majors! ;)
The scourge of football forums I guess. ;)

[Charles]

It is always interesting how these threads evolve.

Hos,
In my reply to LaTuna, I state my doubts that many fans opinions will be swayed about Carter even though Roger Staubach picks Carter as his dog in this fight. I reference your previous post as an example of how fans set standards for Carter, but even if those standards are met, some how you still find more hope in a player that hasn’t even proven anything.

Here is the quote again:

” I expect a lot out of Chad Hutchinson this year. Or Carter if he does in fact win the job. If they don't measure up then I think we are all goign to be lamenting for years that we passed up Byron Leftwich when he was on our board. I got to be honest with you amigo, I don't want to think that way. Therefore, I expect clear and noticeable improvement which in my mind means scoring and winning”

Prior to the 2003 season you expect clear and noticeable improvement WHICH IN YOUR MIND meant more scoring and winning. You didn’t specify 300 points per season or 3 more Tds per game in July of 2003. In your mind more scoring and winning would indicate clear and noticeable improvement. That was totally understandable, because the Cowboys were a 3 time 5-11 team. The Cowboys won more games and the Offense scored more points. Carter met the standards you brought forth.

I just find it interesting you would have more hope in a player that hasn’t proven he can lead an NFL offense to any points, but have zero faith in the Carter led Cowboys who met the simple standard.

Of course now you wanted the luxury of explaining what you really meant 1 year ago. It doesn’t work both ways.

I am not satisfied with the offensive production from last season. I have never stated I was satisfied with last years offensive performance, but I if I expected more scoring and winning as a sign of improvement in July of 2003 I would give the Cowboys credit because that’s exactly what they did. I wouldn’t revise my standard, give a failing grade and put my hopes in an un-proven entity.

I find it amusing that you think I am obsessed with you. You are not the 1st poster to have their quotes in my signature line. Joe Cowboy fan had that honor. I can understand why you felt like it was a jab. I thought it was good example to use in getting my point across to LaTuna.

I didn’t get my panties in a bunch when you reference our Henson/Troy jpeg discussions as a proof that I thought you hated Carter, when I actually brought it up to show the ANNOINTING of Henson before he broke a sweat at practice.

[Hostile]

It is always interesting how these threads evolve.

It's also interesting how people interpret how other people think and feel.

Hos,
In my reply to LaTuna, I state my doubts that many fans opinions will be swayed about Carter even though Roger Staubach picks Carter as his dog in this fight. I reference your previous post as an example of how fans set standards for Carter, but even if those standards are met, some how you still find more hope in a player that hasn’t even proven anything.

Staubach did not pick Carter as his dog in the fight but I am not shocked you interpret it that way. You need to show me where he came right out and said "I think Carter is the man to lead this team back to the Super Bowl and they need to do everything they can to build around him." He didn't say that you know. No, like me, Staubach tells the things he likes about Carter and says he needs to do better and he wants the team to get better.

You seem convinced I can NEVER be happy with Carter in any capacity. I have NEVER said that, but I have let you have your little fantasy that you have me pegged. You have no idea how I think or feel, nor can you alter how I think or feel. All these little digs and jabs serve no purpose other than to give you a soapbox from which I constantly shoot you down. Not my problem you don't see that.

I love the way you try to do this. By hammering at the same quotes over and over and highlighting or putting in italics the part you think is the "smoking gun." Oh look, here is an example...

Here is the quote again:

” I expect a lot out of Chad Hutchinson this year. Or Carter if he does in fact win the job. If they don't measure up then I think we are all goign to be lamenting for years that we passed up Byron Leftwich when he was on our board. I got to be honest with you amigo, I don't want to think that way. Therefore, I expect clear and noticeable improvement which in my mind means scoring and winning”

My only question to you is why you pay no attention to the fact that I seem to be lamenting not acquiring Byron Leftwich? As many times as you've posted that quote you'd think his name would stand out above Henson's as the object of your ire. The fact of the matter is I wanted Leftwich in the worst way but am happy with Newman.

I take that back. I am also curious as to how you think you can define MY interpretation of "clear and noticeable improvement." That's quite the gift you think you have there.

Prior to the 2003 season you expect clear and noticeable improvement WHICH IN YOUR MIND meant more scoring and winning. You didn’t specify 300 points per season or 3 more Tds per game in July of 2003. In your mind more scoring and winning would indicate clear and noticeable improvement. That was totally understandable, because the Cowboys were a 3 time 5-11 team. The Cowboys won more games and the Offense scored more points. Carter met the standards you brought forth.

Even though I am long winded, I rarely tell people that my feelings and thoughts fit within a certain set of parameters. You seem to think I should be required to explain down to the detail each and every time I make a statement but you don't require that of yourself or anyone else that I can notice.

Actually Qcard you're harping your standards and trying to push them on to me. You see that the team scored more and won more so you're happy and figure I have to be or ought to be. You accept no explanations that don't fit within the box you've placed around the subject and my refusal to stay within that box annoys the hell out of you. So much so that you delve backwards in time to find "the smoking gun."

You've interpretted my thoughts (wrongly) or set a standard upon me that you feel is evident enough to elicit a confession. The problem is that "Perry Mason" was a TV show and the confession isn't coming because I'm not guilty.

I'm not likely to lose a debate to anyone that the premise of the whole debate is how I feel about something. I find it laughable that anyone would even try. How exactly is that supposed to work?

Fascinating, truly fascinating.

I just find it interesting you would have more hope in a player that hasn’t proven he can lead an NFL offense to any points, but have zero faith in the Carter led Cowboys who met the simple standard.

I find it interesting that you didn't grill me on my desire to draft Steven Jackson who had not proven anything in the NFL over my zero faith in Troy Hambrick who met a simple standard.

I find it interesting that you don't grill me on my hope that Jacob Rogers starts over Kurt Vollers because a simple standard was met.

Actually I don't find those things interesting because they are your standards not mine despite your interpretation. You have a standard and you want me to conform to it. I can't. I have my own standards and I do not waver from them. EVER.

I have proven that to the case over and over. If you open your eyes, you might catch a glimpse of that fact.

Of course now you wanted the luxury of explaining what you really meant 1 year ago. It doesn’t work both ways.

Actually it does for any person who has ever lived in the United States of America where freedom of expression is granted. I can't say the same for people of other countries. But no matter who the person is, if they say something that is not undestood for some reason, they are given the opportunity to clarify.

For example if you say, "I like sheep" and people begin to assume you mean in a sexual way, you should have the right to explain what you really meant. You should never be expected to live within that box of misinterpretation. No, in this country you can explain what you mean or meant. There is no statute of limitations upon which your thoughts and meanings have an expiration point.

It was a nice try though.

No that's not the problem here. The problem is you want me to accept your standards because you think they are the best standards ever invented.

I am not satisfied with the offensive production from last season. I have never stated I was satisfied with last years offensive performance, but I if I expected more scoring and winning as a sign of improvement in July of 2003 I would give the Cowboys credit because that’s exactly what they did. I wouldn’t revise my standard, give a failing grade and put my hopes in an un-proven entity.

Wow, you'll strip your gears reversing field that fast.

I find it amusing that you think I am obsessed with you. You are not the 1st poster to have their quotes in my signature line. Joe Cowboy fan had that honor. I can understand why you felt like it was a jab. I thought it was good example to use in getting my point across to LaTuna.

Don't get me wrong, I'm flattered. Amused, but flattered.

I didn’t get my panties in a bunch when you reference our Henson/Troy jpeg discussions as a proof that I thought you hated Carter, when I actually brought it up to show the ANNOINTING of Henson before he broke a sweat at practice.

Those poor gears. Not going to be a tooth left when you're done.

[MichaelWinicki]

For example if you say, "I like sheep"


How do you like sheep Hos?

[Hostile]

How do you like sheep Hos?
Turning on a spit with butter basting them over and over. I really prefer beef though. Or pork ribs.

[MichaelWinicki]

Turning on a spit with butter basting them over and over. I really prefer beef though. Or pork ribs.


Good answer Hos... My first thought is that it may have been sexual.

Not that there is anything wrong with that.

[blindzebra]

Good answer Hos... My first thought is that it may have been sexual.

Not that there is anything wrong with that.

Don't you need a cliff to really make that work? :D

[Hostile]

Good answer Hos... My first thought is that it may have been sexual.

Not that there is anything wrong with that.
He'll either finally get it, or he won't. I tend to think I am closing all of his loopholes.

Wait, do I need to explain what I meant by closing "his" loopholes? ;)

Has anyone ever tried to tell you what you meant really about something and tried to change your mind after you explained yourself? I highly recommend it. I feel 10 years younger after the laughter of the last 2 days.

[MichaelWinicki]

Don't you need a cliff to really make that work? :D


Well you know Hos was getting a tad bit too serious up this thread a little ways.

We just can't have that. The Cowboys are 0-0. We're a long way from that first game. We're headed into a long weekend. Let's all just take things a little less seriously.

[blindzebra]

He'll either finally get it, or he won't. I tend to think I am closing all of his loopholes.

Wait, do I need to explain what I meant by closing "his" loopholes? ;)

Has anyone ever tried to tell you what you meant really about something and tried to change your mind after you explained yourself? I highly recommend it. I feel 10 years younger after the laughter of the last 2 days.

I officiate basketball, so that is an every game occurrence. ;)

[Hostile]

Well you know Hos was getting a tad bit too serious up this thread a little ways.

We just can't have that. The Cowboys are 0-0. We're a long way from that first game. We're headed into a long weekend. Let's all just take things a little less seriously.
When was I getting serious? How did I screw up? I promise everyone, if I was serious I never meant it. It was an honest mistake born of medication and lack of sleep.

[blindzebra]

When was I getting serious? How did I screw up? I promise everyone, if I was serious I never meant it. It was an honest mistake born of medication and lack of sleep.

Maybe he mistook LENGTH for seriousness. :D

[Hostile]

Maybe he mistook LENGTH for seriousness. :D
Well, I do have some serious length.





I look forward to explaining that one. :D

[blindzebra]

Well, I do have some serious length.





I look forward to explaining that one. :D

That's not what the sheep saaaaaaidd.

[Charles]

It's also interesting how people interpret how other people think and feel.

I didn’t interpret how you thought or felt. I read and understood what you posted a year ago. You expect(ed) clear and noticeable improvement which in YOUR mind would be indicated by scoring and winning. You DIDN’T mention any stats. You DIDN’T mention 330 points per season. I thought (and still think) that those standards or expectations (to signify improvement) were totally within a fans right and completely logical after watching the Cowboys offense 2000 thru. 2002.

I don’t know what you were REALLY thinking or how you REALLY felt. I go by what you post. On forums, your posts (or words written) are your bond. I’ll assume most posters post what they feel or what they are thinking. I know I do.

The only way the 2003 Cowboys would have fallen short of your expectations (as written) is if they didn’t win more than 5 games and scored fewer points than the 2002 offense. Based on what you expected as clear and noticeable improvement, the 2003 offense passed with flying colors BECAUSE THEY SCORED AND WON. They won 5 more games and the offense jumped 15 spots. The offense was ranked No.1 for a QTR of the 2003 NFL season.



Staubach did not pick Carter as his dog in the fight but I am not shocked you interpret it that way. You need to show me where he came right out and said "I think Carter is the man to lead this team back to the Super Bowl and they need to do everything they can to build around him." He didn't say that you know. No, like me, Staubach tells the things he likes about Carter and says he needs to do better and he wants the team to get better.

Actually, he did. I don’t know where CowboynIraQ got his article, but Staubach was at a fashion show with Troy and Quincy Carter and this was his quote on a CBS highlight.

http://cowboyszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1459&highlight=Staubach


Roger Staubach:"It will be interesting to see how the battle emerges. It's a little bit like Craig Morton and myself. Personally, I see good things in Quincy Carter, so I am (or ahh) kinda pulling for him”.

I don’t need mediot cliché’s like “QB of the future”, “build around”, “ the man to lead to Superbowl” to let meknow how a former player feels. He stated he's pulling for Carter.

Roger reference a historical QB battle Staubach/Morton. He sees some similarities. He then goes on to state he’s kinda pulling for Carter. Carter hasn’t proven he can play at a consistently high level. Why should Staubach go out on a limb and state "I think Carter is the man to lead this team back to the Super Bowl and they need to do everything they can to build around him.". Carter still has to prove he deserves to be the franchise QB.
I doubt a player of Staubach experience and success ANNOINTS players before they prove their worth. He is pulling for Carter in the competition to prove who has what it takes to become the long term future. How else can one interpret what Staubach said. Well I guess you COULD if clichés like “QB of the future” or “build around” are words you look for attached to players who haven’t proven squat.



You seem convinced I can NEVER be happy with Carter in any capacity. I have NEVER said that, but I have let you have your little fantasy that you have me pegged. You have no idea how I think or feel, nor can you alter how I think or feel. All these little digs and jabs serve no purpose other than to give you a soapbox from which I constantly shoot you down. Not my problem you don't see that.

I agree you constantly shot me down. By the way where can I buy a forum pedestal?



I love the way you try to do this. By hammering at the same quotes over and over and highlighting or putting in italics the part you think is the "smoking gun." Oh look, here is an example...

I love it too. Some prefer long winded posts. Some prefer breaking down or putting together pictures. Some prefer one sentence responses. It’s just my style of getting my point across.


I take that back. I am also curious as to how you think you can define MY interpretation of "clear and noticeable improvement." That's quite the gift you think you have there.

I don’t have to define your interpretation of “clear and noticeable improvement. YOU did already. You qualified clear and noticeable improvement (IN YOUR MIND) as being the Cowboys ability to score and win more. This doesn’t require psychic abilities (I know some who claim have this ability …. I call them the innate ones).

Maybe some other posters can let us know how they interpreted the post.


Even though I am long winded, I rarely tell people that my feelings and thoughts fit within a certain set of parameters. You seem to think I should be required to explain down to the detail each and every time I make a statement but you don't require that of yourself or anyone else that I can notice.

I didn’t ask you to explain yourself. You took it upon yourself to expound on your expectations. Like I mention earlier I saw your post from July 2003 and noticed that Carter met the expectations as expressed in the post, but surprisingly Henson (a player that hasn’t registered or contributed to ANY points in the NFL) inspires more hope.



P.S. Please feel free to explain to me how I have back tracked in any of the topics we have had. It's easy to reply with one-lined cute responses, but it another thing to back them up..

[MichaelWinicki]

When was I getting serious? How did I screw up? I promise everyone, if I was serious I never meant it. It was an honest mistake born of medication and lack of sleep.


It's OK Hos we still love you. :D

[blindzebra]

I didn’t interpret how you thought or felt. I read and understood what you posted a year ago. You expect(ed) clear and noticeable improvement which in YOUR mind would be indicated by scoring and winning. You DIDN’T mention any stats. You DIDN’T mention 330 points per season. I thought (and still think) that those standards or expectations (to signify improvement) were totally within a fans right and completely logical after watching the Cowboys offense 2000 thru. 2002.

I don’t know what you were REALLY thinking or how you REALLY felt. I go by what you post. On forums, your posts (or words written) are your bond. I’ll assume most posters post what they feel or what they are thinking. I know I do.

The only way the 2003 Cowboys would have fallen short of your expectations (as written) is if they didn’t win more than 5 games and scored fewer points than the 2002 offense. Based on what you expected as clear and noticeable improvement, the 2003 offense passed with flying colors BECAUSE THEY SCORED AND WON. They won 5 more games and the offense jumped 15 spots. The offense was ranked No.1 for a QTR of the 2003 NFL season.




Actually, he did. I don’t know where CowboynIraQ got his article, but Staubach was at a fashion show with Troy and Quincy Carter and this was his quote on a CBS highlight.

http://cowboyszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1459&highlight=Staubach


Roger Staubach:"It will be interesting to see how the battle emerges. It's a little bit like Craig Morton and myself. Personally, I see good things in Quincy Carter, so I am (or ahh) kinda pulling for him”.

I don’t need mediot cliché’s like “QB of the future”, “build around”, “ the man to lead to Superbowl” to let meknow how a former player feels. He stated he's pulling for Carter.

Roger reference a historical QB battle Staubach/Morton. He sees some similarities. He then goes on to state he’s kinda pulling for Carter. Carter hasn’t proven he can play at a consistently high level. Why should Staubach go out on a limb and state "I think Carter is the man to lead this team back to the Super Bowl and they need to do everything they can to build around him.". Carter still has to prove he deserves to be the franchise QB.
I doubt a player of Staubach experience and success ANNOINTS players before they prove their worth. He is pulling for Carter in the competition to prove who has what it takes to become the long term future. How else can one interpret what Staubach said. Well I guess you COULD if clichés like “QB of the future” or “build around” are words you look for attached to players who haven’t proven squat.




I agree you constantly shot me down. By the way where can I buy a forum pedestal?




I love it too. Some prefer long winded posts. Some prefer breaking down or putting together pictures. Some prefer one sentence responses. It’s just my style of getting my point across.



I don’t have to define your interpretation of “clear and noticeable improvement. YOU did already. You qualified clear and noticeable improvement (IN YOUR MIND) as being the Cowboys ability to score and win more. This doesn’t require psychic abilities (I know some who claim have this ability …. I call them the innate ones).

Maybe some other posters can let us know how they interpreted the post.



I didn’t ask you to explain yourself. You took it upon yourself to expound on your expectations. Like I mention earlier I saw your post from July 2003 and noticed that Carter met the expectations as expressed in the post, but surprisingly Henson (a player that hasn’t registered or contributed to ANY points in the NFL) inspires more hope.



P.S. Please feel free to explain to me how I have back tracked in any of the topics we have had. It's easy to reply with one-lined cute responses, but it another thing to back them up..

Roger made that quote in the presence of Carter, right? What is an upstanding, loyal man like Roger gonna say?

Would he have been just as complimentary of Henson...and there is an article where he was...Romo, or Hutchinson if they were standing beside him? I'd bet he would be, that is just the type of person he is.

So take the Staubach ball and run with it. Hold it up as a ringing endorsement, even though it's not, it still comes down to performance.

[BrAinPaiNt]

While reading this thread (and yes including my other post).

I keep hearing the Benny Hill theme.

Not sure what that means :p

[Charles]

Roger made that quote in the presence of Carter, right? What is an upstanding, loyal man like Roger gonna say?

Would he have been just as complimentary of Henson...and there is an article where he was...Romo, or Hutchinson if they were standing beside him? I'd bet he would be, that is just the type of person he is.

So take the Staubach ball and run with it. Hold it up as a ringing endorsement, even though it's not, it still comes down to performance.

I don't think it's a ringing endorsement. Roger Staubach right now is pulling for Carter. He is not the 1st experience and successful QB to state that Carter has shown some good qualities and has a chance to become a good NFL QB.

I'd like to know exactly where Roger stated he's pulling for Romo and Hutchinson. Where is the article?.

I know..... maybe it's in the same article where Parcells said Henson has made throws that no other QB on the roster can make. ;)

[MichaelWinicki]

While reading this thread (and yes including my other post).

I keep hearing the Benny Hill theme.

Not sure what that means :p


It means we need to be chasing girls in garter belts & stockings?

[Doomsday101]

I don't think it's a ringing endorsement. Roger Staubach right now is pulling for Carter. He is not the 1st experience and successful QB to state that Carter has shown some good qualities and has a chance to become a good NFL QB.

I'd like to know exactly where Roger stated he's pulling for Romo and Hutchinson. Where is the article?.

I know..... maybe it's in the same article where Parcells said Henson has made throws that no other QB on the roster can make. ;)

So you think Roger is pulling aginst the other QB? Or being that Roger was a former player that he just may be pulling for all our guys to become better?

[BrAinPaiNt]

It means we need to be chasing girls in garter belts & stockings?


http://www.skincarephysicians.com/rosaceanet/images/wcfields.jpg

<wc fields voice>

Here you go kid...

http://www.indiana.edu/~cacard/images/dollar_bills.jpg

go by yourself a few...

http://www.hbva.ca/images/beers.jpg

:p

[Dale]

I enjoy reading comments from former greats and how they are still pulling for the team. Glad guys like Staubach still feel attached to the organization despite the rift that was created between current managment and past players after the Landry incident.

Like Roger said, it'll be interesting to see what happens with Quincy. This is it for him -- his ultimate chance to fail or succeed.

[ABQCOWBOY]

I enjoy reading comments from former greats and how they are still pulling for the team. Glad guys like Staubach still feel attached to the organization despite the rift that was created between current managment and past players after the Landry incident.

Like Roger said, it'll be interesting to see what happens with Quincy. This is it for him -- his ultimate chance to fail or succeed.

Can't really ask for more then that.

[Hostile]

I didn’t interpret how you thought or felt. I read and understood what you posted a year ago. You expect(ed) clear and noticeable improvement which in YOUR mind would be indicated by scoring and winning. You DIDN’T mention any stats. You DIDN’T mention 330 points per season. I thought (and still think) that those standards or expectations (to signify improvement) were totally within a fans right and completely logical after watching the Cowboys offense 2000 thru. 2002.

Sure you did. You read the quote, figured you knew the parameters, and you let it fly from there. Do you honestly think I would have been happy with 218 points and 6 wins? Seriously?

Bill Russell was on Johnny Carson one night and he told this story. He asked a woman if she would have sex with him for 1 million dollars and she said yes. So he asked her if she would have sex with him for 20 dollars and she said, "no. What do you think I am?" To which he replied, "we've established what you are, now we are haggling on the price."

So it is not for you to say what I consider sufficient points or wins to equal satisfaction that is my determination. Nice try.

I don’t know what you were REALLY thinking or how you REALLY felt. I go by what you post. On forums, your posts (or words written) are your bond. I’ll assume most posters post what they feel or what they are thinking. I know I do.

The only way the 2003 Cowboys would have fallen short of your expectations (as written) is if they didn’t win more than 5 games and scored fewer points than the 2002 offense. Based on what you expected as clear and noticeable improvement, the 2003 offense passed with flying colors BECAUSE THEY SCORED AND WON. They won 5 more games and the offense jumped 15 spots. The offense was ranked No.1 for a QTR of the 2003 NFL season.

Once again you seem to have a mental block. 218 points and 6 wins is still improvement by your rather broad definition. For some really stupid reason you want to pigeonhole me into that definition. You'd have better luck trying to shove hot butter up an unchained rabid wildcat's a** with a hot poker under a July sun. You simply have no power to tell me what I meant or what my expectatiosn were. None. Zero. Zip. Nada.

To be truthful I find the attempt to be rather insulting.

Actually, he did. I don’t know where CowboynIraQ got his article, but Staubach was at a fashion show with Troy and Quincy Carter and this was his quote on a CBS highlight.

http://cowboyszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1459&highlight=Staubach


Roger Staubach:"It will be interesting to see how the battle emerges. It's a little bit like Craig Morton and myself. Personally, I see good things in Quincy Carter, so I am (or ahh) kinda pulling for him”.

I don’t need mediot cliché’s like “QB of the future”, “build around”, “ the man to lead to Superbowl” to let meknow how a former player feels. He stated he's pulling for Carter.

Roger reference a historical QB battle Staubach/Morton. He sees some similarities. He then goes on to state he’s kinda pulling for Carter. Carter hasn’t proven he can play at a consistently high level. Why should Staubach go out on a limb and state "I think Carter is the man to lead this team back to the Super Bowl and they need to do everything they can to build around him.". Carter still has to prove he deserves to be the franchise QB.
I doubt a player of Staubach experience and success ANNOINTS players before they prove their worth. He is pulling for Carter in the competition to prove who has what it takes to become the long term future. How else can one interpret what Staubach said. Well I guess you COULD if clichés like “QB of the future” or “build around” are words you look for attached to players who haven’t proven squat.

Well, then I guess you can put me down as sympatico with Roger because I've said many times that I'm pulling for him as the starting QB of my team to get it done.

Stretch it as far as you want to.

I agree you constantly shot me down. By the way where can I buy a forum pedestal?

No idea. The soapbox unsteady?

I love it too. Some prefer long winded posts. Some prefer breaking down or putting together pictures. Some prefer one sentence responses. It’s just my style of getting my point across.

Yeah but why stick with it when you're so obviously missing the mark?

I don’t have to define your interpretation of “clear and noticeable improvement. YOU did already. You qualified clear and noticeable improvement (IN YOUR MIND) as being the Cowboys ability to score and win more. This doesn’t require psychic abilities (I know some who claim have this ability …. I call them the innate ones).

Here we have once again demonstrated that you have a broad definition that you want to impose upon me. If you wanted parameters in July 2003 you could have asked. For your general information. When will I be satisifed with the Cowboys offense and not seek to improve it? When all 11 guys are All Pro and shoo ins for the Hall of Fame even with this biased cast of voters. When their top backups could start for any team in the NFL other than the Cowboys. When the scoring record for a season is out of all possible reach for any team to ever achieve. Then and only then will I not be talking about how we can get better. In other words I hope you have lots of talcum powder to stop the chapping.

Shall I break down when I'll be satisfied with the defense and not seek to improve? I figure if I do this for you now it will save you lots of heartburn later.

Or maybe it will cause some. I don't know. You tell me.

Maybe some other posters can let us know how they interpreted the post.

LMAO

What will that prove? If even one poster agrees with me you'll say it is because they agree with my sentiments. I don't care who agrees with you. They don't define my interpretations of what I think either.

I didn’t ask you to explain yourself. You took it upon yourself to expound on your expectations.

Yes, I did because it was obvious to me that you needed attention. "Hey look at my sig line." So I gave you the attention you craved and decided to clarify for you the illusions you were (and apprently still are) under. Are you denying you hoped I'd see that or that someone would at least ask you about it since you made sure it was noticed? Why not put it in a post then make it a sig later?

You seem to think I would or should have been happy with 218 and 6 wins. Hey, jump for joy at 289 and 10 wins if you want to Qcard. No one tells me when to dance.

For the record I am thrilled with the 10 wins. I still consider 289 points tepid at best. Oh and an easy way to have known this would be to find out if I was happy in 2000 with 294 points since that is more than 289. The easiest way would be to ask me for parameters instead of creating your own and then saying I left the box. I was never in the box.

Like I mention earlier I saw your post from July 2003 and noticed that Carter met the expectations as expressed in the post, but surprisingly Henson (a player that hasn’t registered or contributed to ANY points in the NFL) inspires more hope.

Carter met your expectations, not mine. By the way, I wasn't happy with the running game or the WRs either since you didn't ask. How many times do you need to be reminded of this? Your expectations and mine do not have to jive.

My hopes in Henson really are a thorn in your side huh? I still don't understand why my hopes for Steven Jackson weren't and my hopes for Julius Jones aren't. Hope in a rookie over a vet who underwhelmed is equal across the board for me. Then again, I have no agendas beyond the team improving. Not a single one.

Your agenda appears to be player over team. Not me. Not ever. Mike Lucky was my friend. Jason Witten makes the team better. Bye bye Mike. Thank you for the inside tips and the free tickets.

P.S. Please feel free to explain to me how I have back tracked in any of the topics we have had. It's easy to reply with one-lined cute responses, but it another thing to back them up..

Backtracked? Where did I claim that?

I said you didn't recognize sarcasm directed at myself. I said you took that comment to mean my whole post of a year ago was sarcastic. I said you built parameters for me and told me those were mine. I never said you backtracked.

Let's get something straight between us. Hypothetical siutauton here. Okay? Do you grasp that? Hypothetical only? Not saying this WILL happen.

2004 season and Drew Henson is named the starter. My dream come true by your interpretation. Cowboys go 11-5 under his leadership and score 272 points, holding opponents to 230, and they win a playoff game 10-7, then lose another one 12-0.

Do you imagine for one minute that I am going to be satisifed with that offensive performance? That I will defend it? Do you think I will excuse Drew Henson because he's a rookie and my guy? That I will shout "11 wins, 11 wins, 11 wins?" Because if you think that way then you couldn't be further from reality.

Like last year, I will be thrilled with the wins and the playoffs and even the win in the playoffs. I have NEVER griped about those things. Not once, not ever.

Bottom line, performance is performance, execution is exectution, and no amount of singing, dancing, finger pointing, or post quoting by you or anyone else is ever going to tell me that I don't even know what I meant or what I think. You do not define that for me. You want to do it for your own giggles that is fine, but when you expect me to sit up and clap like a seal and play the little horn for the people in the audience, know this, it ain't gonna happen. Imagine it in your own mind all you want.

I'll be glad to answer direct questions, define my complicated answers, tell you the parameters I am looking for, or just otherwise explain myself to you anytime you are not crystal clear on what I am thinking. All you have to do is ask. But don't ever try to put me in the box because brother, I ain't going.

[Hostile]

It's OK Hos we still love you. :D
Then life is good. Whew.

[Hostile]

While reading this thread (and yes including my other post).

I keep hearing the Benny Hill theme.

Not sure what that means :p
That you want to pinch cute girls on the bottom? :D

[Hostile]

It means we need to be chasing girls in garter belts & stockings?
Guess I should have kept reading. We think alike.

[Charles]

Then life is good. Whew.
No it's not. Coincidentally the link to the old forum goes directly to the new forum. I can't access the old forum archives anymore. :eek:

I had some juicy nuggets lined up for the rest of the summer. :(

[Hostile]

No it's not. Coincidentally the link to the old forum goes directly to the new forum. I can't access the old forum archives anymore. :eek:

I had some juicy nuggets lined up for the rest of the summer. :(
We've talked about bringing those archives over here. Not sure on a timetable for that. I have no idea why the link might not be working.

[Charles]

Sure you did. You read the quote, figured you knew the parameters, and you let it fly from there. Do you honestly think I would have been happy with 218 points and 6 wins? Seriously?

Bill Russell was on Johnny Carson one night and he told this story. He asked a woman if she would have sex with him for 1 million dollars and she said yes. So he asked her if she would have sex with him for 20 dollars and she said, "no. What do you think I am?" To which he replied, "we've established what you are, now we are haggling on the price."

So it is not for you to say what I consider sufficient points or wins to equal satisfaction that is my determination. Nice try.

This absolutely hilarious.

I didn’t figure out the parameters. You set the parameter indicating what you thought would be clear and noticeable improvement. In your mind it was scoring and winning.

How did I set the parameters when YOU clearly wrote that IN YOUR MIND???

Please could any other posters explain how I set the parameters. Maybe another voice of reasoning can get Hostile’s point across.



Once again you seem to have a mental block. 218 points and 6 wins is still improvement by your rather broad definition. For some really stupid reason you want to pigeonhole me into that definition. You'd have better luck trying to shove hot butter up an unchained rabid wildcat's a** with a hot poker under a July sun. You simply have no power to tell me what I meant or what my expectatiosn were. None. Zero. Zip. Nada.

To be truthful I find the attempt to be rather insulting.

How am I pigeon-hole(ing) the parameters, when you simply stated that IN YOUR MIND scoring and winning would be a clear and noticeable sign of improvement.

It’s not my fault you didn’t expound on the parameters at the time. I saw what you wrote. You expected improvement from whichever QB (Chad or Quincy) won the job. IN YOUR MIND noticeable improvement would be indicated by scoring and winning.

How can my interpretation of what you wrote be consider pigeon-holing or setting the parameters?

Once again, puuulease can another poster explain exactly the point Hostile is trying to get across, because I just don’t get it.


Well, then I guess you can put me down as sympatico with Roger because I've said many times that I'm pulling for him as the starting QB of my team to get it done.

Stretch it as far as you want to.

You’ve also said many times that you don’t think Carter has what it takes “not for one minute”.

You’ve also said that Henson is your “dog in this fight”.

You also believe everything done and not done at the QB position is a precursor to paving the way for Henson.

On one hand you claim to be pulling for Carter like Roger, but on the other hand he certainly isn’t your dog in this fight.

Flip-flop . Flip-flop .

By the way. I don't need to know what you really think. I have seen it many times, but usually a flip-flop sentence or comment here or there leave me scratching my head. Flip-Flop.


Here we have once again demonstrated that you have a broad definition that you want to impose upon me. If you wanted parameters in July 2003 you could have asked. For your general information. When will I be satisifed with the Cowboys offense and not seek to improve it? When all 11 guys are All Pro and shoo ins for the Hall of Fame even with this biased cast of voters. When their top backups could start for any team in the NFL other than the Cowboys. When the scoring record for a season is out of all possible reach for any team to ever achieve. Then and only then will I not be talking about how we can get better. In other words I hope you have lots of talcum powder to stop the chapping.

Shall I break down when I'll be satisfied with the defense and not seek to improve? I figure if I do this for you now it will save you lots of heartburn later.

Or maybe it will cause some. I don't know. You tell me.

This is getting redundant.

Why would I ask for the parameters?

You set the parameters yourself. You wanted and expected clear and noticeable improvements IN YOUR MIND meaning scoring and winning.

Maybe other posters can surmise what they would take from this paragraph (taking into account the Cowboys are coming off an abysmal 5-11 season)

” I expect a lot out of Chad Hutchinson this year. Or Carter if he does in fact win the job. If they don't measure up then I think we are all goign to be lamenting for years that we passed up Byron Leftwich when he was on our board. I got to be honest with you amigo, I don't want to think that way. Therefore, I expect clear and noticeable improvement which in my mind means scoring and winning”



Let's get something straight between us. Hypothetical siutauton here. Okay? Do you grasp that? Hypothetical only? Not saying this WILL happen.

2004 season and Drew Henson is named the starter. My dream come true by your interpretation. Cowboys go 11-5 under his leadership and score 272 points, holding opponents to 230, and they win a playoff game 10-7, then lose another one 12-0.

Do you imagine for one minute that I am going to be satisifed with that offensive performance? That I will defend it? Do you think I will excuse Drew Henson because he's a rookie and my guy? That I will shout "11 wins, 11 wins, 11 wins?" Because if you think that way then you couldn't be further from reality.

Like last year, I will be thrilled with the wins and the playoffs and even the win in the playoffs. I have NEVER griped about those things. Not once, not ever.

Bottom line, performance is performance, execution is exectution, and no amount of singing, dancing, finger pointing, or post quoting by you or anyone else is ever going to tell me that I don't even know what I meant or what I think. You do not define that for me. You want to do it for your own giggles that is fine, but when you expect me to sit up and clap like a seal and play the little horn for the people in the audience, know this, it ain't gonna happen. Imagine it in your own mind all you want.

I'll be glad to answer direct questions, define my complicated answers, tell you the parameters I am looking for, or just otherwise explain myself to you anytime you are not crystal clear on what I am thinking. All you have to do is ask. But don't ever try to put me in the box because brother, I ain't going.

I gotta give it to you Hostile. You have uncanny ability of cluttering simple arguments with a bunch of unnecessary BS. Johny Carson, Bill Russell, wild rapid cats, clap like a seal, play the little horn etc. Bunch of unnecessary fluff camouflaged with hypothetical scenarios, clichés like excution is excution, QB of the future etc etc etc.

I have not swayed from my point. I won’t. If I want to discuss hypothetical scenarios I’ll look for the appropriate thread. If I want to ask you to expound on expectations and standards I will.

This discussion is based on me using your simple expectation in 2002 as an example during a reply to LaTuna. You took offense. You’re not the 1st poster I have you used in my signature line. Everyday posters on this forum post about other posters without using their usernames. You have done it and many other do it under the veil of “apologist” or “hater”.

I got your panties in a bunch Hos. You wouldn’t have replied to my post if it didn’t bother you.

Why did it bother you?

Is it because the Carter led Cowboys met your expectations AS WRITTEN?

Is it because even after the Carter led Cowboys met your expectations AS WRITTEN you would rather struggle with Henson?

I can’t understand how or why I am being accussed ( not in a serious way) of mind reading or parameter setting when you clearly wrote that IN YOUR MIND, scoring and winning would indicate clear and noticeable improvement.

[blindzebra]

This absolutely hilarious.

I didn’t figure out the parameters. You set the parameter indicating what you thought would be clear and noticeable improvement. In your mind it was scoring and winning.

How did I set the parameters when YOU clearly wrote that IN YOUR MIND???

Please could any other posters explain how I set the parameters. Maybe another voice of reasoning can get Hostile’s point across.



How am I pigeon-hole(ing) the parameters, when you simply stated that IN YOUR MIND scoring and winning would be a clear and noticeable sign of improvement.

It’s not my fault you didn’t expound of the parameters at the time. I saw what you wrote. You expected improvement from whichever QB (Chad or Quincy) won the job. IN YOUR MIND noticeable improvement would be indicated by scoring and winning.

How does my interpretation of what you wrote consider pigeon-holing or setting the parameters?

Once again, puuulease can another poster explain exactly the point Hostile is trying to get across, because I just don’t get it.



You’ve also said many times that you don’t think Carter has what it takes “not for one minute”.

You’ve also said that Henson is your “dog in this fight”.

You also believe everything done and not done at the QB position is a precursor to paving the way for Henson.

On one hand you claim to be pulling for Carter like Roger, but on the other hand he certainly isn’t your dog in this fight.

Flip-flop . Flip-flop .

By the way. I don't need to know what you really think. I have seen it many times, but usually flip-flop sentence or comment here or there leave me scratching my head. Flip-Flop.



This is getting redundant.

Why would I ask for the parameters?

You set the parameters yourself. You wanted and expected clear and noticeable improvements IN YOUR MIND meaning scoring and winning.

Maybe other posters can surmise what they would take from this paragraph (taking into account the Cowboys are coming off an abysmal 5-11 season)

” I expect a lot out of Chad Hutchinson this year. Or Carter if he does in fact win the job. If they don't measure up then I think we are all goign to be lamenting for years that we passed up Byron Leftwich when he was on our board. I got to be honest with you amigo, I don't want to think that way. Therefore, I expect clear and noticeable improvement which in my mind means scoring and winning”



I gotta give it to you Hostile. You have uncanny ability of cluttering simple arguments with a bunch of unnecessary BS. Johny Carson, Bill Russell wild rapid cats, clap like a seal, play the little horn etc. Bunch of unnecessary fluff caumoflaged with hypothetical scenarios, clichés like excution is excution, QB of the future etc etc etc.

I have not swayed from my point. I won’t. If I want to discuss hypothetical scenarios I’ll look for the appropriate thread. If I want to ask you to expound on expectations and standards I will.

This discussion is based on me using your simple expectation in 2002 as an example during a reply to LaTuna. You took offense. You’re not the 1st poster I have you used in my signature line. Everyday posters on this forum post about other posters without using their usernames. You have done it and many other do it under the veil of “apologist” or “hater”.
I got your panties in a bunch Hos. You wouldn’t have replied to my post if it didn’t bother you.

Why did it bother you?

Is it because the Carter led Cowboys met your expectations AS WRITTEN?

Is it because even after Carter led Cowboys met your expectations AS WRITTEN you would rather struggle with Henson?

I can’t understand how I am being accussed ( not in a serious way) of mind reading or parameter setting when you clearly wrote that IN YOUR MIND, scoring and winning would indicate clear and noticeable improvement.

Why in God's name is this still going on? Why does it need to be 1,000 words to make or contradict a point?

Hostile did not set a fixed parameter. He said points and wins. That could be 1 more point and 1 more win, for those overly satisfied with average, or 150 more points and a Super Bowl win.

That's what you keep missing. You have him on a technicality, a vagueness that does not prove, in any way shape or form, that Carter performed above adequate.

[junk]

Why in God's name is this still going on? Why does it need to be 1,000 words to make or contradict a point?

Hostile did not set a fixed parameter. He said points and wins. That could be 1 more point and 1 more win, for those overly satisfied with average, or 150 more points and a Super Bowl win.

That's what you keep missing. You have him on a technicality, a vagueness that does not prove, in any way shape or form, that Carter performed above adequate.

I think that about sums it up.

[Nors]

Carter has improved dramatically since Rookie year. You label me pro Carter but if you followed me at the time I was against him starting as a Rookie and not impressed with his arm. I was not oposed at the time to giving Chad a chance. After watching that I was sure Carter was the starter going forward.

Parcells made no changes and Carter grew as a leader, QB on and off the field. You'll give everyone credit but Quincy for the 10 win playoff turnaround.


Its his job to lose and Vinnie, Drew are competition.

Let the best QB win.

[Charles]

Why in God's name is this still going on? Why does it need to be 1,000 words to make or contradict a point?

Hostile did not set a fixed parameter. He said points and wins. That could be 1 more point and 1 more win, for those overly satisfied with average, or 150 more points and a Super Bowl win.

That's what you keep missing. You have him on a technicality, a vagueness that does not prove, in any way shape or form, that Carter performed above adequate.

I am still waiting on the article where Parcells stated that Henson has made throws that no other QB on the roster has made. Maybe I'll also find Hostile quote where he said points and wins.

By the way. You don't have to read this thread. Flies are attracted to sh#!@t. Use the ignore button.

[blindzebra]

Carter has improved dramatically since Rookie year. You labe me pro Carter but if you followed me at the time I was against him starting as a Rookie and not impressed with his arm. I was not oposed at the time to giving Chad a chance. After watching that I was sure Carter was the starter going forward.

Parcells made no changes and Carter grew as a leader, QB on and off the field. You'll give everyone credit but Quincy for the 10 win playoff turnaround.


Its his job to lose and Vinnie, Drew are competition.

Let the best QB win.

I agree with the not starting him as a rookie part...we screwed up Hutchinson too, by doing the same...He has improved with some of his mechanics, i.e. ducks, and he puts in the time to study and improve.

Where I disagree is that last point. We won 10 games and got to the playoffs because of defense and coaching. No one on offense had more than a minute influence on that record. We had only a few players on offense that played above average and Carter is not one of them.

Look at it this way, if we were 10th in scoring defense instead of 2nd, we'd most likely have been 6-10.

[blindzebra]

I am still waiting on the article where Parcells stated that Henson has made throws that no other QB on the roster has made. Maybe I'll also find Hostile quote where he said points and wins.

By the way. You don't have to read this thread. Flies are attracted to sh#!@t. Use the ignore button.

Last I checked points and scoring are the SAME thing.

You asked for a reasoned reply explaining Hostile's stance and I gave you one.

The quote was from one of the mini camp reports. Since you are the KING of the archives, I'm sure you can find it. I have better things to do than go digging through old threads looking for ammo. ;)

[Nors]

I agree with the not starting him as a rookie part...we screwed up Hutchinson too, by doing the same...He has improved with some of his mechanics, i.e. ducks, and he puts in the time to study and improve.

Where I disagree is that last point. We won 10 games and got to the playoffs because of defense and coaching. No one on offense had more than a minute influence on that record. We had only a few players on offense that played above average and Carter is not one of them.

Look at it this way, if we were 10th in scoring defense instead of 2nd, we'd most likely have been 6-10.

Plays a very conservative offense. I believe we led the league in rushing attempts and were near the lead in time of posession. This will never be a Martz or Weiss scorefest by design. That change in TOP allowed our D to not wilt like it did in 2002...........

2004 is all I care about now. 45 days

[Hostile]

This absolutely hilarious.

I didn’t figure out the parameters. You set the parameter indicating what you thought would be clear and noticeable improvement. In your mind it was scoring and winning.

How did I set the parameters when YOU clearly wrote that IN YOUR MIND???

Oh, I thought you weren't going to respond. So let me ask you one question. I am making the following statement. "I need to see Ellis finally step up and prove his #8 Draft status." That is my comment. Quote me on it.

Would you please tell me what I mean? That's what you are doing now. Even if you refuse to admit it.

How am I pigeon-hole(ing) the parameters, when you simply stated that IN YOUR MIND scoring and winning would be a clear and noticeable sign of improvement.

So, whatever I say, you determine what I meant? That is called pigeon holing. It doesn't work. If I say something, I expect to be allowed to explain what I meant if someone is unclear.

It’s not my fault you didn’t expound of the parameters at the time. I saw what you wrote. You expected improvement from whichever QB (Chad or Quincy) won the job. IN YOUR MIND noticeable improvement would be indicated by scoring and winning.

I didn't feel the need to expound because I was not asked. Had I been asked I can assure I would have expounded. It's really that simple. Your interpretation of what I wanted won't fit. Although I must admit it tickles me that you are still trying in vain.

How does my interpretation of what you wrote consider pigeon-holing or setting the parameters?

Deja vu. I could swear you just asked this.

You’ve also said many times that you don’t think Carter has what it takes “not for one minute”.

You’ve also said that Henson is your “dog in this fight”.

You also believe everything done and not done at the QB position is a precursor to paving the way for Henson.

On one hand you claim to be pulling for Carter like Roger, but on the other hand he certainly isn’t your dog in this fight.

Yeah, and none of those things change the facts. The facts remain when Q is the QB I root for him and pull for him to do good. With the exact same energy and zeal that I rooted for Roger Staubach, my all time favorite player.

I believe Henson has the tools to be a great one and I like great ones at QB. Once he assumes the starting nod he gets the same treatment I just described above.

I want Bradie James to move into a starting role at LB. That doesn't mean I won't pull for Dexter Coakley to do well. Does this bother you too?

You see, I don't have an agenda like you. I don't need to root for Chad Hutchinson to fail so I can rub people's nose in it. If Q ends up failing here I don't intend to harp on it unless he goes somewhere else and flaps his gums against the team. I'll bet you just about any amount you want the celebration when/if Hutchinson is waived or traded will be forum shaking and if he ends up elsewhere the articles and digs at him won't stop.

I bet the same will be true for Q if it happens. Unless he bashes the team...I won't have much to say. I never do.

I didn't like Ekuban at all. Do you hear me still bashing him? No, because he's not cracking on the team. He's gone. Doesn't exist to me any more.

I didn't like Hambrick at all. He ran his mouth recently and I made comments. If he keeps it up I'll keep talking about him. If he shuts up I won't have much to say.

Other people bash Deion for leaving the Cowboys or his contract while he was here. I never have. Not once. Not ever.

You see, I don't get your agenda. I never will. This really isn't an issue with me that I take personally. I can disagree with people without judging them for it. You could tell me today that you think Lynn Scott is the best safety we have on the team. I won't agree with it, but I'm not going to beat you over the head over it. That's your opinion and you are entitled to it.

So, I like Drew Henson and want to see his era launch. I fail to see how my hope, desire, opinion, or thinking punches holes in Quincy's boat and sinks his chances. Are you under some delusion that he is failing because I have no faith in him? I mean really, why is my hope in Henson that damned important to you? Just because of the agenda? Break it down for me please. Oh wait puuuuuuulease.

By the way. I don't need to know what you really think. I have seen it many times, but usually flip-flop sentence or comment here or there leave me scratching my head. Flip-Flop.

Clearly you do need to know what I really think because you haven't hit the target yet. You could aim at the ground and miss the way you're going.

This is getting redundant.

Well, then quit repeating illogical points. It's not rocket science.

Why would I ask for the parameters?

So you can get them straight. Clarification. Same page. Pick a theory.

You set the parameters yourself. You wanted and expected clear and noticeable improvements IN YOUR MIND meaning scoring and winning.

Right. I set the parameters myself because they were what I want. Not what you want. I don't govern your thinking and expectations any more than you govern mine. The difference is, I wouldn't have the audacity to try and claim I could set yours.

I gotta give it to you Hostile. You have uncanny ability of cluttering simple arguments with a bunch of unnecessary BS. Johny Carson, Bill Russell wild rapid cats, clap like a seal, play the little horn etc. Bunch of unnecessary fluff caumoflaged with hypothetical scenarios, clichés like excution is excution, QB of the future etc etc etc.

It's called analogies. I like to use them from time to time to help explain things and keep things light.

I have not swayed from my point. I won’t. If I want to discuss hypothetical scenarios I’ll look for the appropriate thread. If I want to ask you to expound on expectations and standards I will.

You have no point. The problem is you don't recognize that. You put an interpretation upon my expectations and tried to run with it.

This discussion is based on me using your simple expectation in 2002 as an example during a reply to LaTuna.

Once again, I know you meant 2003.

You took offense.

There you go again, thinking you know me. I'm not offended. I'm amused.

You’re not the 1st poster I have you used in my signature line. Everyday posters on this forum post about other posters without using their usernames. You have done it and many other do it under the veil of “apologist” or “hater”.
I got your panties in a bunch Hos. You wouldn’t have replied to my post if it didn’t bother you.

I don't remember saying or even thinking that I was the only person you've quoted. Is there a relevant point here? If so can we get there or move on?

Why did it bother you?

It didn't. I find it funny.

Is it because the Carter led Cowboys met your expectations AS WRITTEN?

Do I need to explain it to you yet again?

Is it because even after Carter led Cowboys met your expectations AS WRITTEN you would rather struggle with Henson?

Apparently I do. You still don't get it.

I can’t understand how I am being accussed ( not in a serious way) of mind reading or parameter setting when you clearly wrote that IN YOUR MIND, scoring and winning would indicate clear and noticeable improvement.

It's really simple. You ask. And if someone answers you in a way that answers your questions you accept their answers and you move on. If you are still confused you ask more. You keep asking until you understand. You didn't do that. Instead you had to invent an imaginary line of 218 points and 6 wins and anything that surpassed that imaginary line was going to be used to try and pigeon hole me into a surrender.

When you weren't straight on the expectations from Point A there is no way you can be straight on them at point Z which is where we are today. I've tried explaining it to you. The synapses just aren't firing or you are purposely being obtuse.

Bottom line, the white flag you want, ain't happening. Not over your interpretation of my standards. Not going to happen. Get used to it.

[blindzebra]

Of this thread please log on to LONGWINDED.COM... :D

[Hostile]

Please could any other posters explain how I set the parameters. Maybe another voice of reasoning can get Hostile’s point across.

Once again, puuulease can another poster explain exactly the point Hostile is trying to get across, because I just don’t get it.

Maybe other posters can surmise what they would take from this paragraph (taking into account the Cowboys are coming off an abysmal 5-11 season)

” I expect a lot out of Chad Hutchinson this year. Or Carter if he does in fact win the job. If they don't measure up then I think we are all goign to be lamenting for years that we passed up Byron Leftwich when he was on our board. I got to be honest with you amigo, I don't want to think that way. Therefore, I expect clear and noticeable improvement which in my mind means scoring and winning”
Let me state for the record that I find these pleas to have little worth.

It is possible that some posters who do not like my stated ideas on QBs will think Qcard has a point. For him that might mean the ability to claim victory in this debate. That someone (anyone) agrees with him. That simply won't matter to me one ounce. If you agree with him fine. My stance will not change.

I know what I expect, expected, am expecting, and have always expected with regards to performance. If anyone wants to know my opinions on these things I am not shy. I'll be glad to rap with you on them.

There are some posters who will likely agree with me. Brainpaint noticed his intent early in the thread and called him on it too. So clearly Brainpaint's opinion already stated many pages ago didn't matter. He's not going to give credence to anyone who agrees with me either. I suspect he will gloss right over it.

Respond if you feel like it. It's your call.

[Hostile]

Of this thread please log on to LONGWINDED.COM... :D
At least it is entertaining.

[jterrell]

Carter has improved dramatically since Rookie year. You label me pro Carter but if you followed me at the time I was against him starting as a Rookie and not impressed with his arm. I was not oposed at the time to giving Chad a chance. After watching that I was sure Carter was the starter going forward.

Parcells made no changes and Carter grew as a leader, QB on and off the field. You'll give everyone credit but Quincy for the 10 win playoff turnaround.


Its his job to lose and Vinnie, Drew are competition.

Let the best QB win.

An excellent post.

As to QCard and Hos debating I am staying out of that. Hos has never lost a debate yet because he simply outtypes everyone. LOL:)

What Qcard says that rings true with me though is Carter haters(Not necessarily Hos) would never commit to an improvement number. There was no statistical offerings made at all. Carter was going to suck regardless for far too many of them. I ask now for hard numbers as I did then. What does it take statstically from Carter to shut you(To Carter haters in general not anyone specific) up as a yelping Carter hater?

NorthDalAl was a man and offered his expectation. It is lofty but at least it is in print.

[blindzebra]

An excellent post.

As to QCard and Hos debating I am staying out of that. Hos has never lost a debate yet because he simply outtypes everyone. LOL:)

What Qcard says that rings true with me though is Carter haters(Not necessarily Hos) would never commit to an improvement number. There was no statistical offerings made at all. Carter was going to suck regardless for far too many of them. I ask now for hard numbers as I did then. What does it take statstically from Carter to shut you(To Carter haters in general not anyone specific) up as a yelping Carter hater?

NorthDalAl was a man and offered his expectation. It is lofty but at least it is in print.

I've stated repeatedly that what I want is a QB around 60% with a TD/INT ratio near 2 to 1 with a QB rating in the low to mid 80's. It seems that for many to aspire for that is "hating".

[MichaelWinicki]

I've stated repeatedly that what I want is a QB around 60% with a TD/INT ratio near 2 to 1 with a QB rating in the low to mid 80's. It seems that for many to aspire for that is "hating".

BlindZ how can you live with yourself having so much "hate" within you?

[Hostile]

As to QCard and Hos debating I am staying out of that. Hos has never lost a debate yet because he simply outtypes everyone. LOL:)

Guilty. LOL

What Qcard says that rings true with me though is Carter haters(Not necessarily Hos) would never commit to an improvement number. There was no statistical offerings made at all.

First of all we are not haters. Second of all I've never been asked. Third of all numbers don't translate into much really, so I talk about performance. I can talk about numbers, but I don't think they tell the whole story. I also don't think it will end the discussion.

Carter was going to suck regardless for far too many of them.

Not true.

I ask now for hard numbers as I did then. What does it take statstically from Carter to shut you(To Carter haters in general not anyone specific) up as a yelping Carter hater?

Mostly it will take for cheap shots like that to stop. Until they do why should I, or anyone else, take it seriously? This is just an invitation to fire back with more crap and stir up the anger more. The very thing that is supposedly wrong. Don't invite it then. Anyone who seriously thinks this will make the peace is nuts.

NorthDalAl was a man and offered his expectation. It is lofty but at least it is in print.

Good for him.

[blindzebra]

BlindZ how can you live with yourself having so much "hate" within you?

I know Osama, Saddam, Ted Bundy, Charles Manson, Hitler and blindzebra.

I probably should not have said that, Qcard is likely to save it and use it against me a year from now. :D

[junk]

I've stated repeatedly that what I want is a QB around 60% with a TD/INT ratio near 2 to 1 with a QB rating in the low to mid 80's. It seems that for many to aspire for that is "hating".

I seem to recall posting something similar myself. Like others have said, stats are hard to predict and don't always tell the whole story, but if QC posted numbers like that, it would be tough to replace him.

For some, I agree, there probably is a certain degree of hate. For others, it is just a simple desire to get better at the QB position (there are other positions too, but they don't have three threads a day or such off the wall accusations from both sides. I posted one on punt returners that got all of about 1 reply)

Some of us are very demanding in what the QB brings to the table. As jterrell I believe said, the QB touches the ball every offensive play. I want that player to be great. I don't really want Jay Fiedler, who gets 10 wins with a great D every year and never wins the big one (or even gets there). I would rather have a couple of sub par seasons in place, if it meant getting to and winning the big one, than to string together a bunch of 10 win, out of the playoffs in one type seasons.

[MichaelWinicki]

I know Osama, Saddam, Ted Bundy, Charles Manson, Hitler and blindzebra.

I probably should not have said that, Qcard is likely to save it and use it against me a year from now. :D


LOL!

Yep. You've been "marked".

Don't ever tell Qcard about things that occurred to you in childhood either.

Can you imagine debating him in "Quincy" thread and all of a sudden he brings up the fact that you pooped your pants when you were 5 and now that renders every opinion you have "tainted".

[junk]

LOL!

Yep. You've been "marked".

Don't ever tell Qcard about things that occurred to you in childhood either.

Can you imagine debating him in "Quincy" thread and all of a sudden he brings up the fact that you pooped your pants when you were 5 and now that renders every opinion you have "tainted".

All right, we don't need any more crap out of you Winicki :D

[MichaelWinicki]

All right, we don't need any more crap out of you Winicki :D

LOL! That was good! :D