Recap: Talking Cowboys1/8 - Page 8 - Dallas Cowboys Forum

RS12 · 01-08-2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by diehard2294

Watkins just tweeted he was told Wade Wilson is expected back

Wilson get hit with Joe D's tent pole?

Redball Express · 01-08-2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by silver

so he stays? me thinks the OC should be the QB coach and be in constant communication with the QB. At least that's the way it was with Troy & Norv back in the day.

Just came home to grab lunch and flipped on ESPN. There was a quick story about interest in Turner returning to Dallas as OC/headcoach but that he would want to bring his staff being released in San Diego.

Have to see if there is any other info about this elsewhere on the internet.

Stay tuned.

BTW..I'm a million percent for that. Turner was in a superior position over Garrett in Dallas in his first stint and has already forgotten more than Red will ever know.

Jerrah...for once, let timing and your checkbook merge.

Yes. Yes.

RedBalL EXPrEsS

Redball Express · 01-08-2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by ABQCOWBOY

I don't agree with this. Norv likes strong armed QBs. Everything is done on three and five step drops. That's not Romo. I don't believe he fits Norv's offense.

JG's offense is not like that at all. He uses much more 7 step and allows the QB to audible much more. The QB decides the plays at the line most times. That's not the same offense.

Comes and waits for no man.

Garrett and Romo need to change or if Norv comes and them two don't perkup..we'll be looking at Orton as QB and Norvell as HC.

Mark my words.

RedBaLL ExPreSS

**ABQCOWBOY** · 01-08-2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by Redball Express

Comes and waits for no man.

Garrett and Romo need to change or if Norv comes and them two don't perkup..we'll be looking at Orton as QB and Norvell as HC.

Mark my words.

RedBaLL ExPreSS

And this helps us how? I am skeptical about Norv's ability to come here and OC with the talent at hand. I am absolutely certain that it's a crash and burn scenario if he becomes the HC here in Dallas.

This is exactly what I'm afraid of and exactly why I do not think it's a good idea for Norv to come here.

ak47kaehu · 01-08-2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by dadymat

if the Cowboys want him they will make it happen, I dont never underestimate Stephen in making the $ work

I see my post in your sig. Whats that all about?

Hoofbite · 01-08-2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by LatinMind

Mickey says he was told Skip Peete firing is the first move and more to come in the coaching dept.

They way they're talking is the changes will come on the offensive side. Talking about being told the team didnt like the way the OFFENSE played in the begining part of the season.

I dont think they were talking about the offense. Sounds like they were talking about the defense.

http://www.dallascowboys.com/multime...8-7bf3bf049fba

At the 6:30 mark he talks about interviewing Jerry for a show on Saturday night.

He asked about the defense and injuries and if he gives the defense a pass and Jerry's reply in paraphrased form was about not liking the way the defense played to start the year when there weren't injuries. He also mentions that Seattle and Chicago are games that Jerry said he didn't like.

IMO, this is just insane. The ST and offense fronted the Seahawks 10 points and only mustered 7. Even a flawless game from the defense doesn't win that.

Against Chicago, the offense handed over 14 points and another turnover or two.

If Jerry is going to base his decision to keep or fire Rob and he's using Seattle and Chicago as his examples, Jerry's more lost than any of us could have imagined. Look, the defense folded in the second half of the Seattle game. I think they were hung out to dry but they got bullied and ran over in the second half. That said, if you're only scoring 7 points in a game and 10 points have been given to the opponent, it doesn't matter how good the defense plays. If you're rule for measuring your own defense includes it's inability to stop your own offense or special teams from allowing the opponent to score, you've got some problems with the ruler.

I also like how Broaddus mentioned that firing Skip Pete was misguided because there are bigger problems than Skip Pete. Broaddus also called it a "philosophical issue". Lets see, philosophically the running back coach isn't in line with the guy calling plays. That kind of narrows it down for me. Pete probably wanted more running and Garrett wasn't having it.

Broaddus also mentions how Ray Sherman was let go for similar reasons. Here's my question, what exactly is going on that after multiple years on the team these "philosophical" issues arise?

Sherman was around for 4 years.......philosophical issues so he's gone.

Pete was around for 6 years......philosophical issues so he's gone.

The same thing with past players.....just not a good fit. If Jay Ratliff gets released for standing up to Jerry instead of playing the role of whipping boy, he'll be called a "bad fit".

1. Why do these issues only arise after multiple seasons? If a guy isn't "philosophically" on the same page, isn't that something that should come out a lot earlier? Wouldn't you discuss such things in the interview?

2. Why does Jason Garrett have such difficulty working with these guys? Ray Sherman has been a coach in the NFL since before Jason even set foot on an NFL field as a player. Ray Sherman's first collegiate coaching position came when Jason Garrett was 8 years old. You telling me Ray Sherman can't be worked with?

Skip Pete has been a coach for just as long as Garrett has been in the NFL, although the 1st 10 years were at the collegiate level and the last 15 have been in the NFL. Skip Pete can't be worked with?

These are two tenured guys with vastly more experience than Jason Garrett, they have worked with more coaches than Jason has and yet philosophical problems can be the reason for their release?

Perhaps it isn't "everyone else" who has the "philosophical problem". Perhaps it's Jason Garrett.

Hoofbite · 01-08-2013

Dang Latin, this was a good episode. Thanks for pointing it out. Who's the chick that just sits there and looks at Facebook the whole time? Or at least that's what appears to be her job?

I'm only 11 minutes in and they're discussing why Zimmer hasn't gotten any looks, especially from Chicago who has apparently interviewed anyone that would come in. Broaddus suspects that Zimmer's demeanor is a little too abrasive but says that his time working with him was great so that is basically misplaced worry.

Mickey talks about how teams have fired coaches without the replacement in mind and they extend the argument to QBs. I think these are both poor arguments. You don't have to have all the solutions worked out in a 'rainbows and kittens' best case scenario in order to realize that the guy you have isn't getting it done. Pretty much the entire NFL knows that Mark Sanchez isn't getting it done. It doesn't matter who the replacement is, if it's time for the Jets to move on from Sanchez it's time to move on. Holding on to a guy who isn't getting it done because you don't have all the answers at your disposal at this very moment seems like stacking bad decisions on top of one another. I don't buy the argument that you keep a horribly known problem in tact because the immediate alternative is simply an unknown. I think teams that are afraid of making the obvious move because of fear of not knowing how to correct the problem are simply foolish. If you have a guy who sucks at QB, is that any different than not having a guy who sucks at QB and having to find a QB?

Mansta54 · 01-08-2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aven8

It's the fact that the Owner of this team goes on the radio blabbering about changes and then keeps the same guys, outside of Pete, for an offense that has been failing for 6 years. I'm the biggest Romo fan out there, I really am, but I want to see him with a fresh new coaching staff. Just once. One time.

The offseason just started, you haven't given him time to make changes, that doesn't happen overnite.

Westcoasthabsfan · 01-08-2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by Super_Kazuya

That sucks about Dez's finger but I was worried about that. I've had finger injuries and I know that you have to start the repair/rehab immediately or you will lose flexibility. It won't affect his career, but Dez did sacrifice a bit of quality of life to stay on the field.

Limited mobility in one finger affects someones quality of life? Dont think so, sorry its not like he lost a hand or a foot.....

AbeBeta · 01-08-2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by burmafrd

what many here are forgetting is that unlike the last 6-7 years until just lately the CAP will not be going up. It is going to be stagnant for several years. Which means pushing money into the future is not anywhere near as easy to do.

That does nothing to change the fact that two things that we will absolutely do -- extend Romo and convert Carr's guaranteed salary for 2013 to bonus -- will free over 10 mill in cap space. That doesn't even take into account cutting guys and reworking other deals that are designed to be reworked this year. The pushing money into the future issue is irrelevant. Those bumps to the cap each year were not large enough to have the sort of impact you put on them.

Hoofbite · 01-08-2013

Little more on Dez's injury. Latin mentioned the limited mobility of that finger moving into the future but didn't include the part where he accepted that in lieu of having to go on IR.

Had he gone on IR and through 4 months of rehab, he has surgery which corrects his finger all together and doesn't lose mobility.

From the sounds of it, his finger is just stuck in a point. He can still bend it at the base of the finger but moving to the middle knuckle he loses the ability to bend in there so that finger will always be extended.

LatinMind · 01-08-2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hoofbite

Dang Latin, this was a good episode. Thanks for pointing it out. Who's the chick that just sits there and looks at Facebook the whole time? Or at least that's what appears to be her job?

I'm only 11 minutes in and they're discussing why Zimmer hasn't gotten any looks, especially from Chicago who has apparently interviewed anyone that would come in. Broaddus suspects that Zimmer's demeanor is a little too abrasive but says that his time working with him was great so that is basically misplaced worry.

[View Full Quote]

I agree Broaddus seems to take a more realistic approach, while Mickey is all about the company line. I actually cant stand when he's talking.

I liked the point in their debate that Broaddus came at Mickey with like 5 questions on bases of judging Garretts performance, and Mickey looked lost and Broaddus just stopped and said but i see where youre coming from lol.

Hoofbite · 01-08-2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by Westcoasthabsfan

Limited mobility in one finger affects someones quality of life? Dont think so, sorry its not like he lost a hand or a foot.....

I'm not sure it's going to affect his quality of life. That's a bit extreme. Clearly he can play with it being compromised so I don't see why a rigid digit would impaire quality of life.

That said, it's a finger on his dominant hand and will take some getting used to.

Tori Holt has a 90-degree kink in his middle finger.

Left it like that as a souvenir from the game I guess.

dadymat · 01-08-2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by ak47kaehu

I see my post in your sig. Whats that all about?

just helping you spread your gospel......ill remove if it bothers ya

Hoofbite · 01-08-2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by LatinMind

I agree Broaddus seems to take a more realistic approach, while Mickey is all about the company line. I actually cant stand when he's talking.

I liked the point in their debate that Broaddus came at Mickey with like 5 questions on bases of judging Garretts performance, and Mickey looked lost and Broaddus just stopped and said but i see where youre coming from lol.

I'm not their yet. Pausing every few to post a bit.

But I agree, Mickey seems like he doesn't really have any real opinion other than to agree with what the team is doing.

Even when he talked about how they might bring some people in and have to "shift titles" around on the offensive side of the ball. He throws out the "take it or leave it" for guys who wouldn't like to have a title taken from them. I can only assume, as theebs pointed out on another board, that it's gotta be Callahan and the OC title. How realistic is just saying "take it or leave it" to a guy who was hired to be the OC but wasn't actually the OC and then when the guy who was calling plays didn't do a good enough job instead of giving the guy with the title the play calling abilities they revoke the title and hire someone else.

His tone was like he was Jerry's personal mouthpiece and it doesn't matter what is said, he's gonna get on board. How can you support such buffoonery? I'm sure Mickey would like to be hired for a job he never actually was given and then a year later have his job title stripped instead of getting a chance at it.