Help me understand Parcells refusal to play Henson - Dallas Cowboys Forum

Fan Since 77 · 02-15-2005

Hello fellow Cowboy fans. I've been away from the boards for awhile, and I'm sorry if this topic was beaten to death already.

I used to give 100% trust and faith in anything Parcells did. That all changed when Parcells refused to play Henson late in the year when the Cowboys were obviously out of the playoff picture. Maybe a good explanation would have settled the issue with me. It never came.

Even more mystifying than the benching was the explanation Parcells gave for not starting him. He stated that he didn't want to throw Henson to the wolves, or something like that. Huh?

This is the NFL, the best of the best, right? In order for a quarterback to overcome adversity, he must first get used to it. When did Bill suddenly become a nurturing mother, instead of a tough-luck suck it up kind of guy?

Perhaps, there was something else behind the curtain that Bill wasn't revealing? Whatever the case now, our situation is more bleak than ever. Instead of some real game experience with our young stud QB, I am now left to wonder why, and of course, question the decision. Question Bill Parcells? GASP! I used to think the same thing.

pgreptom · 02-15-2005

8 Games in college(all and all) - 8 games since he graduated high school, now he's in the pros

most get what - 25-35? The guy needed an offseason, regardless.. if it happens again this year, you can say Parcells is off his rocker.

*edit - until then, i'm sticker by parcells side.. "TIB" trust in bill.. and i'll do that.

BTW, the 3-year layoff that henson took, didn't help, either.

blindzebra · 02-15-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by wastedfluid

8 Games in college(all and all) - 8 games since he graduated high school, now he's in the pros

most get what - 25-35? The guy needed an offseason, regardless.. if it happens again this year, you can say Parcells is off his rocker.

*edit - until then, i'm sticker by parcells side.. "TIB" trust in bill.. and i'll do that.

BTW, the 3-year layoff that henson took, didn't help, either.

He started 8 games he played in over 20.

Facts people, FACTS.

Portland Fanatic · 02-15-2005

I don't think Bill's hiding anything...he has been straight forward as a matter of fact. Whether the media or us fans want to believe...well that's up to us.

Bill said several times Drew was not ready and that he really needs to improve things around him...paraphrasing of course...I personally do not think BP is lying when he says this...he really felt that way...like it or not.

When you look at everything once the year was over...
A. No Campbell..best blocking TE in the business
B. No Glenn...need his down field threat.
C. Gurode benched
D. Tucker benched
E. Flo off sides on a regular basis
D. Ritchie went down...best blocking back we have.

BP feels we need to improve in these areas and get more healthy before he puts Henson (the guy who has not played in a few years) on the field with a fair chance to succeed.

If BP did not think Drew could do it...we would be hunting for another QB...or going after one in the draft, which I do not think we will.

If we listen...Bill answers all of these questions for us...do we choose to listen is the real question???

Fan Since 77 · 02-15-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by wastedfluid

8 Games in college(all and all) - 8 games since he graduated high school, now he's in the pros

most get what - 25-35? The guy needed an offseason, regardless.. if it happens again this year, you can say Parcells is off his rocker.

*edit - until then, i'm sticker by parcells side.. "TIB" trust in bill.. and i'll do that.

BTW, the 3-year layoff that henson took, didn't help, either.

All the more reason to throw him out there I say. As a coach, I would even want him to have a horrible game. That is when the real evaluation begins. How does he respond to adversity? Does he crawl into a shell? Does he come out swinging the next week? The kid doesn't have to play lights out; just show me character. Important evaluations we could have known going into the season. I don't think Troy Aikman would have become the quarterback he was without those first years of adversity. The same could be said for many QB greats who were "thrown to the wolves".

Dough Boy · 02-15-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fan Since 77

All the more reason to throw him out there I say. As a coach, I would even want him to have a horrible game. That is when the real evaluation begins. How does he respond to adversity? Does he crawl into a shell? Does he come out swinging the next week? The kid doesn't have to play lights out; just show me character. Important evaluations we could have known going into the season. I don't think Troy Aikman would have become the quarterback he was without those first years of adversity. The same could be said for many QB greats who were "thrown to the wolves".

Would you take a knife to a gun fight?

Nerm · 02-15-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by wastedfluid

8 Games in college(all and all) - 8 games since he graduated high school, now he's in the pros

most get what - 25-35? The guy needed an offseason, regardless.. if it happens again this year, you can say Parcells is off his rocker.

To be fair, he had 8 starts, not 8 games.

But the point that Bill has said time and time and time and time again is that Drew wasn't ready. He made it clear that putting a young QB in a position, where you know he will fail, is a bad idea. He said over and over that Drew wasn't ready to play. Not that he would never be ready, but that it could hurt a young QBs development (i.e. Drew) if you put them in when they are not ready.

Nobody has to agree will Bill, but I am getting tired of the "I don't understand it" posts. I'm not bashing you Fan Since 77, but the issue has been discussed a little. Bill has made it clear that, in his opinion, it would be worse for Drew, and the future of the Cowboys, to put Drew in at the end of the season. He has also made it clear that, in his opinion, this does not mean that Drew can't play in the NFL.

Anyone can disagree about if Bill is right or not (you, me, Jerry Jones, etc.), but Bill has made his opinion clear.

Fan Since 77 · 02-15-2005

Quote:

When you look at everything once the year was over...
A. No Campbell..best blocking TE in the business
B. No Glenn...need his down field threat.
C. Gurode benched
D. Tucker benched
E. Flo off sides on a regular basis
D. Ritchie went down...best blocking back we have.

Pfan, these reasons alone would force me to start him. Suck it up kid, and go play football, and let's see how you do.

ghettogandhi · 02-15-2005

sometimes smart people make dumb decisions-

this is one of those cases-

we were out of the playoff hunt in week 14- realistically-

henson should have played at least the final 3 games when it was evident that Julius would provide most of the o to take the pressure off of him.

Look for parcells to draft a back in round 4 or 3 if we trade for it.

Juke99 · 02-15-2005

Truth is....NONE of us knows why...we can guess...there are all kinds of opinions...but none of us knows why.

Simply said, it's because Parcells decided it was not in the best interest of the team to play Henson.

Whether or not Parcells definition of "best interest" is flawed or ill advised is yet to be seen.

The interesting thing is, in every QB controversy I've ever seen, there are two camps...one for each QB...

But in this case, Vinny has very few supporters...

The two camps in this discussion mostly center around those who are pro-Parcells in his decision...and those who are anti...

Dough Boy · 02-15-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by ghettogandhi

sometimes smart people make dumb decisions-

this is one of those cases-

we were out of the playoff hunt in week 14- realistically-

henson should have played at least the final 3 games when it was evident that Julius would provide most of the o to take the pressure off of him.

Look for parcells to draft a back in round 4 or 3 if we trade for it.

Do you think the staff could evaluate the rest of the team if Henson played extremley terrible? I don't think it was dumb. Dumb is doing something that you (in your professional judgment) no wont work because fans/media want you to. That's dumb.

StreetPlayaRoss21 · 02-15-2005

look at david carr and whats happened to his development after being sacked 82 times in his rookie year, better to take your time then stunt his growth

Portland Fanatic · 02-15-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fan Since 77

Pfan, these reasons alone would force me to start him. Suck it up kid, and go play football, and let's see how you do.

Many different philosophies...beleive me I'm not one for kid gloves, BUT this is a unique situation where he did not play for a while and needs more reps and to have the offense down pat.

Look at the Baltimore game...played very well...6 for 6 and a TD...despite the early fumble.

Then the Bears...they game planned for him and the pinned there ears back and blitzed almost every down. We sucked at picking up the blitz...big time if you go back and look at the game, but that is the point...without Campbell, and the right side of the Oline playing like crap. He did not have a chance to succeed. He still needs time to learn the different looks and blitzes, but if we are not even close to picking them up...he might as well hike and take a knee.

As soon as Vinny came in the Blitzing almost stopped by the Bears...it really did. PErsonally I would have rather BP focus in the blitz pick up and let Drew fight through it, but BP thought differently.

Dough Boy · 02-15-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fan Since 77

Pfan, these reasons alone would force me to start him. Suck it up kid, and go play football, and let's see how you do.

Again I ask, would you go into a gun fight with a knife? Then why go into a football with a QB (one of the most important positions) who does not belong on a pro football field. I think Drew will be a stud, just not last year.

Fan Since 77 · 02-15-2005

Quote:

He made it clear that putting a young QB in a position, where you know he will fail, is a bad idea.

I guess this is the sticking point with me Nerm. I am of the opinion where a young quarterback must fail in order to eventually succeed. You're right though, it would be pointless to argue about it. But hey, this is a messageboard, and they are for pointless arguments!