Discussion in 'News Zone' started by Cbz40, Feb 27, 2007.
Post 300 tosses more cold water on iceberg.
Which is a bizarre sentence without context.
Uhh... because free agency started, and so did the salary-cap... Dallas was in salary-cap hell, and had to rely primarily on the draft to get any good players. By the time Jerry cleaned house, who did he bring in? What did Bill Parcells have to work with? Bill came into a situation that every coach dreams of... And give that credit to Jerry Jones...
Agreed, nice post Fuzzy
Which he failed miserably to do. In fact, he even took that opportunity to trade away two #1's even though the team was strapped by the cap.
Again I'll fall back to Fuzzy's post. Jerry in that stretch post Jimmy and pre-Bill did about everything wrong imaginable. I think Zrin is right in that he did it for the right reasons - to try to get Troy and Emmitt to one more SB, but the plan was shortsighted and Troy already had a history of concussions to boot.
A horrific roster and a bad QB hand-picked by the owner who you are saddled with your first season? I think Wade is coming into a much, much better situation. Heck, Turner has 'em both beat.
I'll give Jerry credit for cleaning up the cap, but he left Bill with very little to work with and stuck him with Quincy. It was hardly ideal, and Bill mentioned the QB situation several times as the hardest part he had to deal with here.
and being 'the hardest part' could involve a lot of things. he's the one who brought in retreads that we couldn't wait to see leave. he's the one who played vinnie for 4 games at the end of a useless season vs. letting the young guys have some time.
if you look at bills 4 years, it ain't exactly spotless in his efforts either. like zrin has said, his best record was with the rejects.
I agree with most of this except I think it was Bill who was in love with QC ..... I think Jerry had already had enough of him and thats why he kept bringing in Troy Aikman wannabe clones .....
I truly believe that if QC could have stayed of the Crack pipe he would have remained Bills starting QB. I do not understand the Love for him that Bill seemed to have.
Because Jerry had already said he wasn't going to spend a high number 1 on a QB. Then he traded the 3rd for Henson to be groomed for the future.
What exact choice did Bill have other than the retreads?
As for not playing, they weren't ready. Henson just would have been out of football 4 weeks earlier and Bill and Romo have both said he wasn't ready to see the field yet.
Never said it was. It was certainly disappointing.
But it wasn't Candyland when he got here either.
Which started Ice on the get rid of Bill train ...... it took me 3 years of November nosedives for me to finally wise up .....
Which obviously dictated the approach of Jerry as GM... He drafted players to fill the holes that were created by players like Haley leaving.
I don't think so personally, although who knows.
Most of what I read indicates Bill agreed with Jerry when he took the job that he would let Carter remain the starter. In fact one of the problems they had trying to bring in Delhomme is that they wouldn't promise him the job over Quincy. Bill didn't even know Quincy at that point, so I don't think he was the one who was resisting there.
Plus, I'm one of those who think his cutting was more performance than drug based. He tailed off badly the last half of 2003, and was showing the same timid tendencies as far as throwing the ball down the field early in camp as he did late the year before. I think the drugs were a formality.
I think Jerry kept bringing in the Aikman clones because allegedly Carter already had a strike or two with regards to drug testing.
I think it was Hos who said he had heard some inside info that Vinny was brought into start from day 1, and I don't see any convincing evidence against that theory. Bill had Henson and Romo in his back pocket who weren't ready to get on the field yet but had potential, and needed a 1 or two year stpogap until they were ready. If he was sold on Quincy I'm not sure he brings in Vinny, he could have just made Romo the backup.
Jerry has said that his drafting philosophy post-Jimmy was "draft backups."
Hello Kavika Pittman.
we didn't have a high pick so to trade up would have been costly. yes, jerry likes to limit himself with phrases such as this and hopefully we've all learned ot take situations as the individual things they are where 1 set of rules simply doesn't work.
they were meaningless games where *any* playing time could have been beneficial in their long term growth. say romo got 2 1/2's for 1 full game. would his "cinderella" season this year have been the same? no. i would think that the "new" is off the qb since he did get some time in and maybe he'd have not possibly bought into the hype. if neither were ready to see the field, then wouldn't you also call this a coaching faux paux to have a 41 year old qb and behind him NO ONE ready to play just in case?
same for bledsoe. if neither were ready, then being 2 and 3 was kinda silly, given how qb's can get hurt in this league. *all this* is some of my confusion for bill's handling of our qb situation. it's as if he didn't want competition for his choices of "retreads".
all that is speculation and whichever side you're on will likely drive the conspiracy, but it did feel that way to me.
1. old starting qb.
2. 2nd string qb not ready.
3. 3rd string qb not ready.
just seems like a bad spot to put yourself in *intentionally*.
no, it wasn't. but again, parcells has his best success year-long wise with the team of retreads and players we laugh at.
maybe this team will turn it around and make us realize what a joke that team really was. but in the end when you live in a world of "you are what you are" - then that team was the best parcells had to field due to the end results.
it's all the "gray area" we push to our own points of view that can get frustrating.
good convo everyone.
ya'll had to put up with me on the other forum. in here i tried to be more civil, but it's not where i "let loose". but the pain that put me through - to see vinnie out there KNOWING we'd not have him around the following year was just frustrating as hell to me.
then "best chance to win" was the battlecry. but win what? anyone give a damn NOW about those 4 games? and what if in those 4 games romo got some experience to take the new off his career. then he plays this year and maybe we don't spin into storyland because he's not "out of nowhere!" so to speak.
in the end i do fully believe parcells did the best he could. however, it's just not what *todays* nfl needs to win. he's gone now and that makes some happy, some sad, and the arguments will forever continue.
So again, how can you blame Bill for bringing in "re-treads" when he
a) doesn't have the resources to bring in someone else
b) has 2 legitimate prospects already on the bench who are not ready to play
What else is he supposed to do?
I don't wanna go down this road again, suffice to say I disagree. I don't see the benefit of QB playing 2 1/2 games when he is completely overwhelmed and doesn't really understand what going on.
To me its like giving a 5 year old a calculus test with the assumption that when they take it for real in high school there will have been some advantage to seeing it beforehand.
Again, what were the options?
Jerry just traded a third for Henson. That is one spot taken up.
Obviously Romo was showing good potential, although he wasn't ready to take the field. That's your second option.
Good QBs simply don't hit FA that often. That year there certainly wasn't much better than Vinny on the market, and probably no one willing to hold the spot for a year or two until one of the kids is ready.
IIRC correctly guys like Kerry Collins and Kurt Warner were the alternatives. Nothing to get excited about.
Its not an ideal situation, but you have to play with the cards your dealt.
It was a fluke. The division outside of Philly was horrible. We caught them napping once too. The only other semi-decent team we beat that year was Carolina, and they spanked us in the playoffs. That season was more a result of luck, schedule and parity than any kind of potential that team had. It was an anomaly.
I think it was more of the whole NFL was hurting for talent in that time period .... Which is why I do not see that we had such horrible drafts considering we did not have first round picks for 2 years ......
The whole league was down talent wise.
I agree ..... great discussion.
He also got Larry Allen.
Yeah, he did, and there was nothing illogical in it. What Jerry was looking for was giving Aikman a number-one receiver after Irvin left. Jerry Galloway, when Jerry traded for him, was all-pro and had plenty of gas left in his tank. The reason that pick failed was because of an injury. Galloway busted his knee early in the season. Since that time, he has never been able to match the numbers before his trade to Dallas. The Galloway pick was akin to drafting a number first round receiver, except for the fact that this number one receiver was producing in the NFL.
2 first-round draft picks does not necessarily guarantee the numbers a Galloway, pre-Dallas, was putting up. The Redskins flopped in their drafting Michael Westbrook in the first round.
A question to ask is what has Seattle done since those draft picks? That was a long time ago, in a galaxy far away.
Dallas' approach at the end of it's dynasty, was to fill the holes they had as a result of players like Novacek leaving. Jerry went full force for LaFleur, because of Aikman's recommendation. He also drafted players like Bjornson. Jerry went after Ekuban and Carver to fill the gaps Haley left. One of the problems with our offensive line was Erik Williams getting into an accident, and also hurting his knee. His career was cut short by his own stupidity.
There are a whole host of factors that were playing after Jimmy left Dallas. It was not all about internal decisions, but external factors as well.
Jerry had to work within a salary cap with what he was given, at the same time restructuring the foundations from ground-up.
What did he do other than trying to plug holes with players, while cleaning house? Certain teams accept losing for a few years, in order to start fresh. It is no coincidence that by the time Bill Parcells came into town, Dallas could start fresh. Jerry had opened up plenty of cap room to allow Bill Parcells to get who he wanted.
And Vinny was great? How about Bledsoe? Those were the grand results of the Parcells era. We only have Romo because of Sean Payton. It took Bill way too long to even start Romo because of his attachment to Drew.
Wade is coming into a much better situation because Bill Parcells had a lot of money to do what he wanted. By the time Bill came into play, we could make moves in free agency.
Little to work with... Dallas got rid of him without and major hits. We even got rid of Jerry's projects, without suffering much. But our projects at QB with Parcells weren't any better. All credit for Romo goes to Sean Payton.
TO established himself in a league and THEN became a head-case... On the other hand, players such as Bryant had talent, but they never established themselves before becoming head-cases...
But Dallas has progressed way faster than it's arch rival during the dynasty years, i.e. the San Fransisco 49ers... SF hasn't made the play-offs since God knows when... The way I see it, one should look at teams comparable to Dallas during the decline...
Wityh respect to the two best teams who were hit the hardest in the 90s because of free agency and the salary cap, who came out in a better position? Hell, look at Green Bay... their decline was on par with SF, and they were the third best team during those years... they still haven't recovered as well..
Dallas is far ahead of those two in terms of restocking...
As if a Troy Aikman, Emmitt Smith, and Michael Irvin come along every draft. Hell, even trying to find a TE the calibre of Jay Novacek is hard in and of itself.
Yeah, but how many players are on a team?
How many players is Jerry suppose to bring in through the draft, devoid of any room in the salary cap?