We can disagree about Cowboys, but you are mistaken

Discussion in 'Fan Zone' started by CrazyCowboy, Sep 22, 2005.

  1. CrazyCowboy

    CrazyCowboy Well-Known Member

    32,235 Messages
    265 Likes Received
    We can disagree about Cowboys, but you are mistaken

    By Randy Galloway / Knight Ridder Newspapers (KRT)
    September 22, 2005

    [​IMG]FORT WORTH, Texas — We're all friends, right?

    So when it comes to sports (I won't push it on the topics of religion or politics) we can all disagree, right?

    And still be friends.

    I thought so.

    So don't take it personally when I give this opinion:

    I'm right. You're wrong.

    After the classic Cowboys collapse of Monday evening, I'm still climbing out from under a Himalayan stack of angry e-mails.

    Everybody is mad at somebody over the now-infamous FEMA four minutes to end that game. Even mad at me for not agreeing with your opinion on the hows and the whys of this disgraceful event.

    So in my normal fair and biased way, democracy prevailed.

    I polled the room. Took a vote.

    Final tally:

    I win, 1-0. Too bad you weren't present.

    It's good that we've got all that disagreement out of the way.

    So now, let me tell why you are wrong.

    And again, this is based on the Himalayan stack of angry e-mailed opinions.

    At 10-0, and 13-0, the Cowboys' offense was way too conservative. They didn't go for the throat, and ended up losing the game.


    The Redskins spent the first 56 minutes with about as offensive an offense as you will see in the NFL.

    Mark Brunell made Vinny T. look young and frisky. Clinton Portis, the running back, had Troy Hambrick numbers.

    The last thing the Cowboys wanted to do with their offensive plan was deliver any kind of game-changing gift to a very good Washington defense.

    If that game had turned late on a picked-off Drew Bledsoe pass, then we'd all have a legitimate scream of "Why did you get cute."

    Down 14-13, but with great field position, the Cowboys blew it with play-calling. They passed instead of running Julius.

    You people are nuts.

    But Bill Parcells second-guessed himself Wednesday, saying on a do-over he'd be running the football.

    Then again, on second-and-four, was there anything all night which indicated the Cows could drive into field goal range by hammering with Julius?

    The run-game had been consistently stuffed.

    And besides, Flozell Adams would have been called for holding, although Parcells was taking Flo off the hook Wednesday. Big Bill blamed Al Johnson, the center for doing "something" that caused Flo to hold.

    Oh, brother.

    Anyway, I got no problem with any of the offensive play-calling, OK?

    And you shouldn't either.

    Buffalo was right about Bledsoe. He choked at the end of that game.

    If I could reach that far, I'd slap you silly.

    This is my favorite part — the head coach carved it into stone that the Cowboys have to win with defense and a running game.

    But when those two fail, and, boy, did both fail, then it's time to blame the quarterback.

    Bledsoe did exactly Monday night what he's being told to do:

    Don't make stupid mistakes, and don't take silly sacks.

    And with four minutes left, the Cowboys were up 13-0.

    When that changed, now you want Bledsoe to go out and win the game for you, huh?

    Well, Troy is retired. Roger is rich and old.

    Big Bill, himself, said quarterbacks don't win games in the NFL. Defense does. Running backs do.

    So live with it.

    And don't make Bledsoe your whipping boy when he played a "perfect" game.

    At least it was perfect based on Big Bill's misguided standards for the most important position on the field.

    What was Aaron Glenn doing covering the one Redskins receiver who could beat you deep? And why wasn't he bumping Santana Moss at the line of scrimmage when the safeties were in deep coverage?

    Parcells obviously thinks Glenn, even at his age, is a better cover corner than Terence Newman.

    Anthony Henry? The Cowboys don't flip corners.

    The lack of a bump? Good question, but I don't have an answer for you.

    Roy Williams should be cut immediately. Any safety who lets a receiver get behind him twice in those situations is worthless.

    So much anger. So much overreaction. But I love you for it.

    A couple of fatal mistakes by Roy, yes, but I don't think I'd cut him. Not this week, anyway.

    Besides, Big Bill also took Roy off the hook Wednesday, obviously wanting to blame only Glenn.

    But when is two-deep coverage not two-deep coverage, and in that 70-yard bomb situation, how could the safety not be responsible for bombing raids?

    Or maybe that was also Al Johnson's fault.

    Where Roy is concerned, he needs to decide if he wants to be a safety or does he want to be on Sports Center, blowing up people with his hits.

    And Parcells needs to help him make that decision. Pronto.

    The Cowboys lost this game because of a late defensive collapse involving two veteran players (Williams and Glenn). And because three veteran offensive linemen (Flozell, Larry Allen and Marco Rivera) all had penalties that negatively impacted drives. The kids didn't fail, the veterans did.

    Thank you, thank you, thank you.

    The vote just went to 2-0 on the right opinion about Monday night.

    This was a loss that will make the Cowboys better in the long run.

    Ah, yes, the optimistic outlook.

    Sorry, but you're wrong.

    There was nothing about Monday night that will make the Cowboys better, not even Sunday on the road against a bad San Fran outfit.

    Are we all still friends?

    If so, can I now give you my opinions on religion and politics?


    © 2005, Fort Worth Star-Telegram.

    Visit the Star-Telegram on the World Wide Web at http://www.star-telegram.com. Distributed by Knight Ridder/Tribune Information Services.
  2. Chuck 54

    Chuck 54 Well-Known Member

    11,438 Messages
    2,181 Likes Received
    I like it...
  3. dallasblue05

    dallasblue05 New Member

    1,286 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    this article is terrible, IMO. I hate reading what sounds like an arrogant journalist giving his "2 cents" on thursday after a monday night game. Did it really take him 3 days to write this article. Evreything I just read is spread out over 4 or 5 threads that were posted on Monday night/tuesday morning. how about you write something relevant to the next game?
  4. jimmy40

    jimmy40 Well-Known Member

    16,203 Messages
    939 Likes Received
    Great article.
  5. Carl23

    Carl23 Active Member

    356 Messages
    54 Likes Received
    horrible read. content was okay but his delivery stunk.

    Thanks for the post, though!
  6. Champsheart

    Champsheart Active Member

    2,572 Messages
    14 Likes Received
    The only thing I got out of this is he believes his opinion is all that matters.

    Pretty much sucks if you ask me.
  7. Justis

    Justis New Member

    572 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    Bull, with the fear of the pass lingering a few draws could have gotten us into the endzone. We ****** up by getting predictable.
  8. jimmy40

    jimmy40 Well-Known Member

    16,203 Messages
    939 Likes Received
    If you don't think that Parcells believing that QB's don't win games is relevent to next weeks game and every other game after that then maybe you shouldn't watch.
  9. Champsheart

    Champsheart Active Member

    2,572 Messages
    14 Likes Received
    You know, I am really getting sick and tired of hearing this crap.

    I have heard Parcells say many times, even this year, you have to have good QB play to win. You can not win in this league without a good one.

    Yes he said that this year, and last year.

    All Parcells is saying when he is trying to commuinicate to the media, is it takes a whole lot more than just the QB. He is also trying to take some pressure off the QB from a media stand point.
    He is saying you can win without a QB throwing for 5000 yards and 50 Td's.

    Get real! If you think for one minute Parcells does not know the importance of the QB and winning, then you are just a puppet that listens to the media spin.

    As a matter of fact the VERY FIRST thing he said when coming to Dallas was "I have always been lucky to have a good QB."

    That was in reference to being asked why he was succesful as a Coach.

    He knows!
  10. Next_years_Champs

    Next_years_Champs New Member

    833 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    If what your implying is true, how do you explain the San Diego game? Clearly Parcells put that game on Bledsoe's shoulders at the end of the game.

    This article is more of Galloway's drunken day dreams, nothing more nothing less..........
  11. Thick 'N Hearty

    Thick 'N Hearty Active Member

    2,359 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    Um, you're wrong. Parcells never said that. He said he won't let his QB put the team in a position to lose by making stupid plays. That does require a smart QB. Yes, he does know the importance of having a good QB, but he also won't let that position be the death of the team.
  12. Sportsbabe

    Sportsbabe Well-Known Member

    9,730 Messages
    4,716 Likes Received
    I've never in my life seen a bunch of people who make a federal case out of every single article, play, player and comment in regards to football. Football is #1 in my heart but you people have got to lighten up and learn how to have fun with it .... good lawd!!!!

    BTW - I enjoyed reading the article. It confirms everything that's been said here ad nauseum. I like it when people unwillingly agree.
  13. Next_years_Champs

    Next_years_Champs New Member

    833 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    AMEN !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  14. Champsheart

    Champsheart Active Member

    2,572 Messages
    14 Likes Received

    Um, no I am not wrong. Parcells did say that, exactly.

    I have listened to every single press conference since he has been here, and not only has he said it, he has said it more than once.

    Also, you are correct that he also said what you stated.

    Parcells will say what he thinks he has to say. A lot depends on his mood, or is he on the defensive, or is he just being open.

    He is weird when it comes to this, but it is very clear he will not help to throw his QB under the bus. He tries to be protective at times, which leads to this perception.

    He knows the importance of a QB. I have no doubts! IMO to believe otherwise is simply foolish.
  15. Kittymama

    Kittymama Benched

    2,170 Messages
    1 Likes Received
    First of all, Randy has a serious case of man-love for Jake Delhomme. We'll probably hear until he dies (which if we're lucky will be soon from his cirrhosis of the liver) that we should have taken Jake. Even tho he didn't specifically mention Jake in this article (maybe he was so drunk he couldn't spell Delhomme), it's clearly yet another tired refrain from him. We get it Randy--you wanted Jake. Well, we didn't get Jake. Get over it.

    HOWEVER--unless I've missed something the past few years, I don't recall seeing Peyton Manning or Michael Vick in a Super Bowl, or at all. Yet for some reason, those two have all the sports announcers creaming their panties (the gushing over Vick is sickening). McNabb finally made it after years of futility but still couldn't pull off a win. Favre hasn't been in years. Remember last year how Drew Brees (who many on this board were saying earlier this year we should sign) & Dante Culpepper were looking? Cough.

    As some posters have said, THAT'S what Parcells is talking about. He knows you need a good QB. But you also need a strong supporting cast around that QB. NE had a solid strong team around Brady, who then had the time to develop on the job. Ditto for Roethlisberger. There aren't too many other teams around the league where Big Ben would have looked so good so quickly. It's still early in the season, but so far, it looks as tho we've picked up some pretty solid youngsters on both sides of the ball. Let's give them a year to develop. Meanwhile, we still have both Henson & Romo in the wings. Yes, we have Bledsoe for now. But realistically, don't you think it's better that a kid like Rob Petitti learn on the job with a vet QB behind him than to have an inexperienced QB? By the time Petitti & the other rookies get some more experience, we'll be in pretty good shape to start bringing in a younger QB.

    Meanwhile, Randy should crawl back into his beer & go back to drunkenly groping cocktail waitresses.
  16. lurkercowboy

    lurkercowboy Well-Known Member

    4,115 Messages
    97 Likes Received
    So that was the latest from Mr. "Handful of Minnesota smoke" Galloway?
  17. The Curly One

    The Curly One New Member

    587 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    Sometimes he says stuff to stir up poopie and cause a stink. When he says really controversial or stupid stuff people read his mindless drivel.
    The newspaper does not care if you buy their paper for intellegent articles and news or mindless drivel as long as you buy their newspaper.
    In this "article" he basically said everyone but him is a mindless idiot and his opion is the only one that matters.
    My opinion is "You can argue with an idiot all day long and at the end of the day he is still Stupid" No amount of our argueing with him will make him any smarter. Please do not feed the idiots. Curly
  18. M'Kevon

    M'Kevon A Love Supreme

    3,751 Messages
    675 Likes Received
    This could be said for every single poster here. Why should he be an exception, especially when he's paid for it?

    Besides, he right. :cool:
  19. Sportsbabe

    Sportsbabe Well-Known Member

    9,730 Messages
    4,716 Likes Received
    Good post Kitty.
  20. Maikeru-sama

    Maikeru-sama Mick Green 58

    14,547 Messages
    1 Likes Received
    You remember that too huh?

    Oh, good post KM.

    - Mike G.

Share This Page