2006 Season - As I See It

[BourbonBalz]

I've been thinking about it and this is what I think was our major problem this year. If you look down our roster, you'd have to agree that no NFC team is more talented then this year's version of the Dallas Cowboys from top to bottom. Personally I believe that. So, if we have the talent, it has to be coaching/scheming? Yes, I think so.

The problem has been that Parcells still thinks it's 1986. He's far too conservative on BOTH sides of the ball. Parcells always says he likes his team to have a chance to win games at the end. Bull crap!!!! If you're an investor and you only invest conservatively, you end up with mediocre returns on your $. You have to sometimes take risks in order to really be satisfied with your investments and to put yourself on the next level financially. The exact same thing applies in any sport, particularly the NFL. If you play every game close to the vest hoping to get lucky and make a play in the end to win it, you're going to lose half and win half. That's just how things will break if you don't take some risks and try to separate yourself from the competition throughout a game, rather than waiting and hoping things will go your way at the end. What do you get if you always play it conservatively and avoid risks? A .500 team, which is what Parcells has put on the field since he's been here.

Next year, we've got to force the issue offensively and defensively. We've got to play aggressively, force tempo, and play with a killer instinct (something we never had this year). We need to unleash the talent that has been assembled. If Parcells doesn't trust the players he's put on the field, then he's failed as an evaluator of talent. He's always talked about "shopping for the groceries". Well, he's stocked the cupboards and we're still a .500 team.

We lost Saturday for the same reasons we've lost all year. No risks. We didn't get after the QB. We didn't challenge Seattle's patch-work secondary. Once again, we tried to keep it close and win it at the end. We all know how that turned out. Enough of my rant.

 

[superpunk]

I don't see how Parcells is conservative on both sides of the ball. Look around the league. Did you see any offense more innovative and exciting than ours this year? Maybe Philly, early on,and New Orleans, but that's about it.

Maybe Parcells' philosophy on defense is old and outdated. He expects that his guys will be prepared, and that they will be physically ready, and he expects them to win one on one. That is the best way to run a defense. Get pressure with four and let the rest react to the play. Unfortunately for us, Parcells, and the perception of the defense - Spears and Canty were complete failures for most of the year. Our best pressure guy went down so our pass-rush became one-dimensional with Singleton getting alot of time outside. You blitz, and do all that silliness that us fans think is so "sweet" to cover for your deficiencies. Sure, it can be used in a well-timed spot to generate confusion or get a little extra pressure, but because the reward for the offense goes up relative to the risk from the defense, the blitz is a great way to get burned for a big play, a la LJ Smith against us.

If Parcells and his defensive scheme are guilty of anything, it's this: They do not disguise their blitzes well. It seems to me they are as aggressive as any other team, but there is not mystery involved. The blitzers enter the box with enough time for the QB and the line to make adjustments, and generally the blitz fails. That is where they struggle, and that is one area we can point to - for sure - being a coaching issue.

But aside from that, I see them being guilty of believing that their pass rushers aren't humongous turds. It's just too bad they were wrong this year.

 

[BourbonBalz]

If you don't think our offense was as conservative as Barry Goldwater this past Saturday, then you were obviously watching another game. Same can be said for most of the season.

 

[BourbonBalz]

Watch the games we played. We NEVER go for the jugular. We allow teams to stay in games and play it safe, giving us a chance to win at the end. I've heard Parcells say this hundreds of times. We get a lead (small lead) and we go into safe mode, basically playing a prevent offense.

 

[superpunk]

Conservative offense, at least in this instance (if you're looking at saturday in a vacuum, and it seems you are) is a copout for "The palyers didn't execute." Romo was crap. There were calls downfield. He was looking for it. He couldn't anticipate, he wouldn't pull the trigger, and we suffered offensively. That does not mean that the calls were not aggressive.

Never go for the jugular. We go for it - again, we don't execute. Whether it be TO dropping a sure-TD that would have won us a game against the Commanders, on a very aggressive call with the lead - to put the team away. Or - the great call made at the line last saturday to Glenn, who, if he doesn't fall and fumble, jukes Jennings for a 98 yard TD on a great play call.

The coaching staff can call an aggressive game all they want. If the palyers don't execute, it doesn't matter.

 

[big dog cowboy]

Once again, we tried to keep it close and win it at the end. We all know how that turned out.

We played not to lose. It has been the BP mantra since his return. I HATE that. That is a loser mentality. JMO but no team has ever won a championship playing like that.

 

[BourbonBalz]

You're exactly right big dog. Some just can't or won't see it. Parcells has always coached that way. It worked in the 80's, but it won't work now. The offensives and defenses are too diverse today. Too many specialty packages to play it not to lose. All you will do is lose.