Bill bashing in vogue right now

[smarta5150]

Parcells is gone. Stop talking about the guy. Some of these vets need to get in a meeting and let guys like Spears, James and Julius know that crying about last season is not going to help them this season.

Sorry, but this made me :laugh2: :laugh1:

I thought Bradie was a vet and a "leader" on our team.

 

[iceberg]

You do the same.

Nowhere in those quotes do I see Ferguson saying any of it was a good thing. And the 'circus elephants' comment sure as %^$# isn't some compliment!

This player is openly questioning why the team persisted in running a conservative scheme.

You want to defend Parcells?

Feel free.

And I'll feel free to criticize his ultra-conservative coaching too.

:toast2:

and we don't have bill here to say why - so you pick what you want to hear and run with it for "max-drama-value" cause you want to "feel free to criticize his ultra-conservative coaching". right?

if that's what you're out to do then sure - fling quotes on the wall till one sticks. i didn't care for that style either and am looking forward to our D opening it up. now if that fails, then where to you direct your "blame"?

maybe parcells didn't feel he had the players to do more than "trained elephants". cause spears never kicked it up and ellis got hurt.

maybe parcells was on his way to getting something else out of it and couldn't get that message to the players.

maybe yes - parcells was wrong and we'll see that in time.

timeslicing for your own views benefit is a tad too convenient to me.

 

[Stash]

I don't care if Bill Parcells was putting them in the wrong spots, I don't care if Bill Parcells was calling the wrong plays and I don't care if Bill Parcells was too conservative on offense and defense...

Yeah, let's ask Roy Williams to do something he's not good at - and then criticize him when he's somehow 'not good at it".....

]These guys were still playing football for Petes sake. The more excuses they keep making the stupider they are gonna look if they suck next year.

Key words are "if they suck next year". Neither stance can't be proven or disproven until then, right?

The whole 'blame parcells' thing is really sad. I would like to see a bunch of players who are focused on winning games in the future, not crying about games lost in the past.

If this theme works all the way into training camp this team is in trouble. They need to start worrying about the things they need to do become better football players, not look for ways to hide all the flaws on some of these players.

It's put up or shut up for the guys complaining. Guys like Spears and Jones will have no excuses after this season.

Wade Phillips and Brian Stewart are going right along with this theme also as if they just won 5 Super Bowls together. They were a one and done team last season just like the Cowboys. That Chargers defense for all the sacks and what not did allow 20 or more points in 9 of it's 17 games last season. So it's not like he was dominating teams like the '85 Bears.

Maybe they feel the same way some of us do? As I've said, both sides of this debate will have to wait until this upcoming season to see who's right and who's wrong.

If all these guys keep making excuses and blaming Parcells they better come out on Sept. 9th against the Giants and show and prove. Because if they don't the local media in Dallas is gonna start the blame game right away and they will have plenty of quotes to work with when dissing this team.

If I was a defensive player who was just abused like these guys were last Decemeber I would not open my mouth to any reporters. I would keep my trap shut until sometime next season when I was playing better and that play proved the point that I was in a bad scheme.

Talk is one thing, but until you're in their shoes, you really can't say - and neither can I. This 'game' is their livelihood and if I felt someone was holding me back from being the best I could be in my profession, I don't know that I would quietly just take it either.

Parcells is gone. Stop talking about the guy. Some of these vets need to get in a meeting and let guys like Spears, James and Julius know that crying about last season is not going to help them this season.

Fair enough, but I would say that "what's good for the geese is good for the gander" meaning that Parcells can 'stop talking' about things as well. I'm willing to bet that doesn't happen on his end either. I expect ESPN to get plenty of mileage out of Parcells talking about his former team and its' owner.

 

[Stash]

and we don't have bill here to say why - so you pick what you want to hear and run with it for "max-drama-value" cause you want to "feel free to criticize his ultra-conservative coaching". right?

if that's what you're out to do then sure - fling quotes on the wall till one sticks. i didn't care for that style either and am looking forward to our D opening it up. now if that fails, then where to you direct your "blame"?

How many times will I have to type that we'll have to wait for this season to see who's right before someone reads it?

maybe parcells didn't feel he had the players to do more than "trained elephants". cause spears never kicked it up and ellis got hurt.

maybe parcells was on his way to getting something else out of it and couldn't get that message to the players.

maybe yes - parcells was wrong and we'll see that in time.

timeslicing for your own views benefit is a tad too convenient to me.

Not sure what 'timeslicing' means, but I merely voiced my opinion and that I agree with what several players are saying.

Maybe we've just got a teamful of lousy, excuse-making players and you fellas are all right.

But the point is that nobody is proven right or wrong until this coming season plays out.

 

[superpunk]

Nowhere in those quotes do I see Ferguson saying any of it was a good thing.

Ridiculous. Nowhere in those quotes did Ferguson say that he DOESN'T rape chickens in his spare time. Does that mean that he does?

That doesn't mean Ferguson thinks it was the right thing to do. Just that not saying something isn't exactly "evidence" of anything. Unless you're an agenda boy looking for an angle.

This player is openly questioning why the team persisted in running a conservative scheme.

No he's not.

You want to defend Parcells?

Not especially. I'm pretty disillusioned with him today. What I would like is for the whining from underachieving players who have noone to blame but themselves to stop. I'd also like people to learn about reading comprehension....if it's not too much trouble.

 

[smarta5150]

Not especially. I'm pretty disillusioned with him today. What I would like is for the whining from underachieving players who have noone to blame but themselves to stop. I'd also like people to learn about reading comprehension....if it's not too much trouble.

Out of complete and utter curiosity...

What would you like the players (who honestly feel Parcells was "holding" them back) to say when asked about what they think of Parcells and his scheme?

 

[iceberg]

How many times will I have to type that we'll have to wait for this season to see who's right before someone reads it?

Not sure what 'timeslicing' means, but I merely voiced my opinion and that I agree with what several players are saying.

Maybe we've just got a teamful of lousy, excuse-making players and you fellas are all right.

But the point is that nobody is proven right or wrong until this coming season plays out.

apparantely at least once more and i can agree with that.

timeslicing is when you pick a few quotes to illustrate your point then call it "closed" or a "complete" opinion without an opportunity to answer some of the points you brought up.

it's my own interesting terminology.

 

[Doomsday]

Its too justify the poor play of some of our players.

And if we fall off again this year, some will drum up the ol' "well, its the first year with Wade's system" excuse.

Fact of the matter is, we aren't as good as some think we are. Otherwise, we wouldn't have gone 9-7 last year and lost out in the first round of the playoffs.

 

[superpunk]

Out of complete and utter curiosity...

What would you like the players (who honestly feel Parcells was "holding" them back) to say when asked about what they think of Parcells and his scheme?

What does it matter?

They can say anything they want - just quit whining. Take some personal responsibility. Scheme didn't make Julius an ineffective back to close the year. It didn't make him run up his linemen's back. Scheme didn't cause TO to drop gamechanging receptions. Scheme didn't make Marcus Spears ineffective at the point of attack. Talk about what they're doing to get better. Say they appreciated everything Bill did for them, and taught them.

Lord knows our players who are ACTUALLY good aren't having any problems fielding those questions. Amazingly, it's only the players who aren't any good and are disappointments. (Except for TO...he's just a malcontent regardless.)

 

[smarta5150]

What does it matter?

Becuase this is where all this "whining" came from...

The media asked them how they felt, they gave their honest answers.

Now they are labeled cry babies...

So, what would you have said if in their shoes?

Or would you have been labeled a cry baby as well?

 

[Stash]

Ridiculous. Nowhere in those quotes did Ferguson say that he DOESN'T rape chickens in his spare time. Does that mean that he does?

That doesn't mean Ferguson thinks it was the right thing to do. Just that not saying something isn't exactly "evidence" of anything. Unless you're an agenda boy looking for an angle.

Sorry - where there's smoke there's fire.

Multiple players aren't all wrong, while 'internet guy' knows all.

Ferguson handled the issue in the most diplomatic way he possibly could and I'll credit him for that. But nowhere in his comments does he call the scheme a 'good thing'. You keep the blinders on.

Not especially. I'm pretty disillusioned with him today. What I would like is for the whining from underachieving players who have noone to blame but themselves to stop. I'd also like people to learn about reading comprehension....if it's not too much trouble.

The guys you think have no one to blame - get that point right.

You're typing from a desk somewhere while these guys are actually out there playing, yet you seem to feel that you know better than they do while observing from your couch?

Nice leap of logic there.

And spare me any 'reading comprehension' nonsense.

How about you practice what you preach instead?

 

[Vintage]

He didn't call the scheme bad either.

And maybe we had to play a conservative scheme because of the stupidity/ability of some of our players...such as Roy, Spears, Bradie, etc.

 

[Stash]

apparantely at least once more and i can agree with that.

timeslicing is when you pick a few quotes to illustrate your point then call it "closed" or a "complete" opinion without an opportunity to answer some of the points you brought up.

it's my own interesting terminology.

I'm not trying to say "i'm right" or "you're wrong" - not at all.

I'm merely expressing my opinion like you guys are.

We happen to be on opposite sides of the fence here - and that's fine.

But I think both sides can agree that we have to wait for the season to play out before anybody can have any solid idea of what the truth really is.

 

[superpunk]

Becuase this is where all this "whining" came from...

The media asked them how they felt, they gave their honest answers.

Now they are labeled cry babies...

So, what would you have said if in their shoes?

Or would you have been labeled a cry baby as well?

Looks like you didn't read the rest.

Surprise....:

Sorry - where there's smoke there's fire.

Multiple players aren't all wrong, while 'internet guy' knows all.

Ferguson handled the issue in the most diplomatic way he possibly could and I'll credit him for that. But nowhere in his comments does he call the scheme a 'good thing'. You keep the blinders on.

Let's use your logic, then. There's 40-some players who haven't said anything about the scheme, or what they thought about it. Hey, if they never said it was bad, or too conservative, I might as well assume they agree with ME, right? I can go ahead and read things into their quotes and claim that their silence is deafening. I mean....that's your brilliant approach.

OMG....Ferguson wasn;t glowing in praise for a unit that fell on it's face. Color me shocked.

The guys you think have no one to blame - get that point right.

You're typing from a desk somewhere while these guys are actually out there playing, yet you seem to feel that you know better than they do while observing from your couch?

Nice leap of logic there.

And spare me any 'reading comprehension' nonsense.

How about you practice what you preach instead?

I'll spare you once you actually read what is in front of you, captain agenda.

 

[smarta5150]

Looks like you didn't read the rest.

Surprise....:

I did, but no where in that novel you replied back was an answer to the original question.

 

[Hoov]

He didn't call the scheme bad either.

And maybe we had to play a conservative scheme because of the stupidity/ability of some of our players...such as Roy, Spears, Bradie, etc.

I was wondering this myself. While i will not go so far as to question the players intelligence or physical ability, i wouldnt be suprised at all to hear that Parcells felt he couldnt trust the players football knwoledge and experience at this point enough to allow for some more freelancing and variations.

I also remember folks complaining that there was a lack of leadership on the defensive side of the ball, which would make above more credible.

There's been a lot of changes over the past 2 years, bunch of FA's brought in and a lot of rooks starting, going from 4-3 to 3-4, new kid at QB.

 

[TheSkaven]

it is amazing all the negativity being spewed about Bill by players and broadcasters right now.....oh, he had his faults for sure but no denying he laid a foundation all of us can be thankful for this year....
I would hope we make it to the SB with the players BP brought in so he will have a good legacy when he gets to the HOF.....this will also prove Wade is right when he says 'putting players in the best position to be successful is what it is all about'.......something maybe BP fell short on..

If it were one or two players, I'd call them a bunch of whiners, but are you sure all of these players are wrong and Bill was right? Especially given some of the results? I think the players have a very good point. We'll see how the new philosophy works out this season.

 

[Stash]

Looks like you didn't read the rest.


Let's use your logic, then. There's 40-some players who haven't said anything about the scheme, or what they thought about it. Hey, if they never said it was bad, or too conservative, I might as well assume they agree with ME, right? I can go ahead and read things into their quotes and claim that their silence is deafening. I mean....that's your brilliant approach.

You can assume whatever you want - you're doing that already.

But I must have missed all those guys singing his praises and how the team can't go on without him. And how he did a great job of coaching them up while they failed him.

OMG....Ferguson wasn;t glowing in praise for a unit that fell on it's face. Color me shocked.

Ferguson had a great year - even in the scheme they ran. Why would he need to say anything negative? You would think he'd be heaping praise on his former coach, being a 'Parcells guy'. That sure didn't happen here.

I'll spare you once you actually read what is in front of you, captain agenda.

You don't have to 'spare me' anything, other than the "I'm right, everyone else is wrong" nonsense we're getting here.

 

[Hostile]

Oh, I don't know, I used to have a hard time bashing Bill Parcells. Not because I couldn't, but because in the minds of so many he (as we so often got reminded) wasn't Dave Campo. I never understood that mentality personally. No one is so good at what they do that there can't be negative opinions expressed. Name me one player or coach in any sport who the whole world agrees is flawless.

Didn't think so.

I was pretty critical of Parcells the last couple of years and I openly admit, I said he'd be here 6 years and we'd win 2 Super Bowls in those 6 years. I don't regret saying that, but I do have to admit he ddin't even come close to my expectations. Especially after year 1 when he won 10 games with scrubs everywhere.

He didn't want star players to be the face of the organization. That was his role. The problem with that is simple, star players help you win. I'm just not a fan of the 5 year rebuild plan. Then when he had players to be aggressive, he was still designing conservative game plans.

Think about it. The players speaking out now are nothing new. Drew Bledsoe asked him in 2005 to take the brakes off the offense. The 2 games that he did had great success. Why do players complain? Because they believe that if given a chance they can beat the other guy.

You can play the percentages, which is what we did for 4 years here, but shouldn't be surprised when the results are above .500, but below expectations.

In reality the players are NOT taking shots at Bill Parcells. What they are doing is showing faith in their own abilities to make plays.

I have never been a fan of reacting to what the other team is doing. Screw that, let them react to what we are doing. Then if they stop us, we extend our hand and say "damn good job" and tip our hats to them in tribute.

 

[Vintage]

I was wondering this myself. While i will not go so far as to question the players intelligence or physical ability, i wouldnt be suprised at all to hear that Parcells felt he couldnt trust the players football knwoledge and experience at this point enough to allow for some more freelancing and variations.

I also remember folks complaining that there was a lack of leadership on the defensive side of the ball, which would make above more credible.

There's been a lot of changes over the past 2 years, bunch of FA's brought in and a lot of rooks starting, going from 4-3 to 3-4, new kid at QB.

Let's not forget, Parcells had the likes of LT, Banks, Carson, Burt, etc on that defense in NY. Freelancing could be allowed because of the talent level on that team.

No one touches the level of the aforementioned on our current team. Thus, maybe a more rigid structure was needed. And lets not forget, we were a very young defense (sans, Henry, Ferguson, Ellis). Young players often need a more rigid structure in the beginning so that they know their responsibilities BEFORE they can be allowed to freelance so they can learn when freelancing makes sense and when they need to maintain their responsibilities.

And, this was year 2 of the 3-4.

So even with some of the experience we did have on defense, its relatively no experience in a 3-4 for the players and coaching staff.