Check out Spags new article on DC.Com......throws Bill under the Bus

[Beast_from_East]

Hey guys, go read Spags new article on DC.com if you havent had a chance yet. He finally threw Tuna under the bus for being too conservative on offense and not making Seattle pay for having both safeties back deep.

When the company man Spags starts throwing Tuna under the bus for the playoff lose, the end is near my friends.

Please Jerry, kick him to the curb

 

[Jarv]

The mouthpiece of JJ speaks, we should all listen. Right or wrong that is Jerry's feelings for sure (I belive he's right).

 

[Beast_from_East]

The mouthpiece of JJ speaks, we should all listen. Right or wrong that is Jerry's feelings for sure (I belive he's right).

I agree my friend, that loss was squarly on Parcells, not Romo like the media would have you believe.

It should have never even come down to that FG if we had a coach who could actually game plan.

If Tuna stays, it is going to be a long offseason and not a lot of hope next year will be any different.

 

[theogt]

You're going to make me go through my bookmarks to find dallascowboys.com?

 

[bbgun]

When the company man Spags starts throwing Tuna under the bus for the playoff lose, the end is near my friends.

Please Jerry, kick him to the curb

But we'd still be stuck with Mickey, the world's biggest cipher.

 

[Big Dakota]

Not sure if i see as much "bus throwing" as you guys. His big inditement was on the OLine.

 

[theogt]

But we'd still be stuck with Mickey, the world's biggest cipher.

I thought you were on vacation.

 

[bbgun]

I thought you were on vacation.

Very easy to do in these parts.

 

[smarta5150]

Very easy to do in these parts.

You mean this time of the season?

 

[theogt]

Very easy to do in these parts.

Do you keep a tally?

 

[bbgun]

Do you keep a tally?

Personal experience. Some of us have bigger bullseyes on our backs.

 

[Kilyin]

Did you even read the article? Spags is throwing the offense under the bus, not Parcells.

 

[Beast_from_East]

Did you even read the article? Spags is throwing the offense under the bus, not Parcells.

No, Beast did not read the article. Beast is just making this stuff up.

Hello..........

Spags clearly states that Bill was too conservative on offense because he did not trust Romo with limited starts. He then said that we should have made the Hawks pay for playing thier safeties so deep.

No offense, but how can you can read this and come to the conclusion this is not a shot at Parcells?

 

[stealth]

No, Beast did not read the article. Beast is just making this stuff up.

Hello..........

Spags clearly states that Bill was too conservative on offense because he did not trust Romo with limited starts. He then said that we should have made the Hawks pay for playing thier safeties so deep.

No offense, but how can you can read this and come to the conclusion this is not a shot at Parcells?

its called prejudice and you have it for parcells and see what you want in an article. you are the one reaching. and literally dude, stop with the third person thing already it only makes you look foolish.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

http://cowboyszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=78473

 

[superpunk]

A photoshop of Mickey actually throwing Parcells under a bus would be awesome here.

This thread is useless without pics.

 

[Rockytop6]

I agree my friend, that loss was squarly on Parcells, not Romo like the media would have you believe.

It should have never even come down to that FG if we had a coach who could actually game plan.

If Tuna stays, it is going to be a long offseason and not a lot of hope next year will be any different.

I don't understand all the hate toward Romo. If somebody else would have been the holder and fumbled the ball, how would Romo's game and season be evaluated? He should be evaluated strictly on his play as the QB. If a WR has a great year as WR but is sorry as a ST guy do you throw him under the bus because he is not a good ST guy or do you evaluate him on his year as a WR?

Romo is now the starting QB for the Cowboys. Use somebody else as the holder.

 

[Doomsday101]

I don't understand all the hate toward Romo. If somebody else would have been the holder and fumbled the ball, how would Romo's game and season be evaluated? He should be evaluated strictly on his play as the QB. If a WR has a great year as WR but is sorry as a ST guy do you throw him under the bus because he is not a good ST guy or do you evaluate him on his year as a WR?

Romo is now the starting QB for the Cowboys. Use somebody else as the holder.

I agree and love the ideal of heading into next season with Romo making his 1st full season as starting QB. As for the botched snap those things happen and no one feels worse about it than Romo does.

 

[Beast_from_East]

its called prejudice and you have it for parcells and see what you want in an article. you are the one reaching. and literally dude, stop with the third person thing already it only makes you look foolish.

So because Spags states what everybody on this board already knows, that Tuna was too conservative, that is me being prejudice.....WOW.

Dude, your agenda here is pretty clear. If you are happy with Parcells, his .500 record, a pair of one and dones, and being outcoached each week then I am happy for you.

Beast is just stating the obvious. Apparently you think Parcells game planned perfectly and you attack the messenger if you dont like the messsage.

As for hatin on Beast, if you dont like Beast, dont respond or read Beast's post.

 

[DipChit]

Was kind of hard to figure out just what Mickey was saying actually.

On one hand he says too conservative, on the other hand he says the safeties were playing deep and we couldnt spread them out even when we went 5 wide which sort of infers going deep wouldnt be advantageous.. and then concludes with.... the bottomline was we should've been able to rush for 200 yards on the same number of carries as we had... but couldnt.

Well if you couldnt throw deep due to max coverage, you couldnt get the running game going like should've been able to against said coverage (prolly why they were playing it in the first place.. not just to protect their secondary but because our running game struggles so much), whats left? A bunch of underneath passes? Well I guess thats what we did.. 29 of them.