Could it be...

[billknows]

I suppose those supreme talents like Quincy Carter and Troy Hambrick were what got the team those 10 wins?

You can blame him for a lousy coaching job last year. He made some mistakes that were patently silly with clock management and playcalling.

But in 2003, with that collection of losers, he got 10 wins. He instilled a sense of authority, discipline and order on what was basically a kindergarten class out of control. Now it appears the one of the leftovers from the kindergarten class is making some noise. He'll survive and so will the team.

To be honest ,I think that 10-6 2003 season belongs to Zimmer, Yes I said Zimmer. And is probably why he still has a job ,considering how last season went.lets face it Bills offense was'nt any better than Zimmers D last yr, both were bad...

 

[silverbear]

The real problem is Parcells?

Year one he was in God status, even though he made mistakes at QB and RB. Luck and an overachieving defense made the playoffs.

Year two, changes were made at QB and RB, but mistakes at DE, DT and in the secondary along with injuries on offense killed us. We began hearing rumblings that players were not buying into Parcells system. Bad character guys were being shipped out left and right, and old players with zero upside were playing instead of young guys.

Year three begins with us overspending for pretty good players in free agency and overkilling at positions of need in the draft. Now I'm all for bringing in talent, but the motives behind this overreaction worries me.

And there's where your whole theory falls apart... seems that you're just about the only one who thinks that Parcells "overspent" for "pretty good players in free agency", and "overkilled" at "positions of need in the draft" (how in God's name can you overkill at positions of need, anyway??)...

Most of the rest of the football world thinks that the Cowboys did really well in both areas this offseason, and that the team has signifcantly upgraded the talent base... and I don't see the "problem" with that...

We release a high character guy in Coakley, and hear grumblings from two other high character guys in Glover and Ellis.

I see, you'd suggest we stay with the 4-3 exclusively, because that scheme better fits these THREE players... and it's Parcells' "fault" that we're not gearing our entire defensive scheme around these THREE players...

Again, your theory doesn't stand up to close scrutiny...

We still have personnel better suited for the 4-3.

Ahhh, NOW we come to it... you just don't like the ongoing switch to the 3-4... change bothers you, does it??

We are replacing a pro bowl player with 7th rd picks or UDFA, depending on rookies...

1) Coakley hasn't been a Pro Bowler in some time now, and in fact did not play anywhere near to his Pro Bowl form last year...

2) Coakley's likely replacement is neither a 7th round pick nor an undrafted rookie free agent...

most of whom came from the 4-3...and alienating two of our best players in the process, and for what?

Yeah, our defense was totally DOMINANT last year, how dare we change up what we've been doing for so long... after all, we've made the playoffs and contended for the Super Bowl these last ten years, with that old defense...

If the embarrassment of a 6-10 season caused this much change in both free agent philosophy and personnel, what would another losing season do? Especially if it occurs in a 3-4 comfort zone for Parcells.

And what if this change leads to a 10-6 record (or better) instead?? Have you taken even a moment to ponder THAT possibility, Chicken Little??

I don't see a long term plan for this team after Parcells leaves and that scares me.

When I hit the bed for a little rest here in a little while, I'll send up a prayer of Thanksgiving that you have no say in personnel matters for my favorite football team, Chicken Little...

And no, the sky is NOT falling... rather, a plan is in place to rebuild the Cowboys... it may not come to fruition this season, but that will only prove that the Boys had a long way to go when they started the rebuilding process...

Again, the way you talk, you'd think what the Cowboys have done these last few years WORKED... it didn't, yet you advocate not changing anything... that's just completely ludicrous... I hated to see Coakley leave, I'm loyal to the players of the past too, and I saddened that these changes cause Ellis and Glover discomfort, but unlike you, I would never, ever be so completely foolish as to advocate maintaining the status quo because 2 of our 11 defensive starters don't really fit in that well...

I'd rather win football games than stoke egos... the sky is probably not falling, Chicken Little...

 

[silverbear]

I schooled you on that before, so sticking your head in the sand won't make it any less true now.

Small school DE to OLB, nope no issues there at all.

I'll bet you can't think of even one small school DE who made that switch quite successfully, can you??

Not quick enough to be a playmaker, nope no possible issue there.

Since your little rant didn't seem to mention who you're talking about here, it'd be pretty hard to respond, so I'll just ask why we should believe that your sub-moronic take on personnel is superior to that of Jerry, Bill and Jeff Ireland??

Undersized for strongside 3-4 LB, nope no issue there.

Same response as above...

Jones and Thomas, looking like a 3rd down back, nope he's can't miss.

LOL... Jones looks like a stud, off of his rookie season, and Thomas will most assuredly NOT be a 3rd down back... he will in all likelihood be Julius' backup, spell him for 6-10 carries a game, and be the go-to guy in short yardage situations...

And of course you don't factor in Marion Barber III, who was very productive at a pretty high level of play in college... REALITY is that the Cowboys are very deep, and very good, at RB...

Small school SS, nope no issues at all on 6th round picks becoming starters.

LOL... Beriault won't be the starter at FS, not this year... that will be either Keith Davis or (more likely, IMO) Izell Reese...

And if he DOES surprise us all by winning the starting job, that means he will have EARNED it, by OUTPLAYING the competition... in that event, I'll be quite content...

Your last two stabs at analysis demonstrate quite nicely that you're full of bovine fecal matter...

DE or DT, hell all 7th round picks become pro bowlers.

Some do, some don't... and exactly where is it written that Jay Ratliff will only be a solid addition if he makes the Pro Bowl?? Seems to me that you will only be content with ANY pick if that player goes on to become a Pro Bowler... that's a pretty freaking unrealistic standard you've got there, son...

A more realistic expectation for Jay Ratliff is that he contributes to the DL rotation this year... if you really are a Cowboys fan, and can remember back as far as our last 3 Pro Bowls, one of the secrets to Jimmy's success is that he ran a whole bunch of semi-talented defensive linemen at the opposition... ask yourself what round Leon Lett was drafted in, Chicken Little...

You're either a troll or an idiot... which one is it, Chicken Little??

 

[silverbear]

As of right now Witten is the only young player Parcells has drafted that may be a given.

Newman had problems last year, but I'd include him as well.

Jones needs to show he can stay healthy.

This year's draft has not played a down of football yet, so to say they are a given is silly. Remember 2002.

Yes we have more talent on the roster than we did in 2002, but much of that is based on potential and not proven on the field.

And yet, you seem to be quite willing to hit the panic button before any of them has a CHANCE to prove themselves on the field... indeed, by your frantic insistence that the Cowboys not change a thing, you show yourself to be unwilling to GIVE them the chance to prove themselves...

And of course, your analysis of the successful recent draft picks is incomplete, isn't it?? Seems to me that Al Johnson has proven himself pretty well...

 

[silverbear]

I don't have a problem with the 3-4 if, and it is still a big if, we have the personnel to run it.

My problem is not building for the future or trying to win now, but attempting to do both.

Blow up the defense fine, but blow it up and admit you are rebuilding, don't try to fit square pegs into round holes and call it a reduction to keep them fresh.

Do the same on offense, turn it over to the young guys and go through the growing pains in one year.

You're absolutely right, Chicken Little, the sky is falling...

I'd suggest you contemplate suicide...

 

[dbair1967]

You guys are making a big deal out of nothing. Let's wait until training camp starts and see a few preseason games before we come to conclusions on 3-4 or 4-3, or if Greg Ellis and Parcells are at irreversible odds with each other, or if the moon is made of cheese or not...

couldnt agree more...

but makign a big deal out of nothing or reading stuff into things that just arnt there are characteristics of many on here, unfortunately

David

 

[dbair1967]

Not to take anything away from him but what exactly was that terrific coaching that Parcells did in the 10-6 year?

your kidding right? that team, (especially on the offensive side of the ball) had no business being 10-6 and landing in the playoffs

David

 

[The Curly One]

"His first year was just flat out terrific coaching. Getting 10 wins when handicapped with QC at QB and Hambrick at RB is pretty amazing. That was a 6 win squad in terms of talent."

So you think Antique Eddie George and Vinny was an IMPROVEMENT?
I can understand why you do not like Quincy Carter and Hambrick but they are much better than the Antiques that replaced them and the stats and wins proved it.
I did not like it when Parcells picked up Vinny and Eddie George, I knew that was heading in the wrong direction. Now starting Vinny and Eddie George, THAT IS A HANDICAP! Bottom line is he down graded two key positions and our records and stats showed it. Curly

 

[dbair1967]

So you think Antique Eddie George and Vinny was an IMPROVEMENT?
I can understand why you do not like Quincy Carter and Hambrick but they are much better than the Antiques that replaced them and the stats and wins proved it.
I did not like it when Parcells picked up Vinny and Eddie George, I knew that was heading in the wrong direction. Now starting Vinny and Eddie George, THAT IS A HANDICAP! Bottom line is he down graded two key positions and our records and stats showed it. Curly

niether of those guys were brought here to be the starter though...both were supposed to be backups...they ended up starting because of stupidty by one guy and injury to another

David

 

[ctalker]

To be honest ,I think that 10-6 2003 season belongs to Zimmer, Yes I said Zimmer. And is probably why he still has a job ,considering how last season went.lets face it Bills offense was'nt any better than Zimmers D last yr, both were bad...

Well said. Makes you wonder if we would be going to the 3-4 if Parcells would have gotten Zimmer some help on Def last year instead of bringing in Wiliey and taking chances with youngsters at other positions.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

Good thread.

I agree with IR that Parcells should have put in the 34 the second he got here. He's always preferred it, and it seems to me that he was just waiting for the "undersized" group to fail so he could scrap it... But they played too well in 2003 for him to do it. In a strange sense, I think he got what he wanted last year. Now, I just hope he's around long enough to see his vision through.

Anyway... I agree that this year will tell a lot. Parcells has had one great year and one terrible year. Like Juke always used to say, Parcells tells even his Hall of Fame vets that what they did in the past doesn't matter, they still have to show they can do it. Come on Parcells, show us you can still do it.

 

[Nors]

I love all the couch sitters who profess to know more than Bill Parcells.
Bellicheck, Crennel, Coughlin, Saban, Weiss - his coaching tree is proof.

David and now Blind Zebra - you guys should be coaching on Sundays! LOL

 

[Kilyin]

Parcells is extremely overrated.

 

[blindzebra]

I'll bet you can't think of even one small school DE who made that switch quite successfully, can you??



Since your little rant didn't seem to mention who you're talking about here, it'd be pretty hard to respond, so I'll just ask why we should believe that your sub-moronic take on personnel is superior to that of Jerry, Bill and Jeff Ireland??



Same response as above...



LOL... Jones looks like a stud, off of his rookie season, and Thomas will most assuredly NOT be a 3rd down back... he will in all likelihood be Julius' backup, spell him for 6-10 carries a game, and be the go-to guy in short yardage situations...

And of course you don't factor in Marion Barber III, who was very productive at a pretty high level of play in college... REALITY is that the Cowboys are very deep, and very good, at RB...



LOL... Beriault won't be the starter at FS, not this year... that will be either Keith Davis or (more likely, IMO) Izell Reese...

And if he DOES surprise us all by winning the starting job, that means he will have EARNED it, by OUTPLAYING the competition... in that event, I'll be quite content...

Your last two stabs at analysis demonstrate quite nicely that you're full of bovine fecal matter...



Some do, some don't... and exactly where is it written that Jay Ratliff will only be a solid addition if he makes the Pro Bowl?? Seems to me that you will only be content with ANY pick if that player goes on to become a Pro Bowler... that's a pretty freaking unrealistic standard you've got there, son...

A more realistic expectation for Jay Ratliff is that he contributes to the DL rotation this year... if you really are a Cowboys fan, and can remember back as far as our last 3 Pro Bowls, one of the secrets to Jimmy's success is that he ran a whole bunch of semi-talented defensive linemen at the opposition... ask yourself what round Leon Lett was drafted in, Chicken Little...

You're either a troll or an idiot... which one is it, Chicken Little??

Idiot is pretty strong coming from someone who can't figure out that:

1. Those comments were in the order of who we drafted, let's see, small school DE moving to a new position, hmmm could it be Ware? Sorry, next time I'll go into complete detail for the intellectually challenged out there.

2. How about applying the context that was behind those observations, ya think? Tough task, I know since you appear to not have the brain power to figure out #1, so I'll spell it out for you.

That came in response to someone who was basically carving busts for these guys without them playing a down. In a past thread I reminded him of just how all Cowboys fans felt about that draft class of 2002. He went into a tizzy about how this class had no issues. Now anyone who knows football knows that every draftee has issues, and we won't know for sure for 2 or 3 years if they'll pan out.

 

[dargonking999]

So you think Antique Eddie George and Vinny was an IMPROVEMENT?
I can understand why you do not like Quincy Carter and Hambrick but they are much better than the Antiques that replaced them and the stats and wins proved it.
I did not like it when Parcells picked up Vinny and Eddie George, I knew that was heading in the wrong direction. Now starting Vinny and Eddie George, THAT IS A HANDICAP! Bottom line is he down graded two key positions and our records and stats showed it. Curly

did u stop to think that when Vinny was brought he was suppose to be a Vetran leader a BACKUP, but QC made a mistake and was cut and was thrust into STARTING, because BP didnt think Henson was ready

did u stop to think we had just drafted a RB who wasssuppose to be our starter, and Eddie was there for more Vet leadership, goalline situations and to BACKUP Jones.

No i bet you didnt stop to theink about that did you, i bet you didnt even realize that JJ was listed as doubtful in that ravens game but BP didnt hesatiate not once to put JJ and run him 3 straghit games 30+ carries, and the last 7 games 197 carries.

DO me a favor do some reasurch before you start crying

 

[Charles]

The real problem is Parcells?

Year one he was in God status, even though he made mistakes at QB and RB. Luck and an overachieving defense made the playoffs.

Year two, changes were made at QB and RB, but mistakes at DE, DT and in the secondary along with injuries on offense killed us. We began hearing rumblings that players were not buying into Parcells system. Bad character guys were being shipped out left and right, and old players with zero upside were playing instead of young guys.

Year three begins with us overspending for pretty good players in free agency and overkilling at positions of need in the draft. Now I'm all for bringing in talent, but the motives behind this overreaction worries me.

We release a high character guy in Coakley, and hear grumblings from two other high character guys in Glover and Ellis. We still have personnel better suited for the 4-3. We are replacing a pro bowl player with 7th rd picks or UDFA, depending on rookies...most of whom came from the 4-3...and alienating two of our best players in the process, and for what?

A very average Bledsoe will need to lead this offense very well for us to have any chance. That and this defense coming together seems very unlikely to me, so then what?

If the embarrassment of a 6-10 season caused this much change in both free agent philosophy and personnel, what would another losing season do? Especially if it occurs in a 3-4 comfort zone for Parcells.

I see 3 seasons of reacting.

I don't see a long term plan for this team after Parcells leaves and that scares me.

I nominate this post above for.......Dumbest Post of the Year........and there are still 5 more months to ago in 2005.

Go sell this trash somewhere else. Look at Parcell's resume. It speaks for itself.

Belicheck has won 3 SuperBowls built on the nucleus assembled by Parcells.

Does anyone remember what city the Jets played in before Parcells came to town?

Did the Giants play in the NFL before 1983?

You are questioning arguably the greatest coach in modern NFL history because you can not forsee a plan for the future and are left scratching your head about personnel movements.

Ever wonder why you watch games from your couch on Sundays?

 

[Alexander]

To be honest ,I think that 10-6 2003 season belongs to Zimmer, Yes I said Zimmer. And is probably why he still has a job ,considering how last season went.lets face it Bills offense was'nt any better than Zimmers D last yr, both were bad...

So how was it Zimmer's D but Parcells O?

Why wasn't it Sean Payton and Maurice Carthon's O?

And wasn't last year's Zimmer's D if 2003 was his as well?

Make no mistake, Zimmer's D may have made that team, but Coach Parcells held it together and willed it to win.

 

[Doomsday101]

So how was it Zimmer's D but Parcells O?

Why wasn't it Sean Payton and Maurice Carthon's O?

And wasn't last year's Zimmer's D if 2003 was his as well?

Make no mistake, Zimmer's D may have made that team, but Coach Parcells held it together and willed it to win.

And that is what a HC does. The OC and DC run their respective unit, the HC over sees it all. Offense,Defense and Special Teams.

 

[blindzebra]

And there's where your whole theory falls apart... seems that you're just about the only one who thinks that Parcells "overspent" for "pretty good players in free agency", and "overkilled" at "positions of need in the draft" (how in God's name can you overkill at positions of need, anyway??)...

Most of the rest of the football world thinks that the Cowboys did really well in both areas this offseason, and that the team has signifcantly upgraded the talent base... and I don't see the "problem" with that...



I see, you'd suggest we stay with the 4-3 exclusively, because that scheme better fits these THREE players... and it's Parcells' "fault" that we're not gearing our entire defensive scheme around these THREE players...

Again, your theory doesn't stand up to close scrutiny...



Ahhh, NOW we come to it... you just don't like the ongoing switch to the 3-4... change bothers you, does it??



1) Coakley hasn't been a Pro Bowler in some time now, and in fact did not play anywhere near to his Pro Bowl form last year...

2) Coakley's likely replacement is neither a 7th round pick nor an undrafted rookie free agent...



Yeah, our defense was totally DOMINANT last year, how dare we change up what we've been doing for so long... after all, we've made the playoffs and contended for the Super Bowl these last ten years, with that old defense...



And what if this change leads to a 10-6 record (or better) instead?? Have you taken even a moment to ponder THAT possibility, Chicken Little??



When I hit the bed for a little rest here in a little while, I'll send up a prayer of Thanksgiving that you have no say in personnel matters for my favorite football team, Chicken Little...

And no, the sky is NOT falling... rather, a plan is in place to rebuild the Cowboys... it may not come to fruition this season, but that will only prove that the Boys had a long way to go when they started the rebuilding process...

Again, the way you talk, you'd think what the Cowboys have done these last few years WORKED... it didn't, yet you advocate not changing anything... that's just completely ludicrous... I hated to see Coakley leave, I'm loyal to the players of the past too, and I saddened that these changes cause Ellis and Glover discomfort, but unlike you, I would never, ever be so completely foolish as to advocate maintaining the status quo because 2 of our 11 defensive starters don't really fit in that well...

I'd rather win football games than stoke egos... the sky is probably not falling, Chicken Little...

Hmmm, I seem to recall EVERY beat writer covering the Cowboys talking about us overspending on Ferguson, Henry and Rivera. 31 million in one day is chicken feed, right?

Let's see Parcells first year we brought in guys like Campbell and Anderson, role players for little money. We passed on FA QBs and talked about NOT spending big money in free agency.

Year two, we again go the Walmart route. Again talking about NOT spending big bucks for positions of need.

Year three, a 180 turn in philosophy. I said REPEATEDLY that I'm glad we brought in talent, but I see problems with the timing of this drastic change.

I guess I'm the only one who noticed how Parcells looked beaten all year and had to field retirement questions after the season?

I'm fully aware the roster needed upgrading and I'm glad we have more talent, most of which is still in the process of proving, however. As was pointed out by others drastic changes usually occur at the beginning of a coaches tenure. These are happening 3 years down the road, hmmm.

Like I said before, I see a coach embarrassed that is making changes based on saving face. A coach that either never had a long term plan, or just blew up his plan going into year 3. A coach with a history of leaving teams when his place in history starts taking a hit.

There was a poll taken a week or so ago, on this forum, about how long Parcells will stay and most felt this year will be the deciding factor, but I'm a chicken little for pointing out what most seem to be picking up on.

 

[Alexander]

Hmmm, I seem to recall EVERY beat writer covering the Cowboys talking about us overspending on Ferguson, Henry and Rivera. 31 million in one day is chicken feed, right?

Let's see Parcells first year we brought in guys like Campbell and Anderson, role players for little money. We passed on FA QBs and talked about NOT spending big money in free agency.

We paid marketvalue. And everybody "overspends" in free agency. Those are the rules.

Year three, a 180 turn in philosophy. I said REPEATEDLY that I'm glad we brought in talent, but I see problems with the timing of this drastic change.

Until we see these drastic changes, your problems are more with what you think might happen versus what really might.

I guess I'm the only one who noticed how Parcells looked beaten all year and had to field retirement questions after the season?

Last year wore everyone out. And especially Coach Parcells who hates to lose. I am sure he thought about it, but his pride would not let him give up. I am glad he didn't otherwise we would be talking about Houston Nutt, and would have drafted Matt Jones in the first round.

I'm fully aware the roster needed upgrading and I'm glad we have more talent, most of which is still in the process of proving, however. As was pointed out by others drastic changes usually occur at the beginning of a coaches tenure. These are happening 3 years down the road, hmmm.

Had our initial year not been 10-6, I think you would have seen more changes last year. Why else would Coach Parcells be saying he was "mislead" all year last year. Everyone screwed up, including him. It took a disaster like last year to convince him, the coaching staff, Mr. Jones and even the players that what we had was Fool's Gold.

Like I said before, I see a coach embarrassed that is making changes based on saving face. A coach that either never had a long term plan, or just blew up his plan going into year 3. A coach with a history of leaving teams when his place in history starts taking a hit.

How do we know the "plan" in year one and two was his?

Raise your hand if you really and truly believe that he wanted Quincy Carter and Troy Hambrick. Or that he wanted to go with an undersized 4-3 defense?

There was a poll taken a week or so ago, on this forum, about how long Parcells will stay and most felt this year will be the deciding factor, but I'm a chicken little for pointing out what most seem to be picking up on.

No, you are a chicken little because you are assuming too much off of this Greg Ellis situation. Unless you had these feelings all along and just kept them well underwraps.