Cowboys Pick Bollinger Over Simms Is Laughable..

[joseephuss]

With this situation in mind, I think we can't ignore the b/u QB position next year. Not that they grow on trees, but I think it's important to start grooming someone who can step in for Romo.

I think that is why they brought in Bollinger. He is still young with some experience. I am sure they will keep bringing young guys and see if they can develop into a capable back up. They have been doing that the past few years. Some of the guys just have not panned out like Matt Baker and Richard Bartel and then they made a tough decision with Matt Moore. They will continue to do the same.

 

[dbair1967]

Now let me start off by saying that I am not a Chris Simms fan but there is no way that the Cowboys can even think of taken Bollinger over Simms. Well, they actually did.

I think this was a mistake! The bottom line is Bollinger isn't an NFL QB and never really showed any upside in any time he played.

At least with Simms he was drafted in the first day of the draft. When Simms played, even though limited, he showed upside.

In the end, I think the Cowboys organization and fans alike will be regreeting the fact that Jerry Jones once again has made a made move.

Taking Bollinger over Simms is laughable. Even funnier is that Jerry Jones took Bollinger over anybody else is just plain stupid!

this post is laughable

Simms is awful

 

[silverbear]

Now let me start off by saying that I am not a Chris Simms fan but there is no way that the Cowboys can even think of taken Bollinger over Simms. Well, they actually did.

I think this was a mistake! The bottom line is Bollinger isn't an NFL QB and never really showed any upside in any time he played.

The bottom line is you were full of it the first time you said this, and in your thousandth repetition of it, you're still full of it...

At least with Simms he was drafted in the first day of the draft. When Simms played, even though limited, he showed upside.

And yet, it's Bollinger who has the higher career quarterback rating, 75.2 to 71.2...

 

[DaBoys4Life]

Please complain about more things. Thanks.

 

[Beast_from_East]

Why all this love for Simms? Is it because he went to UT?

His QB rating for his career is 71 and you guys are acting like he is the next Elway.

Bollinger career rating is like 75, yet it is laughable that Garrett picked him over Simms? Seems to me Garrett is using that Princeton education and realizes that 75 is higher than 71.

For comparison purposes, Romo's QB rating for an average game is usually around 100.

WE ARE SO ****** SCREWED WITHOUT ROMO.

 

[MONT17]

I can understand fans wanting to get a new buQB next year. But its this year where the backup is needed and ppl who get paid a lot of money ignored dumbluck last year in hopes of repeating it! Any other job in Corporate America that person would have been fired!

 

[cowboyed]

But JJ gives money to a guy that was arrested 14 times in Adam Jones!

Gawd how long is this going to be beat to death. Why don't you just get it over with and make a Jerry Jones sucks signature. As soon as you find out that it wasn't Jerry's call on Bollinger you immediately pick on something else.

It has been documented for the umpteenth time that PacMan's contract is low risk and has a pick recovery clause. We also customized a support system to minimize PacMan behavior liabilities. In the aggregate the hotel incident wasn't criminal it was a civil disturbance by a high profile player on a very short leash. It should not have happened and PacMan deserves the majority of the blame.

It is obvious I like and respect Jerry Jones but he deserves blame too for allowing PacMan to go to this function where alcohol is served. Overall the idea of constantly babysitting any player becomes a frustrating and oppressive process and interactively it is very complicated. Then psychologically PacMan who is fighting his daily impulses has to also contend with the greater freedom his teammates enjoy to come and go.

Now PacMan signed up for this to achieve reinstatement, so I don't feel sorry for this dumb arse talented player who can also act like a punk. But give it a rest already. Interestingly enough the Teddy Roosevelt of the NFL, Mr. Goodell, has seen fit to give PacMan yet another chance after stating zero mistake tolerance. You see if PacMan stays out of trouble during the next couple of weeks there is a good chance Goodell reinstates him.

 

[CrazyCowboy]

Brooks just might be our hero on Monday

 

[SMCowboy]

Lets get a few things straight. The reason that we picked Bollinger over Chris Simms has absolutely NOTHING to do with money. Chris Simms to begin with was NEVER a good starting QB. There is a reason that John Gruden the man who LOVES QB's more than life itself wanted NOTHING to do with Simms and was constantly looking to replace him.

Chris Simms had one "good" and I use that word very lightly season, and that was in 2005. However in 2006, he was beyond terrible and that was before his injury. Which was a VERY serious and life threatening injury. And has anyone on here even seen him since the injury. Has anyone considered that the reason that Simms couldn't do any better than a 3rd string QB job, is because he never fully recovered from his injury? Not that he was all that "good" before his injury.

Both had one year, where they played a significant number of snaps, and it just so happens that that year was 2005 for both of them, and they both played in 11 games that year. And if you look at the stats both sets of stats are very similar:
Bollinger: 150-266, 56.4%, 1558 yrds, 5.9 yrds/att, 7 TD, 6 INT, 72.9 RAT
Simms: 191-313, 61.0%, 2035 yrds, 6.5 yrds/att, 10 TD, 7 INT, 81.4 RAT
One big difference is that during 2005 Bollinger carried the ball 35 times for 135 yards (and was his teams 3rd leading rusher). While Chris Simms carried the ball 1 time for -3 yards. So Bollinger clearly brings a new dimension that Simms does not bring to the table.
One more slight differences, Chris Simms played for a team that had a very good running game with Carnell "Cadallac" Williams having his great rookie year, as well as Michael Pittman, Earnest Graham, and Mike Alstott in the backfield for added help. Bollinger has Curtis Martin (the 3.3 yrds per carry version and Cedric Houston as his running game.

One other major difference, Chris Simms started three more games after 2005 (in 2006 to be exact) and posted a miserable 58-106, 54.7%, 5.5 YPA, 1 TD, 7 INT, 46.3 RAT. Brooks Bollinger played in 7 more games after 2005 and went 46-68, 70.6%, 537 yrds, 7.9 YPA, 1 TD, 2 INT

We also have to keep in mind, that with an offense that is build around Tony Romo and his mobility and his ability to create things with his legs as well as his arm. Having a backup like Bollinger (for next year) who does have good mobility allows us to keep the same basic offense. While with Chris Simms, you get a statue in the pocket that can only beat you with his arm.

 

[cowboyed]

Lets get a few things straight. The reason that we picked Bollinger over Chris Simms has absolutely NOTHING to do with money. Chris Simms to begin with was NEVER a good starting QB. There is a reason that John Gruden the man who LOVES QB's more than life itself wanted NOTHING to do with Simms and was constantly looking to replace him.

Chris Simms had one "good" and I use that word very lightly season, and that was in 2005. However in 2006, he was beyond terrible and that was before his injury. Which was a VERY serious and life threatening injury. And has anyone on here even seen him since the injury. Has anyone considered that the reason that Simms couldn't do any better than a 3rd string QB job, is because he never fully recovered from his injury? Not that he was all that "good" before his injury.

Both had one year, where they played a significant number of snaps, and it just so happens that that year was 2005 for both of them, and they both played in 11 games that year. And if you look at the stats both sets of stats are very similar:
Bollinger: 150-266, 56.4%, 1558 yrds, 5.9 yrds/att, 7 TD, 6 INT, 72.9 RAT
Simms: 191-313, 61.0%, 2035 yrds, 6.5 yrds/att, 10 TD, 7 INT, 81.4 RAT
One big difference is that during 2005 Bollinger carried the ball 35 times for 135 yards (and was his teams 3rd leading rusher). While Chris Simms carried the ball 1 time for -3 yards. So Bollinger clearly brings a new dimension that Simms does not bring to the table.
One more slight differences, Chris Simms played for a team that had a very good running game with Carnell "Cadallac" Williams having his great rookie year, as well as Michael Pittman, Earnest Graham, and Mike Alstott in the backfield for added help. Bollinger has Curtis Martin (the 3.3 yrds per carry version and Cedric Houston as his running game.

One other major difference, Chris Simms started three more games after 2005 (in 2006 to be exact) and posted a miserable 58-106, 54.7%, 5.5 YPA, 1 TD, 7 INT, 46.3 RAT. Brooks Bollinger played in 7 more games after 2005 and went 46-68, 70.6%, 537 yrds, 7.9 YPA, 1 TD, 2 INT

We also have to keep in mind, that with an offense that is build around Tony Romo and his mobility and his ability to create things with his legs as well as his arm. Having a backup like Bollinger (for next year) who does have good mobility allows us to keep the same basic offense. While with Chris Simms, you get a statue in the pocket that can only beat you with his arm.

Bollinger also has a fairly live arm from what Garrett stated. Maybe Bollinger's decision making may off-set some of his physical attributes. However after seeing what Brad Johnson is all about offensively, I would love to see Bollinger give it a go especially against this Giants team.

In fact I would also consider any of the zombies from one of the Living Dead movies start over Brad Johnson. That stated I hope Johnson proves us doubting Thomases wrong in a most dominating way. That would be tasty crow to eat indeed.

 

[MONT17]

Hey didn't Quincy have better stats than Brooks that year?

I wish ppl would get out of Gru's *** the guy likes Jeff Garcia and Bob Greises kid, Oh and let's not forget Gradblowski! Who has Gruden ever drafted @ QB? Or even tutored to be a probowler under the age of 35! He likes old guys Simms is not Old! Any questions?

 

[jobberone]

Thanks Blaze. I would have thought Simms numbers were better than that.

But, heres the thing, I believe he had gotten it before he got hurt and was on his way to being good - and if this staff and organization was trying to win on Sunday instead of trying not to lose, Brooks or Simms would have been starting.

Simms went to TN because he is behind an old man and a WR playing QB. He likes those odds of getting a fair shot if Fisher is as smart as many think - but I doubt Fisher is if he really thinks Young can be a franchise QB.

Exactly. Simms believes he's a starting QB and went to the better situation to possibly win a starting job. I doubt he'd ever want to come here. Maybe as a last resort.

So even if they wanted Simms, I don't see him coming here even for money.


And to another poster, Simms had a ruptured spleen. There's no doubt he's over that and at no risk to play.

And to all if Simms and Bollinger were the only QBs here able to play, which one would you pick to play the Giants. Hopefully most would pick Simms who should be able to manage a game better than Bollinger.