Do More Than Just Gripe

[CosmicCowboy]

[youtube]8aXsEO2eKo4[/youtube]

awesome, i remember that....

 

[ufcrules1]

KJJ in 3.....2.....1....

 

[baj1dallas]

Then what?

Replace him with one of the half dozen guys who've proven they are more capable than him.

 

[Denim Chicken]

Well, as long as we’re postulating our options on what would make the board better; in addition to your suggestion, we could also stop creating 3000 different threads on the exact same subject w/ the exact same discussions and refrain from cliché jokes and phrases in every thread (i.e. ‘this^^’, ‘championship!!’, ‘Romo’s backwards hat’, ‘tacos’ etc.). Just my 2 cents.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

Well, as long as we’re postulating our options on what would make the board better; in addition to your suggestion, we could also stop creating 3000 different threads on the exact same subject w/ the exact same discussions and refrain from cliché jokes and phrases in every thread (i.e. ‘this^^’, ‘championship!!’, ‘Romo’s backwards hat’, ‘tacos’ etc.). Just my 2 cents.

Listen good Sir, I will ask you kindly not to bad mouth tacos in my presence.

Just because you have a chicken in your jeans it does not mean you have to go around and bad mouth tacos.

 

[Denim Chicken]

Listen good Sir, I will ask you kindly not to bad mouth tacos in my presence.

Just because you have a chicken in your jeans it does not mean you have to go around and bad mouth tacos.

I formally redact the inclusion of ‘tacos’ as an example in my last post. I have obviously crossed a line.
:laugh2:

 

[Dallas]

Listen good Sir, I will ask you kindly not to bad mouth tacos in my presence.

Just because you have a chicken in your jeans it does not mean you have to go around and bad mouth tacos.

 

[Zimmy Lives]

Hostile, your sagacious posts are always appreciated (by me) but these are different times we live in today. Opinions of yesteryear were no different than they are today. I can still remember fans focusing their hate for certain players such as Danny White, John Fitzgerald, Timmy Newsome, Steve Pelluer, Ken Norton, Ron Francis, and so on. The only venue open to fans back then was sport-talk radio. Just ask Brad Sham and Norm Hitzges about who were the mosted hated Cowboys of years past; they'll tell you.

Good or bad, everyone has a voice and this website is the perfect opportunity for all die-hards to let themselves be heard. Personally, I think it's great; Nervous Nellies and Kool-Aid drinkers aside, it's nice to know how your opinion stacks up with everyone else's. Positive or negative, die-hard or bandwagoner, it's nice to know that we will all come together in universal harmony when the Cowboys do succeed!

 

[elcowboi]

It's no secret I am not a fan of negativity. Now, I'm not talking about being down on a coach or player. I couldn't stand Dave Campo. That's not negativity really. I griped about him and the job he did, but I always had solutions in mind when I talked about wanting him gone. That is why it really isn't negativity.

That was just my opinion on the man's abilities. Obviously Jimmy Johnson in particular would not agree with me about him since he hired him at Miami and brought him with him to Dallas. Right now Kansas won't agree with me either since he is now their DC.

I don't mind negativity when it offers solutions. Too often though it simply does not. I just read a thread where someone offered a positive view on the Head Coach here and the prevailing reply is essentially "just win." That's fine, but how do those posters propose we go about doing that?

Easy answer, just win.

It's like a dog chasing its own tail and being impressed with the speed of the circles.

If you don't like Tony Romo as a QB fine, tell us what you would have done to bridge the gap since Troy Aikman and postulate on how things could have been different. For example, in 2004 Kurt Warner was a Free Agent and he wanted to come to Dallas. I know for a fact Jerry Jones was interested too. But Bill Parcells had just endured Quincy Carter for a year and he wanted a guy he felt could lead his system. To be fair to Bill, at that time there were concerns about Warner's thumb and was he done.

In retrospect he wasn't done. He completely turned around the Cardinals and I have to tell you that may be the most impressive thing the man ever did because that franchise is a true laughingstock. Look at their solution post Warner. Would you like to see Kevin Kolb in Dallas under Center?

I wouldn't. It was pure serendipity that we hit upon Tony Romo. Yeah, you can praise Sean Payton and the scouts and anyone else you want for finding the man, but let me tell you the real reason why it is fortunate. Because no one could have foreseen this man's ability to lead a football team in the NFL. If they could he would have been a first round pick and a Ryan Leaf would have gone undrafted.

So when people are negative about Tony Romo I'd like to see them offer a viable solution once in a while. Tell me what you would have done that would have given us better results than Tony's 1-3 playoff record. I hope that isn't too much to ask, but I sense it will be because quite frankly some people don't want to put their opinions on the line, they just want to gripe.

That's what gets me. I don't want to hear gripes. I'd love to hear what that person would do differently. Just win. Okay, tell me how you would go about it.

For the longest time we heard the media talking about Camp Cupcake and Wade was too undisciplined, and kudos to them, it turns out they were right to a degree. There were all kinds of solutions offered to turn this thing back around.

Hey reality check time, Jason Garrett has implemented almost every one of those suggestions in one way or another. Is there any patience for the building process? None at all. I confess, this baffles me.

I may be lonely on this island, but I have never thought anything was a magic switch that suddenly makes a team just win. I am a shill for two things in football, pedigree and the importance of a top QB. Jimz31 and I used to go round and round on whether a bus driver really was enough.

I am not trying to call him or anyone else out, but my question then is the same as now. Is it? Back when Eli was in the Draft I was one of very few people who saw him as a franchise capable QB. He certainly wasn't going to measure up to his brother, I was assured of that. He hasn't, but in Super Bowl wins he has surpassed him and for all his greatness I do not believe Peyton will add another.

Suddenly Eli is considered a top QB and many would choose him over Tony Romo. That's fine, but tell me, how does Dallas get him? In 2004 when he was going to be the overall #1 pick Dallas was coming off a 10-6 season and had the 22nd pick in the Draft. How do they move up to take Eli?

See, you can't just tell me you'd rather have him, how do we acquire him and what is the counter cost? Do you give up your entire Draft to get him? Larry Lacewell recommended exactly that to Bill Parcells. I am not joking. I didn't know that until a day ago.

In hindsight maybe some would give up the entire 2004 Cowboys Draft for Eli. Hindsight is 20/20 vision. It is the easy way out. Sitting here right now I would gladly do it. At the time it was suggested, not on your Nellie. As much as I liked Eli then, I would not give up an entire Draft to move up and take the top QB, and I am a pedigree guy.

This is why I say it was serendipity that brought us a more than capable solution in Tony Romo. I will still tell you that in 2004, even if the Chargers would have taken our entire Draft for the #1 pick, I would have kept the picks and signed Kurt Warner as a Free Agent. I would have done that then, and today, looking back in my rearview mirror, I still would have done that.

Would that change the discovery of Tony Romo? Probably would, and I might seriously regret losing out on him, but I still would have preferred Kurt Warner to Vinny Testaverde and Drew Bledsoe. I liked Bledsoe, don't get me wrong. I honestly feel that was a right move in 2005, but so was benching him in 2006 for Romo. In all honesty, Warner in 2004 would not have granted us anything. He was ineffective and injured at first, and even the Cardinals Super Bowl year was a 9-7 season.

So was Eli's last year. The importance was in the leadership each guy had. I believe Tony has that same leadership and his production underscores that. I know people hate stats, but they are a litmus test. There are reasons why Dan Marino, Dan Fouts, Warren Moon, and Tony Romo all put up huge stats. It is because they are great QBs. There were reasons why the first three never won a Super Bowl and why Tony hasn't to this point. Some of it falls on them, much of it doesn't.

Tony just needs to win. Garrett just needs to win. Okay, fine. Tell me what Don Shula and Dan Marino failed to do to get their ring. Two Hall of Famers. Two of the very best, yet it eluded and escaped them. In the eyes of some it tarnishes Marino. I think that's silly personally, but to each their own.

So, how do teams just win? First of all they don't focus on what they don't have. They overcome what they do have.

If you are asking me right now what I think the weakest position is in our projected 22 starting lineup, I am going to tell you the same thing I said pre-draft when I was screaming for David DeCastro and Peter Konz, Center and interior OL. Some people are going to tell me that we cannot win with Phil Costa at Center and we need Nick Mangold. Okay, how do we get him?

Quick, off the top of your head, who was the great Center on the last 5 Super Bowl winners?

Center is important, but it is not a position that like QB is a prophecy of doom. Do I want to improve on Phil Costa? Lord yes. How many times have I said I want Bernadeau at Center and Leary at RG?

See, that's not negativity for the sake of being negative. Am I griping about Costa? Hell yes, but I am also offering a solution. Maybe that solution will not work out, but at least it isn't just empty commentary like "just win."

How?

What would you do that Garrett isn't doing? "I'd win games." Gosh, that's such genius. Why hasn't anyone else thought of that?

I want to win as badly as anyone, especially with all the shilling I have done for Jason Garrett. I am sorry folks, but it really is a process. You can believe that or not, but it is and it is also something else, it is a journey.

Bill Belichick is the best Head Coach in the NFL right now. Some might argue that Coughlin has taken him twice. Fine. Did either of them have immediate NFL success or did they build towards what they have? Did they just win?

not even Tom Landry, as great as he was, just showed up and we won. He built upon what he wanted in a team. Jimmy Johnson built what he wanted in his teams. Anyone who thinks it is a simple transition is kidding themselves and you.

If you want to tell me that you'll get behind this team once they start winning fine. I personally have never wanted to be a fair weather fan, but to each his own. I really don't have an issue with someone being less than enthused about the past results. But as you are talking about what needs to be done, offer your plan, your solution, your vision of the future.

I hear an occasional poster say something like, "I've been right for 16 straight years in saying the Cowboys weren't good enough." That isn't being right. Tell me for the last 16 years how you've picked every Super Bowl winner right before the season started. That is being right for 16 straight years. The other example is being negative for 16 straight years and nothing more.

What was your solution? What would have changed the last 16 years? Keeping Jimmy? Okay, tell me how you do that? How do you hang onto a man who has himself said he was itching to get back to Miami? How do you hang onto a man who himself has said he wanted out? Then let's ask Jimmy if that would have kept him here. If he answers yes then I will applaud your plan. I really will.

I never wanted Barry, Chan, or Dave here. But each time one of them got hired I was not just griping about what we did do, I was saying what I would have done. George Seiffert and Tony Dungy were among my solutions to the post Jimmy era. I didn't just gripe, I offered up what I would have done differently.

There's nothing at all wrong with not liking what the team does or is doing. I will point blank tell you I do not like Phil Costa right now. Could he turn into a strength for this team? Of course he could. It will be as much serendipity as it was that Tony Romo developed. I think it is less likely, but I could be wrong on Costa. I am not scared to admit that.

But at least when you hear me griping about him, or Chris Jones, or Dave Campo, I'm offering alternative solutions and for the most part I keep them realistic I think. Kurt Warner over Vinny was a realistic possibility. Acquiring Eli in the Draft, not so much. So though I liked Eli a lot more than most, I wasn't screaming for us to get him.

I wore people out about DeCastro, whom I even suggested would play Center for us if we got him. I am fine with the acquisition of Mo Claiborne because I do see him as potentially the best defensive player in this Draft. He's going to have rough spots. it is a rough transition from LSU to the NFL. I am down on Costa and always have been. Bernadeau is my current solution because it is actually feasible.

So if you want us to just win, fine. Tell us how to go about it, and while you're at it, make it a feasible solution. Do that, and your negativity won't bother me at all, and it will make for an actual good discussion point. Just win is a fine plan. No one goes from point A to pint B without some kind of idea on how that plan is going to unfold.

Jason Garrett has a plan in place. The players are buying in. It is time for the fans to do the same, or to present better solutions that we can talk about.

Now I know some smart alec is probably going to probably make a sarcastic reply to this and say just win and it will garner some laughs. Here's the sad part about that shtick, that's all they have. Pay close attention, that's all they've ever had. If that is what you want to applaud and follow, be my guest. I'll always prefer someone who shares insight over those who incite.

Nice.....I do believe it is a process and sometimes you get things right and sometimes you miss. The solutions may work or they may not. Hopefully focusing on the defense will pay dividends in the end.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

Hostile, your sagacious posts are always appreciated (by me) but these are different times we live in today. Opinions of yesteryear were no different than they are today. I can still remember fans focusing their hate for certain players such as Danny White, John Fitzgerald, Timmy Newsome, Steve Pelluer, Ken Norton, Ron Francis, and so on. The only venue open to fans back then was sport-talk radio. Just ask Brad Sham and Norm Hitzges about who were the mosted hated Cowboys of years past; they'll tell you.

Good or bad, everyone has a voice and this website is the perfect opportunity for all die-hards to let themselves be heard. Personally, I think it's great; Nervous Nellies and Kool-Aid drinkers aside, it's nice to know how your opinion stacks up with everyone else's. Positive or negative, die-hard or bandwagoner, it's nice to know that we'll will all come together in universal harmony when the Cowboys do succeed!

You know what I like.

I like when someone posts something that makes me stop and think.

It might be a post that makes me change my opinion on a player, coach or situation.

Or even if it does not make me change my opinion it might make me stop and think that even though the opposing opinion is completely contrary to mine but it is presented in a manner that makes me appreciate it. Either appreciate the time, effort and thought that went into the opinion or actually see that although it does not mesh with my opinion that there are valid points being made.

That is what I like.

 

[tupperware]

Some people just hate to be wrong and will fight til the bitter end with their opinions.

No amount of reasoning will change this fact about the posters who are like this because if you could reason with them in the first place it wouldn't be a problem.

 

[Shinywalrus]

I agree with the OP's sentiments in some arenas of life, just not this one.

If we were members of a professional organization - colleagues in the employ of Jerry Jones, let's say - then I'm certainly on board with you. It's incumbent upon anyone in that position in a well-structured organization to provide more than empty criticisms, lobbed insults and the like. In that context, providing alternatives and solutions is the bread and butter of how you improve and become a better organization.

The reason why I don't think a lot of your post makes sense is that the objectives of a message board and those of a professional organization or staff are completely different. As fans, we have practically no ability to effect change, to influence performance or decisions, etc. The idea that we ought to be solutions-focused is derivative of the more critical goal of increasing performance, and given our impotence in that arena, doesn't really make sense to me.

So what are we on a message board to do? Here's my opinion:

- Identify facts that like-minded fans might enjoy
- State opinions that we would like to debate with like-minded and oppositionally-minded fans
- Establish comaraderie with other fans, whether it be of the bandwagoning or misery-loving-company variety

I don't really feel like a "solutions" orientation has any relevance to those three things.

Where I think there's a gray area that starts to get into what you're talking about concerns the second bullet, where we debate opinions. While I disagree that "solutions" are any sort of litmus test for whether a debate in this context is legitimate, I think part of your point is that the empirical requirements some people put on "winning" a debate are silly. It's very easy for a negative person to revert to a "just win games" measure for success, just as its easy for a very positive person to say, "We won the games, so all that other stuff doesn't matter."

The problem with your philosophy (just my opinion) is that it is inherently imbalanced. You are ONLY requiring something extra from people who have a negative opinion. But as long as those people are providing legitimate support for their opinion, whether actual evidence, strong logical arguments or otherwise, I don't see why a "solution" has to enter into it.

 

[Zimmy Lives]

You know what I like.

I like when someone posts something that makes me stop and think.

It might be a post that makes me change my opinion on a player, coach or situation.

Or even if it does not make me change my opinion it might make me stop and think that even though the opposing opinion is completely contrary to mine but it is presented in a manner that makes me appreciate it. Either appreciate the time, effort and thought that went into the opinion or actually see that although it does not mesh with my opinion that there are valid points being made.

That is what I like.

Amen to that!

 

[tupperware]

I agree with the OP's sentiments in some arenas of life, just not this one.

If we were members of a professional organization - colleagues in the employ of Jerry Jones, let's say - then I'm certainly on board with you. It's incumbent upon anyone in that position in a well-structured organization to provide more than empty criticisms, lobbed insults and the like. In that context, providing alternatives and solutions is the bread and butter of how you improve and become a better organization.

The reason why I don't think a lot of your post makes sense is that the objectives of a message board and those of a professional organization or staff are completely different. As fans, we have practically no ability to effect change, to influence performance or decisions, etc. The idea that we ought to be solutions-focused is derivative of the more critical goal of increasing performance, and given our impotence in that arena, doesn't really make sense to me.

So what are we on a message board to do? Here's my opinion:

- Identify facts that like-minded fans might enjoy
- State opinions that we would like to debate with like-minded and oppositionally-minded fans
- Establish comaraderie with other fans, whether it be of the bandwagoning or misery-loving-company variety

I don't really feel like a "solutions" orientation has any relevance to those three things.

Where I think there's a gray area that starts to get into what you're talking about concerns the second bullet, where we debate opinions. While I disagree that "solutions" are any sort of litmus test for whether a debate in this context is legitimate, I think part of your point is that the empirical requirements some people put on "winning" a debate are silly. It's very easy for a negative person to revert to a "just win games" measure for success, just as its easy for a very positive person to say, "We won the games, so all that other stuff doesn't matter."

The problem with your philosophy (just my opinion) is that it is inherently imbalanced. You are ONLY requiring something extra from people who have a negative opinion. But as long as those people are providing legitimate support for their opinion, whether actual evidence, strong logical arguments or otherwise, I don't see why a "solution" has to enter into it.

ost:

 

[Zimmy Lives]

Some people just hate to be wrong and will fight til the bitter end with their opinions.

No amount of reasoning will change this fact about the posters who are like this because if you could reason with them in the first place it wouldn't be a problem.

IMO, this is the best way to express your opinions. In the old days fistfights were the norm if fans were carless with their words.

 

[tupperware]

IMO, this is the best way to express your opinions. In the old days fistfights were the norm if fans were carless with their words.

What I mean is that some people cannot see the other side at all. It's their opinion and their opinion only that matters. It's okay to stick by your own views but to ignore other views just because it doesn't jive with your own?

 

[superpunk]

Them innernets sure are serious business.

 

[Hostile]

I didn't realize class was in session..

Definitely agree with this. Not just offering solutions either, but reasoning as to why you think something would be a good solution or reasoning as to why you think certain things are problems in the first place. I see far too much, "Our secondary is the best in the league!" "Our offensive line sucks!" "My mom didn't put mayo on my sandwich today!".

Discussion and debate is much easier when people try to rationalize their thoughts and present them in an organized mannar.

Interesting about face from one post to the next.

Thank you.

 

[Hostile]

I formally redact the inclusion of ‘tacos’ as an example in my last post. I have obviously crossed a line.
:laugh2:

And this redaction saved you.

 

[Hostile]

By the way, make no mistake about it, I knew in advance exactly what type of commentary this thread would illicit as far as backlash, and likely from whom. The same shadows that darken just about anything I say.

:laugh2: