Garrett: We are gonna move on from some guys

[tyke1doe]

Not true. Jerry said they have looked at all the evidence and spoken with all of Zeke's people and feel
he is a go for camp and the team this year.

You took his post seriously?

 

[tyke1doe]

I actually saw him speaking on this. He was trying to say what he was really thinking, but he was wearing some kind of weird collar and every time he started to speak it looked like he was being zapped.....

 

[tyke1doe]

This comment is taken to be specific when it was generic. He was talking about in general the team will at times move on from some guys. This was said in regard to Dallas taking risks on players. He essentially said there are times when those risks pay off and times when they don't. "We're going to move on from some guys" could refer to players this year or players they bring in in the future. Garrett was waxing philosophical about risk taking.

Why would you move on from a player not on your team?

 

[Stash]

More blame should be put on Jones. But seeing FA's and draft picks blow up in his face gives me reasons to believe the rest of the FO won't support him as much going forward. Much like the story about Manziel and Jerry getting no support for that pick the same could happen for getting troubled players in general.

I hope that these recent failures sink in with him and that both he, and by extension the organization, have learned a lesson moving forward.

 

[gimmesix]

Why would you move on from a player not on your team?

Maybe I didn't explain it well. Garrett was essentially giving a philosophical answer. Teams take risks on talented players and sometimes it's going to work out and sometimes "we're going to move on from some guys."

It was more of a general statement about risk-taking than it was an indication that Dallas is specifically going to move on from McClain, Gregory, etc. In fact, all of the Cowboys management said they would not be speaking specifically about how they are handling those players' situations.

 

[Joe Realist]

How's Wentz doing so far?

in 3 years, we will wish we got Wentz.

 

[visionary]

That's what I don't like people clowning on the right kind of guys with Jason. He didn't want these guys to begin with. It would be a different had he had control. We wouldn't have drafted Gregory for one thing. And that not a total endorsement of garret, I'm just saying he's catching flack for jerrys whims.

What is this based on?
Can you show me where Garrett stated he did not want McClain, Gregory and Hardy?

People clown Garrett because he is a cardboard HC spouting cliches and accomplishing little else

Can't blame jerry for the bad decisions just to excuse your favorite HC

Jerry stated VERY clearly that the coaches wanted McClain to stay

I thought Garrett was the architect of this team and was building a contender

Make up your mind
Is jerry building this team or is Garrett?
Can't have it both ways

 

[Bullflop]

"Moving on from some guys" is really a pretty generic statement. Every team moves on from "some guys" after each and every training camp. To me, it's a question of whom 'moving on' includes, more than anything else. Will it include Rolando and/or Gregory? Who knows?

This is something that is yet to be determined. Anyone can make a vague statement to pacify the multitudes of fans that cry out for discipline to become a reality with the Dallas Cowboys' organization. It means virtually nothing until such time as specific action is implemented.

 

[cowboys2233]

Guys is plural. Ro is obvious. Unless there's somebody in trouble we don't know about, it could be Gregory.

Of course, he could be referring partly to Hardy, too.

The team has moved on from Hardy. They did a long time ago. Why would Garrett feel compelled to say they moved on from someone they've already moved on from months ago? Let me answer that -- it is only some folks here who haven't moved on from Hardy. The team has moved on and has said so on multiple occasions. For some reason, some folks can't comprehend that.

 

[erod]

The team has moved on from Hardy. They did a long time ago. Why would Garrett feel compelled to say they moved on from someone they've already moved on from months ago? Let me answer that -- it is only some folks here who haven't moved on from Hardy. The team has moved on and has said so on multiple occasions. For some reason, some folks can't comprehend that.

My point was, Garrett said "guys". Plural. More than one.

We know they're moving on from McClain. So if he's not referring to closing the door on Hardy, then who is it? Gregory? It's not Lawrence.

 

[cowboys2233]

At the very least, we need to keep Gregory on the roster.

We drafted the guy knowing he had some mental health issues. We need to provide him with opportunities to get better even if he doesn't play for us. That's just being a good employer.

I don't think you really understand how pitiful this is. The NFL basically puts up a blinking neon sign that tells the players "YOU'RE GOING TO BE DRUG TESTED DURING THIS SMALL WINDOW OF TIME" -- all a player has to do is pass that single test and they're never tested again during the year. And yet, this guy somehow manages to get busted multiple times, get himself suspended for four games, still doesn't care, and gets busted again, throwing away an entire season. And millions of dollars to boot.

Your suggestion that the team needs to "provide him with opportunities to get better" should be offensive to anyone with half a brain.

 

[cowboys2233]

My point was, Garrett said "guys". Plural. More than one.

We know they're moving on from McClain. So if he's not referring to closing the door on Hardy, then who is it? Gregory? It's not Lawrence.

Who knows? The point is, Hardy's name has been brought up yet again which is strange given that he is in no way associated with the team and hasn't been for months. Why does this guy's name keep coming up? Let. It. Go.

 

[AsthmaField]

in 3 years, we will wish we got Wentz.

Y'all did get Wentz. You're not making sense.

 

[AbeBeta]

I don't think you really understand how pitiful this is. The NFL basically puts up a blinking neon sign that tells the players "YOU'RE GOING TO BE DRUG TESTED DURING THIS SMALL WINDOW OF TIME" -- all a player has to do is pass that single test and they're never tested again during the year. And yet, this guy somehow manages to get busted multiple times, get himself suspended for four games, still doesn't care, and gets busted again, throwing away an entire season. And millions of dollars to boot.

Your suggestion that the team needs to "provide him with opportunities to get better" should be offensive to anyone with half a brain.

And I don't think you understand how someone with a disease might not make good decisions.

And you are wrong about the league telling you the window. That's start of the season and only a relevant argument for players not in the drug program. If you are in the program you get tested randomly. Gregory began his career in the program, so your argument whiffed right there

 

[Nightman]

I know we want to move on from the guys not here and I agree, but on a technical note has anyone confirmed that Gregory is suspended for 10 games....there seems to be some confusion.....ESPN keeps listing him with 4 games...a lot of people took the going to rehab as another failed test but was it just a result of the first suspension??

 

[CCBoy]

It's so dumb. For one thing, he's talking generally about how they want to build the team in terms of core players and premium FA dollars. Two, he clearly mentions on multiple occasions that they make allowances for troubled players they think have a shot to rehabilitate if they have other traits in terms of personality and physical ability that they're looking for. And on top of that, as you say, there's the Jerry factor that nobody else really has any control over.

The risks they take on players like Hardy and McClain they take because the deals are pay-as-you-go. Randy Gregory was a mistake, but he's a guy who (as Stephen said again today) has a sickness that they're working through. He's otherwise the kind of guy they're looking for

Overall, though, we've got a lot of smart dedicate players who do the right thing. If they build the bulk of the roster that way and supplement it with a couple of long shots they think might pan out who are pay-go guys, it's not the end of the world. The character of the team overall is very good, and that's what Garrett's talking about. He said exactly that again today.

Anybody who doesn't understand that at this point is just trying not to understand it.

I have gone through employers who didn't stand up for their workers...at all. Jerry has the backs of his players, IF, there is some human side to the core of the problem. I actually respect that in the man.

 

[CCBoy]

Blame it on senility...but I'm still pulling for Gregory

 

[big dog cowboy]

I know we want to move on from the guys not here and I agree, but on a technical note has anyone confirmed that Gregory is suspended for 10 games....there seems to be some confusion.....ESPN keeps listing him with 4 games...a lot of people took the going to rehab as another failed test but was it just a result of the first suspension??

It's still 4 games until the league announces something different. So far, nothing.

 

[Stash]

It's still 4 games until the league announces something different. So far, nothing.

Yeah, but it took them a month of Sunday's to even decide if Lawrence was being suspended.

You don't really think he won't get more time added on, do you?

 

[big dog cowboy]

Yeah, but it took them a month of Sunday's to even decide if Lawrence was being suspended.

You don't really think he won't get more time added on, do you?

Considering who is in charge, I'd say anything is possible.