Holy Cow, Quincy was just on 103.3...

[Alexander]

QC led the 2003 Cowboys to the playoffs.

If QC had been the qb for 2004, we probably wouldn't have gone 6-10.

Perhaps, but it is highly questionable we would have been better than a five hundred team.

That team had bigger problems than Vinny Testeverde.

 

[Crown Royal]

Perhaps, but it is highly questionable we would have been better than a five hundred team.

That team had bigger problems than Vinny Testeverde.

You mean like:

Injuries at CB, including Newman
Loss of Woody (I can't even remember who played safety in his stead)
Marcellus Wiley
Whoever the 1 technique DT was
Eddie George/Injured Jones
Torrin Tucker
Injured Terry Glenn
Injured Dan Campbell
Injured Richie Anderson

To name a few....

God that was an awful year.

 

[Hostile]

I don't doubt you have sources... i do however doubt if they really know the facts or what they are lead to believe. Let me clarify.

Your info might have been nothing but a test for Q and head games by Tuna.

Vinnie was gonna be brought in as backup (some such as yourself might say starter) at least. We all know that. I do believe Tuna was using this "vinny to start" as a motivator to see if QC crumbled or not and was worth the time to continue with. He's a master motivator and NOTHING he does is random. "Vinny to start" was sorta true.. he'd be starting at least 4 games (while QC was suspended). I know he used some press leaks to pressure and evaluate Quincy - notably Francessa at WFAN who has zero insight to the cowboys - so him constantly reffering to Vinny starting was staged and leaked purposefully. Clear as day.

Again if QC was not going to be suspended and didin't violate the drug policy i have NO DOUBT he'd have started (short leash perhaps) and Vinny backup. No way he'd have been cut. I also believe (by the wording upon release) that QC had a verbal arrangement of sorts with Jerruh and/or Tuna about drugs (after first violation) and his failed test as the broken agreement. Cut. Everything about the cut was absurd, most notably the timing.

I find it hard to believe ANYONE even even minimally informed about Vinny's quarterback play would think VINNY would have been more effective than Quincy (in his second year w/ Tuna).

I want you to break this down as math and tell me what adds up.

2003 QBs on this squad were Q, Hutch, and Romo.

In late February 2004 we added Henson. You want to call this Jerry's QB, that's fine. But why were we adding another young QB when we already had 3? Clearly someone was going to go. You want that to add up to Hutch, fine, I won't disagree.

That leaves Q, Henson, & Romo.

June 2004 arrives and we go get Vinny. Again, someone is going to be the odd man out because we are not going to keep 4 QBs.

Henson is Jerry's QB of the future. Romo is Parcells QB of the future, and Vinny is his guy. He wanted a mentor for his young QBs and someone he could trust. Think back, Vinny said he was promised "a chance to start."

Why would they promise him that if Q was the starter?

Is your theory adding up? Or is mine?

Even without what my source said which one adds up? Now add the source.

Change your mind any? If you say no, then you're simply hiding behind a 2 year old myopia for a QB you liked.

 

[Crown Royal]

I want you to break this down as math and tell me what adds up.

2003 QBs on this squad were Q, Hutch, and Romo.

In late February 2004 we added Henson. You want to call this Jerry's QB, that's fine. But why were we adding another young QB when we already had 3? Clearly someone was going to go. You want that to add up to Hutch, fine, I won't disagree.

That leaves Q, Henson, & Romo.

June 2004 arrives and we go get Vinny. Again, someone is going to be the odd man out because we are not going to keep 4 QBs.

Henson is Jerry's QB of the future. Romo is Parcells QB of the future, and Vinny is his guy. He wanted a mentor for his young QBs and someone he could trust. Think back, Vinny said he was promised "a chance to start."

Why would they promise him that if Q was the starter?

Is your theory adding up? Or is mine?

Even without what my source said which one adds up? Now add the source.

Change your mind any? If you say no, then you're simply hiding behind a 2 year old myopia for a QB you liked.

I'll be honest - until this year and the emergence of Romo, none of this added up for me. Romo is kinda the part that makes it make sense.

That being said - a chance to start or a chance to compete to start? What were his words exactly?

 

[BigDFan5]

QC led the 2003 Cowboys to the playoffs.

Crankcase didn't "lead" the Cowboys to the playoffs, he went along for the ride.

What do you think had a bigger affect on our season

Crankcase and his 17 TDs and 21 INTs

Or the #32 ranked schedule and the #1 Defense?

 

[Hostile]

I'll be honest - until this year and the emergence of Romo, none of this added up for me. Romo is kinda the part that makes it make sense.

That being said - a chance to start or a chance to compete to start? What were his words exactly?

I honestly don't remember but it really doesn't matter.

It is obvious to me that they wanted to groom the 2 young guys and Vinny is a better mentor than a guy who was struggling to learn the game himself.

Even without knowing anything else, this makes more sense than the theory that Q's drug use caused his release. The Cowboys denied that allegation, Parcells didn't even know about the positive test per the CBA, and it was his call to release him.

 

[Munchis]

I've always felt that Quincy got screwed over here in Dallas just like Henson and now Bledsoe.

But yet he let a 40 year old dinosaur started an entire season in Dallas....go figure.

Munchis....Out!

 

[chinch]

June 2004 arrives and we go get Vinny. Again, someone is going to be the odd man out because we are not going to keep 4 QBs.

Henson is Jerry's QB of the future. Romo is Parcells QB of the future, and Vinny is his guy. He wanted a mentor for his young QBs and someone he could trust. Think back, Vinny said he was promised "a chance to start."

Why would they promise him that if Q was the starter?

Is your theory adding up? Or is mine?

Even without what my source said which one adds up? Now add the source.

Change your mind any? If you say no, then you're simply hiding behind a 2 year old myopia for a QB you liked.

I haven't liked a cowboy QB since Troy circa 1996 and what i've seen thus far in Romo. Yes i wanted Troy to retire but yes i wanted to groom someone mid-90s.

Vinny never said he was promised a chance to start... and if he did then he contradicted himself 10x over. i heard many interviews with him locally and he said he actually wanted to be a backup and came back for Tuna. Tuna had to talk him off the mat to start.

Hutch was gone and to be honest Romo to practice squad or Henson would have been cut if not for QC's drug problem. Tuna has no problem cutting Jerruh's players (all of which are flunkies if you haven't noticed). Your "math" needs some brushing up.

Either way it's water under the bridge and irrelevent today. The one positive is the Vinny was a big help to Romo (his words) in regard to preparation and organization so maybe long term this was all for the best

 

[CowboyChris]

You've smoked before, but I doubt you've ever had pressure on you equal to that of being the QB of the Dallas Cowboys. So don't act like you know what it's all about.

good point

 

[Hostile]

Vinny never said he was promised a chance to start... and if he did then he contradicted himself 10x over. i heard many interviews with him locally and he said he actually wanted to be a backup and came back for Tuna. Tuna had to talk him off the mat to start.

No you didn't, and I have no idea why your imagination would come up with that.

 

[CowboyChris]

I say Vinny was brought in to replace him. Got it direct from Valley Ranch in March 2004, a full 4 months before we even got Testasaurus. Henson was also brought in to replace him. That didn't work out. It doesn't change the fact that was clearly the plan from the get go.

nevermind:starspin

 

[chinch]

No you didn't, and I have no idea why your imagination would come up with that.

you're confusing Drew with Vinny.. i'm sorry your sources fed you misinfo and never factored in things like practice squad for undrafted FAs from small schools.

BTW - ROTF at your other scenario of Henson coming in and starting over Q out of baseball. Ugh.

 

[goshan]

BS on your theory Hostile.
Parcells was totally devastated to cut QC. He even said so himself a few weeks back.
If you saw his face in the press conference, this was not his intention and was not planned.

I will also add that it was not all parcells decision.

Jerry intentionally made a point of saying 'it was not a difficult decision'.

He drove the process of waiving QC and Bill agreed.

 

[Hostile]

you're confusing Drew with Vinny.. i'm sorry your sources fed you misinfo and never factored in things like practice squad for undrafted FAs from small schools.

BTW - ROTF at your other scenario of Henson coming in and starting over Q out of baseball. Ugh.

BS on your theory Hostile.
Parcells was totally devastated to cut QC. He even said so himself a few weeks back.
If you saw his face in the press conference, this was not his intention and was not planned.

Believe whatever you want gents. The facts back me up and I don't care if you believe it or not. 6 days into training camp he got cut. If he was going to serve a 4 game suspension for mj, why not start Vinny for 4 games and bring him back? I mean according to you Vinny was never meant to be the starter. Your theories don't add up and they never will.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

Can you tell us what really happened when you left the Cowboys? I failed a Marijuana test. The rumours about me being bypolar or doing cocaine were false.

whew, and I thought it was serious :

 

[chinch]

Believe whatever you want gents. The facts back me up and I don't care if you believe it or not. 6 days into training camp he got cut. If he was going to serve a 4 game suspension for mj, why not start Vinny for 4 games and bring him back? I mean according to you Vinny was never meant to be the starter. Your theories don't add up and they never will.

please don't insult us by stating your "opinion" as fact OK. you are finding new arguments since "math doesn't add up" correction to prove your point. Trust me, you're not the first guy to think Vinny was brought in to be a savior. It's just that you obviously didn't watch VT play much after he missed the season with the Jets due to the injury, nor did you follow his career in a local market.

the flunked test most certainly broke the bond of trust w/ QC and he was cut by jj/bill. only a fool would wait to revisit the problem week-5 with the QB position.

your mind is made up but just as certain your sources were misled. not a big deal.

 

[Hostile]

please don't insult us by stating your "opinion" as fact OK. you are finding new arguments since "math doesn't add up" correction to prove your point. Trust me, you're not the first guy to think Vinny was brought in to be a savior. It's just that you obviously didn't watch VT play much after he missed the season with the Jets due to the injury, nor did you follow his career in a local market.

the flunked test most certainly broke the bond of trust w/ QC and he was cut by jj/bill. only a fool would wait to revisit the problem week-5 with the QB position.

your mind is made up but just as certain your sources were misled. not a big deal.

If I was going to insult you, I'd have just done it.

They aren't new arguments. I'm not stating an opinion here. I'm relaying to you exactly what was told to me. How is that "my opinion?"

You can claim the person at VR is misled, but I find that really humorous. Why? Let's start with the fact the event I was told was going to happen, happened. 4 months later when that person said it would. Misled? Seriously?

Hence why I said believe what you want, but it doesn't make you right, because you aren't quite frankly. If that insults you...oh well.

Forgive me for putting more credence in the version coming from someone related to the team who turned out to be right. That's just a coincidence right?

:wink2:

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

Believe what you want as I said. I believed in Santa Clause a long time ago too.

 

[joseephuss]

Believe whatever you want gents. The facts back me up and I don't care if you believe it or not. 6 days into training camp he got cut. If he was going to serve a 4 game suspension for mj, why not start Vinny for 4 games and bring him back? I mean according to you Vinny was never meant to be the starter. Your theories don't add up and they never will.

He wasn't going to serve a 4 game suspension at that time. He was being fined 4 game checks. His next offense would lead to suspension. Apparently, he did fail another test and if ever signed again would have to serve some kind of suspension. Which theory does that support?

 

[joseephuss]

You mean like:

Injuries at CB, including Newman
Loss of Woody (I can't even remember who played safety in his stead)
Marcellus Wiley
Whoever the 1 technique DT was
Eddie George/Injured Jones
Torrin Tucker
Injured Terry Glenn
Injured Dan Campbell
Injured Richie Anderson

To name a few....

God that was an awful year.

Don't play dumb. You know who played safety for Dallas that season. Tony Dixon and Lynn Scott.

My therapists says that I am in a better frame of mind to discuss that season now. I don't have to pretend that it didn't happen. I am no longer waking up sweaty and screaming.

 

[Hostile]

He wasn't going to serve a 4 game suspension at that time. He was being fined 4 game checks. His next offense would lead to suspension. Apparently, he did fail another test and if ever signed again would have to serve some kind of suspension. Which theory does that support?

I don't remember him being fined the 4 game checks but I'll take your word for it.

It doesn't matter though. It doesn't change the fact that he was going to be released no matter what. Had he been clean as a whistle he was still out of the long term plans.

Remember, for Bill it's 3 years in the league to show him something or you are gone. His 3 years were up. All Bill had to see for himself in 6 days of camp was that Vinny could do what he wanted. Trigger pulled.

Does that mean he liked doing it? Of course not. It doesn't change the fact that Parcells said he didn't know anything about a failed test. It doesn't change the fact that the CBA prohibits Jerry from telling him about the failed test. He made a football decision to move forward and because some people liked the player they have to rationalize why he was released.

Why has every other player that this team released been about performance and this player it was a conspiracy to undermine him? Can someone please answer that question for me?

Come on, stop believing in the faery tale.