I guess I'm the only one disappointed in Phillips comments about our offense.

[Crown Royal]

Yeah yeah yeah our offense was 4th in scoring and was fine an dmoves the ball and blah blah blah/

Our offense was decent. That's it. It did some good things against crap defenses, but disappeared down the stretch. Phillips' comments today lean toward the idea that the scheme is going to stay the same/use Parcell's offensive philosophy.

This is frustrating - does that mean that when you play an injury decimated secondary, you won't throw the ball against them? Does that mean that when TO is against a team's rookie CB that is garbage (NOLA) you'll only attempt fades? Does that mean TO will ONLY play flanker, never moving to the slot, running deep ins/drags?

Forgive me if the prospect of a 'somewhat adequate' offense doesn't excite me when it has the talent to be special.

 

[ThreeSportStar80]

No REMEMBER, it was Parcells who had his hands all over the playcalling on BOTH sides of the ball. He couldn't let go and allow the OC to do his job.

 

[theogt]

This just proves that you will never have everyone happy.

Seriously, if you weren't pleased with the offense last year, you'll never be pleased. Could it improve? Sure, but my god if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

 

[ThreeSportStar80]

This just proves that you will never have everyone happy.

Seriously, if you weren't pleased with the offense last year, you'll never be pleased. Could it improve? Sure, but my god if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Agreed, and let's not forget the control freak had his hands all on the playcalling.

 

[Crown Royal]

This just proves that you will never have everyone happy.

Seriously, if you weren't pleased with the offense last year, you'll never be pleased. Could it improve? Sure, but my god if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

It was broke.

How is it OK to complain about 2003's defense but not 2006's offense?

One example of many - where was that unbroken offense in the playoffs?

 

[the kid 05]

Yeah yeah yeah our offense was 4th in scoring and was fine an dmoves the ball and blah blah blah/

Our offense was decent. That's it. It did some good things against crap defenses, but disappeared down the stretch. Phillips' comments today lean toward the idea that the scheme is going to stay the same/use Parcell's offensive philosophy.

This is frustrating - does that mean that when you play an injury decimated secondary, you won't throw the ball against them? Does that mean that when TO is against a team's rookie CB that is garbage (NOLA) you'll only attempt fades? Does that mean TO will ONLY play flanker, never moving to the slot, running deep ins/drags?

Forgive me if the prospect of a 'somewhat adequate' offense doesn't excite me when it has the talent to be special.

the ball throwing againts a decimated Secondary has to do with not having a true OC and having your old school guru of a head coach runn the ball more then he does pass it, he failed to realize that, "hey, they are hurting in the secondary, their front 7 is their strength right now esp the linebackers, why not throw it deep some times more then 5?"

 

[Crown Royal]

the ball throwing againts a decimated Secondary has to do with not having a true OC and having your old school guru of a head coach runn the ball more then he does pass it, he failed to realize that, "hey, they are hurting in the secondary, their front 7 is their strength right now esp the linebackers, why not throw it deep some times more then 5?"

I agree with this. Also, I don't like our passing routes/philosophy. I think our passing game can be special - hopefully it becomes that. There were too many times that Parcells, during his tenure, said the WRs weren't getting open. I find that hard to believe with the players we've had through here.

Hopefull Haley's departure will assuage our woes in the passing.

 

[theogt]

It was broke.

How is it OK to complain about 2003's defense but not 2006's offense?

One example of many - where was that unbroken offense in the playoffs?

It wasn't broke. It was creative and effective. I can't count the number of times Tony took the ball and drove it down opponents throats for game-winning drives. Toward the end, it remained extremely effective, but the defense faltered. Seriously, if you think this offense was broken, either (1) there's no pleasin you, or (2) you just didn't watch the games.

Again, there's always room for improvement.

 

[the kid 05]

I agree with this. Also, I don't like our passing routes/philosophy. I think our passing game can be special - hopefully it becomes that. There were too many times that Parcells, during his tenure, said the WRs weren't getting open. I find that hard to believe with the players we've had through here.

Hopefull Haley's departure will assuage our woes in the passing.

i agree i believe as his tenure went on he became more like Hitler a la the controlling and such, when he first got here in 03 how many big plays did we see? aloooot how many in 06?....not so much

 

[Crown Royal]

It wasn't broke. It was creative and effective. I can't count the number of times Tony took the ball and drove it down opponents throats for game-winning drives. Toward the end, it remained extremely effective, but the defense faltered. Seriously, if you think this offense was broken, either (1) there's no pleasin you, or (2) you just didn't watch the games.

Again, there's always room for improvement.

Like in the Washington game where we scored 19 points and had to rely on a last second drive to even consider trying to win?

Or Indianapolis where we scored 4 more offensive points than the Grossman led Bears?

Or the Giants where we again relied on a last minute drive to win by 3, after scoring 10 points?

How bout New Orleans, where our innovative offense passed for all of 6.6 yards per pass and an anemic 14 points?

Philadelphia. 7 Points.

Seattle. 7 points.


Sorry if I expect more out of an offense that isn't broken.

 

[theogt]

I can cherry pick data and make any offense look bad. Watch the games.

 

[Crown Royal]

I can cherry pick data and make any offense look bad. Watch the games.

Excellent rebuff. I guess I wasn't watching the magnificient offensive performance they put up against Seattle.

 

[theogt]

Excellent rebuff. I guess I wasn't watching the magnificient offensive performance they put up against Seattle.

The Seattle game was a bit peculiar. It seemed like the offense was more worried about limiting mistakes than taking advantage.

It's by no means indicative of the overall body of work of the offense in 2006. That is what Wade wants to keep.

 

[The Realist]

Excellent rebuff. I guess I wasn't watching the magnificient offensive performance they put up against Seattle.

Somewhere, a clueless Colt's fan is whining about only putting up 14 points against Dallas.

 

[Beast_from_East]

Yeah yeah yeah our offense was 4th in scoring and was fine an dmoves the ball and blah blah blah/

Our offense was decent. That's it. It did some good things against crap defenses, but disappeared down the stretch. Phillips' comments today lean toward the idea that the scheme is going to stay the same/use Parcell's offensive philosophy.

This is frustrating - does that mean that when you play an injury decimated secondary, you won't throw the ball against them? Does that mean that when TO is against a team's rookie CB that is garbage (NOLA) you'll only attempt fades? Does that mean TO will ONLY play flanker, never moving to the slot, running deep ins/drags?

Forgive me if the prospect of a 'somewhat adequate' offense doesn't excite me when it has the talent to be special.

Didnt we score 425 pts last year? Didnt our D totally suck?

Give me another 425 and with the "phillups 34" we will be in NFC Title Game.

 

[silverbear]

Yeah yeah yeah our offense was 4th in scoring and was fine an dmoves the ball and blah blah blah/

Our offense was decent. That's it. It did some good things against crap defenses, but disappeared down the stretch. Phillips' comments today lean toward the idea that the scheme is going to stay the same/use Parcell's offensive philosophy.

Actually, I've read that if Jason Garrett is in control of the offense, we'll see more of the old Cowboys/Norv Turner timing offense employed...

Forgive me if the prospect of a 'somewhat adequate' offense doesn't excite me when it has the talent to be special.

OK, but I'll have a tougher time forgiving you for jumping to such a ludicrous conclusion, based on what Wade had to say... you read a lot more into that words than was really there, I think...

 

[CalCBFan]

I think Phillips comments about our O were accurate. Sure, we can improve; but it was the D that cratered in December.

I for one hope that Sparano/Garrett DO NOT go w/ the old Norv timing-based O, but use more of the multiple offense ala Sean Peyton. Romo's mobility and ability to throw accurately on the run are assets that should be utilized, not suppressed out of him.

And regardless of the offense we use, practicing agains a much improved D will make them better than they are now, even if nothing on offense changes...

 

[sago1]

I didn't read Phillips' comments the same way. We did score a lot of points but also agree we didn't do that against some of the better teams. Part of the problem was our OL which didn't give our QBs (including Romo) the team he needed to get rid of the ball which is why he often had to move outside the pocket. Also Parcells playcalling (and he was the one essentially making those calls) was too conservative and vanilla too often. Look how well Sean Payton doing as HC but certainly wouldn't have been allowed do that under Parcells. We definitely need RG and I think the whole world knows that. I also think Adams needs be challenged (this is last year of his contract) so interested in seeing what McQuistan able to show in comparison. Also think/hope Gurode & Colombo will play even better this year based on all the experience they gained in 06 which was first time either had been starters for any length of time. Maybe even Kosier will improve with time spent in our offseason weight conditioning program (think Jerry Jones will still maintain it) and continuity on OL will also be a big factor.

Will be interested to see how Julius Jones does this year under Garrett/Soprano and w/o Parcells looking over his shoulder. Want to see if he can revert back to last half of his rookie season when he took over games (unless his fresh legs in rookie season was totally responsible). I don't see Phillips comments as necessarily meaning there wouldn't be some good changes on the offense. Do think he leave lot of decisions up to Garrett/Soprano.

 

[Cowboy4ever]

Yeah yeah yeah our offense was 4th in scoring and was fine an dmoves the ball and blah blah blah/

Our offense was decent. That's it. It did some good things against crap defenses, but disappeared down the stretch. Phillips' comments today lean toward the idea that the scheme is going to stay the same/use Parcell's offensive philosophy.

This is frustrating - does that mean that when you play an injury decimated secondary, you won't throw the ball against them? Does that mean that when TO is against a team's rookie CB that is garbage (NOLA) you'll only attempt fades? Does that mean TO will ONLY play flanker, never moving to the slot, running deep ins/drags?

Forgive me if the prospect of a 'somewhat adequate' offense doesn't excite me when it has the talent to be special.

I didn't hear that! What I heard Wade say is that he is going to trust his offensive coachs to create the game plan and make it happen. He said the offensive coachs that are still here were successful last year, so he doesn't see any reason to micro manage them. He will discuss the game plan and give advice and how he wants the general direction to go,, but I think it was clear that he will let the offensive coachs coach and game plan. And since neither Tony S or Jason G have done this on their own yet, we have no idea how the offense will look.

 

[dbair1967]

Yeah yeah yeah our offense was 4th in scoring and was fine an dmoves the ball and blah blah blah/

Our offense was decent. That's it. It did some good things against crap defenses, but disappeared down the stretch. Phillips' comments today lean toward the idea that the scheme is going to stay the same/use Parcell's offensive philosophy.

This is frustrating - does that mean that when you play an injury decimated secondary, you won't throw the ball against them? Does that mean that when TO is against a team's rookie CB that is garbage (NOLA) you'll only attempt fades? Does that mean TO will ONLY play flanker, never moving to the slot, running deep ins/drags?

Forgive me if the prospect of a 'somewhat adequate' offense doesn't excite me when it has the talent to be special.

I think Parcells subtraction will make things better just by itself...and I think Garrett will be good...we just need 1 or 2 upgrades on the OL, and we'll be in good shape if we stay healthy...

David