I thought...

[windward]

I thought that Parcells was no longer able to hire coaches with experience and only coaches that are new to the NFL or lacked any significant role would come here. I thought experienced coaches would not demean themselves by working for a "bully"

Score another one for the Parcells-bashers

 

[lcharles]

Let me give this a shot.....

I guess when you get fired from the worst team in the league you will be happy just to have employment anywhere.

Even if it means working for a bully.

 

[windward]

He was fired after two games, before the Texans were deemed the worst team in the league. The Texans actually improved every year from 2002-2004. Who knows how good/bad the Texans would have been if he had stayed

 

[windward]

Moreover, from 2002-2004, not only did Houston's record improve from 4to 5 to 7 wins, their offense improved

2002 213 points
2003 255 points
2004 309 points

 

[Cowboy Junkie]

Let me give this a shot.....

I guess when you get fired from the worst team in the league you will be happy just to have employment anywhere.

Even if it means working for a bully.

Palmer did not need to come here , he would have gotten work elsewhere....
Anyone who thinks Palmer came here out of desperation are fooling thereselves...

 

[Hostile]

It had to happen sooner or later. They'd use bathwater to make the kool aid.

 

[Cbz40]

It had to happen sooner or later. They'd use bathwater to make the kool aid.

 

[hmcorp]

Palmer led some of the most prolific offenses in the 90s.

the air attack of the patriots from 93-96 and the amazing scoring ability of jacksonville in 97-98. (they beat the jimmy johnson led dolphins something like 67-3...oh my god in the playoffs!!!)

too bad he left for the cleveland browns job. after that things went downhill for him.

cant wait to have him back with parcells.

the boy has come home.

thank god.

 

[windward]

It had to happen sooner or later. They'd use bathwater to make the kool aid.

Look at Palmer's track record when he actually had offensive talent around him. Our offensive personnel is far superior to Houston's and especially Palmer's Cleveland teams.

 

[Cowboy Junkie]

It had to happen sooner or later. They'd use bathwater to make the kool aid.

I am not emplying that he is the answer.
I am not even emplying that he is a great coach...
I really do not know a whole lot about Palmer , but I do know that he is well thought of in NFL circles and he would not have been unemployed long with or without the Cowboys offer....

 

[Bob Sacamano]

I am not emplying that he is the answer.
I am not even emplying that he is a great coach...
I really do not know a whole lot about Palmer , but I do know that he is well thought of in NFL circles and he would not have been unemployed long with or without the Cowboys offer....

here you go:

2 teams wanted Palmer to be their OC, but instead, he chose to be the QB coach here

QB coach?...OC?....hmmm, I don't know about you, but I would choose to be an OC

 

[Billy Bullocks]

here you go:

2 teams wanted Palmer to be their OC, but instead, he chose to be the QB coach here

QB coach?...OC?....hmmm, I don't know about you, but I would choose to be an OC

I'd say it's more of "QB Coach"...Parcells will still have his hand in this offense, but he seems to trust Palmer.

Palmer will do just fine.

 

[Jarv]

Moreover, from 2002-2004, not only did Houston's record improve from 4to 5 to 7 wins, their offense improved

2002 213 points
2003 255 points
2004 309 points

Nice stats, good job !

I don't know enough about Palmer to actually make a statement about him. Those stats are interesting tho.

 

[superpunk]

It had to happen sooner or later. They'd use bathwater to make the kool aid.

OH YEAH!!!!

 

[Hostile]

I am not emplying that he is the answer.
I am not even emplying that he is a great coach...
I really do not know a whole lot about Palmer , but I do know that he is well thought of in NFL circles and he would not have been unemployed long with or without the Cowboys offer....

In fairness, I did not make my comment to any poster in particular. It is made to the idea that if Parcells did it, then it must be a good move, therefore anyone not excited about this hiring is out of their mind.

Let me break it down like this, several teams are replacing Offensive Coordinators besides us. I think the majority of them did a better job and it insults me. The only reason given by any poster here has been that Parcells ego won't allow him to work with ______________.

Jerry's ego brought this team down from the pinnacle of the NFL. I'm supposed to believe now that Parcells' ego is going to vault us up there? That's a math I don't understand.

On my college football team we had workout shirts that we were proud to wear. They were gray with yellow letters. Yellow doesn't show up on a white background so I'll use red.

TEAM
ME
​

The translation of this was "the Team is bigger than Me." It is a philosophy I cherish to this day. I worry that our Head Coach isn't of this mindset. In other words, screw his ego. Give us the best team and staff because we are the Cowboys and we deserve it.

He's a great coach. You'll never hear me say different. He's not so great that he can do every job and take full credit. No one is that great.​

 

[superpunk]

The only reason given by any poster here has been that Parcells ego won't allow him to work with ______________.

How about I give you another reason? Offensive philosophies just weren't the same.

For instance, Commanders paid an outrageous amount of money for Al Saunders. (This subsequently caused all the Cowboy fans suffering from Commanders envy to **** their pants, but I digress......) Al Saunders is a brilliant offensive mind, no doubt. But the reason it made sense for the Skins to sign him, is because he employs basically the same offensive strategy that Gibbs has always used. They are both Air Coryell disciples. IMO, Saunders was brought in, not to install some groundbreaking, earth shattering new system, but as an underling who knows the existing system like the back of his hand, and will thus aid in the process of execution.

Palmer's the same deal. Could we have signed someone else? A fresh new face, to come in and put in a new method? Sure we could.....but where would that have gotten us? This team is designed to run Parcells offense. Bringing in a brand new system could be disastrous for this team's offensive progress. Wouldn't you agree, that it makes much more sense to bring in someone who already knows what's going on? Someone who is there, not to change the entire foundation of the existing system, but to assist is the execution of the existing system, and maybe just add a few wrinkles of his own?

I'm not saying I'm fully on board with this. It's all fine and dandy to look at what Palmer did in the past with Parcells and Coughlin, but you can't ignore what he did in Houston and Cleveland, either. So, for now, I'm cautiously optimistic. I think Palmer will be great for (you guessed it) continuity. I think having someone there that Parcells trusts entirely to work specifically with the passing game, is a pretty good idea. It frees Parcells up for more Head Coaching responsibilities. I think this situation has the potential to work out. This year will tell us for sure, I think, if it's the players, or the execution. Palmer should greatly help the latter.

 

[odog422]

How about I give you another reason? Offensive philosophies just weren't the same.

For instance, Commanders paid an outrageous amount of money for Al Saunders. (This subsequently caused all the Cowboy fans suffering from Commanders envy to **** their pants, but I digress......) Al Saunders is a brilliant offensive mind, no doubt. But the reason it made sense for the Skins to sign him, is because he employs basically the same offensive strategy that Gibbs has always used. They are both Air Coryell disciples. IMO, Saunders was brought in, not to install some groundbreaking, earth shattering new system, but as an underling who knows the existing system like the back of his hand, and will thus aid in the process of execution.

Palmer's the same deal. Could we have signed someone else? A fresh new face, to come in and put in a new method? Sure we could.....but where would that have gotten us? This team is designed to run Parcells offense. Bringing in a brand new system could be disastrous for this team's offensive progress. Wouldn't you agree, that it makes much more sense to bring in someone who already knows what's going on? Someone who is there, not to change the entire foundation of the existing system, but to assist is the execution of the existing system, and maybe just add a few wrinkles of his own?

I'm not saying I'm fully on board with this. It's all fine and dandy to look at what Palmer did in the past with Parcells and Coughlin, but you can't ignore what he did in Houston and Cleveland, either. So, for now, I'm cautiously optimistic. I think Palmer will be great for (you guessed it) continuity. I think having someone there that Parcells trusts entirely to work specifically with the passing game, is a pretty good idea. It frees Parcells up for more Head Coaching responsibilities. I think this situation has the potential to work out. This year will tell us for sure, I think, if it's the players, or the execution. Palmer should greatly help the latter.

good post. i agree.

 

[Hostile]

How about I give you another reason? Offensive philosophies just weren't the same.

For instance, Commanders paid an outrageous amount of money for Al Saunders. (This subsequently caused all the Cowboy fans suffering from Commanders envy to **** their pants, but I digress......) Al Saunders is a brilliant offensive mind, no doubt. But the reason it made sense for the Skins to sign him, is because he employs basically the same offensive strategy that Gibbs has always used. They are both Air Coryell disciples. IMO, Saunders was brought in, not to install some groundbreaking, earth shattering new system, but as an underling who knows the existing system like the back of his hand, and will thus aid in the process of execution.

Palmer's the same deal. Could we have signed someone else? A fresh new face, to come in and put in a new method? Sure we could.....but where would that have gotten us? This team is designed to run Parcells offense. Bringing in a brand new system could be disastrous for this team's offensive progress. Wouldn't you agree, that it makes much more sense to bring in someone who already knows what's going on? Someone who is there, not to change the entire foundation of the existing system, but to assist is the execution of the existing system, and maybe just add a few wrinkles of his own?

I'm not saying I'm fully on board with this. It's all fine and dandy to look at what Palmer did in the past with Parcells and Coughlin, but you can't ignore what he did in Houston and Cleveland, either. So, for now, I'm cautiously optimistic. I think Palmer will be great for (you guessed it) continuity. I think having someone there that Parcells trusts entirely to work specifically with the passing game, is a pretty good idea. It frees Parcells up for more Head Coaching responsibilities. I think this situation has the potential to work out. This year will tell us for sure, I think, if it's the players, or the execution. Palmer should greatly help the latter.

If it helps you sleep at night to think that our players and coaches are pigeon holed into one way of playing and no other way will help them play any better, then I guess this makes sense.

I've never understood the "he runs a WCO" (or insert another strategy)philosophies that pervade message boards. Is it taboo to use something that works? Is _______________ incapable of figuring out how to run Julius Jones? Is Parcells incapable of stomaching a coach who develops QBs?

I mean let's get down to brass tacks here. What exactly fuels the reticence to think that these great football minds might know more than one method of doing things?

That's exaclty what I am talking about with regards to ego in the way. The my way or the highway stuff would be fine and dandy if it was already the best philosophy out there or at the very least was being so effective that it was approaching unstoppable. Is that what you're seeing with regards to our offense?

Sometimes new really is improved.

 

[superpunk]

If it helps you sleep at night to think that our players and coaches are pigeon holed into one way of playing and no other way will help them play any better, then I guess this makes sense.

Now that is not at all what I said, and you know it. Parcells has built the offense to do the things he likes to do, and those things work. The problem is in the execution. It's not that these players can't do anything else, or fit in any other system, but most of them are familiar with THIS system. Is changing things every yearly really going to help the team feel comfortable in the offense? Peyton Manning has had the same offensive coordinator since he came into the league. You think that hasn't helped the development of that offense? Parcells offense can work. Palmer is here to help things execute properly. Like you said, Parcells can't do everything, noone can. So, he needs people who he trusts, and who know exactly what needs to happen to have success.

I've never understood the "he runs a WCO" (or insert another strategy)philosophies that pervade message boards. Is it taboo to use something that works? Is _______________ incapable of figuring out how to run Julius Jones? Is Parcells incapable of stomaching a coach who develops QBs?

I don't believe I'm wrong in saying that Palmer has a respectable history in regards to developing QBs, such as Bledsoe, Brunell, he was even doing a good job with Carr until this year. You don't think he'll be helpful in Romo/Henson's development?

That's exaclty what I am talking about with regards to ego in the way. The my way or the highway stuff would be fine and dandy if it was already the best philosophy out there or at the very least was being so effective that it was approaching unstoppable. Is that what you're seeing with regards to our offense?

Sometimes new really is improved.

How is it egocentric to come to the conclusion that it's not the best idea in the world to reinvent the wheel every offseason? The best teams are the ones that execute the best, and that comes from continuity. The early 90s Cowboys were not flashy, or groundbreaking, or hell, even very interesting on offense. Every game you knew EXACTLY what they were going to do. But it couldn't be stopped. The execution was so flawless, that other teams were helpless against it. Is our offense approaching that level? Not yet. But it's not going to get any closer, by changing QBs, and philosophies every year. You gotta give these guys a chance to develop in a system they're totally comfortable in. Palmer, because of his familiarity, and similar offensive style, provides someone who can instruct the players just as well as Parcells - in terms of execution - but he has even more time to do so.

Improving a team's execution of a system already in place is much more effective than blowing things up and starting over. Look at the difference in the Commanders offense in the past two years. There were no earth-shattering changes. They ran essentially the same offense. The difference? Now those linemen were getting out where they needed to be on those WR screens. The linemen were opening the holes the they needed to for the RBs. The difference was execution, not a reinvention. A few wrinkles were added, and the difference was seen, after a year of continuity, and experience in the existing system.

In the NFL, new is seldom improved - immediately.

 

[Hostile]

Now that is not at all what I said, and you know it. Parcells has built the offense to do the things he likes to do, and those things work. The problem is in the execution. It's not that these players can't do anything else, or fit in any other system, but most of them are familiar with THIS system. Is changing things every yearly really going to help the team feel comfortable in the offense? Peyton Manning has had the same offensive coordinator since he came into the league. You think that hasn't helped the development of that offense? Parcells offense can work. Palmer is here to help things execute properly. Like you said, Parcells can't do everything, noone can. So, he needs people who he trusts, and who know exactly what needs to happen to have success.



I don't believe I'm wrong in saying that Palmer has a respectable history in regards to developing QBs, such as Bledsoe, Brunell, he was even doing a good job with Carr until this year. You don't think he'll be helpful in Romo/Henson's development?



How is it egocentric to come to the conclusion that it's not the best idea in the world to reinvent the wheel every offseason? The best teams are the ones that execute the best, and that comes from continuity. The early 90s Cowboys were not flashy, or groundbreaking, or hell, even very interesting on offense. Every game you knew EXACTLY what they were going to do. But it couldn't be stopped. The execution was so flawless, that other teams were helpless against it. Is our offense approaching that level? Not yet. But it's not going to get any closer, by changing QBs, and philosophies every year. You gotta give these guys a chance to develop in a system they're totally comfortable in. Palmer, because of his familiarity, and similar offensive style, provides someone who can instruct the players just as well as Parcells - in terms of execution - but he has even more time to do so.

Improving a team's execution of a system already in place is much more effective than blowing things up and starting over. Look at the difference in the Commanders offense in the past two years. There were no earth-shattering changes. They ran essentially the same offense. The difference? Now those linemen were getting out where they needed to be on those WR screens. The linemen were opening the holes the they needed to for the RBs. The difference was execution, not a reinvention. A few wrinkles were added, and the difference was seen, after a year of continuity, and experience in the existing system.

In the NFL, new is seldom improved - immediately.

Another real good post. Thank you. I appreciate good dialogue and this is top notch again.

I'm not sold on the system we are running. In fact I think it is a formula for failure if you want to know the truth. I'm not too interested in shoring it up. If Parcells and his minions can make me eat my words I'll gladly do it. I'll relish the bitterness.

Our offense is basically designed to keep us in games. It lacks imagination other than the occasional trick play. I can't name one play that we run that is executed so well that it would give opposing teams a sleepless night. Can it win games? Sure, I'm not saying it can't. Is it going to get us to the next level? I don't think so.

That's why I am a strong advocate of going hard at finishing the defense in this off season. In my opinion that is our only shot at glory at this juncture. To build a defense that no one can move the ball on. If we do that, then none of this stuff bothers me.

I just don't see the problem with an imaginative offense. Palmer is predictable and IMO boring. This hire lacked imagination and again IMO will not cause any sleepless nights for opposing teams. The same defensive game plans that worked last year will be employed. I wanted teams to have to adjust to us for a change.

You're good with the hire. That's fine. Nothing at all wrong with that. Not for you or anyone else who likes this move. I'm not good with this hire or this direction in lieu of the lack of success produced so far. I'll admit it, I think our personnel is much better suited to a wide open offense. Bledsoe, Witten, Glenn, Julius, even Keyshawn. Why do you think they were begging for this to happen even with the O-line woes?

I'm not saying Palmer isn't a good football guy. Hell, just a couple of weeks ago I praised Dick Vermeil for using former NFL Head Coaches on his first staff in St. Louis and Palmer has that resume' as well. My problem isn't necessarily with Palmer. It's with the perception that the direction we're already going is great. I simply don't agree with that. Getting a better kicker isn't going to solve the lack of offensive production.