I thought...

[Hostile]

no, just the most glaring

Is that why you have us waiting until the 3rd round to fix this glaring deficiency in your sig mock?

 

[Bob Sacamano]

Is that why you have us waiting until the 3rd round to fix this glaring deficiency in your sig mock?

nope, have us signing Kevin Barry, and continuity, as well as the maturation of Al Johnson and Rivera getting back to 100%, as well as the return of Flozell

 

[Hostile]

nope, have us signing Kevin Barry, and continuity, as well as the maturation of Al Johnson and Rivera getting back to 100%, as well as the return of Flozell

Better coaching couldn't help that huh?

Hmm.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

Better coaching couldn't help that huh?

Hmm.

it couldn't hurt

 

[Bob Sacamano]

well Hos, I'm off

I'll be back to school you later though

 

[Hostile]

well Hos, I'm off

I'll be back to school you later though

I couldn't have said it any better.

:wink2:

 

[Hostile]

it couldn't hurt

Then you agree with me. Thanks for the lesson.

 

[wileedog]

This is why I always say Stats don't tell the whole story. How many runs left? How many right? How many sweeps? How many from I formation? How many slants? How many posts? How many crosses?

Number of plays run doesn't have anything to do with similarity of scheme.

I fail to see how running more sweeps vs. running more draws vs. running more deep outs necessarily indicates that one team uses the pass to set up the run or vice versa.

I agree simply taking these numbers I posted in a vacuum don't prove anything, but watching KC its obvious they were a very balanced team who relied heavily on Larry Johnson this year to set up the pass, specifically because outside of Gonzalez they are not loaded with receiving threats.

If it did, wouldn't these numbers indicate that my preference of Al Saunders to any other candidate had valid reasoning? I was led to believe earlier in this thread that he would be a far cry from where we are trying to go. I politely disagree. I think that is exactly where we need to go.

Actually I've said several times of all of the OC headliners being talked about, Saunders was the most palatable in terms of being able to mesh with Parcells. Martz or Sherman were a pipe dream.

However Saunders is a friend of Gibbs who has coached with him before and their philosophies mesh even better. Throw in a wad of money from Danny boy and you have a severe uphill battle trying to bring him in here.

Let's look at offensive scoring between the 2 teams. 403 for KC and 325 for Dallas. What does that indicate to you taking into consideration your contention of 1 run play and 2 pass plays difference?

That KC has much more talent on offense.

Here's what it says to me. They were more explosive and thus more effective. What contributes to that? Personnel and scheme. They have the personnel advantage, especially at OL. Without looking it up, name me all 5 of KC's starting OL. Not exactly legenday names at 3 of the 5 positions, IMO. They have a clearly superior scheme. See my comments on Sparano's scheme earlier.

No, but clearly they have experience and time together to be considered far far better than our one washed up HOFer, a UFA backup, a 2nd year C, a RG with a back problem and a 6th round rookie.

Sparano's scheme could be pure genius and I wouldn't expect much better results.

Plus their QB is better, their RB is better, their TE is marginally better. Our WRs are better overall, but big whoop when Bledsoe barely has time to take the snap.

The point is they can have virtually identical pass and run plays, but please don't tell me we were anywhere near as effective. You can't lay all of that 78 point discrepency at the feet of the OL and the Kicker.

78 points is 5 points per game. I absolutely can lay that at the feet of just the Oline and the kicker. Because our Oline and kicker really were that bad, and KC's is that good.

When your RB is going for 5.2 yards a pop and you have a threat like Tony Gonzales with Trent Green throwing the ball with all the time in the world to do so, my 4 year old could call effecive plays by throwing darts at a playchart.

When your QB is getting nailed on handoff and other team is running back the ensuing fumble for a TD, the whole exercise gets a little harder.

FYI, I do not see KC as a pass to set up the run team with Larry Johnson, I did when Vermeil first got there and used Priest as he did Faulk in KC. The point is they were adaptable.

Hey I love Vermeil. He's one of the few coaches I would take over Parcells, precisely because of that versatility.

But Vermeil never did get that whole defense thing down - even the Rams D was a slightly above average unit that got to play with the lead all the time. Just like I would never call Parcells an offensive guru either. But they each bring their strengths - and their weaknesses - to the table.

 

[trueblue1687]

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.
​

In my view, nobody really knows what commodity they are going to get when a coaching position moves from team to team. Take Norv Turner for instance: he was a great OC w/ Dallas, but was VERY lukewarm with Washington and Oakland...enough so that he was fired. Saunders was very good with KC, but who's to say waht he'll be able to do now?? Can't make wholesale staements that someone will or won't be any good before they actually try.
As far as Jerry bringing the team down from the "Pinnacle", remember that he also took it there! I'm not his biggest fan, and he is an egotist...as probably all owner are to varying degrees. However, Jerry was the one who actually bought the team, hired Johnson, signed the checks, and so on. There are no more dynasties...at least not for very long. Dallas was more of a dynasty under Landry than since Jones bought the team. Some will disagree withthat point, but the facts are pretty clear. Also, Parcells seems to be the total opposite of what you precieve his ego to be. A players reputation has little to do with his desire to win. See Ellis and Glover for examples. Or JJones, etc. I can't equate assistant coaching moves with an enlarged ego. Most of his players / ex- players say that Parcells is interested in one thing: winning.

 

[Hostile]

In my view, nobody really knows what commodity they are going to get when a coaching position moves from team to team. Take Norv Turner for instance: he was a great OC w/ Dallas, but was VERY lukewarm with Washington and Oakland...enough so that he was fired. Saunders was very good with KC, but who's to say waht he'll be able to do now?? Can't make wholesale staements that someone will or won't be any good before they actually try.

I am going to disagree with you. Being an OC is not the same as being the Head Coach. You're talking apples and oranges.

As far as Jerry bringing the team down from the "Pinnacle", remember that he also took it there! I'm not his biggest fan, and he is an egotist...as probably all owner are to varying degrees. However, Jerry was the one who actually bought the team, hired Johnson, signed the checks, and so on.

Why do I have to acknowledge this to say what I did? Okay, Jerry did all that. Thank you Jerry.

He also said "any of 500 guys could be Head Coach of the Cowboys" and proceeded to try and prove it. He hired blue light special coaches for a flagship franchise and fandom who deserved better. That's what I meant and I stand by it.

There are no more dynasties...at least not for very long. Dallas was more of a dynasty under Landry than since Jones bought the team. Some will disagree withthat point, but the facts are pretty clear.

I apologize but I'm unsure what dynasties have to do with what I've been debating.

Also, Parcells seems to be the total opposite of what you precieve his ego to be. A players reputation has little to do with his desire to win. See Ellis and Glover for examples. Or JJones, etc. I can't equate assistant coaching moves with an enlarged ego. Most of his players / ex- players say that Parcells is interested in one thing: winning.

I totally disagree with this. 100% in fact. Why was Emmitt Smith released and Hambrick retained? Because Emmitt was the face of the Cowboys. He said unequivocably that he "doesn't want superstar players." Guess what? Superstar players can help you win. He wants to be the central figure and face of the Cowboys.

I like the man, but I draw the line at his input being the single most important thing to the success of this team and I should bow and scrape to the almighty Tuna.

 

[Hostile]

I fail to see how running more sweeps vs. running more draws vs. running more deep outs necessarily indicates that one team uses the pass to set up the run or vice versa.

I agree simply taking these numbers I posted in a vacuum don't prove anything, but watching KC its obvious they were a very balanced team who relied heavily on Larry Johnson this year to set up the pass, specifically because outside of Gonzalez they are not loaded with receiving threats.



Actually I've said several times of all of the OC headliners being talked about, Saunders was the most palatable in terms of being able to mesh with Parcells. Martz or Sherman were a pipe dream.

However Saunders is a friend of Gibbs who has coached with him before and their philosophies mesh even better. Throw in a wad of money from Danny boy and you have a severe uphill battle trying to bring him in here.



That KC has much more talent on offense.


No, but clearly they have experience and time together to be considered far far better than our one washed up HOFer, a UFA backup, a 2nd year C, a RG with a back problem and a 6th round rookie.

Sparano's scheme could be pure genius and I wouldn't expect much better results.

Plus their QB is better, their RB is better, their TE is marginally better. Our WRs are better overall, but big whoop when Bledsoe barely has time to take the snap.


78 points is 5 points per game. I absolutely can lay that at the feet of just the Oline and the kicker. Because our Oline and kicker really were that bad, and KC's is that good.

When your RB is going for 5.2 yards a pop and you have a threat like Tony Gonzales with Trent Green throwing the ball with all the time in the world to do so, my 4 year old could call effecive plays by throwing darts at a playchart.

When your QB is getting nailed on handoff and other team is running back the ensuing fumble for a TD, the whole exercise gets a little harder.


Hey I love Vermeil. He's one of the few coaches I would take over Parcells, precisely because of that versatility.

But Vermeil never did get that whole defense thing down - even the Rams D was a slightly above average unit that got to play with the lead all the time. Just like I would never call Parcells an offensive guru either. But they each bring their strengths - and their weaknesses - to the table.

Fun debate.

I'm going to propose something and bring this back to my original post that sparked this.

The Coach I wanted was Saunders. Pretty well documented.

I believe NFL fans are fairly knowledgable for the most part. I will bet you that if you conduct an informal poll of fans of all teams that this is what you'd discover.

Commanders fans are for the most part ecstatic with landing Saunders.

Chiefs fans are upset he's leaving.

Fans of other teams appluad the hire with the exception possibly being the salary he got which will adversely affect the whole elague eventually.

Texans fans are ecstatic Palmer is gone.

Dallas fans are mixed, with those who are happy about it likely to be happy no matter who was hired.

Fans of other teams for the most part aren't threatened or impressed that we've added Palmer to the staff. Some are probably even amused.

Would you agree?

This is why I said it was inevitable that the Kool Aid would be made from bath water.

I don't like the hire, but I'll root for him to make a believer out of me.

 

[trueblue1687]

I am going to disagree with you. Being an OC is not the same as being the Head Coach. You're talking apples and oranges.

Not really apples and oranges. Assistants become HCs because of their ability to coach. Owners hire them to make the BEST use of what talent the team has. Obviously the jobs are different in what they entail, but the objective is essentially the same: to win football games. If the two positions were unrelated, then why would ANY owner give a look to an OC?? They would only look at guys who were Head Coaches - whether in pros or college. They believe success as an OC equates to success as a HC, so therefore they have a definite relationship.

Why do I have to acknowledge this to say what I did? Okay, Jerry did all that. Thank you Jerry.

I give up, you tell me. Your comment basically said that Jones was respnsible for the demise of the Cowboys thru his arrogance. True enough, he is arrogant, but to be fair, he WAS responsible for those teams of the 90's we enjoyed.

He also said "any of 500 guys could be Head Coach of the Cowboys" and proceeded to try and prove it. He hired blue light special coaches for a flagship franchise and fandom who deserved better. That's what I meant and I stand by it. True, he did hire some winners like Gailey, Switzer (although his name is beside a SB win). Flagship? We probably think so, but is that reality...probably not, at least not anymore. I'm not sure deserve really factors in to an owners decision (see Art Modell, Al Davis, etc...you get the point). It would be nice if it did, but it's really about egos and money.

I apologize but I'm unsure what dynasties have to do with what I've been debating. Your post seems to have an aire that there is disappointment that the Cowboys haven't been to the SB every year or at leat most years. The cmments about coaching hires, personnel moves seems to read theat you expect the Cowboys to remain successful EVERY year. It just doesn't happen anymore - that's where this comment comes in to your debate.

I totally disagree with this. 100% in fact. Why was Emmitt Smith released and Hambrick retained? Because Emmitt was the face of the Cowboys. He said unequivocably that he "doesn't want superstar players." Guess what? Superstar players can help you win. He wants to be the central figure and face of the Cowboys. I totally disagree with you, 100% in fact. Emmitt was released because he was a fading talent. PERIOD. Who cares if he was "the face of the Cowboys"??? What does THAT have to do with Parcells being a team player (putting the TEAM before me)?? You say that you played college ball...so did I for 4 years. Keep a straight face and name a player who started (only thing equivilent in College) because he was a fan favorite. I thought you wanted the team put before the individual? Now, I really don't know what Parcells wants and I know that you're speculating ALOT here, but it is pretty clear he wants to win. Emmitt should have retired, but became infatuated with the rushing record (solidifying) and believing he was immortal. He eeked out a 1000 yard season with the cards and was essentially cut by one of the worst teams in the league a year later...it was past time to go. He was one of the greatest, but should have went out on top. Add to that Smith's salary (astronomical and was payed for a few years after he left) as opposed to Hambricks played a big part in his departure as well. We had been stretching contracts fro a few years and were not in real good cap shape to do it again with Smith. Hambrick was a dork for sure and there could have been several better backs, but he was retained because when he did spell Smith, he ran better. All you have to do is look at his average before he was a starter and compare with Smith as the starter - it was better. When he (Hambrick) started, he looked completely different.

I like the man, but I draw the line at his input being the single most important thing to the success of this team and I should bow and scrape to the almighty Tuna.

I agree. The thing is, I really don't understand where you get this idea. He has an ego like every other HC, but to listen to his past and present players...he simply wants to win, however possible. There's a reason that players like him...I'm not exactly sure what it is, but to have a REAL egotist like Keyshawn Johnson say he was the best coach he's ever palyed for means something. Same thing with Terry Glenn who supposedly was on his *hit list in NE. If he had the attitude that you seem to believe he does, I can't see anyone playing for him a second time, but they do...over and over again. Even Palmer will coach with him again contrary to the "Palmer was hired by New Orleans" the-sky-is-falling threads that were here a few days ago. But what do you know...he actually took the job with Dallas afterall.:laugh2:

 

[Concord]

I'm not on that bandwagon either, unless it's a FA bandwagon. I've got a serious man-crush on Lecharles Bentley, proven player, still young, but I doubt it will happen.

"I'll die before I let you fail."

Anyone remember that? Pettiti isn't going anywhere. I'm fully on addressing LB in the draft, finish this defense, let that be our hallmark.

Parcells is full of these stupid little gems...

I want a Bus driver...Don't eat the cheese...I'll die before I let you fail...uke:

I'm sure I haven't even heard half of them

Counting on Pettiti again is bad.

I hope he can turn things around...But I'm highly skeptical

 

[MinnesotaCowboy]

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

Are you sure they actually took baths?

 

[Hostile]

I had to get that kill my eyes red out to answer this.

Not really apples and oranges. Assistants become HCs because of their ability to coach. Owners hire them to make the BEST use of what talent the team has. Obviously the jobs are different in what they entail, but the objective is essentially the same: to win football games. If the two positions were unrelated, then why would ANY owner give a look to an OC?? They would only look at guys who were Head Coaches - whether in pros or college. They believe success as an OC equates to success as a HC, so therefore they have a definite relationship.

I simply do not buy this at all. OCs being hired as Head Coaches doesn't have thing one to do with it. There is simply a lot more pressure on a Head Coach than there ever will be on an Offensive Coordinator. It is not the same thing.

Your comment basically said that Jones was respnsible for the demise of the Cowboys thru his arrogance. True enough, he is arrogant, but to be fair, he WAS responsible for those teams of the 90's we enjoyed.

I have no idea what this has to do with it. Jerry let his ego get in the way of what would have been the storied dynasty of all time. Yeah he took the risks to build it. That means he's exempt? Not in my book. Ego took the team down. Period.

True, he did hire some winners like Gailey, Switzer (although his name is beside a SB win). Flagship? We probably think so, but is that reality...probably not, at least not anymore. I'm not sure deserve really factors in to an owners decision (see Art Modell, Al Davis, etc...you get the point). It would be nice if it did, but it's really about egos and money.

Ask the networks who televise the games who the flagship franchise is. Nuff said.

Your post seems to have an aire that there is disappointment that the Cowboys haven't been to the SB every year or at leat most years. The cmments about coaching hires, personnel moves seems to read theat you expect the Cowboys to remain successful EVERY year. It just doesn't happen anymore - that's where this comment comes in to your debate.

I absolutely am guilty of this. No one will ever accuse me of being a lovable loser. I hate losing. There is not one thing about it that I appreciate. Nothing about it is acceptable. The very thought of this is alien to me.

I totally disagree with you, 100% in fact. Emmitt was released because he was a fading talent. PERIOD. Who cares if he was "the face of the Cowboys"???

Apparently Mr. Bill Parcells. Why else would he say he wanted to be the face of the Cowboys? Yeah, Emmitt was fading and on his worst day was a better RB than Troy Hambrick ever dreamed of being.

What does THAT have to do with Parcells being a team player (putting the TEAM before me)?? You say that you played college ball...so did I for 4 years. Keep a straight face and name a player who started (only thing equivilent in College) because he was a fan favorite.

I thought you wanted the team put before the individual?

I said someone started because he was a fan favorite?

Okay. I guess.

My comment about team first had to do with the Coach, not a player. You're jumping all over the place looking for a rabbit hole that is right at your feet.

Now, I really don't know what Parcells wants and I know that you're speculating ALOT here, but it is pretty clear he wants to win.

I never once said he doesn't want to win. Not in my lifetime. Completely unrelated to anything in the discussion.

Emmitt should have retired, but became infatuated with the rushing record (solidifying) and believing he was immortal. He eeked out a 1000 yard season with the cards and was essentially cut by one of the worst teams in the league a year later...it was past time to go. He was one of the greatest, but should have went out on top.

Well, while this has nothing to do with the discussion it is so full of inaccuracies that I just wanted to point them out.

1. Emmitt was not released by the Cardinals, he retired.

2. He never rushed for 1000 yards in a season for them.

3. He was already Immortal. That comes with being a sure fire Hall of Famer. When they create a bust in your honor, you're immortal.

I fault no player for wanting to play.

Add to that Smith's salary (astronomical and was payed for a few years after he left) as opposed to Hambricks played a big part in his departure as well. We had been stretching contracts fro a few years and were not in real good cap shape to do it again with Smith. Hambrick was a dork for sure and there could have been several better backs, but he was retained because when he did spell Smith, he ran better. All you have to do is look at his average before he was a starter and compare with Smith as the starter - it was better. When he (Hambrick) started, he looked completely different.

Still don't know what any of this has to do with the discussion at hand, but I'll simply say yes to the salary structure and cap hit. Good point, Blah, blah, blah.

I agree. The thing is, I really don't understand where you get this idea.

You agree, and at the same time don't know where I get the idea?

Maybe it is the way he conducts his Press Conferences. maybe it is because for 20 plus years now I've watched the man. I have no problem with ego, until it gets in the way of what is good for the team. In my opinion that is what we have here. You are not required to agree, but that is exactly what I think at this time.

He has an ego like every other HC, but to listen to his past and present players...he simply wants to win, however possible. There's a reason that players like him...I'm not exactly sure what it is, but to have a REAL egotist like Keyshawn Johnson say he was the best coach he's ever palyed for means something.

Same thing with Terry Glenn who supposedly was on his *hit list in NE. If he had the attitude that you seem to believe he does, I can't see anyone playing for him a second time, but they do...over and over again.

It doesn't mean anything to me. There were Philly players who loved playing for Rich Kotite. There were Giants players who loved playing for Ray Handley. We had guys who loved playing for Dave Campo. There's a lot of love out there.

Even Palmer will coach with him again contrary to the "Palmer was hired by New Orleans" the-sky-is-falling threads that were here a few days ago. But what do you know...he actually took the job with Dallas afterall.

We had sky is falling threads because Chris freaking Palmer was rumored to New Orleans? I missed them. Thank heavens. I have a strong stomach but that would be too much.

 

[Hostile]

Are you sure they actually took baths?

You calling someone the great unwashed?

:wink2:

 

[Nors]

What do sand blasted mean?