Jean-Jacques Taylor: Henson Project Could Be Sacked

[silverbear]

i think some people just learned a phrase and can't wait to use it regardless if it applies.

Kinda like the way "speaking truth to power" has come in vogue in political circles...

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

and this is what i mean. when i was in theater - i could do fine in rehearsals, but when the lights went on and people were there, it's a different game. you can and will react differently. you can see talent in rehearsal but you'll see a "gift" when it's for real in some.

i'm not saying henson or romo have "the gift" - i'm just saying when you have a chance to get them "real" playing time - it can tell you more than 50 1/3 speed practices when you're not allowed to hit anyone on the field.

most will be the same. some will fall and some will step it up. no way of knowing what you got till you play it.

period.

I think this is true. When Favre was with the Falcons, they said he wasn't very impressive in practice. They traded him and even in Green Bay, they said the same thing early on. Delhomme was the same way. Said he was unimpressive in practice. Sonny Jerguson was the same. It happens.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

LOL... c'mon, Alexander, when he says Parcells is not "infowlable", he CLEARLY means he's not chicken...

That was one of the more enjoyable mis-spellings I've seen in a long time...

I am a terrible speller, so I will make my apoligy and leave it at that. On occasion, I can laugh at myself right along with the rest of the world.

 

[iceberg]

Well good, I'm glad we've gotten to the useless unrelated stories, so I'll share mine....

My dogs race straight line, 220 feet. I have my own track at home, and practice on occasion. So in my practices, I have a dog, that no matter how hard she tries, cannot finish better than 3rd out of 6.

So now I go to the official trial events, and don't enter the dog because I know her limits. Who is to tell me I should enter that dog in the official event so THEY can see how she does, when I already know she is not ready to perform at peak level?

OK, now we've had high school teammate story, theatre story, dog story....next?

good to know you're still here to tell me i'm wrong jack - not the same w/o ya!!!

 

[iceberg]

I think this is true. When Favre was with the Falcons, they said he wasn't very impressive in practice. They traded him and even in Green Bay, they said the same thing early on. Delhomme was the same way. Said he was unimpressive in practice. Sonny Jerguson was the same. It happens.

<looking around for jr to dispute this>

 

[Alexander]

The ones that are not going to get you any further in a race for a playoff spot. They are meaningless. It is a perfect opportunity to see what you have. At that point, you should be building for the following year.

No owner, GM or head coach would share this opinion. Well, some unemployed ones might. Professionals don't throw games. Nor do they put themselves in positions where they don't give themselves at least a fighting chance to win if they can help it.

If your a backup QB, you have to be able to come in cold. That's the deal. Henson came in and played on Thanksgiving weekend with no preperation. Is that any more or less fair?

He had half a week of prep and he was responding because of injury. That's not "no preparation".

Totally different circumstance that the Rams game last year, in which we didn't know was meaningless until minutes before kickoff. If that game was even close to being for a playoff spot, you have to give the repetitions to the starter. All of them.

And if you give Romo the start, how fair is it if he had no preparation at all? And what good would that do for your evaluation? If anything it puts the player in a bad position and defeats the purpose. If playing him late is the complaint, that's more valid. But again, there wasn't much to gain, but we also wanted the chance for ten wins and that was what Parcells told them before the game. Given the player's listless performance out there, Romo would have been killed and completely shellshocked. Parcells did the right thing.

That theory, IMO, does not hold water.

Of course it doesn't. To a fan. An NFL head coach that views regular season games, no matter the record, as evaluation tools are not winning coaches in this league for long. If we had a playoff spot wrapped up, that's "meaningless".

 

[RCowboyFan]

I'm pretty sure Chicago was run-blitzing and making Henson beat us w/ his arm, of course he couldn't



exactly, why do you think Buffalo jettisoned Bledsoe and started Losman? because of what you just said, but I think coaches charting their players in practice is just as effective as watching them play in 2 or 3 games

Chicago was all out blitzing. Run-Pass, it didn't matter.

And you are proving my point with your post, on the second paragraph. I am not sure what point you are trying make with that second statement? Or you are contradicting yourself? Look, you cannot say, coaches know by looking at practices when there are numerous examples that is not exactly true.

I guess you can only say, it works in some instances and it doesn't in some. So practices aren't going to exactly gauge a players capability. So there is no perfect model to developing QBs, but it all comes down to, how they do when they get playing time in real games. Thats the bottom line. So far we know nothing of the QB. Jake Delhomme even played in his second or first year I think. And he won his first start too, against Cowboys. Yet, New Orleans still went with or traded for Aaron Brooks.

I am not saying play the QBs now so that we know either. All I am saying is, BP can't be 100% sure on how Romo or Henson will do in live game situations. He said so himself. He might have better idea than any of us, but its still up in the air. Thats why he obviously clings to his old Qbs.

 

[RCowboyFan]

Well, there ARE valid criticisms of his play over there, and we don't know what exactly it was that Parcells was looking for when the Boys sent Drew over to Europe...

I just found it curious that he basically said he didn't see what he wanted to see, just days after being quoted saying he hadn't watched much of the play over there... yeah, I was confused by Parcells' recent remarks, and am inclined to believe they were part of his notorious mind games, an effort to see how Drew reacts to those words...

No, thats wrong. Here is the recap of his interview, where he said he saw all games except one. And thats what I remember him saying.

http://dallascowboyszone.com/forums/showpost.php?p=859951&postcount=1

But its interesting, in one month, i.e. after couple more games, Parcells decides, that he sees improvement to, he needed to see more? What changed or didn't Drew in those 2-3 games to change his mind? His injury or he didn't make it to World Bowl?

 

[Alexander]

No, thats wrong. Here is the recap of his interview, where he said he saw all games except one. And thats what I remember him saying.

http://dallascowboyszone.com/forums/showpost.php?p=859951&postcount=1

But its interesting, in one month, i.e. after couple more games, Parcells decides, that he sees improvement to, he needed to see more? What changed or didn't Drew in those 2-3 games to change his mind? His injury or he didn't make it to World Bowl?

Hmm.

"Wanting to see more".

That could mean he would have liked the opportunity to see how he could do uninjured and with the same WR corps he was doing so well with in his first few games.

Why does this have to be viewed as a negative statement about Henson in particular?

 

[RCowboyFan]

Hmm.

"Wanting to see more".

That could mean he would have liked the opportunity to see how he could do uninjured and with the same WR corps he was doing so well with in his first few games.

Why does this have to be viewed as a negative statement about Henson in particular?

Good question. I guess only BP knows whey he threw that statement out. We all love to speculate, obviously, ones neutral, probably guys like you, go either way with that.

And minority few, already decided, Henson is going be cut including some in Media. Now I am not saying it might not happen, it just doesn't add for me.

Interesting thing, is, BP's statement about Romo is also a big question mark as in, he wasn't so sure about him either, which obviously why he said, he wanted to give him more time in pre-season to see what he has got.

Mick's article did a very good analysis of the situation. Seems like from his article, Romo is indeed on better footing right now. But at the same time, no one seem certain about who will be backup QB right now.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

No owner, GM or head coach would share this opinion. Well, some unemployed ones might. Professionals don't throw games. Nor do they put themselves in positions where they don't give themselves at least a fighting chance to win if they can help it.



He had half a week of prep and he was responding because of injury. That's not "no preparation".

Totally different circumstance that the Rams game last year, in which we didn't know was meaningless until minutes before kickoff. If that game was even close to being for a playoff spot, you have to give the repetitions to the starter. All of them.

And if you give Romo the start, how fair is it if he had no preparation at all? And what good would that do for your evaluation? If anything it puts the player in a bad position and defeats the purpose. If playing him late is the complaint, that's more valid. But again, there wasn't much to gain, but we also wanted the chance for ten wins and that was what Parcells told them before the game. Given the player's listless performance out there, Romo would have been killed and completely shellshocked. Parcells did the right thing.



Of course it doesn't. To a fan. An NFL head coach that views regular season games, no matter the record, as evaluation tools are not winning coaches in this league for long. If we had a playoff spot wrapped up, that's "meaningless".

I believe you asked, "What games are meaningless?" I answered you, in kind. The rest of this tripe is conclusion and speculation on your behalf. However, I would comment on some of it.

GMs and Head coaches play young players all the time in situations where they don't feel as if the game is still realistically able to influence a playoff birth. The examples of this are too numerous to go into. If you force me to do it, I will but even you must know that this is a regular occurance in the NFL. Look no further then the Seattle/GB game last year. Holmgren sat Hasselbeck and played Seneca Wallace for the experience. It does happen all the time. Perhaps you should send a note to Holmgren and explain to him that he should be in fear of his job because of the moves made in the last game of the season against GB.

The definition of a back up QB is to be ready to play at any moment. Back up QBs anywhere in the league normally don't get snaps in practice. That's part of the job. To say that Romo wasn't prepared is rediculouse. His job is to be prepared under any circumstances. Plainly put, your full of crap on that one. It would not have made one bit of difference and probably could only have helped. Besides, who's to say that the backup had to start? Why is it out of the question to play him in the second half or even in the 4th quarter? I'm almost affraid you'll try to answer this with your usual knowledgable answers.

Henson received practically no practice other then walk through on the Thanksgiving day game. We played a Monday night game, followed by a day of travel, recoop and walk through. The following Thursday was game day. Your serious lack of acknowledgment on this is telling. A back up gets more preperation then what was received by Henson on any normal week of practice. There really is no question of it. At a minimum, the back up is in the meetings so they know what the game plan is for any given team on game day.

 

[Alexander]

I believe you asked, "What games are meaningless?" I answered you, in kind. The rest of this tripe is conclusion and speculation on your behalf.

Exhibition games are meaningless. And I really wish you could talk to some NFL execs. I don't think many worth much would agree on your assessment of "worthless games". But carry on.

Look no further then the Seattle/GB game last year. Holmgren sat Hasselbeck and played Seneca Wallace for the experience. It does happen all the time. Perhaps you should send a note to Holmgren and explain to him that he should be in fear of his job because of the moves made in the last game of the season against GB.

I would but if you took the time to read what I said before, when you have a playoff spot clinched, that's worthless. Nice try, but you failed miserably.

Henson received practically no practice other then walk through on the Thanksgiving day game.

:laugh2:

Now who is speculating? Have anything that confirms that Parcells only gave him a walk through?

 

[wileedog]

Henson received practically no practice other then walk through on the Thanksgiving day game. We played a Monday night game, followed by a day of travel, recoop and walk through. The following Thursday was game day. Your serious lack of acknowledgment on this is telling. A back up gets more preperation then what was received by Henson on any normal week of practice. There really is no question of it. At a minimum, the back up is in the meetings so they know what the game plan is for any given team on game day.

And Henson was largely terrible and pulled at halftime.

What exactly did we learn about Henson playing with no prep time?

Exactly nothing.

Meanwhile it started a firestorm of criticsism and some journalists were already declaring out loud the Henson experiement was over.

How does this further your point?

 

[jackrussell]

<looking around for jr to dispute this>

Look all you like, I'm not here 24/7 brother.

So someone comes along and shares something that fits your agenda, therefore, you are correct? But then someone else comes along and gives an opposite example, and that's wrong. Yeah, I'm following ya here.

You have this hard on for Parcells cuz he didn't play Henson a satisfactory amount in games you have deemed meaningless. Could he have played him? Sure. Did he? No. Big deal. Just to show you that we have a 3rd string QB? Please. Perhaps all personel decisions should be show cased for your approval.

Usually this all works out on it's own. Rare it is that a starting QB, especially those of the age we have, go 16 games. I'm surprised in 2 seasons a backup hasn't been pressed into action, especially since the ones we have are statues, hold the ball too long, and perhaps the worse thing of all, one of Parcell's boys.

 

[iceberg]

Look all you like, I'm not here 24/7 brother.

So someone comes along and shares something that fits your agenda, therefore, you are correct? But then someone else comes along and gives an opposite example, and that's wrong. Yeah, I'm following ya here.

You have this hard on for Parcells cuz he didn't play Henson a satisfactory amount in games you have deemed meaningless. Could he have played him? Sure. Did he? No. Big deal. Just to show you that we have a 3rd string QB? Please. Perhaps all personel decisions should be show cased for your approval.

Usually this all works out on it's own. Rare it is that a starting QB, especially those of the age we have, go 16 games. I'm surprised in 2 seasons a backup hasn't been pressed into action, especially since the ones we have are statues, hold the ball too long, and perhaps the worse thing of all, one of Parcell's boys.

actually, JR - all i want and would hope for is some acknowledgement that i could be right that actual game time is valuable to the QB and to help evaluate what the player can do.

yet every time i say that you're there to tell me i'm wrong as if there is *only* right or wrong and i'm just stupid about this. at least that's how it's coming across - 'berg bad, 'berg, stupid. whole idea stupid... nowhere do you ever even say "yea, it "could" help even if only a little. i understand you may disagree but that alone doens't make you right and me wrong. well, not to me anyway but to you i sure seem to be wrong.

also - if you're gonna follow me around and tell me how wrong i am, please also understand i don't care if henson OR romo got that time - i just view it as wasted time, NOT a henson apology.

people confuse that a lot it seems.

as for "showcasing for my approval" - why do you feel that's what i'm after? i've said time and again *I* just feel that time would have been better spent on qb evaluation than trying to win 7 vs. 8 games that season. if you disagree fine but i recall you've gotten upset with me before when i'd take such a hard stance on *your* views. now when i'm trying to find that middle ground, it just doesn't seem to be there in return. you seem hellbent on trying to make me look foolish for my own views. isn't that what got you upset w/*me* awhile back?

 

[superpunk]

I honestly can't believe this thread has gone thi long, without....

Including the majestik m&#248;&#248;se

A M&#248;&#248;se once bit my sister...

No realli! She was Karving her initials on the m&#248;&#248;se
with the sharpened end of an interspace t&#248;&#248;thbrush given
her by Svenge - her brother-in-law - an Oslo dentist and
star of many Norwegian m&#248;vies: "The H&#248;t Hands of an Oslo
Dentist", "Fillings of Passion", "The Huge M&#248;lars of Horst
Nordfink"...

We apologise for the fault in the subtitles. Those responsible have
been sacked.

Mynd you, m&#248;&#248;se bites Kan be pretty nasti...

We apologise again for the fault in the subtitles. Those
responsible for sacking the people who have just been sacked
have been sacked.

M&#248;&#248;se trained by YUTTE HERMSGERV&#216;RDENBR&#216;TB&#216;RDA

Special M&#248;&#248;se Effects OLAF PROT
M&#248;&#248;se Costumes SIGGI CHURCHILL

M&#248;&#248;se Choreographed by HORST PROT III
Miss Taylor's M&#248;&#248;ses by HENGST DOUGLAS-HOME
M&#248;&#248;se trained to mix concrete and sign
com plicated insurance forms by JURGEN WIGG

M&#248;&#248;ses' noses wiped by BJ&#216;RN IRKEST&#216;M-SLATER WALKER
Large m&#248;&#248;se on the left hand side of the screen
in the third scene from the end, given a thorough
grounding in Latin, French and "O" Level
Geography by BO BENN
Suggestive poses for the M&#248;&#248;se suggested by VIC ROTTER
Antler-care by LIV THATCHER

The directors of the firm hired to continue the credits after the other
people had been sacked, wish it to be known that they have just been
sacked.
The credits have been completed in an entirely different style at
great expense and at the last minute.

 

[iceberg]

I honestly can't believe this thread has gone thi long, without....

now look, i'll have your leg!!!

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Exhibition games are meaningless. And I really wish you could talk to some NFL execs. I don't think many worth much would agree on your assessment of "worthless games". But carry on.



I would but if you took the time to read what I said before, when you have a playoff spot clinched, that's worthless. Nice try, but you failed miserably.



:laugh2:

Now who is speculating? Have anything that confirms that Parcells only gave him a walk through?

I am not saying for one moment any game is worthless. Typically, this is another attempt by you to change things up. I said, exactly, the following, "The ones that are not going to get you any further in a race for a playoff spot. They are meaningless. It is a perfect opportunity to see what you have. At that point, you should be building for the following year". Meaningless and worthless are two different word, spelled two different ways, meaning two entirely different things. Perhaps while you are busy conversing with all of your various NFL Exec type contacts, you can discuss the differences in those two words and then we can pick this up where you've left it. Deal?

I suppose your asking me then to provide info on instances when losing teams played young players instead of vets? OK, I can do that to. Honestly, your sad. San Fran played Alex Smith last year to get experience late in the season. They were not in playoff contention. Cleveland played Charlie Frye late in the year, in order to get him experience. They were not in contention. Rex Grossman played very late in the season for Chicago. They did the same thing with him in 03 and again in 04. There are lots of examples of coaches trying to get playing time in for young players when the opportunity presents itself and I'm only listing QBs here. Says nothing of other position players.

I suppose I could insert a laugh or smile or what ever but to what end? It is clear to me that you are not willing to accept truth, even when it smacks you square between the eyes if it doesn't support your position.

What's the point?

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

And Henson was largely terrible and pulled at halftime.

What exactly did we learn about Henson playing with no prep time?

Exactly nothing.

Meanwhile it started a firestorm of criticsism and some journalists were already declaring out loud the Henson experiement was over.

How does this further your point?

Read the thread.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

:laugh2:

Now who is speculating? Have anything that confirms that Parcells only gave him a walk through?

OK Al, your right. He got so much work in, he was practically overworked by the time the game rolled around. That's why he played so poorly.

Doesn't change the fact that Backup QBs are supposed to be ready to play without much prep at all. Go ahead and just tell me how the backup can't play unless they get a complete weeks worth of practice in. Tell me how it's in the rule book. Get a clue, that's the way it is for a backup QB.