Jean-Jacques Taylor: Henson Project Could Be Sacked

[ABQCOWBOY]

uh, developing them, using the phrase, "I don't want to throw him to the wolves", pretty much sums up the whole situation



I'm not saying settle for an average QB, even though nowadays you don't have to be really special to lead a team, like Ben Roth, he's a good QB, but he's not special, and he's certainly no Aikman or Staubach, but good enough to build a perennial contender around, expecting to find another Aikman is setting yourself up for some serious disappointment, again, a player like that comes around only so often, and usually are only available within the top 3, 5, picks of the draft, and like Alexander noted, the quality for QBs has been really down for a really long time, and more busts than franchise QBs have come around

I don't know that I would agree with your assesment of Ben Roath. I do think he's a special QB. He's certainly had better success then either Aikman or Roger in his first few seasons. Obviously, there are reasons for this he's still managed to produce at the very highest levels. Who knows, he may end up being better. As far as busts at the QB position, I don't think it's any worse then it's ever been in the FA era. I think it's too early to evaluate the 2005 class, a class that I did not think was very strong at the position to begin with, but if you look at 2004 and back, it' seems kinda status quo.

If you look at 2004, Manning, Rivers, Roethlisberger and Losman were the top 4 QBs taken, with Schaub the 5th. At this point, all 4 QBs taken in the first will be starting QBs for there respective teams this coming season and Schaub is probably as hot a commodity as there is out there for FA QBs.

2003 draft had 6 first day QBs taken with Palmer, Leftwich, Boller and Grossman taken in the first. Of those four, only Boller will likely not be starting this coming season. The next two, Rangone and Simms are 50/50. I don't know about the future of Rangone but Simms appears to be well on his way in Tampa so, I think you'd have to say that to this point, thats a successful QB class as well.

2002 was a weak class IMO, along with 2001, but of the Carr, Harrington and Ramsey were all 1st rd picks with McCown a first day pick in the 3rd round. I don't know what the future holds for any of these guys but I believe that Carr can be a good QB if Houston helps the guy. Harrington is up in the air. Ramsey is a QB that I liked in Washington. Who knows about him.

2001 only Vick was a 1st round pick. I don't think much of him as a QB but as a football player, I have to admit that he's pretty electric. The next guy was Brees in the 2nd who is doing pretty well for himself. QC was the 3rd QB taken and at this point, you'd have to say he will not pan out. Tuiasosopo doesn't look like a great QB to me but then again, he's looking like he might have a solid career as a backup guy in the NFL. Not a superstar but then, he wasn't taken as a franchise guy either so I guess it's all relative. At this point, I'd say that the QB classes of recent years are about as good as they have always been, maybe better, then previous classes from the FA era.

 

[iceberg]

coaches can read as much into practice as they can into 2 or 3 meaningless games about a player, when the gameplan isn't even being ran around them

your starter going into the season and for the duration, the gameplan is made to fit them, but just all of a sudden changing it up for a new guy w/ a little over a week or 2 to prepare isn't going to tell you much of anything

i get that.

i just disagree.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I see your point but most NFL coaches are only going to play the backup QB in the event of an injury to the starter or possibly late game garbage time which tells you basically nothing. We've been fortunate here not to have injury problems with our starters. I hope that trend continues this year because we need to win as many games as we can and Bledsoe gives us the best chance of doing that. But there is a cost of not knowing what you've got at backup. Nature of the beast.

I believe there is truth in what you say. To me, it is just unfathemable that we haven't given Romo time on the field when opportunity has presented itself. I mean, I guess perhaps the coaching staff may know better then I what we really have with him but to me, you can never really know until the bullets are flying. This is one of the major things I disagree with our coaching staff on. They don't believe there is much value in playing a QB in garbage time. I, on the other hand, believe that there is great value in putting a player out there an letting them get experience under fire.

In the end, I guess you just have to have faith but it is troubling to hear the language BP uses only to see the exact opposite, if you will, play out.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

This is one of the major things I disagree with our coaching staff on. They don't believe there is much value in playing a QB in garbage time.

alot of coaching staffs don't believe in that, unless the game is truly meaningless, such as the postseason being all but assured, that hasn't happened in Dallas for quite some time now

 

[Bob Sacamano]

I don't think Ben is special, it's because he hasn't been asked to lead his team very often, sure he is asked to during stretches, but not consistently enough for me to call him truly special, idk, maybe he hasn't gotten to that point yet, afterall, he's still a young QB, so I'm not throwing the possibility that he could be special out, just he hasn't satisfied me enough yet

and look at the QBs you've listed, how many can you honestly say stack up with Troy Aikman on that true franchise QB level? I see Palmer and maybe Ben in the future

 

[Bob Sacamano]

i get that.

i just disagree.

to each their own then, I respect you for holding to your opinion

 

[iceberg]

to each their own then, I respect you for holding to your opinion

thank you - seems others just wanna beat the hell out of you for not seeing things their own way, so i appreciate that.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

alot of coaching staffs don't believe in that, unless the game is truly meaningless, such as the postseason being all but assured

Perhaps, but then, there are many who do. More then one way and all that. For me, I do believe in getting players time on the field when you can.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

thank you - seems others just wanna beat the hell out of you for not seeing things their own way, so i appreciate that.

np, I guess it's easier when you know that the opposition sees your side of the issue, disagreements aren't bad, it's the one's where the other side is totally oblivious to your argument, or is just being plain ignorant it's all good

 

[Bob Sacamano]

Perhaps, but then, there are many who do. More then one way and all that.

I haven't seen a team outside of those parameters, who do

I value players getting playing time, but only if it's beneficial to the team, and 2 or 3 games telling you absolutely nothing, and getting nothing in return, isn't beneficial to a team IMO

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I don't think Ben is special, it's because he hasn't been asked to lead his team very often, sure he is asked to during stretches, but not consistently enough for me to call him truly special, idk, maybe he hasn't gotten to that point yet, afterall, he's still a young QB, so I'm not throwing the possibility that he could be special out, just he hasn't satisfied me enough yet

and look at the QBs you've listed, how many can you honestly say stack up with Troy Aikman on that true franchise QB level? I see Palmer and maybe Ben in the future

I think that there are a few out there. By know means do I feel as if they grow on trees but I think there are a few. In addition to the two you just mentioned, I think Brady is there. I think Manning could be there, maybe both Mannings. I like Brees a lot. The rest, we will have to see about.

 

[jackrussell]

there's throwing him to the wolves, and there's not letting him throw a pass in 3 years running. as i've said before - we've had opportunity to play them when it didn't really matter. could this in the end wind up being the "right move"?

contrary to what *SOME* have slapped me with, i DO feel this *could* be the right move. just because i don't rant and rave about ALL SIDES of an issue (who does?) doesn't mean i'm saying my way is the *only* way.

but it sure does get taken that way a lot by SOME who feel they must slap me cause i don't see it THEIR way. (not you summer)

Oh give it up Jerry. I've gone back and looked at this thread from beginning to end. The only 'slapping' anyone has given is you to Hammer, which was unprovoked in itself. Yet you claim this moral high ground. The only time the terms 'rant', 'rave', 'bad', 'tirade', 'you are wrong', 'dumb', 'attack' and 'hate', are used, they are used by you.

I posted and reposted the part where I gave the heads up to playing time can be useful, you just choose to ignore it because it doesn't fit your 'Icey the victim' agenda. In fact, that kind of looks like the 'acknowledgement' you asked for, you, the middle ground guy(yeah right).

You also chose to ignore the fact you consider yourself the 'Senior smart***' yet whine because someone is sarcastic to you. Can we say double standard?

This all is atypical of your posting over the years, someone disagrees with you, and you start painting an entirely different scenario. Good to see things never change. Grow up a little.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

I think that there are a few out there. By know means do I feel as if they grow on trees but I think there are a few. In addition to the two you just mentioned, I think Brady is there. I think Manning could be there, maybe both Mannings. I like Brees a lot. The rest, we will have to see about.

I think you're looking for the gleam in a pig's eye, I truly see this as a bad era for QBs that we live in

 

[RCowboyFan]

uh, developing them, using the phrase, "I don't want to throw him to the wolves", pretty much sums up the whole situation



I'm not saying settle for an average QB, even though nowadays you don't have to be really special to lead a team, like Ben Roth, he's a good QB, but he's not special, and he's certainly no Aikman or Staubach, but good enough to build a perennial contender around, expecting to find another Aikman is setting yourself up for some serious disappointment, again, a player like that comes around only so often, and usually are only available within the top 3, 5, picks of the draft, and like Alexander noted, the quality for QBs has been really down for a really long time, and more busts than franchise QBs have come around

Ok, let me get this straight, on one hand we should let BP make the decision, but on other hand, according to you Ben is nothing special, when BP said in Ben's rookie year, that Ben was the best QB prospect he has seen in NFL in 20 years? I am not trying to bust your noggins here, but lets remain consistant shall we?

Big Ben is a special qb. Make no doubt about it. Just because his last game was bad, doesn't make him anything less special, considering, he played with a broken or fractured thumb in playoffs apparently.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

Ok, let me get this straight, on one hand we should let BP make the decision, but on other hand, according to you Ben is nothing special, when BP said in Ben's rookie year, that Ben was the best QB prospect he has seen in NFL in 20 years? I am not trying to bust your noggins here, but lets remain consistant shall we?

when have I ever said that everything Bill says is golden? anyways, BP has yet to work with Ben like he is w/ our young guys, so I don't know how exactly him praising Ben applies to that situation

Big Ben is a special qb. Make no doubt about it.

in your opinion, not this poster's : and I'm not going by his last game, I'm going by his career thus far where he isn't asked to lead his team consistently like the great ones, the truly special QBs, do I think he can be special in the future? of course, I see the signs, but Pitt has managed to be one of the top teams w/ him at this stage, which I don't see as special, and which I think applies to every team nowadays

note: not downgrading the importance of the QB position, just don't put more stock in it than the team aspect anymore

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I haven't seen a team outside of those parameters, who do

I value players getting playing time, but only if it's beneficial to the team, and 2 or 3 games telling you absolutely nothing, and getting nothing in return, isn't beneficial to a team IMO

Well, New England does it. So does Seattle, just to name a few. It may not be an immediate benifit to the team but it is an immediate benifit to the player, which, in turn can be a benifit to the team if that player is called upon to have to play. It's also benificial in that you get an opportunity to display your wares. If you have a decent backup. Backups who have talent normally want to play somewhere. If you have a franchise type QB in place, chances are the backup will sign else where after his contract is up. It can help drive trade value up on a player and in turn, give some return on investment. I just believe in the idea of not only developing QBs but trading them to get return on investment.

 

[DLCassidy]

I believe there is truth in what you say. To me, it is just unfathemable that we haven't given Romo time on the field when opportunity has presented itself. I mean, I guess perhaps the coaching staff may know better then I what we really have with him but to me, you can never really know until the bullets are flying. This is one of the major things I disagree with our coaching staff on. They don't believe there is much value in playing a QB in garbage time. I, on the other hand, believe that there is great value in putting a player out there an letting them get experience under fire.

In the end, I guess you just have to have faith but it is troubling to hear the language BP uses only to see the exact opposite, if you will, play out.

I've read long threads debating the value of the "garbage time" insertion of the backup and I admit I'm mostly on the side of "it doesn't tell you that much". I'm not saying there's no value in it, because there is, but I just don't think there's enought to make a judgement about a guy good or bad. I don't think we know anything more about Henson for his little bit of time in there other than he wasn't ready then.

Here's my basic belief on QB's. If you're trying to develop a young guy, when he finally gets in there expect him to struggle for quite a while. There's not many Ben Rothlisberger's. Even Troy Aikman went 1-15 his first year. And if you have a vet backup it's hard to develop a young guy when he's not getting the reps in practice. At the end of the day I think you have to pray your starter stays healthy and plan on playing a young guy for an extended period when your team really sucks. For us it may mean the future QB of the Cowboys is not on the roster.

 

[iceberg]

I've read long threads debating the value of the "garbage time" insertion of the backup and I admit I'm mostly on the side of "it doesn't tell you that much". I'm not saying there's no value in it, because there is, but I just don't think there's enought to make a judgement about a guy good or bad. I don't think we know anything more about Henson for his little bit of time in there other than he wasn't ready then.

Here's my basic belief on QB's. If you're trying to develop a young guy, when he finally gets in there expect him to struggle for quite a while. There's not many Ben Rothlisberger's. Even Troy Aikman went 1-15 his first year. And if you have a vet backup it's hard to develop a young guy when he's not getting the reps in practice. At the end of the day I think you have to pray your starter stays healthy and plan on playing a young guy for an extended period when your team really sucks. For us it may mean the future QB of the Cowboys is not on the roster.

so 2 years ago when we were out with 3 games left in the season, doesn't that imply "sucks" enough to warrant gametime for a young qb? i said at the time if we never play them we'll never know how they react on the field and years later we'll have qb's with little to no nfl experience and THEN they'll have to take their lumps at the start of a season when it all matters.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

Well, New England does it. So does Seattle, just to name a few.

yes, when the postseason was assured, I could also throw in that teams only do that if they already have an est. young veteran at QB such as Brady, which both situations have yet to transpire in Dallas for quite some time

It may not be an immediate benifit to the team but it is an immediate benifit to the player, which, in turn can be a benifit to the team if that player is called upon to have to play.

here's why I don't think it's beneficial, what if that player doesn't pan out n the future? what if we're right, and 2 or 3 games won't make a bit of difference? are you willing to do that at the risk of losing games and maybe your whole team? I'm not, and I'm sure 90% of the coaches in the league will tell you the same

I just believe in the idea of not only developing QBs but trading them to get return on investment.

I only believe in that scenario if you already have your franchise QB for the next decade, like Favre, and why GB drafted qBs to develop w/ the hopes of trading them for a greater value, and the only team that had any success doing it

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I think you're looking for the gleam in a pig's eye, I truly see this as a bad era for QBs that we live in

The beauty of a message board. Every poster has a right to a god given opinion and the means to present it. Well, the good lord and Al Gore for inventing the InterWeb, that is.