Just Curious Your Take On Our Coach?

[Stautner]

Let me rephrase then. How about different formations to protect your QB who's getting his chinos busted by the blitz. The shotgun, having him role out, a screen pass, a hb delay. These plays were working against the eagles blitz in the 2nd half but we didn't stick w/them. That is on coaching and
gameplanning.

I agree that the shotgun may have been a good option - as i said, I'm not giving the coaches a free pass and saying they are infallable. No coaches are.

As for role outs, screens and hb delays - as much and as quickly as the Eagles were getting into our backfield as the game wore on, those plays may have just been losses waiting to happen.

 

[5Stars]

Consider this:

Accordingly, while play calling certainly matters, execution is the key to success.

Well, that is true in every sport, or life in general...however, when your philosophy is to just earn enough money to buy that one nice house and car, and then you are satisfied...well, why? If you cannot earn the money for that one car and nice house, find a different way to get them! Don't work at the same damn job hoping that eventually, if you do it RIGHT, that you will be able to buy them...

Get out and FIND a new way to buy two houses, and three cars! Why settle for one way of doing things?

In other words...the most succesful people are the ones that take risks and GO FOR IT! Don't wait for it to come to you! GO AFTER IT...!

And, on this offense, I don't think Parcells does that, or the defense for that matter!

 

[tommyboy10]

Well, that is true in every sport, or life in general...however, when your philosophy is to just earn enough money to buy that one nice house and car, and then you are satisfied...well, why? If you cannot earn the money for that one car and nice house, find a different way to get them! Don't work at the same damn job hoping that eventually, if you do it RIGHT, that you will be able to buy them...

Get out and FIND a new way to buy two houses, and three cars! Why settle for one way of doing things?

In other words...the most succesful people are the ones that take risks and GO FOR IT! Don't wait for it to come to you! GO AFTER IT...!

And, on this offense, I don't think Parcells does that, or the defense for that matter!

Yes, exactly, and if I may add, other coaches are doing that better (the original point)

 

[tommyboy10]

I agree that the shotgun may have been a good option - as i said, I'm not giving the coaches a free pass and saying they are infallable. No coaches are.

As for role outs, screens and hb delays - as much and as quickly as the Eagles were getting into our backfield as the game wore on, those plays may have just been losses waiting to happen.

And that is different than the results of the plays we ran how?

WE NEEDED TO TRY SOMETHING DIFFERENT---ADJUST

 

[Sarge]

I thought Parcells was past his prime before he arrived here. He has done nothing to prove me wrong. In fact, he's done a lot to solidify my opinion of him.

 

[juck]

Come Back Jimmy Please!!!!!!

 

[cowboyeric8]

Well my opinion on the whole matter is basically the same as Hostile Cbz.

Its time to move on, I don't think he will be able to get it done.

If he is unsuccessful this year, bye bye Parcells.

I'm just tired of it all.

I'm not saying I won't root my butt off, because that always happens. I'm just saying I don't have confidence in a Parcells team, I want to, but I don't.

But heres to proving me wrong.

 

[TtownCowboy]

I thought Parcells was past his prime before he arrived here. He has done nothing to prove me wrong. In fact, he's done a lot to solidify my opinion of him.

Now if we can just get word to Jerry. Lassie The Boys are in trouble go for help.

 

[5Stars]

But heres to proving me wrong.

It is what it is...amd maybe we are wrong?

 

[Stautner]

AGAIN, AND FOR THE LAST TIME:

Yes, execution is important, but if you don't call the best game and plays to put your players in the best position to execute, you fail. The original thread was talking about Parcell's falling behind the curve of some other coaches that are doing a better job, and with less talent too. Our whole point is and has been this: Even though we are loser armchair QB's, facts are facts, and Bill is not ahead of the Curve anymore....His inability to get more out of this talent puts him in a group of coaches that, based on his years with the Boys, is the group of more mediocre coaches. Other coaches are doing a much better job.

AGAIN, THAT IS AND HAS BEEN THE WHOLE POINT THE WHOLE TIME!

AND FOR THE LAST TIME:

Just because a play doesn't work doesn't mean it's the coaches fault. That's the point - sometimes (most of the time) it just boils down to player execution.

Bill may not be in the forefront of NFL ingenuity these days (although I don't think he ever was), but he's not stupid and although he and his coaches naturally make some mistakes they aren't making decisions that consistently hurt the team.

Here's what I think the crux of the problem is. Everyone tends to ASSUME we have all the talent we need to do whatever we want. Nevermind that much of that talent hasn't done anything more than show POTENTIAL and has yet to prove that they are ready to be the real deal game in and game out. And nevermind that some of that talent has only proven itself with other teams but not yet with Dallas.

And since we have all that POTENTIAL that we ASSUME is the cream of the crop despite the fact that it is still largely unproven, then fans ASSUME the only reason for failure is the coaching.

Let's be realistic, on offense we have O-line and QB problems, and on defense Ware, Spears, Canty, James and Watkins are still wet behind the ears while Ellis and Ayodele are learning new positions.

Sure, there is POTENTIAL for it to all come together - I personally love the potential - but let's be realistic too. A lot of these guys are either still maturing, will never live up to the potential, or will never be as good as they were with other teams.

Potential is not certainty, and potential and production are not the same thing.

 

[5Stars]

Come Back Jimmy Please!!!!!!

Never happen... That was back then...this is a new era of football.

But, someone like him would be just great!

 

[jeff]

I think he's staked everything on Drew Bledsoe and that will finally be his demise. I don't think Drew can get it done and Bill is too conservative to sit him down.

 

[Stautner]

I think he's staked everything on Drew Bledsoe and that will finally be his demise. I don't think Drew can get it done and Bill is too conservative to sit him down.

Last year I would have agreed with you. This year Bill took a different attitude into training camp and almost made it a mission to prove Romo could play.

I'm not saying Parcells won't be reluctant to make a change, but I feel certain that if Bledsoe has one more similar game in the next few weeks a change will be made.

 

[5Stars]

AND FOR THE LAST TIME:

Potential is not certainty, and potential and production are not the same thing.

That's a good point! Parcells has brought in actual "football players" that can play football...not the wannbees...so he has done a great job of teaching JJ how to run a football team...

So, I agree with you on that.

 

[ManicDepressiveMan]

I think it is time for Parcells to go after this season.

This team was exposed as overrated yesterday.

He has had plenty of time to fix this team and it is still broken.

 

[Hostile]

I've got an honest question (maybe two) for you, Hostile.

If I'm not mistake, you voted on the record your preference for starting Bledsoe (over Romo) next week versus the Texans.

You've also been a consistently strong advocate for acquiring a top-flight marquee franchise QB (e.g., a Carson Palmer / Eli Manning type).

Are you concerned that Romo might prove to be a "serviceable" starting QB if he got a chance to play?

Concerned wouldn't be the right word, shocked might be.

I know my elitest attitude about QBs rubs some the wrong way. I just don't see what the harm is in being honest about stuff. I loved Jason Garrett, but he was never more than a backup. Exactly what is so wrong about that? Even if you figured every team had 4 QBs counting one on their Practice Squads it still means an exclusive club of only 128 members.

So I got to ask a question in return. Is it a bad thing if Tony Romo never is more than a backup here? See, I don't think so, and that's where a lot of people get lost in my rants. See, while I appreciate the 128 or fewer exculsive club I'm still always looking for an even more exclusive club, a top 10 QB.

I don't see why this wrong or even a bad thing. How can it be? To want my favorite team to have one of the most respected players in the game is bad? I don't get it. I really don't. Nor do I think I want to.

Because of this philosophy of mine I'm not subject to over the top optimism and Pollyanna stories. Might Romo turn out to be a good QB? Sure he can. I hope he will, perhaps more than anyone even understands. That doesn't mean I have to expect it to happen. I prefer to be honest. That's as simple as I can say it. The odds of him being the 2nd coming of Tom Brady are slight at best.

Again, I don't find anything wrong with that. That is what people don't understand. They never understood it with Q. I never said he should be drummed out of the NFL. I've never celebrated that he essentially was. I said he wasn't good enough to satisfy my elitest philosophies. I was honest and I've been consistent about that philosophy throughout.

I'd like to point out something, for all the doubt I've expressed in a QB who hasn't shown anything in a meaningful game, I've never once bagged on him for his golf game like some do. In fact, I love that about him and root for him to succeed. I respect that.

I could see how this outcome might be the absolute worst one from your perspective. If Romo is seen as "good enough," chances are that the Cowboys wouldn't do all that it would take to obtain a true top-flight all-star sort of franchise QB.

I guess in some ways people would assume this. I can't say it is right or wrong at this point. I suppose it would depend on who the coach is and his philosophy. My complaint with our current situation is that Parcells seems immovable about the position. Year one, he thought he could coach our QBs to better results. Year two, he thought his past dinosaur was a great idea. Year 3 and 4 a younger retread of his past. Throughout all of this almost no effort to actually develop the young QBs. That bothers me.

For the record, I consider Aikman a top 10 all time QB, but from 1996 through when he hung up his cleats I was talking about drafting his successor. It wasn't about disliking the guys who were his backups. I liked some of them a lot. It was about a smooth transition.

So even if Romo is as good as some on here believe he will be, I'm still going to want a QB for the future. Why would I give Romo a pass that I wasn't willing to give a 3 time Super Bowl Champion?

How much, if any, of your current support of Bledsoe (vis-a-vis Romo) is due to a concern that Romo could play well enough to win the job? (and thus postponing the acquisition of the next Carson Palmer?)

None at all. Absolutely not even 1%. If he were to play great I'd be as thrilled as anyone. The difference with me is I'm very skeptical about the odds he can do that.

I've seen him live and I wasn't wowed. I still give him credit for being very smart and accurate. It's still below my elitest standards. That offends some. I won't apologize for my philosophies. Perhaps that is the problem. I'd like to point out I have them across the board and not just at QB, but I am most vocal about QB so it stands out.

You don't have to agree with me or my theories. It doesn't offend me. In some ways I like it that people disagree. Unlike some I actually enjoy the debates and the needles. A lot of people take me very seriously. I always laugh about that. I haven't got a mean bone in my body and I don't have time to dislike people for their opinions. Those who joke around with me have figured that out. That doesn't mean I'm not hard headed and stubborn. I absolutely am. I coached this position and it left me biased about how it is supposed to work.

I gave up believing in Faery Tales a long time ago, but I still root for the underdogs. That's why I like Romo but don't necessarily believe as the masses do that he's our answer as a starter.

I hope that explains this better. If not ask, I'll gladly clarify.

 

[5Stars]

I'm not saying Parcells won't be reluctant to make a change, but I feel certain that if Bledsoe has one more similar game in the next few weeks a change will be made.

That would be interesting....

 

[Stautner]

Hostile - I agree completely with you that there is nothing at all wrong with Romo being a quality backup if that's all he ever becomes, but the key word is "IF".

Parcells seems pretty convinced that Romo can become much more than that, and Romo's consistent success in the preseason certainly suggests it is at least possible, so why dismiss him at this point. Let's see what he can do.

I would say we need to find out sooner that later though, because if he's not the guy I don't want the team to struggle for another few years looking for someone else.

 

[5Stars]

You don't have to agree with me or my theories. It doesn't offend me. In some ways I like it that people disagree. Unlike some I actually enjoy the debates and the needles. A lot of people take me very seriously. I always laugh about that. I haven't got a mean bone in my body and I don't have time to dislike people for their opinions. Those who joke around me with have figured that out. That doesn't mean I'm not hard headed and stubborn. I absolutely am. I coached this position and it left me biased about how it is supposed to work.

I gave up believing in Faery Tales a long time ago, but I still root for the underdogs. That's why I like Romo but don't necessarily believe as the masses do that he's our answer as a starter.

I hope that explains this better. If not ask, I'll gladly clarify.

BUT!! You could not figure out how to go through a revolving door, huh?

 

[tommyboy10]

AND FOR THE LAST TIME:

Just because a play doesn't work doesn't mean it's the coaches fault. That's the point - sometimes (most of the time) it just boils down to player execution.

Bill may not be in the forefront of NFL ingenuity these days (although I don't think he ever was), but he's not stupid and although he and his coaches naturally make some mistakes they aren't making decisions that consistently hurt the team.

Here's what I think the crux of the problem is. Everyone tends to ASSUME we have all the talent we need to do whatever we want. Nevermind that much of that talent hasn't done anything more than show POTENTIAL and has yet to prove that they are ready to be the real deal game in and game out. And nevermind that some of that talent has only proven itself with other teams but not yet with Dallas.

And since we have all that POTENTIAL that we ASSUME is the cream of the crop despite the fact that it is still largely unproven, then fans ASSUME the only reason for failure is the coaching.

Let's be realistic, on offense we have O-line and QB problems, and on defense Ware, Spears, Canty, James and Watkins are still wet behind the ears while Ellis and Ayodele are learning new positions.

Sure, there is POTENTIAL for it to all come together - I personally love the potential - but let's be realistic too. A lot of these guys are either still maturing, will never live up to the potential, or will never be as good as they were with other teams.

Potential is not certainty, and potential and production are not the same thing.

I am not trying to dispute your theory or philosophy....But tell me, even with new guys learning new positions, etc....Do you think we could be successful running more blitz packages on defense? Or what are your thoughts on possible things we could do better offensively? Honestly, I would like to know.

I have shared a few of mine, which I think could be successful...Why? Because of seeing others try them and being successful. We can't sit there and get the same plays beat back in our face over and over. That's it.

We should always be trying to get better, right? So in saying that, this team let's the same things beat it over and over. It comes from one place.....talent, potential, what if's, but's, etc----whatever----someone still calls the plays. If these things haven't worked yet, why are we doing them? Try new things, utilizing some of our strengths.