Just Curious Your Take On Our Coach?

My concern is he'll have another decent game or two... Then, when the pressure is on or it's raining or something the wheels will come off Bledsoe's game again. And so we'll kind of limp along all season, stuck in 3rd gear with Bledsoe driving the bus.
 
5Stars;1081824 said:
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.

Yeah, but we should not be killing ourselves with the same things over and over. We knew what they would bring yesterday, right? If I asked you what the Eagles defense was going to do to us before Sunday's game, what would you have said? Id've said alot of blitzing and tight coverage with the DB's for the first 5-8 yards. Id've planned ways around that so we could have beat it. They knew our safeties were going for double moves--their coaches saw it and adjusted to it, and beat us on it. Other coaches do a better job adjusting and gameplanning than Bill...I knew in the Jacksonville game we would lose as soon as we went from the first drive of throwing the ball around, to old clock-killing Tunaball. Predictable stuff.
 
tommyboy10;1081893 said:
Yeah, but we should not be killing ourselves with the same things over and over. We knew what they would bring yesterday, right? If I asked you what the Eagles defense was going to do to us before Sunday's game, what would you have said? Id've said alot of blitzing and tight coverage with the DB's for the first 5-8 yards. Id've planned ways around that so we could have beat it. They knew our safeties were going for double moves--their coaches saw it and adjusted to it, and beat us on it. Other coaches do a better job adjusting and gameplanning than Bill...I knew in the Jacksonville game we would lose as soon as we went from the first drive of throwing the ball around, to old clock-killing Tunaball. Predictable stuff.


I know how you feel....hopefully it will get better.
 
5Stars;1081904 said:
I know how you feel....hopefully it will get better.

Yeah, I agree....hopefully. They should get a good, convincing win this week. They need that.

I know this, no matter how frustrating it gets, I will cheer for and support my team till the end!

GO COWBOYS!
 
tommyboy10;1081911 said:
Yeah, I agree....hopefully. They should get a good, convincing win this week. They need that.

I know this, no matter how frustrating it gets, I will cheer for and support my team till the end!

GO COWBOYS!


Stupid Cowboy fan!

:lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao:
;)
 
tommyboy10;1081932 said:
Yeah, it's sad, I know...but I am willing to bet you know exactly what I go through, don't you!

Yes...!
 
TtownCowboy;1081186 said:
But when is the last time you watched a Parcells coached Cowboys team and said wow that guy is a freakin' genius w/playcalling and game planning?
:confused:
some of you guys watch too much ESPN and/or play too much Madden video games.

what "game planning" or "play calling" would help MISTAKE AFTER MISTAKE, starting with our QB?

with all Tuna's ineptitude (and offensive and defensive PLAYER mistakes), he had us first and goal on the ROAD for the tie.

get a grip.

if you wan't to argue Bill is stubborn with Drew that is a fair assertion but the "outcoached" nonsense is absurd.
 
chinch;1081957 said:
some of you guys watch too much ESPN and/or play too much Madden video games.

what "game planning" or "play calling" would help MISTAKE AFTER MISTAKE, starting with our QB?

with all Tuna's ineptitude (and offensive and defensive PLAYER mistakes), he had us first and goal on the ROAD for the tie.

get a grip.

if you wan't to argue Bill is stubborn with Drew that is a fair assertion but the "outcoached" nonsense is absurd.


Nope..wrong...there is alot of info all throughout this thread supporting that he gets outcoached, citing specific examples.

Tuna didn't get us that, them letting the receiver behind them and having to play catch up did it..Not Bill...They knew what was coming there, everyone did...Just like normal, predictable.
 
Stautner;1081846 said:
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.
Let me put it this way. I no longer have much faith in Parcells where it pertains to QBs. Therefore his faith means very little to me. Especially when the only time he shows his faith in him is to put him a game to hand off to run out the clock. That's "faith?" Not in my book. Neither is playing him in the pre-season.
 
Stubborn.


And he does a much better job in the spring than in the fall.
 
tommyboy10;1081975 said:
Nope..wrong...there is alot of info all throughout this thread supporting that he gets outcoached, citing specific examples.

Tuna didn't get us that, them letting the receiver behind them and having to play catch up did it..Not Bill...They knew what was coming there, everyone did...Just like normal, predictable.

So I get this straight. When our Wrs get behind the defenders it's not play calling.(coaching) When the other teams WRs get behind our defenders its playcalling.(coaching)

Gotchya:lmao2:
 
Hostile;1081828 said:
Concerned wouldn't be the right word, shocked might be.
I'd be shocked if he were the next Tom Brady, too. I don't see that happening.

Becoming a Jake Delhomme is probably the best case scenerio for Romo.

Could Romo be a John Kitna or Charlie Frye? I think so. And those using the busdriver model of QB could see Frye and/or Kitna as "serviceable" or "good enough."

Hostile;1081828 said:
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.
No harm at all in being forthright.

Hostile;1081828 said:
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.
There is no shame in being a backup.

But some coaches have seen Romo as a potential starter (e.g., Payton wanted Romo to start over Quincy Carter). If Romo remains a backup, it would mean that Romo didn't develop into the player that some coaches thought he might become. That would be less than ideal - particularly for a team that current could use a better starting QB.

Would it be horrible or awful or the end of the world? No. Spending a top 1st round draft pick on Ryan Leaf or Joey Herrington or Heath Shuler (etc.) would be pretty awful, but it isn't like the Cowboys had to sell the farm to obtain Romo. He came very cheap (a telephone call).

Hostile;1081828 said:
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.
Tom Brady, sure. Chances aren't particularly good that any QB, even those selected with the top draft choices, will be that good.

But Delhomme, Frye, Kitna? I don't see that as so terribly unlikely.

I'd guess that you wouldn't be satisfied with a Charlie Frye level / kind of QB, though. Is that right?

Hostile;1081828 said:
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.
He was right, I think. The Cowboys surprised all by getting into the playoffs that year.
Hostile;1081828 said:
Year two, he thought his past dinosaur was a great idea.
Oh, not really. Testaverde was signed before Quincy Carter imploded. Testaverde was to serve as Carter's mentor. Then *poof* Carter was gone. Parcells' choice was between the overripe and not-ready.
Hostile;1081828 said:
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.
Year 3 was as you say.

Year 4 isn't over yet. And, actually, I'm hoping that Romo starts over Bledsoe.

I guess I'm a little surprised that you aren't too, given your appraisal of Bledsoe (a retread) and Parcells (no effort to develop the young QBs).

Hostile;1081828 said:
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 understand.

Hostile;1081828 said:
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 think it is unrealistic to expect Fairy Tales to happen, and incorrect to assume that they don't ever happen - given the unlikely stories of Brady, Delhomme, Warner, and many others down through the years (e.g., John Unitas was a 9th round pick).

I don't expect Romo to be a great success, but I do think there is a decent chance that Romo can exceed the low bar that Bledsoe has set over the past 14 games or so. It isn't like Romo has to play like Tom Brady to be a net improvement over Bledsoe. All things considered, Charlie Frye would be an improvement.
 
the bledsoe formula:

quality protection=quality game from the QB

and that's the bottom line. anything less than quality protection and Dallas will lose.

such is our fate this year.
 

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
465,474
Messages
13,877,590
Members
23,791
Latest member
mashburn
Back
Top