Laufenberg broke down johnsons play from last week!

[Nav22]

The flip-flopping on this board will be hilarious if Brad makes some nice throws downfield today and we pull off the upset.

I still don't believe it's entirely inconceivable, and I still don't think Brad is COMPLETELY incapable of hitting receivers downfield. He did it a couple times in preseason and he had a nice long TD pass to Martellus Bennett vs. the Rams. Call me an optimist, but I believe Brad can bounce back and hit some receivers today.

 

[CATCH17]

The flip-flopping on this board will be hilarious if Brad makes some nice throws downfield today and we pull off the upset.

I still don't believe it's entirely inconceivable, and I still don't think Brad is COMPLETELY incapable of hitting receivers downfield. He did it a couple times in preseason and he had a nice long TD pass to Martellus Bennett vs. the Rams. Call me an optimist, but I believe Brad can bounce back and hit some receivers today.

It may come from some people but even a 3 TD 300 yard performance still doesn't make believe he should be here any longer after the season is over.

It wont happen though because he has no Physical abilities. None.

 

[Nav22]

even a 3 TD 300 yard performance still doesn't make believe he should be here any longer after the season is over.

I don't think anyone is calling for Brad to stay beyond 2008.

But a performance like THAT from Brad would surely shut up the "start Bollinger" crowd, wouldn't it?

 

[theebs]

You weren't saying that Tampa stunk prior to last week's game.

Funny how that changes.

I said right out last week that tampa, along with oakland and houston was one of the teams I had barely watched.

I thought from the numbers they were a good team, but after seeing them in person I didnt think they were that good.

and watching them today, they look disinterested.

So I am not sure what your funny how that changes comment was meant for, but Nothing changed. After the game I thought tampa wasnt a very good team and I said it repeatedly this week.

 

[DaBoys4Life]

Brad was bad we will still win though.

 

[theebs]

you seem downright giddy theebs.

HUH?

I was shocked.

I was under the impression johnson had more pressure in his face on some of those plays and that he was just not seeing the field well.

It was clear that he was not seeing the field well and being overly careful, but having an open throwing lane to see down the field is an indicator of something else.

I still think if brad just throws the ball on time he will be ok, but after seeing laufenberg break him down I am not so sure. He may have just lost his ability to see a defense, recognize where the ball should go and deliver it on time.

 

[windward]

I said right out last week that tampa, along with oakland and houston was one of the teams I had barely watched.

I thought from the numbers they were a good team, but after seeing them in person I didnt think they were that good.

and watching them today, they look disinterested.

So I am not sure what your funny how that changes comment was meant for, but Nothing changed. After the game I thought tampa wasnt a very good team and I said it repeatedly this week.

So you admit that your comments that "we were gonna get killed by Tampa so bad" were made out of ignorance?

Gotcha.

 

[CATCH17]

I don't think anyone is calling for Brad to stay beyond 2008.

But a performance like THAT from Brad would surely shut up the "start Bollinger" crowd, wouldn't it?

Yeah it would but if Romo were to get injured again than Brad having a big day and having to play again could be awful from a big picture stand point.

But he doesnt have any physical abilities so it doesn't matter. He wont have a big day because he physically cant have one.

 

[DallasEast]

I don't think anyone is calling for Brad to stay beyond 2008.

But a performance like THAT from Brad would surely shut up the "start Bollinger" crowd, wouldn't it?

Of course not, but should Johnson lead the team to a victory, it would filter out some poster negativity--albeit only temporarily.

 

[JonJon]

Anyone can claim things in hindsight...

Let us take a look back at some words of wisdom that obviously our front office missed out on, shall we?

http://cowboyszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=82987&

Looks like we're going to talk with the old fossil. Bad move if we sign this old grandpa as our backup. Dumb. Harrington or Ramsey, please.........

Johnson could NOT be counted on to start long term should Romo turn out to be a flash in the pan. We can do better......

We're screwed for sure if we go with Johnson/Vinny/Bledsoe--all old goats.....

Johnson is DONE at this point. This isn't 5 years ago......

We'd be darned FOOLS to go with Brad Johnson......

Like I said, what if Romo is a flash in the pan? Then you're stuck with grandpa Johnson and a 5-11 season. Better get someone better than Johnson to be on the safe side.....

Our opponents will be scared to death of the deep ball. LOL. Dink and dunk, that's all there will be.....a disaster.

What does it matter? If Romo goes down we're likely screwed anyway. The O-line looks like it'll be swiss cheese so whoever the backup is, if he doesn't have Romo's agility, they're toast.

I see. So if Romo goes down in week 2 with a season ending injury, your okay with whoever we get??? Your theory is fine so long as the back up doesn't play for an extended period. However, in many cases the back up is forced to become da man. Brad Johnson is not the guy we would want in that situation.....

I liked Brad Johnson...about 10 years ago during his first stint with the Vikes. However if he can't throw the ball anymore, then why the heck would we want him? A good head on his shoulders, but unable to throw the ball 20 yards???? Sounds like just the guy we want. LOL.

 

[theebs]

So you admit that your comments that "we were gonna get killed by Tampa so bad" were made out of ignorance?

Gotcha.

yes. Of course, I was relying on the numbers I was seeing.

I hadnt seen tampa play more than a quarter this year. And I said as much. I thought they would run inside and make all the quick throws and hit us down the field.

I didnt realize that garcia could be as bad as johnson.

that is why as randy white says, statistics are for losers.

I thought they were going to beat us up and outscore us. But they didnt and my reasoning they didnt is because I dont think they are very good.

So I am not sure what you are getting at, I guess you are trying to make me look stupid or whatever, but unlike most people here I will say it right out when I am wrong.

So feel free to have "Gotcha" moments with me.

 

[DragonCowboy]

HUH?

I was shocked.

I was under the impression johnson had more pressure in his face on some of those plays and that he was just not seeing the field well.

It was clear that he was not seeing the field well and being overly careful, but having an open throwing lane to see down the field is an indicator of something else.

I still think if brad just throws the ball on time he will be ok, but after seeing laufenberg break him down I am not so sure. He may have just lost his ability to see a defense, recognize where the ball should go and deliver it on time.

Okay.

I'm sorry. I assumed there was more behind the OP. I was wrong.

But yeah. Brad sucks. Play Bollinger, what do you have to lose?

 

[windward]

Philo Beddoe for GM!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[notherbob]

Brad has been a pretty accurate passer at times in the past and maybe he just needs more time working with the first unit to get some timing down. He's had another week now, maybe he'll be better today; if not, the Boys will have a hard time of it. Teamwork and spirit haven't been their fortes this year.

Today should show us a lot, one way or another. In the last few years the Cowboys haven't risen to the occasion in this kind of situation.

With game breaks being equal, and with the Cowboys' current injuries, Brad is going to have to do well if the Boys are going to have any kind of a chance of winning today.

 

[BAT]

Okay.

I'm sorry. I assumed there was more behind the OP. I was wrong.

But yeah. Brad sucks. Play Bollinger, what do you have to lose?

Actually, Jimmy Johnson said it best, anyone thinking that a career 3rd string backup like Bollinger is a better option than even BJ (and Brad SUCKS) is insane. Bollinger has lousy vision and holds the ball too long (at least BJ gets rid of it). Bollinger is sacked more often than BJ, not a good thing, at all, especially against an aggressive D like the Giants.

Bollinger is NOT the answer.

 

[DragonCowboy]

Actually, Jimmy Johnson said it best, anyone thinking that a career 3rd string backup like Bollinger is a better option than even BJ (and Brad SUCKS) is insane. Bollinger has lousy vision and holds the ball too long (at least BJ gets rid of it). Bollinger is sacked more often than BJ, not a good thing, at all, especially against an aggressive D like the Giants.

Bollinger is NOT the answer.

so a loss or a loss?

I really don't believe that Johnson can get us 20 points. And we'll need 20 points.

 

[theogt]

Actually, Jimmy Johnson said it best, anyone thinking that a career 3rd string backup like Bollinger is a better option than even BJ (and Brad SUCKS) is insane. Bollinger has lousy vision and holds the ball too long (at least BJ gets rid of it). Bollinger is sacked more often than BJ, not a good thing, at all, especially against an aggressive D like the Giants.

Bollinger is NOT the answer.

Bollinger's career stats are better than Brad Johnson's '08 stats, and neither of them have ever had this much offensive talent to work with. Not sure why anyone would expect Bollinger to have worse numbers.

Bollinger may not be the answer, but he's likely less wrong than Brad Johnson.

 

[windward]

yes. Of course, I was relying on the numbers I was seeing.

I hadnt seen tampa play more than a quarter this year. And I said as much. I thought they would run inside and make all the quick throws and hit us down the field.

I didnt realize that garcia could be as bad as johnson.

that is why as randy white says, statistics are for losers.

I thought they were going to beat us up and outscore us. But they didnt and my reasoning they didnt is because I dont think they are very good.

So I am not sure what you are getting at, I guess you are trying to make me look stupid or whatever, but unlike most people here I will say it right out when I am wrong.

So feel free to have "Gotcha" moments with me.

It's more to do with the fact that people overrate the competition until we beat them.

Then, they stink.

All I heard prior to last week was how Garcia was playing out of his mind and would tear our D a new one. We could not stop Graham or Dunn.

Then, those guys are terrible, Garcis is worse than Brad Johnson, etc...
Funny stuff there.

 

[cowboyrock]

The flip-flopping on this board will be hilarious if Brad makes some nice throws downfield today and we pull off the upset.

I still don't believe it's entirely inconceivable, and I still don't think Brad is COMPLETELY incapable of hitting receivers downfield. He did it a couple times in preseason and he had a nice long TD pass to Martellus Bennett vs. the Rams. Call me an optimist, but I believe Brad can bounce back and hit some receivers today.

You are kidding yourself.Brad Johnson flatout sucks.it is what it is.

 

[windward]

so a loss or a loss?

I really don't believe that Johnson can get us 20 points. And we'll need 20 points.

Maybe,maybe not.