Mickey's on The Ticket ...

[CaptainAmerica]

I agree about Marshall Faulk. I really don't like his style and I don't think he adds anything to the NFL Network as an analyst.

His response about benching Bledsoe was totally nonsensical. It was if he was protecting Bledsoe just because he was a vet player.

 

[Sportsbabe]

I agree about Marshall Faulk. I really don't like his style and I don't think he adds anything to the NFL Network as an analyst.

His response about benching Bledsoe was totally nonsensical. It was if he was protecting Bledsoe just because he was a vet player.

What really ticked me off was when he assumed that everyone in the locker room would be upset about the change. And his only reasoning, as you intimated, was based on veteran-ship. These talking heads never deal with facts. Not how the players actually feel.

 

[WoodysGirl]

I'm the one that interjected the thought that no one thinks Romo is gonna fix everything that's wrong with this team. In my opinion, Mickey talks down to the fans as if he thinks that most of us think: "OK, finally, Romo is in, 10-0." He comes across very condescending. But that's just me.

I will just never understand why a person can't be happy that we've replaced a bad player with a potentially better player. God forbid if somebody voices that enthusiasm. They must be losing their mind .

Thing is SB, there are alot of people on this board that think that. So it may come across as condescending, but the Romo hype is alive and well.

I think a majority are cautiously optimistic, based on his preseason play, but some of his play on Monday wasn't at all reassuring... So you gotta forgive some folks from immediately jumping on the Romo bandwagon.

And then you've got folks thinking that Romo is gonna go set the world on fire. And we're going 3-0 on this road trip and it's all cuz Bledsoe's not the QB and Romo is. Alot of things will have to happen for the 'boys to go 3-0 and it won't all be because of Romo.

 

[LaTunaNostra]

Mickey truly loves the Dallas Cowboys, and I think he is happy for Romo, and happy that a young home-grown qb is getting a shot to lead the team.

I also think some of what appears as less than enthusiastic welcoming of the change, is his understanding that Bledsoe, with all his limitations was a vet qb who had seen it ALL before, and was better able to withstand the potential Owens 'effect'.

Meaning, the team itself is better off with a competent veteran QB..the team captain..and an experienced player who won't easily succumb to mind games, intimidation, and/or tantrums.

Of course, Bledsoe's sorry performance made the point moot, but Mick is just parroting Jerry's line once again, the idea that the best possible scenario this year would have been going with an efficient vet QB. Jerry brought Owens in, but had to know the best shot at handling him would come with a vet qb.

It's no knock on Tony. JJ and Mickey just would prefer that a kid QB not have to handle potential 'issues' within while dealing with so much of a learning curve.

 

[Maikeru-sama]

Mickey truly loves the Dallas Cowboys, and I think he is happy for Romo, and happy that a young home-grown qb is getting a shot to lead the team.

I also think some of what appears as less than enthusiastic welcoming of the change, is his understanding that Bledsoe, with all his limitations was a vet qb who had seen it ALL before, and was better able to withstand the potential Owens 'effect'.

Meaning, the team itself is better off with a competent veteran QB..the team captain..and an experienced player who won't easily succumb to mind games, intimidation, and/or tantrums.

Of course, Bledsoe's sorry performance made the point moot, but Mick is just parroting Jerry's line once again, the idea that the best possible scenario this year would have been going with an efficient vet QB. Jerry brought Owens in, but had to know the best shot at handling him would come with a vet qb.

It's no knock on Tony. JJ and Mickey just would prefer that a kid QB not have to handle potential 'issues' within while dealing with so much of a learning curve.

True, I think the guy loves the Cowboys but he is Human and on too many occassions he has shown bias towards one Quarterback or the other, which some think that is fine, others dont.

From my point of view, I kind of felt he was down on Romo when during a Pre-Game Show before one of the Pre-Season Games, he and Steve Dennis (co-host) really got into as far as Henson (Mickey) and Romo (Dennis/Babe) were concerned. To add, Babe Laufenberg has always been a Romo cheerleader and would even tell you he was.

But Mickey was definately a Henson guy and couldnt stand Quincy Carter. I think he is so-so on Romo, I dont think he hates him though.

- Mike G.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

I have been reading Mickey for years and up to this point I have pretty much respected his opinion and his insight. He has great football knowledge and usually tells it like it is. I was even on his side about Q although he was VERY harsh in his estimate. But he normally turns out to be right about a lot his thoughts....Until Now!

Mickey has been protecting Bledsoe like he was payton manning. He will not acknowledge and give us that same insight into Bledsoe's mistake as he has done with Romo and Q. Why not tell how Bledsoe threw three picks ( when he had time) that lost us the game against jville. Naw, blame it on the O-line. Why not talk about the many open receivers his misses or the lack of Witten going into routes because of blocking duties.

Why not talked about how the defense has actually played well and the Bledsoe turnovers have put them in a bind.

Why not explain how Romo passed to Fasano on a 9 yard pass that Bledsoe probably would not have thrown the pass or how he hits guys on the run to make a play instead of the bad throws.

I am sick and tired of Mickey assuming Romo will suck when I think he will shine! Thank you Parcells for doing the right thing. Mickey will look like a fool and probably will lose alot of respect behind this.

I dont mind you having your opinion but dont treat us like we are stupid. We see what you see! But if Mickey refuses to see the elephant in the room then that's his problem. We cant say what ROMO will or wont do but I know he will do much better than bledsoe.

This team is a special one and Parcells knows it. He does have the in place and Bledsoe's mistakes has had an effect on the whole team, including the defense.

I predict that ROMO will have over 300 yards passing and at least 3 touchdowns. Julius will run for at least his standard 100 yard against Carolina and the Mickey will be writing how he thinks Bledsoe is still the best option at QB.

I don't know if Romo will come anywhere close to the numbers you project but I do know that Mickey is a Bledsoe shill.

 

[tomson75]

I agree about Marshall Faulk. I really don't like his style and I don't think he adds anything to the NFL Network as an analyst.

His response about benching Bledsoe was totally nonsensical. It was if he was protecting Bledsoe just because he was a vet player.

Faulk has been awful to say the least.

 

[superpunk]

Faulk has been awful to say the least.

He did start the "hilarious" tradition of not talking about TO, or not using his name, which has been thieved by such wordsmiths as Chris Carter.

 

[Frosty]

Mickey truly loves the Dallas Cowboys, and I think he is happy for Romo, and happy that a young home-grown qb is getting a shot to lead the team.

I also think some of what appears as less than enthusiastic welcoming of the change, is his understanding that Bledsoe, with all his limitations was a vet qb who had seen it ALL before, and was better able to withstand the potential Owens 'effect'.

Meaning, the team itself is better off with a competent veteran QB..the team captain..and an experienced player who won't easily succumb to mind games, intimidation, and/or tantrums.

Of course, Bledsoe's sorry performance made the point moot, but Mick is just parroting Jerry's line once again, the idea that the best possible scenario this year would have been going with an efficient vet QB. Jerry brought Owens in, but had to know the best shot at handling him would come with a vet qb.

It's no knock on Tony. JJ and Mickey just would prefer that a kid QB not have to handle potential 'issues' within while dealing with so much of a learning curve.

Exactly what a company man does.. stay on message with the Boss,

He know's who sign's his paycheck.. Not all a bad thing,,,, you just have to view everything he write's or says objectively its all Cowboys PR..

 

[Alexander]

http://www.weather.com/weather/wxdetail/USNC0121?dayNum=2

Sunday in Charlotte. The weather channel says a 10% chance of rain and almost no wind. High of 64 and overnight low of 41.

It is raining in Charlotte right now.

It will be clear and cool the night of the game, supposedly.

 

[Alexander]

Faulk has been awful to say the least.

And he has this chiseled smirk on his face that reminds me of this:

Watch for it. It is true.

 

[50cent]

Exactly what a company man does.. stay on message with the Boss,

He know's who sign's his paycheck.. Not all a bad thing,,,, you just have to view everything he write's or says objectively its all Cowboys PR..

Sooner or later, you have to be a man someday. Mick just doesn't have balls. Ive always had the thought that Mickey is the furthest from the pulse of this team than any other reporter. This is an example of why i don't like or respect him. He wanted QC replaced for poor decision making for HUtch(A wouldbe first year starter). Now its a bad move to replace a QB with poor decision making ability for a first year starter. Go figure.

 

[silverbear]

... Also said rain expected in Carolina.

Actually, the rains here in the Mid Atlantic region are supposed to end by tomorrow afternoon (Charlotte is about 5 hours' drive from where I live)...

 

[silverbear]

Details for Sunday Oct, 29 should be a sunny day and clear skies...

The local forecast is for a pretty windy day, with gusts up to 35 MPH... but as you noted, the precip should have moved out of the region by Sunday...

It ain't like it's pouring rain here anyway, just a few off and on showers...

 

[Sportsbabe]

Thing is SB, there are alot of people on this board that think that. So it may come across as condescending, but the Romo hype is alive and well.

I think a majority are cautiously optimistic, based on his preseason play, but some of his play on Monday wasn't at all reassuring... So you gotta forgive some folks from immediately jumping on the Romo bandwagon.

And then you've got folks thinking that Romo is gonna go set the world on fire. And we're going 3-0 on this road trip and it's all cuz Bledsoe's not the QB and Romo is. Alot of things will have to happen for the 'boys to go 3-0 and it won't all be because of Romo.

Point well taken.

But lets address the phrase "Romo hype". What exactly is it? What does it mean?

When I think of hype I think of over blown expectations. Is it so over stated to expect Romo to come in and do good things? Is it stretching it to think he is gonna be more capable than the pass 5 or so QBs (not counting Bledsoe) that have been under center since Bill has been here?

I'm sure he's gonna throw some untimely INTs. The type of player he's described as being is the type who's never seen a play that he thinks he can't make. That's a recipe for INTs. But you know, between he & Drew, I'm going down swinging with Romo all the way.:starspin

Yeah, Monday night was a disaster. I forgive him. But I also loved the good stuff he did. I like to focus on that. Besides, that first INT, what in the heck they doing calling a pass play on the first play from scrimmage anyway Give the guy a minute to get used to the rush. Good Lawd!!!!

 

[ghst187]

Anyone giddy about our QB change really is clue less. Yes we hopefully will get better QB play, and a more mobile and pass rush alert QB will cut down on sacks. BUT there are still problems with the O line, pass rush, and secondary that have NOTHING to do with the QB.

that's wrong!

People that are excited about the change were tired of:
1) pat, pat, pat, step, pat, pat, pat, TG isn't open, sack
2) "oh no! the blitz is coming I just better tuck the ball and take the sack"
3) TG stare down, isn't open, sack
4) hmm TO is single covered and TG is triple covered, surely I can still get the ball to TG.....INT!
5) zero sidesteps to avoid the rush, zero presence to feel the rush and still keep eyes downfield
6) game is in the balance......INT!

and we're excited about:
7) Romo, feels the pressure and sidesteps the rush, keeps his eyes downfield, hits his 4th WR (Witten or Crayton) after going through his reads
8) Witten gets to go downfield and do what he's a PB'er at doing, catching passes
9) Romo, gets out of the pocket, improvises, positive yardage
10) bad shotgun snap, Romo picks up the ball, offensive players keep playing, Romo completes a pass downfield making a great play from a bad beginning

While you're absolutely correct that we have MANY more problems than just the QB, its wrong to say that Romo doesn't hold some potential to turbo charge and open up our offense where Bledsoe was holding it back. Romo should also help out the OL a ton. Bledsoe was a great QB at some point but he lost the ability to go through his progressions and find his 3rd or 4th option. He often cut off half of the entire field just and threw the backbreaking INT.
No one knows if Romo is going to be the savior of this season and he certainly isn't going to fix all that ails us, but I think that if he cuts down just a few bad throws, he will give us a MUCH better chance to win than DB.
I was a huge Bledsoe supporter until sometime between the Jax and Phithy games. He's done. It was time to move on.

Furthermore, I find it inexplicable that BP can get the team, in his first year, to 9-7 or 10-6 (whatever it was) and to the playoffs without much talent...but can't beat a decent team with this one. Can't think that more than 3 or 4 of the players from that other team could sniff the field on this one.

 

[lurkercowboy]

It is raining right now but I am six hours to the east of Charlotte. There is some kind of weather system moving across the state. It should be gone by Sunday though.

 

[sjordan6]

that's wrong!

People that are excited about the change were tired of:
1) pat, pat, pat, step, pat, pat, pat, TG isn't open, sack
2) "oh no! the blitz is coming I just better tuck the ball and take the sack"
3) TG stare down, isn't open, sack
4) hmm TO is single covered and TG is triple covered, surely I can still get the ball to TG.....INT!
5) zero sidesteps to avoid the rush, zero presence to feel the rush and still keep eyes downfield
6) game is in the balance......INT!

and we're excited about:
7) Romo, feels the pressure and sidesteps the rush, keeps his eyes downfield, hits his 4th WR (Witten or Crayton) after going through his reads
8) Witten gets to go downfield and do what he's a PB'er at doing, catching passes
9) Romo, gets out of the pocket, improvises, positive yardage
10) bad shotgun snap, Romo picks up the ball, offensive players keep playing, Romo completes a pass downfield making a great play from a bad beginning

While you're absolutely correct that we have MANY more problems than just the QB, its wrong to say that Romo doesn't hold some potential to turbo charge and open up our offense where Bledsoe was holding it back. Romo should also help out the OL a ton. Bledsoe was a great QB at some point but he lost the ability to go through his progressions and find his 3rd or 4th option. He often cut off half of the entire field just and threw the backbreaking INT.
No one knows if Romo is going to be the savior of this season and he certainly isn't going to fix all that ails us, but I think that if he cuts down just a few bad throws, he will give us a MUCH better chance to win than DB.
I was a huge Bledsoe supporter until sometime between the Jax and Phithy games. He's done. It was time to move on.

Furthermore, I find it inexplicable that BP can get the team, in his first year, to 9-7 or 10-6 (whatever it was) and to the playoffs without much talent...but can't beat a decent team with this one. Can't think that more than 3 or 4 of the players from that other team could sniff the field on this one.

These are all great points and i really cant understand the skeptics. I mean did you guys see the jville game or philly game or the giants game? How many ints did bledsoe throw and how many drives were killed because of ints, fumbles, or sacks. To me, sacks are just as bad as turnovers.

Romo has only played that first half of the giants game. He had six drives in that half. Two tds...three ints...one turnover on downs ( the T.O. drop).

This is a great team that is really about to go places. get ready

 

[fanfromvirginia]

First Mickey gets crititicized for being a "team mouthpiece" and company man, and now he gets criticized for disagreeing with a team move.

Which is it?

The Enemies of the People are damned if they do, damned if they don't here on the LFOH: Little Forum of Hate. If he's pizzing off the regulars in here, he's doing something right by my book.

 

[Sportsbabe]

The Enemies of the People are damned if they do, damned if they don't here on the LFOH: Little Forum of Hate. If he's pizzing off the regulars in here, he's doing something right by my book.

LFOH Love it.