Not "right this minute"

[Angus]

Parcells, October 9th press conference:

"I'm not switching the quarterback," Parcells said Monday after Drew Bledsoe threw three interceptions in Sunday's 38-24 loss to the Eagles. . . . "No, not right at this moment, no. . . . I don't think that's the answer right this minute."

http://www.dallascowboys.com/news.cfm?id=2F419DDD-C75F-F860-1A351EF4D1102F92


If Parcells wanted to put the quietus on talk of switching quarterbacks, he would not have made it seem that it was not quite imminent. He says Bledsoe will start the Texan game but he doesn’t say he will play the whole game or finish it. I look for him to play Romo a good bit this Sunday. I’ll be disappointed if he doesn’t.

 

[neosapien23]

Well the Tuna hate is beggining to subside a little bit. At least Parcells is letting Bledsoe know that his job will not be safe if his poor play continues. Not right at this moment means let him screw up some more and he will be sitting on the bench.

 

[superpunk]

Well the Tuna hate is beggining to subside a little bit. At least Parcells is letting Bledsoe know that his job will not be safe if his poor play continues. Not right at this moment means let him screw up some more and he will be sitting on the bench.

Nice point. That is probably a message to Drew, as well as his strong words about what is costing the team these games. This won't be tolerated much more. I think the Giants game is going to be a make or break game for Drew. Excel - he keeps his job. Flounder, I think Romo is getting a shot. It's not time yet, but Parcells knows that's a possibility.

 

[Stautner]

Parcells, October 9th press conference:

"I'm not switching the quarterback," Parcells said Monday after Drew Bledsoe threw three interceptions in Sunday's 38-24 loss to the Eagles. . . . "No, not right at this moment, no. . . . I don't think that's the answer right this minute."

http://www.dallascowboys.com/news.cfm?id=2F419DDD-C75F-F860-1A351EF4D1102F92


If Parcells wanted to put the quietus on talk of switching quarterbacks, he would not have made it seem that it was not quite imminent. He says Bledsoe will start the Texan game but he doesn’t say he will play the whole game or finish it. I look for him to play Romo a good bit this Sunday. I’ll be disappointed if he doesn’t.

It doesn't make sense to just make a blanket statement that you expect Romo to play - especially a good bit.

QB isn't like a lot of other positions where it doesn't hurt or change momentum dramatically if you alternate or rest players in favor of others.

If the game is close and Bledsoe is playing well then Bledsoe should stay in for the duration - that's just not a point that can be reasonably argued.

If the game ends up lopsided or Bledsoe plays as poorly as he did last week then that's a differents story.

But I do agree with you about Parcell's press conference choice of words - not exactly a ringing endorsement of Bledsoe's future as the starter.

 

[BlueStar II]

Yes, I would think that it's a message he's sending to Bledsoe and wanting Bledsoe to hear it as well.

 

[StanleySpadowski]

Parcells is conflicted right now.

He's really a simple guy to figure out. Tell him he can't do something and he'll do it just to spite the naysayers. Too stubborn for his own good, he likes to make everyone believe he doesn't care what they think of him.

But at the same time, he's very concerned about how his legacy is viewed.

A huge part of him wants to prove he can win with Drew Bledsoe but another part of him doesn't want failing to do so tarnishing his HOF career.

 

[YosemiteSam]

He says Bledsoe will start the Texan game but he doesn’t say he will play the whole game or finish it. I look for him to play Romo a good bit this Sunday. I’ll be disappointed if he doesn’t.

This is what I noted the other day. I suspect Romo plays Sunday during the second half especially if the Cowboys are up by 17+ points.

 

[cobra]

... that BP should think about making a change at qb?

Thoughts?

 

[cobra]

Ahh... boo!!! Mods merged my post into this thread. It no longer is an obvious satirical joke to mock all of the stupid redundant threads we have had.

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

When the media pressure BP with Romo questions he stutters(after Jax game, after Eagles game)... he knows its coming... he really doesnt get nervous other times...

 

[chinch]

Parcells is conflicted right now.

He's really a simple guy to figure out. Tell him he can't do something and he'll do it just to spite the naysayers. Too stubborn for his own good, he likes to make everyone believe he doesn't care what they think of him.

But at the same time, he's very concerned about how his legacy is viewed.

A huge part of him wants to prove he can win with Drew Bledsoe but another part of him doesn't want failing to do so tarnishing his HOF career.

you got it wrong....

he doesn't listen to the "naysayers" and isn't stubborn at all because they have no effect on what he does.

he wants to win every game - never concede a game remember that "would you take 5-1 start for the season" or something question from a press conf. he said "no, because that would be conceding one game and i won't do that".

he really thinks a veteran on his team SHOULD know better, play smarter and react better than what Drew (and Vinny) have. he knows he just needs a DECENT PERFORMER at QB, who keeps turnovers to a minimum and we win.

in fact, we're 4-0 if we have that this season (it's not asking alot either!).

but unfortunately in his mind he believes Drew can play better, as a team he can work around the deficiencies and only THEN would he give Romo a start. Realistically speaking that doesn't happen 4 games in. It's the same reason Farve is allowed to start, nevermind have a contract in this league.

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

you got it wrong....

he doesn't listen to the "naysayers" and isn't stubborn at all because they have no effect on what he does.

he wants to win every game - never concede a game remember that "would you take 5-1 start for the season" or something question from a press conf. he said "no, because that would be conceding one game and i won't do that".

he really thinks a veteran on his team SHOULD know better, play smarter and react better than what Drew (and Vinny) have. he knows he just needs a DECENT PERFORMER at QB, who keeps turnovers to a minimum and we win.

in fact, we're 4-0 if we have that this season (it's not asking alot either!).

but unfortunately in his mind he believes Drew can play better, as a team he can work around the deficiencies and only THEN would he give Romo a start. Realistically speaking that doesn't happen 4 games in. It's the same reason Farve is allowed to start, nevermind have a contract in this league.

Who is to say that we cant use Romo like Pittsburgh used Roth in the first two years(draft/undrafted aside) Roth was asked to next to nothing... couldnt we ask Romo to do as much

 

[chinch]

Who is to say that we cant use Romo like Pittsburgh used Roth in the first two years(draft/undrafted aside) Roth was asked to next to nothing... couldnt we ask Romo to do as much

No doubt. Tuna sees the season as 30+ weeks, 16 gamedays.

Perhaps the first 8 games will bolster our OL, running game and D to a point where Romo can come in and drive the bus without crashing it (as drew has).

Lots of ifs and buts though... i wouldn't hold my breath waiting for it.