Parcells handling of Q.B's

[Waffle]

no...

okay.


(I still want a copy of that bootleg practice tape)

 

[Zaxor]

okay.


(I still want a copy of that bootleg practice tape)

NEVER!! Its mine I tell you... my precious

 

[Waffle]

NEVER!! Its mine I tell you... my precious

Selfish bastid!!

 

[burmafrd]

Volek was never available and Delhomme was passed on by a whole lot of coaches.
QB is probably the hardest position to figure out- its a real crapshoot. And remember that Delhomme was available at the same time JJ still had his love affair going on with Q.

 

[Arch Stanton]

Heres another bit of evidence. Maybe someone can find the article and post it. Anyway, early in training camp last year an interview/article was done on Tony Romo. In it he was asked his thoughts on being cut due to the log jam at Q.B. He basically LAUGHED right at the reporter. He really did, its there if you read it. I mean, he didnt just come off as confident, he came off like he was looking at the reporter as if he were a moron. Like Tony knew something WE DIDNT. Go look it up, its THERE, litteraly laughing right in the reporters face...LOL Gotta boogie. If I have time maybe I'll hunt it down and post it later unless someone beats me to it....

Couldn't find the article about Romo, but don't forget he just signed a new contract worth around double the vet minimum that VRF could have paid. With only 3 QB's signed, at the moment, before TC it could indicate a certain amount of confidence in the abilities of both Romo and Henson. Its going to be interesting to see how this pans out. Personally bet is on Bledsoe being another Vinny, Henson being T.N.A and Romo a Jason Garrett type QB.

 

[percyhoward]

Parcells most definitely knows more about the game than anyone here. But he is far from perfect and I wouldn't assume he has some grand plan in place for the QB's. If my memory serves me correctly this is the man that past on Delhomme and Volek. Each could have been had for a song.

Interesting that you mentioned those two guys. How much playing time did they get in their first 3 seasons?

 

[blindzebra]

Couldn't find the article about Romo, but don't forget he just signed a new contract worth around double the vet minimum that VRF could have paid. With only 3 QB's signed, at the moment, before TC it could indicate a certain amount of confidence in the abilities of both Romo and Henson. Its going to be interesting to see how this pans out. Personally bet is on Bledsoe being another Vinny, Henson being T.N.A and Romo a Jason Garrett type QB.

They did the same with Randall Williams last year.

 

[blindzebra]

I still believe Bill made a huge mistake in not playing Henson in the last few games of the season. Vinny was NOT playing well and we were NOT going to make the playoffs. He could have put Henson in and played him for a quarter or two and pulled him out if the heat got to be too much.

More than anything else, Henson needs playing time. Protecting him year after year will not develop him into a starter. He needs to get in the game and play, period.

Last year I said that signing Vinny would hurt Henson's development and I was shouted down on a couple of forums, but sa it has turned out I was right, signing Vinny has hurt Drew's development. If not for Vinny, Carter would proabably have been the starter until he was benched and Henson would have played, thus getting a chance to develop last year.

With Bledsoe as the starter, how much playing time will Henson see this year? If Parcells was not willing to sit Vinny last year when we had no chance of making the playoffs, what are the chances of him benching Bledsoe when we have a good shot? How about zero.

The notion that Henson will be the starter in 2006 is a fantasy. He will NOT get any playing time this year unless Bledose gets hurt (God forbid!).

The point of my rant is this: Henson is NOT our QB of the future, not according to Parcells. For whatever reason, Parcells sees something in him that precludes him giving the kid a chance. Maybe he's right and maybe he's wrong, we won't know that for a few years at least, but he had a chance last year to see what the kid had and didn't take it. Now there will be no more chances unless Bledsoe goes down. Even then it wouldn't surprise me to see Romo thrown in instead of Henson.

The two opportunities Henson had last year he showed me that he has a good arm, good pocket awareness, and is tough. He played very well in the final minutes of the Ravens game, going 6 for 6 and a TD, but struggled to handle the blitz the Bears threw at him. Most QBs struggle in their first start especially when the other team throws everything in the book at him. Even though he only completed 4 of 12 passes I still saw some good things from him in that game.

Bill is NOT always right and has made his share of mistakes over the years. I believe his handling of Henson last year was one of those mistakes and it will cost us any potential Henson may have as he isn't likely to ever get a chance to develop in Dallas.

Here's to hoping Bledsoe can stay healthy and win games for us for the next couple of years.

I agree with you that we should have given both young QBs some snaps, but I completely disagree with you about your take on how Parcells feels about Henson.

First, Parcells gushed over him before the GB game last year, talking about how he's much farther along than they thought he'd be and that he really liked his potential.

Second, Parcells said several times about playing and winning with young QBs, that you need a team around them. He kept using Pittsburgh and Roethlisberger as an example.

Well, we have spent the entire offseason BUILDING that Pittsburgh model. The minute the running game and defense show they can carry the team, I have no doubts that Parcells would go to the young QBs if Bledsoe falters.

 

[viman96]

Lot of truth in that. We tried to win with bargain of the month QBs.

I'd argure even worse then bargain of the month. Tony Banks

 

[jobberone]

If Bledsoe falters then they have no choice but to go with one of the two remaining QBs. I don't what falter means to you but I see it as playing a fair amount worse than VT which is bad. I don't see Bledsoe doing that.

So unless he's injured then Romo/Henson won't do a lot. JMO.

 

[kartr]

I agree with you that we should have given both young QBs some snaps, but I completely disagree with you about your take on how Parcells feels about Henson.

First, Parcells gushed over him before the GB game last year, talking about how he's much farther along than they thought he'd be and that he really liked his potential.

Second, Parcells said several times about playing and winning with young QBs, that you need a team around them. He kept using Pittsburgh and Roethlisberger as an example.

Well, we have spent the entire offseason BUILDING that Pittsburgh model. The minute the running game and defense show they can carry the team, I have no doubts that Parcells would go to the young QBs if Bledsoe falters.

Henson did get some snaps and he scored 21 points, 14 for the opposition and 7 for us.

 

[blindzebra]

Henson did get some snaps and he scored 21 points, 14 for the opposition and 7 for us.

Once again, wrong.

He directed a TD drive in the Chicago game, we scored 14 points when Henson was playing. Cundiff also boinked a FG that would have had us ahead at the half on Thanksgiving.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I dont see why its out of the realm of possibilities that Parcells made a decision to not play Henson behind that offensive line.

Sorry but Tucker and Gurode were horrid.

I also dont see why Parcells cant just be waiting to see who plays the best to win the starting job.

 

[Hostile]

I dont see why its out of the realm of possibilities that Parcells made a decision to not play Henson behind that offensive line.

Sorry but Tucker and Gurode were horrid.

I also dont see why Parcells cant just be waiting to see who plays the best to win the starting job.

i don't think it's outside the realm. I still would have liked to see Romo and Henson over Vinny once the playoffs were out of the question.

 

[BigDFan5]

The point of my rant is this: Henson is NOT our QB of the future, not according to Parcells. For whatever reason, Parcells sees something in him that precludes him giving the kid a chance

Really? Are you in BP's mind? You must have seen him quoted as saying this right? Link please