Pats Fan - Now you know what we know

[jterrell]

I think Katr's point is, we all know what the real deal was with Quincy Carter and the majority of the Cowboys fans (I don't need to say it). Quincy would have never succeded in this type of Town/State.

The fans didn't like him from day 1 - the fans were pulling for Hutchinson to win over QC, and I wonder why?

QC went into that season and became a Parcells groupie - he did everything Parcells asked of him. People back then didn't want to blame the line or the receivers or the running back, but now that it's all American Bledsoe, we have a thousand excuses for this guy.

Us Cowboys fans are some horrible people sometimes. Right after Carter had taken us to a playoff, that following season when VT came in, there were people saying that Carter is scared now that a real QB is in town.

Well guess what? VT gave us squat! Truth Hurts!

Somehow, this stupid talking, duck throwing, drug sniffin, no snap handling idiot, found a way to win 10 games in a season and took us to the playoffs.

Meanwhile; This tall, handsome, strong arm, well spoken, Aikman cloan (Bledsoe that is) just has too many sorry linemen, and runners that can't get yards, and receivers that are too slow, and this, and that, and this and that.

I don't give a **** who plays QB, wether it's Bledsoe/Quincy/ or Jet li playing QB for us, I want wins.

I say, keep Bledsoe and draft the kid from USC even if you have to give up picks for the followling year to do it. Let him sit under Bledsoe for a year, and then send Bledsoe packing. This kid Matt (or whomever else you think will be a great franchise QB) will be running the league here in Dallas (or Arlington) for the next 12 years. "Get er done Jerry"

Must be seriously good egg nog

We won't be able to get Lienart period. We just d/wont draft high enough to even package picks. So you can forget that altogether.

We could possibly land a QB in the mid to late first but it won't be Lienart who goes no later than 2nd without ever working out for scouts.

As to QC: I liked him as a QB. He gave us an ugly but effective offense. It ate clock and got first downs. He made a few plays out of nothing. However he brought about his own downfall. He had won out over Coslet and whomever else and was the guy here but drugged his way out of the league. Having listened to him recently the guy is just clueless and completely lost.

QC did start for a 10-6 team but one that played an easy schedule and had maybe 3 wins over playoff teams. This Dallas team under Drew has played like 12 games against teams still in the playoff hunt with 2 weeks remaining. We played the strongest AFC division, we play in the strongest NFC division where no team will be under 6 wins and the top 3 all have 8 or more. We played the champions of what looks like 3 of the 4 NFC divisions.

 

[Garland powerplay]

Wouldn't you think it would be in the gameplan to beat the blitz? W/ 4 guys who can catch. Quick passes will kill a blitz or heavy pass rush. It was not in the Washington game.Once you burn them enough times they will either stop or lose big gains. I hope they have put something in for this week since it wasn't there for NY or Wash.

 

[mr.jameswoods]

I agree with your message overall. But I think you are being shortsighted to not give credit to Bledsoe for helping you to your first Superbowl. And it's unfair to criticize him for not winning the Superbowl. Green Bay was a far superior team to any AFC team. No one in their right mind thought New England had a chance. Favre was in his prime and the rest of that Green Bay team was loaded with talent.

 

[mr.jameswoods]

Even with that being said, he's done well in games facing pressure. Played very well against San Diego, Philly (first game), Denver, KC, Washington (first game), Giants (first game), etc.

He has also played pretty lousy under pressure this season as well. Do we really need to list all those games?

The fact comes down to this. Tom Brady wouldn't be putting up the same numbers in NE if he had Dallas' current O-Line. The same goes for Peyton Manning, Carson Palmer etc.

But then again, he wouldn't really be putting up those costly interceptions and giving up a lot of sacks either. That's the point many of you seem to miss. Of course a QB will struggle under a lousy offensive line. With a bad offensive line, he is not going to throw for 4000 yards and 30 TD's. However, not all QB's fold under pressure. A lot of QB's will not fumble the ball or can do enough to evade a pass rush to throw it out of bounds. The great QB's know when not to force passes which Bledsoe struggles with under pressure.

 

[mr.jameswoods]

Parcells said part of his agreement with Jerry when he signed on was that he would evaluate the QBs we already had. You want to blame someone, blame Jerry and his accursed infatuation with Quincy and Hutch.

Apparently that didn't stop Jerry from letting Bill sign Vinny Testaverde or allowing Parcells to keep Testaverde as the starter when he (Jerry) wanted Henson to start last season. Don't make Jerry the scapegoat.

 

[Zaxor]

honestly this is just pathetic from someone I thought paid attention.

If you saw the Washington game they only defended the run with 7 and we still couldn't get much going. The announcers brought it up many times.

Now..now don't get ruffled....take a deep breath...

They didn't need 9 because 7 worked fine...either way the point I made was valid... perhaps they put a man on Key and one on Witten... but what does it matter unless they were running 20+ yards down the field... but you could rush just 1 and he can be blocked by all 5 of the o-lineman and it's even odds that Bledsoe might step into that sack

Drew has his faults but no one can lay blame on last week's loss on him

sure they can...even you can.. give it a try

. He really had no chance to run the plays that were called due to pressure.

agreed that he has to run the plays called but if they say 75yxzgo the go is suppose to clear the way for the underneath stuff not be the primary target he'll either throw it high or at the feet of or left or right of the intended target or go for the BOMB

As for Indy you are right. They have lost 1 game. The 1 game they didn't block for Peyton. Amazing how that happens.

your use of strawmen is not necessary...but if you insist that I knock them down <sigh> JT how many teams go undefeated...Indy was long due for a bad game..however it came about..it does not matter...and again with Bledsoe it is ALWAYS the O-line isn't it

Kinda like how we were 7-3 when we were blocking better up front.

what happened to that 7-3 o-line?

Or how KC sucked when Raof was out. Or how Pitt who has been a top 5 rushing team was horrid minus their starting LT that one season. LT is a franchise position and it severely affects the outcome of games.

did you not listen to Bill Nobody Cares it is not an excuse that is tolerated

Bledsoe has shown this season if you block for him he will score you points. Not FGs but TDs.

Really!? lol which games did we block for bledsoe and which did we not

This team has not had a guy throw TD passes like that in ages and yet all we get are nonsensical whines about his play. good grief.

Really!? Bledsoe has thrown 21 td's this year... last year Vinny threw 17 without Glenn and Jones for a good portion of the year...

but bledsoe has had 15 fumbles this year and VT had 8 last year
Bledsoe 14 ints VT 20...Bledsoe 39 sacks VT 34

Good grief it looks like VT part II but even scarier than the first part...

There really is no point in debating this further.

That is what I have been saying there is just no defending the guy

Bledsoe is what he is and he is a capable NFL QB.

capable of what? getting sacked, fumbling, throwing int's, finishing last or next to last 8 out of 11 times in his division...losing to backups with the playoffs on the line...boneheaded decisions...locking onto one receiver?

We are however starting at least 2 guys on the OL who are not capable of doing their job at all right now due to some combination of inexperience and injury. Rob isn't just a 6th round rookie, he also has a beat up body.

I agree totally that Bledsoe puts undue stress on the offense/defense/ST but especially the o-line...but just how many supermen are available to play on the o-line anyway?

Bledsoe leaving sure didn't help McGahee. In fact McGahee has had markedly less success this year. One could easily surmise that is because the defenses they face now stop him first as opposed to stopping Bledsoe. Travis Henry who was looking like a young stud whith Bledsoe passing now rides pine in Tennessee where franchise QB McNair resides. He didn't beenfit from the change of scenery.

again Mcgahee runs better with Holcomb in the game...

Not only that but alot of vets have voiced concerns over Bledsoe being let go this season to the extent it has caused friction in Buffalo's clubhouse.

that could well be the truth of it.. Losman has been awful but is learning and it is gonna take sometime... right now he is hasn't reached Bledsoe's level of incompetence but he is getting close...I think in the long run Buffalo made the right decision

 

[mr.jameswoods]

That was a great game but the Broncos werent good at all in '94. That was the Wade Phillips "era". Leonard Russell was their leading rusher that year.

They had 4 players make the Pro Bowl that year. Kansas City had 3. Elway had a talented receiving roster including Shannon Sharpe, Mike Pritchard and Anthony Miller. Anthony Miller had over a 1000 yards receiving and made the Pro Bowl the year prior in 93' and the following year in 95'. Dennis Smith didn't make the Pro Bowl that year but he made it the year prior in 93'. They also had the 4th highest rated offense and the 17th ranked defense. To say they were terrible is quite strong.

And gave players like Davis the "right to think" SB? Elway gave players like Sammy Winder the "right to play" in them. More than once.

Yet, he doesn't get credit for choking in 3 Superbowls prior to Mike Shanahan which is exactly what happened.

And how was beating the Niners in week 2 at Arrowhead that particular year 24-17 "utterly destroying" and a "total blowout". I dont really remember that particular game so perhaps "the game wasnt as close as the score would indicate"?

That Niners team won the Superbowl and was arguably one of the 10 most dominant teams of all time. That team was loaded with talent. They may not have blown out the Niners but beating them was a miracle considering the Niners had 5 times the amount of talent that KC had.

Anyway, if you wanted to argue Montana was better than Elway, thats fine. You obviously wouldnt be alone in drawing that conclusion. But I'd think you'd need to use better examples than these.

How is that not a great example? Montanta didn't have Jerry Rice or the SF system excuse? The game was played in Denver. The Broncos were leading and Montana won the game in the last minute. Denver had arguably as much if not better talent than Kansas City that year. I don't know what more evidence you want? Montana was not as physically talented as John Elway but he knew how to win and inspire players to win. In the end, Montanta came out on top. To me that answered who the best was

 

[RCowboyFan]

I know they asked to open up the offense and I know BP knew better because he told us so in his daily press conferences ALL WEEK.

BP gets paid 4 million to coach the team. Its HIS job to tell the players to shut up and execute the plays that are called.

When you see me post endorsing Drew Bledsoe or Keyshawn as our next head coach let me know. Until then, as usual, you have no point.

You know it was a mistake for me to even continue a debate, as soon as someone proclaimed himself to be among the smart. In my umpteen years of posting thats the first sign it becomes pointless. Which to me says, I am right because I say so, if you don't agree you are stupid. Second trump card, the pointing the "English" option, meaning, "Look at you, you are so stupid you can't type properly in english".

Beyond, one thing is certain, Its obvious who has a point, only in their mind.