PFT: Reeves: “Coaches Never Punch A Clock”

[khiladi]

I would have been more happy if Jerry fired Garrett and got my grandmother to coach this offense, then if Jerry hired Reeves while Garrett was still the OC...

 

[Beast_from_East]

So far I am only hearing crickets.

Apparently since Jerry did not spill the beans about draft strategy and player personnel, he is a liar. I asked for a "non player personnel" example of a flat out lie and so far crickets is all I hear.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

So far I am only hearing crickets.

Apparently since Jerry did not spill the beans about draft strategy and player personnel, he is a liar. I asked for a "non player personnel" example of a flat out lie and so far crickets is all I hear.

he's probably trying right now

poor guy

 

[Beast_from_East]

he's probably trying right now

poor guy

I hope Google doesnt crash, he would be screwed then.

:laugh2:

 

[bbgun]

Whatever dude, those "technicalities" are how you operate a franchise and apparently you have to be a bold face liar to run a franchise in the NFL using your logic.

If Jerry Jones not sharing our draft board or player acquistion strategy with the league makes him a liar, then I guess (using your extrene definition) he is a liar then.

I guess you as GM would babble our entire draft board to JJT if he asked you since you are not a liar, correct???

For the umpteenth time, whether or not the lie "made strategic sense" from the Cowboys' standpoint is not part of the equation. Jerry was indeed right not to tip his hand before the trade deadline, but a white lie is still a lie. And issuing a categorical denial goes waaay beyond mere bluffing. Everything else is spin.

 

[bbgun]

we're still waiting for the other lies you assure us you can find

No, that was predicated on my wanting to make the effort, and I don't. If you want to sift through thousands of interview and press conference transcripts, feel free. I'm sure you'll unearth a fib or two.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

What I find hilarious is people trying to excuse this BS by saying that the clause would have ensured Dan Reeves would not skip out early to play golf on Friday afternoon or halfass it in Dallas.

It's Dan Freaking Reeves for God's sake. The guy has done nothing in his career to suggest he's some sort of slacker that needs to be micromanaged.

Are you freaking kidding me?

The guy has more success as a coach than our entire coaching staff combined. He's won playoff games and taken two teams to the Super Bowl. But yeah, he's some slacker that you need to micromanage to ensure he gets his work done.

Wow.

I never said that he was a slacker. Try again.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

You asked for a lie, got one, and have been furiously backpedaling ever since. I could care less if the lie was savvy, justifiable, routine practice, or worked to the Cowboys' advantage, because those are technicalities. Have fun moving those goalposts.

Actually you proved nothing. He said he had no plans at that time. CAn you prove that he did?

 

[Jed_70]

I never said that he was a slacker. Try again.

Yes you did. You didn't use the term "slacker" but you did say:

Essentially what it does is protect the franchise from him going out and playing golf on the friday before a game like Spurrier was known to do.

That's calling Reeves a slacker.

And you aren't the only one using that silly excuse to defend Jerry. I just quoted your post with my reply because there are several other misguided individuals making the same silly statement regarding Reeves work ethic.

 

[bbgun]

Actually you proved nothing. He said he had no plans at that time. CAn you prove that he did?

Yeah right. The notion of trading for Roy--a player Jerry had been pining for for over two years--never entered his noggin until after the public denial and shortly before the trade deadline. Hi-larious. I was born at night, but not last night.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Yeah right. The notion of trading for Roy--a player Jerry had been pining for for over two years--never entered his noggin until after the public denial and shortly before the trade deadline. Hi-larious. I was born at night, but not last night.

I just want to get this straight. You feel that Jerry is lying about the other coaches having the clause in their contract. Your justification for feeling this was because Jerry denied trade rumors before the trade deadline and then went ahead and made a trade.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Yes you did. You didn't use the term "slacker" but you did say:



That's calling Reeves a slacker.

And you aren't the only one using that silly excuse to defend Jerry. I just quoted your post with my reply because there are several other misguided individuals making the same silly statement regarding Reeves work ethic.

No its not.

What it says is it protects from that kind of behavior. That is why the language is in all the contracts. I made no comment about Reeves so try again.

That being said, you dont know a damn thing about Reeves, his personal life or desire to work at his current age. Quit acting like you do.

 

[bbgun]

I just want to get this straight. You feel that Jerry is lying about the other coaches having the clause in their contract.

False. I never offered an opinion about that, mainly because I'm not in a position to know. You're probably confusing me with dcfanatic.

Your justification for feeling this was because Jerry denied trade rumors before the trade deadline and then went ahead and made a trade.

See above.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

False. I never offered an opinion about that, mainly because I'm not in a position to know. You're probably confusing me with dcfanatic.



See above.

fair enough

 

[Jed_70]

No its not.

What it says is it protects from that kind of behavior. That is why the language is in all the contracts. I made no comment about Reeves so try again.

That being said, you dont know a damn thing about Reeves, his personal life or desire to work at his current age. Quit acting like you do.

Dude, I'm not going to waste more time going around in circles with you arguing semantics.

You know what you meant and so do I. You said it prevents "him" from playing golf on a Friday like Spurrier. When you said him wou were referring to Reeves, buddy. So yeah, you did say or at least refer to Reeves when making that statement.

I think I know Reeves' track record well enough to know that he's a hard worker and that I wouldn't have to worry about him going golfing instead of prepping for Sunday's game.

Or did you not say that either, and should I try again.

Anyhow, this is my last post on the subject I'm not going to change your mind and you're not going to change my mind. We have differing opinions and that's fine. No matter how wrong yours may be.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Dude, I'm not going to waste more time going around in circles with you arguing semantics.

You know what you meant and so do I. You said it prevents "him" from playing golf on a Friday like Spurrier. When you said him wou were referring to Reeves, buddy. So yeah, you did say or at least refer to Reeves when making that statement.

I think I know Reeves' track record well enough to know that he's a hard worker and that I wouldn't have to worry about him going golfing instead of prepping for Sunday's game.

Or did you not say that either, and should I try again.

Anyhow, this is my last post on the subject I'm not going to change your mind and you're not going to change my mind. We have differing opinions and that's fine. No matter how wrong yours may be.

No, instead you are going to argue what I meant. Quit trying because you are wrong.

What I said is that it would prevent him (or anyone else) from doing that. A guard rail prevents you from going over the side of the road. It does not follow that if the guard rail was not there that you would go over the side. Prevention does not belie intent and you can sit there and try and say that it does all day long but you can be wrong all day long as well.

And yeah you are going to have to argue semantics when you are trying to tell me what I meant.

And again, you don't know crap about his track record. You certainly do not know a damn thing about his state of mind now that hes been retired for most of a decade, has health issues and is right around 70.

 

[TellerMorrow34]

This is one of the best topics ever. The way some people defend, or battle against, these two guys as if they're defending their family or attacking their worst enemy is absolutely hilarious.

This is one of the reasons I love these forums, and this team, so much. Some how the fans always wind up pissing all over one another, and their opinions, as if the person with a different opinion has attacked a close loved one.

I love it.

 

[TwoDeep3]

Not sure I understand what all the hubbub is about.

Reeves got his nose out of joint over a clause in the contract. He bolted.

Jerry had a right to include that regardless of the name of the guy signing the contract.

Reeves had a right to say no.

Jerry did. Reeves did. End of story.

 

[odog422]

Not sure I understand what all the hubbub is about.

Reeves got his nose out of joint over a clause in the contract. He bolted.

Jerry had a right to include that regardless of the name of the guy signing the contract.

Reeves had a right to say no.

Jerry did. Reeves did. End of story.

The hubbub is about the intent. The contract existed without the clause, Reeves was already working, parameters appeared to be set.

11th hour Jerry inserts the clause and says "take it or walk."

Agreed, Jerry has that right. Just as Reeves had the right to walk.

But what brought about the sudden "need" for the clause? Folks are either upset because they respect Reeves and what he's accomplished in 40 years in the game and thought he would be good for the franchise, or they're not and think Reeves is lazy and was looking for an easy check without working for his money.

Topic for debate....

 

[jterrell]

The hubbub is about the intent. The contract existed without the clause, Reeves was already working, parameters appeared to be set.

11th hour Jerry inserts the clause and says "take it or walk."

Agreed, Jerry has that right. Just as Reeves had the right to walk.

But what brought about the sudden "need" for the clause? Folks are either upset because they respect Reeves and what he's accomplished in 40 years in the game and thought he would be good for the franchise, or they're not and think Reeves is lazy and was looking for an easy check without working for his money.

Topic for debate....

...sigh...

We get 179 threads about this but no one actually pays attention.

Dan Reeves himself stated in any number of his seemingly 679 interviews on the subject that Jerry gave in to all of his concerns about title, duties and salary. Once they were agreed on all that then Jerry felt the clause was necessary. It is pretty clear Reeves wanted a real role and a real salary... which makes sense. It also makes sense that Jerry didn't wanna hire him to an open ended contract that meant he could spend a lot of time in Atlanta with with family if he was gonna be hired as an offensive guru.

As TD says, this is a non-story. They talked, it wasn't a fit, time to move on.

Reeves hasn't actually coached in a few years and there is some doubt he really wants to go into a 24x7 coaching role again unless he is a head coach.

If it is so ridiculous to assume the time wouldn't be an issue than Reeves could have simply signed and made his 2 or 2 mil per year. but Reeves himself mentions he was worried about failing to meet it and that he could released for violating the contract.