Please help me understand this "Fabini over Pettiti" thing

[AMERICAS_FAN]

So basically Parcells kept Fabini over Pettiti because he felt that Fabini would be a bettter swing tackle (i.e. a better backup for both tackle spots) than Pettiti THIS YEAR. Parcells was quoted as saying this, but he was also recently quoted as saying that he learned from Ron Wolf - former GM of the Packers - to not let veterans stand in the way of progress, meaning that if you had a young player with upside then you are better off developing that player over keeping the veteran.

So basically Parcells was quoted as saying that he would prefer to choose the long-term benefits that the promising younger player can give a team over the short-term benefits the the older veteran offers. So whay then did Parcells choose Fabini over Pettiti since he believed Pettiti had a good upside? Is it that Parcells merely said that but does not really believe that or is he favoring Fabini becaise he's an old Parcells guy? I'm just confused because Parcells is talking out of both sides of his mouth on this one.

**

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

My inside sources say that he chose Fabini over Rob, because Rob had too many T's in his last name and that was the final capper.

Or could it be that after Rob came back in much better shape he was still showing some of the same problems as last year and Bill decided to go with Fabini instead.

Who knows.

Sometimes a coach will just find one player better than the other and it is not always a terrible sneaky conspiracy theory behind the decisions.

 

[YosemiteSam]

Parcells had Petitti last year and brought in Fabini as either the starter if Petitti still had problems or as the backup in case someone went down. The problem started when they drafted McQuistan. McQuistan showed that he had a lot more promise than Petitti. So, as you noted. McQuistan became the can't lose talent. So, either Petitti or Fabini had to go. Fabini has more experience and is proven that he *can* do the job. McQuistan gets the nod over Petitti (as the future of the team) and Fabini has the experience to be the backup of both (swing) Adams and Colombo.

He didn't keep Fabini because he is better than Petitti. He kept him because he is the better choice as a backup. McQuistan is the future.

 

[kmd24]

It's McQuistan that is the fly in the ointment. Parcells isn't going to load the roster down with developmental guys, and his choice to keep McQuistan made it paramount that the 4th OT (who would be the active swing on gameday) had to be the best player. Based on TC reports, I'm surprised that Fabini is the guy. It must come down to comfort level (remember the quote about lining Fabini up backwards?).


If Parcells hadn't chosen to keep Suisham, I really think Petitti would still be on the roster. Keeping 5 OT is somewhat a luxury, especially when you consider that two of them would be inactive on gameday.

 

[superpunk]

I think it might break down like this.

McQ is Parcells choice for the future.

Flo's medical status is still pretty uncertain.

Fabini (supposedly) is a better LT than Pettiti.

Fabini wins the backup spot, McQ is the future, and we can't keep 5 tackles.

Just a numbers game, I guess.

 

[Deep_Freeze]

I really liked Pettiti, but we also have to know that he lead the league in sacks allowed last year. That isn't a stat that makes you want to keep him around.

 

[Doomsday101]

I think it might break down like this.

McQ is Parcells choice for the future.

Flo's medical status is still pretty uncertain.

Fabini (supposedly) is a better LT than Pettiti.

Fabini wins the backup spot, McQ is the future, and we can't keep 5 tackles.

Just a numbers game, I guess.

I agree. I think it came down to a numbers game with Dallas keeping 2 kickers instead of 1 and 6 WR instead of 5 as most thought.

 

[theogt]

X = Fabini's value as a backup now and possibly the next year or two.

Y = Petitti's value as a backup now and potential starter in the future.


X > Y

 

[DLCassidy]

So basically Parcells kept Fabini over Pettiti because he felt that Fabini would be a bettter swing tackle (i.e. a better backup for both tackle spots) than Pettiti THIS YEAR. Parcells was quoted as saying this, but he was also recently quoted as saying that he learned from Ron Wolf - former GM of the Packers - to not let veterans stand in the way of progress, meaning that if you had a young player with upside then you are better off developing that player over keeping the veteran.

So basically Parcells was quoted as saying that he would prefer to choose the long-term benefits that the promising younger player can give a team over the short-term benefits the the older veteran offers. So whay then did Parcells choose Fabini over Pettiti since he believed Pettiti had a good upside? Is it that Parcells merely said that but does not really believe that or is he favoring Fabini becaise he's an old Parcells guy? I'm just confused because Parcells is talking out of both sides of his mouth on this one.

**

I think he liked Petitti but he sees Pat McQuistan as having more upside as a developmental prospect and he likes Columbo, who is still young, as the starter at right tackle. So you have LT in FA locked up for a couple more years and a potential long term starter at RT in Columbo with McQuistan the future swing guy and possible future replacement for FA. In the meantime you have a chance to win this year so the 4th tackle needs to offer more in the here and now. Agree or disagree with his assessment but in BP's mind that guy is Jason Fabini. Maybe if we didn't have to keep 2 kickers we would have kept all five, who knows?

 

[ric]

I don't think the battle was between Fabini and Petitti. In my opinion, it was Petitti and Mcquistan. Parcells, Ireland, Soprano, and Jerry had to ask themselves "Down the line who would be the better pro" and the answer was Mcquistan.

Then it came down to if (god forbid) Adams or Colombo goes down who would go with, a vet who has expirence starting in the league who may get into trouble one play but wont let it tear him apart or a young kid who has a chance to improve but when he faces trouble he may collapse under the pressure ( last year NYG, DEN, STL)

You have to look at it like this Rob is still going to get his chance in the league and may be a different player the next time we see him, but he's still a project. Thats what killed are season (not blaming him directly) but when you throw a project like that at a position where you face 260 lbs.men that can throw you down like nothing (not saying he was) its expected and we had two of them (Torrin Tucker). We needed a vet who know what his job will be so we won't have to go through that again.

 

[Stash]

I think he liked Petitti but he sees Pat McQuistan as having more upside as a developmental prospect and he likes Columbo, who is still young, as the starter at right tackle. So you have LT in FA locked up for a couple more years and a potential long term starter at RT in Columbo with McQuistan the future swing guy and possible future replacement for FA. In the meantime you have a chance to win this year so the 4th tackle needs to offer more in the here and now. Agree or disagree with his assessment but in BP's mind that guy is Jason Fabini. Maybe if we didn't have to keep 2 kickers we would have kept all five, who knows?

I essentially agree with this statement. Parcells believes he can win now. Fabini's experience helps now. He has fewer "holes" than Petitti and has shown he can play both left and right tackle. And despite his "training camp struggles", he played well in the preseason games.

Despite Rob's offseason work, he still had some physical limitations that others didn't. No amount of work would make him a better athlete than some others at the position, namely McQuistan.

I think the combination of McQuistan's potential and Fabini's experience sealed Petitti's fate.

I wish him well and feel he can win the starting RT spot in New Orleans.

 

[aikemirv]

I liked Pettiti, I really did, but I don't understand how anyone could watch last years second half debacle and wonder why we kept a veteran over a
2nd year player who did not have a good year last year.

We have 2 young guys in Mcquistan and Columbo and BP probably felt he could pick up another project T with as good of long term prospects as Pettiti in next years draft if he felt the need.

This is really not that hard to understand IMO.

I thounght Pettiti had potential and was a hard worker and did all he was asked but in no way do I think we will have a hard time replacing him.

 

[Echo9]

So basically Parcells kept Fabini over Pettiti because he felt that Fabini would be a bettter swing tackle (i.e. a better backup for both tackle spots) than Pettiti THIS YEAR. Parcells was quoted as saying this, but he was also recently quoted as saying that he learned from Ron Wolf - former GM of the Packers - to not let veterans stand in the way of progress, meaning that if you had a young player with upside then you are better off developing that player over keeping the veteran.

So basically Parcells was quoted as saying that he would prefer to choose the long-term benefits that the promising younger player can give a team over the short-term benefits the the older veteran offers. So whay then did Parcells choose Fabini over Pettiti since he believed Pettiti had a good upside? Is it that Parcells merely said that but does not really believe that or is he favoring Fabini becaise he's an old Parcells guy? I'm just confused because Parcells is talking out of both sides of his mouth on this one.

**

Another quote from Parcells to help explain things:

"I'm not interested in being consistent. I'm interested in being right"

Each situation is it's own. Blanket statements like "progress stoppers" and "the three year rule" don't fit reality.

Just becuase he's says something once about a particular situation does not mean he's then forced to live by that hard and fast rule for the rest of his life.

Making decisions is about weighing the pros and cons or a specific situation. It's not about pulling ironclad rules out some notebook and mindlessly following them.

 

[onetrickpony]

He didn't keep Fabini because he is better than Petitti. He kept him because he is the better choice as a backup.

That's my feeling, too. Fabini has actually played left tackle in a game before. Rob's only game day experience is right tackle. The veteran has a better shot at being successful when forced into the game with little practice time. Rob wouldn't be getting much practice with the first team so he wouldn't have a chance to improve from what he showed in the pre-season and may even have regressed from lack of practice.

I believe that was the bottom line here. McQ is the rising star and Fabini is the insurance policy. BP chose a balance between veteran experience and youthly potential. Rob just got squeezed out as having less potential than McQ and less experience than Fabini.

 

[BARRYRAY]

Well as much as I like Pittdawg, the NFL is a harsh world, like america's got talent, the end comes harsh, Rob is a great person who works really hard, but he doesn't have enough talent to play in the NFL, sorry it had to be said, HE LED THE LEAGUE IN SACKS,that is not what someone hopes for as an o-lineman, people be honest he was as bad as Eddie George was when he was here, nice is what has kept us out of the playoffs for forever. Nice didn't get us to being America's Team. Forget nice we got TO and Roy and a lot of other BIG, BAD defensive guys. We outweigh the frickin Jaguars in the front seven, thats what I'm talken about. Besides if you really care about Rob then going to the Saints in like when BP first came here and we brought in all the can't make it anywhere else guys. If he can't make it in New Orleans, then its off to the nacho stand with Q and Eddie George and all the other ones....

 

[flashback]

Good thread, guys. The move actually makes sense. A_F, look at the depth chart behind Adams and Colombo. With Pettitti in there, its long on potential and short on experience. With Fabini in there, you've got another guy who can mentor Colombo and McQuistan a little bit.

Now, after watching all of the preseason games, I didn't see Pettitti or McQuistan doing a lot of great things, but I watched the RT spot pretty closely, and Colombo looked pretty good, and Fabini did a pretty good job...if his job is impersonating a turnstile. Again, I hope Parcells knows what he's doing with this former player.

 

[theogt]

Good thread, guys. The move actually makes sense. A_F, look at the depth chart behind Adams and Colombo. With Pettitti in there, its long on potential and short on experience. With Fabini in there, you've got another guy who can mentor Colombo and McQuistan a little bit.

Now, after watching all of the preseason games, I didn't see Pettitti or McQuistan doing a lot of great things, but I watched the RT spot pretty closely, and Colombo looked pretty good, and Fabini did a pretty good job...if his job is impersonating a turnstile. Again, I hope Parcells knows what he's doing with this former player.

You must not have actually watched the games.

 

[stardeep]

This thread is what makes this the best Cowboys site on the net, hands down. Intelligent, insightful, mature discussion. I almost responded with a 'totally agree, perfect analysis' to five different posts. Well done guys!

 

[ravidubey]

This wasn't about Petitti vs. Fabini; more like finding the best two of Petitti, McQuistan, and Fabini for Dallas both now and in the future. Parcells made the right choice like he usually does.

Also, Petitti was competing against not only other players at his own position, but also on others as well. Parcells wisely was unwilling to keep 5 OT's, and Rob has found another situation for himself.

 

[HDC]

Fabini is there for some vereran help.