There has been a heated discussion on quarterbacks of late, with this place looking similar to the Quincy/Hutch wars over the back-ups, of all things.
People seem to divide their loyalty when this topic comes around. It isn't what is best for the team, but who you prefer, and how you can crow later about your pony in this race crossing the finish line first.
However, Parcells said some things today in the press conference which is both cryptic and telling at the same time. He spoke about the quarterbacks, and his comments do suggest what he thinks.
When asked about Henson, and specifically if he was done, Bill said:
Again he was quizzed later in the press conference about Romo and Henson.
So experience is the key to this battle. Obviously Romo, at this point-in-time has the experience over Henson.
Which is why he is the number two quarterback on this team.
But Bill says more functional. Which states emphatically that Romo can function in this offense with a higher success rate than Henson. But the "developing" comment does have a bearing on this.
Bill makes further comments which are very telling.
Speaking about Bledsoe, he discusses their previous relationship when they were both with New England.
Now factor in what Parcells said about Henson when asked if he had taken a step backwards.
It is clear that Parcells is being very patient with Henson. He has been away from the game for a long while, and it will take some time for him to get acclimated with the speed and decision-making neccessary to move up the depth chart.
But what is unspoken here is what Bill eluded to the other day when he spoke about Ron Wolfe. He stated that Wolfe taught him that you cut your loses. Don't sit around waiting for a player to show you something when what he is showing you is nothing at all.
Cut the guy and move on.
I have seen a lot of comments on this board by the impatient which are ready to cut Henson. I am not sure if this is a comment borne of wanting any competition for Romo to be jettisoned from the team, or just absolute stupidity.
Both the cap ramifacations and the fact that there will be a number of teams ready to sign Henson if he were cut states in three inch letters that this will not happen.
But more importantly Bill said something else in the press conference which was very significant.
He was asked about the quarterback ratings and his reply shoots huge holes in the prevalent theories that abound on boards like these.
To sum up, what he seems to be saying is this.
Don't believe the stats put out on NFL.com on quarterback ratings. You and I and everyone else that is not involved with this team are just voyeurs and nothing more. Each play has a results which would be hidden from anyone that is not on the team using THEIR grading system.
Henson is a work in progress. He is behind Romo because of experience.
His comments about Bledsoe suggest experience will win the day with any of these guys.
But, and this is the crux of the argument.
Obviously Henson has something, or the team would figure a way to move him along. It might be by trade,or outright cut.
Quoting Parcells again:
Does anyone here truly think Henson is the 52nd or 53rd player on this roster?
There must be something there or Parcells wouldn't waste his time with this player. And the notion that this something isn't significant doesn't take into consideration that they don't want someone to just carry a clipboard. Parcells is not the type of coach to waste a spot on the team if the player doesn't have potential.
Quantifiable potential.
The demise of young Mr. Henson has been premature at best.
The suggestion that Romo is the future may be also.
There is nothing written in stone as yet other than this season Romo will be #2.
At this time. That could change.
