NextGenBoys
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 9,252
- Reaction score
- 1,964
jimmy40;2560974 said:Thank goodness Jerry finally listened to someone, you should post more.:starspin
Yeah, I pull some weight down at Valley Ranch...
jimmy40;2560974 said:Thank goodness Jerry finally listened to someone, you should post more.:starspin
NextGenBoys;2560993 said:Yeah, I pull some weight down at Valley Ranch...
BraveHeartFan;2560935 said:This is interesting. So there was some team issues over him being brought right back in and allowed to play and this is part of the reason he's now been cut?
Again I don't care what the reason is. I'm just glad he's now gone.
Amazing how many guys here wouldn't listen to this back then.Kangaroo;2561010 said:Think about it this was not a guy injured you can understand that but a guy that was given back a role after being a screw up and he got the nod to start anyways. I mean what is the point is busting your are and doing things the right way if they are just going to reward the screw up for doing nothing but causing issues.
I mean he was rewarded for freelancing so why would the rest of the defense not be rewarded for freelancing.
Amen to all you said... But the great thing is that Pacman is now gone. Maybe this is the start of that moving away you talk about.RainMan;2560904 said:As important as it is that we released him, the important thing for the organization to remember is the mindset it took to create all this drama in the first place. Not only the willingness to take a chance on Pacman, but then to absolve him of all his wrongdoings and immediately play him the week he returned when, according to this report, the rest of the locker room was appalled by such a decision.
None of the decision to play him was Pacman's fault. That blame rests squarely on the organization.
So as good as it is we got rid of the guy, it's important that as an organization we move away from the mentality that talent rules out over all else. At the end of the day, players want and need accountability. If a guy is suspended, he can't be welcomed back the next week and inserted into a starting role. If a player speaks out about wanting the ball, the owner can't step on the coaches' toes and agree with the player. If a quarterback is throwing up too many turnovers, his miscues can't be glossed over by the coaching staff when addressing the media/public.
So, yes, congrats to the Cowboys for wising up here. But let's also wise up on the bigger picture, please.
Chocolate Lab;2561025 said:Amen to all you said... But the great thing is that Pacman is now gone. Maybe this is the start of that moving away you talk about.
My greatest hope for the "change" we've heard about since the end of the season has been that Wade would step up and tell Jerry that look, I know you own the team and I'm the employee here, but I need to be the one to decide who plays and when.
Maybe that was part of that "man to man" talk Wade said they had? ray:
Either way, this is great news. Better late than never.
theogt;2560859 said:This statement looks kinda silly now that Jerry cut him.
How so? If Jerry was pushing the guy to be a starter just weeks ago, it wouldn't make sense for him to do a 180 and want to cut him now.Alexander;2560893 said:How so?
It was making a statement after the fact. Cutting him now makes a statement that perhaps this is part of "change". That speaks nothing about what I said.
The simple fact is, nobody was obligated to bring him back, particularly like he never left.
Eh...after watching him up close and personal the last few months, I probably wouldn't have done it originally, but I don't think it was a clear cut bad decision at the time -- it was low risk, etc.dcfanatic;2561138 said:The point is that he should have never brought him here.
theogt;2561145 said:How so? If Jerry was pushing the guy to be a starter just weeks ago, it wouldn't make sense for him to do a 180 and want to cut him now.
Of course, that was before we found out there's new evidence of him actually being a(n attempted) murderer, so it's a whole new ball of wax.
Yup. But it could be worse. He could be coming out with some sort of "this was all in the past" BS.Alexander;2561174 said:That basically means he did not "clean house" or anything of the sort. This was a reactive move based off the incident.
Chocolate Lab;2560814 said:Mosley says he was talking to some people at Valley Ranch today, and this is the first time he's heard this... But he says some of the internal team strife started at a team meeting after it was announced that Pacman Jones would not only play, but be immediately inserted into the starting nickel lineup and punt return role. Goes back to accountability, and the players wondering why he deserved to play so much right away. Apparently he'd been seen doing some "Pacman things" on the town the week before... Use your imagination on that one.
Just reporting what I heard.
And this is my speculation, but it makes me wonder if this could've been what Newman was talking about. If Pacman is out there blowing assignments like he did -- when he wasn't getting himself suspended -- I could see why some of the players thought he hadn't earned his way back on the field yet.
That's purely a guess on my part, so please don't hang Newman for it. (Although I do agree he never should've said anything negative about the coaches.)
I also would bet dollars to doughnuts that Jerry was the one pushing for Pacman to play right away. Jerry pumped up Pacman nonstop in every interview I heard, while Wade sounded lukewarm about him.
Well whoa... 103.3 just said that Pacman was just released! If so, this is a great sign for the team this year!
CaptainAmerica;2561408 said:I'm certainly not a defender of Wade, but I will bet he told Jerry in their "man to man" talk that all the crap surrounding Pac was a big part of the friction in the lockerroom.
I do believe Jerry sees the error of his ways on that issue.
No doubt about it.wileedog;2561416 said:Nope, I think Jerry sees more allegations coming. Nothing has changed.