T.O. says Jerry 'blindsided' him - 3/28/09

[Dave_in-NC]

Which sucks, doesn't it?

Not for me, not at all. The nightmare named owens is gone and
the weight of his mouth and his holier than though attitude is history.

I'm excited about the possibilities.

 

[peplaw06]

If TO going to Buffalo says anything, what does Garrett being here say for the OC, considering he failed every Head Coaching interview, including the pathetic of the pathetic, i.e. Detroit, despite being the hottest commodity the year before?

Worst. Comparison. Evar.

There's an Ugliest Car thread in the off-topic zone. I'm shocked there's not a post from you about how Garrett sucks in that thread. You're slippin.

 

[jimmy40]

Nice try, but explain why the Patriots traded for Corey Dillon and Randy Moss. Moss was a problem in the locker room, on the field and off the field. Yet an elite franchise chose him. Dillon was the same way but worse off the field with his indiscretions. And the G-Men are apparently taking Plaxico back.

Some of these elite organizations have little issue with signing a troubled player. So making the point that he only signed with the Bills is a bit short sighted.



YAKUZA

What the hell does any of that have to do with anything? This has nothing to do with those guys, this is about TO. Where is he now?

 

[1fisher]

Which sucks, doesn't it?

Only for the TO nuthuggers!

:laugh1:

 

[khiladi]

Worst. Comparison. Evar.

There's an Ugliest Car thread in the off-topic zone. I'm shocked there's not a post from you about how Garrett sucks in that thread. You're slippin.

Well then, you really suck at understanding comparisons now, don't you? Garrett couldn't sniff the Detroit job, nor did he get the Rams job... That is a fact... They were more pathetic than Buffalo... But you wouldn't understad that...

 

[khiladi]

Not for me, not at all. The nightmare named owens is gone and
the weight of his mouth and his holier than though attitude is history.

I'm excited about the possibilities.

Owens was a 'nightmare'? I don't think he was bad, and I think Romo's 'aw shucks' attitude is more annoying than TOs mouth. But I like them both, because they are good football players.

 

[Dave_in-NC]

Owens was a 'nightmare'? I don't think he was bad, and I think Romo's 'aw shucks' attitude is more annoying than TOs mouth. But I like them both, because they are good football players.

owens has had some bad luck then I guess. Three teams, same problems.
I don't think Romo will have the aw shucks attitude any more.
Never liked owens, never will.

 

[khiladi]

owens has had some bad luck then I guess. Three teams, same problems.
I don't think Romo will have the aw shucks attitude any more.
Never liked owens, never will.

Romo has always had that attitude and it has been his definining feature since he came into the spotlight. Him changing is about as absurd as people saying wade will become a meany at practice.

Also, Owens didn't have the same problems. With the Eagles, it was reneging on the contract. He didn't have that problem here.

And you just hit the nail on the head... You never liked Owens...

 

[peplaw06]

Well then, you really suck at understanding comparisons now, don't you? Garrett couldn't sniff the Detroit job, nor did he get the Rams job... That is a fact... They were more pathetic than Buffalo... But you wouldn't understad that...

Garrett is an offensive coordinator being interviewed for a promotion to HC. TO is a HOF WR who by all accounts got one offer to be a WR.

But then again, everyone knows logic ain't your strong suit. I bet you'll blame Garrett.

 

[Dave_in-NC]

Romo has always had that attitude and it has been his definining feature since he came into the spotlight. Him changing is about as absurd as people saying wade will become a meany at practice.

Also, Owens didn't have the same problems. With the Eagles, it was reneging on the contract. He didn't have that problem here.

And you just hit the nail on the head... You never liked Owens...

owens fought with TEAM MATES in Philly over his contract? Wow he's dumber than I thought. Yes he did have those problems here, your love has you blinded. And those are the reasons I have never liked owens.

You are in for a miserable season as a fan, that's to bad really.

 

[TellerMorrow34]

Well some side of the argument is going to have a bad season. Either we do really great offensively, and win a playoff game or two, and the TO haters will be able to say, "See I told you he was a problem", or we'll struggle on offense, not make the playoffs, or win any playoff games, and the TO lovers will say, "See I told you people Roy Williams couldn't be a #1 and that it was stupid to not have TO. Did you see this offense struggle?"

This will come up EVERY single week this season. Everytime the offense does great the TO haters will gloat. Every time the offense struggles the TO lovers are going to gloat.

It's going to be a long season, either way, and all I can hope for is that it's the offense doing great, and us winning, cause at least that annoying gloating will come with a positive.

 

[DallasEast]

Owens was a 'nightmare'? I don't think he was bad...

Shocking!!! Wait...



nevermind.

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

Have you ever considered that maybe we consider the subject of Jerry Jones relevant to the Dallas Cowboys? Further have you considered that Owens signing with the Buffalo Bills is not about the Dallas Cowboys?

No we didn't. Some of us didn't vote on that poll. The ones who did all did vote it was a good move. But it wouldn't hurt to tell the truth.

This isn't worth a flush.

Hey... its finally where it belongs. In the NFL zone.

I guess you decided to flush.

 

[DallasEast]

Hey... its finally where it belongs. In the NFL zone.

I guess you decided to flush.

This is going to be a GREAT year.

 

[khiladi]

Garrett is an offensive coordinator being interviewed for a promotion to HC. TO is a HOF WR who by all accounts got one offer to be a WR.


But then again, everyone knows logic ain't your strong suit. I bet you'll blame Garrett.

Guess what, Genius? That wasn't my argument. My argument was that Garrett couldn't get a job with the most pathetic teams, Detroit included. Whether he interviewed for them or not, is irrelevant. In fact, it is even more pathetic, considering he was the front-runner for every job the year before. One more time for you: Garrett DIDN'T GET THE JOB. He was offered jobs the year before. Whether he interviewed or not is irrelevant to the point. It is quite obvious whose 'logic' is at fault here. Further, we have no idea who offered TO a contract and Buffalo was the only seeker. Where is the credible evidence? IS it simply based upon the fact he signed with Buffalo? Wow... Amusing thing is, Marvin Harrison and Terry Holt are still looking for a job and couldn't sniff a contract anywhere near the level of TO, yet they are both younger and supposedly not the locker-room cancers TO is. Uh, my bad, did I whup on you again? Why, yes I did.It is obvious I got into your skin because I whalloped you in the discussion on Garrett;s inept game-planning so your trying ever so hard to get me back. It just doesn't work, because I'm always a step ahead of you, because unlike you, I actually know football. You, on the other hand, are a Garrett homer.

 

[khiladi]

owens fought with TEAM MATES in Philly over his contract? Wow he's dumber than I thought. Yes he did have those problems here, your love has you blinded. And those are the reasons I have never liked owens.



You are in for a miserable season as a fan, that's to bad really.

ARe you really going to argue that TOs issues with Philly weren't contractual? TO fighting with teammates happened ultimately as a RESULT OF THE CONTRACT DISPUTE. This is so well-documented nobody can deny it. When the contractual dispute situation resulted in McNabb siding with the organization, the rift between Owens and McNabb grew, with some supporting the QB and some supporting the WR. Alos, like I said, whether or not those were the reasons you never liked Owens doesn't matter, because those reasons, contract dispute, weren't what defined his actions here. Those reasons is what defined how you perceived of him when he was here, even though he never had a contract dispute and nobody on the team has actually come out and bashed him. In Philly, those who weren't on his side were well-known. As far as misery, you must have been miserable the last two yuears then, considering your boy Parcells is in Miami, not in Dallas. I thought you didn't like Wade?

 

[khiladi]

Well some side of the argument is going to have a bad season. Either we do really great offensively, and win a playoff game or two, and the TO haters will be able to say, "See I told you he was a problem", or we'll struggle on offense, not make the playoffs, or win any playoff games, and the TO lovers will say, "See I told you people Roy Williams couldn't be a #1 and that it was stupid to not have TO. Did you see this offense struggle?"

This will come up EVERY single week this season. Everytime the offense does great the TO haters will gloat. Every time the offense struggles the TO lovers are going to gloat.


It's going to be a long season, either way, and all I can hope for is that it's the offense doing great, and us winning, cause at least that annoying gloating will come with a positive.

This offense can get it done without TO. There is no disputing that. But that 'getting it done' is predicated WHOLLY ON GARRETT. I've always said that the reason this offense failed is because of the play-calling and that is what needs changing. I praised Garrett last year when was due, among them the second Washington game. I drew attention to some wrinkles he brought in the first Philly game of 2007, when he used TO all over in motion. The fact is, THERE IS NO DISPUTING THE ISSUE, whether one is a Garrett fan or a Garrett hater, THAT HE NEEDS TO CHANGE HIS PLAY-CALLING, which ultimately implies that it was NEVER about TO. If Dallas kept TO, and Garrett continued in the same manner he did all year last year, this OFFENSE WOULD STILL FAIL.

 

[Vintage]

We didn't win playoff games with Owens...

I am fully confident we can continue to lose playoff games/not qualify for the playoffs without Owens.

Owens is gone. Whatever. That solves ONE issue, maybe.

There are still PLENTY of other issues that held us back the past several years. Fix those, and we can back to being relevant again. Don't fix them, then we can continue doing what we've been doing the past 10, 11, 12, 13 years....

Whatever.

 

[peplaw06]

Guess what, Genius? That wasn't my argument. My argument was that Garrett couldn't get a job with the most pathetic teams, Detroit included.

*Sigh*

The point is that he wasn't interviewing for the same job that he currently had. It was for a promotion. He already has a job... one that he wasn't released from. And we decided to eat a multi-million dollar cap hit, just so we could get rid of TO. It cost us money to cut him. Garrett on the other hand, it costs us money to keep him.

A proper analogy would be if TO were interviewing for a job that he wasn't previously doing.... Or say if Garrett had been fired and he didn't get any offers for Offensive Coordinator positions except from one team in Canada. But it's not the same. Therefore your comparison is ********.

Whether he interviewed for them or not, is irrelevant. In fact, it is even more pathetic, considering he was the front-runner for every job the year before. One more time for you: Garrett DIDN'T GET THE JOB. He was offered jobs the year before. Whether he interviewed or not is irrelevant to the point.

How many times are you going to misuse the word irrelevant? It's clear you have no idea what it means.

It is quite obvious whose 'logic' is at fault here.

Yes it is.

Further, we have no idea who offered TO a contract and Buffalo was the only seeker. Where is the credible evidence? IS it simply based upon the fact he signed with Buffalo? Wow...

I said by all accounts.... meaning all reports were that there weren't any other teams interested. You got some evidence that he got other offers?

Amusing thing is, Marvin Harrison and Terry Holt are still looking for a job and couldn't sniff a contract anywhere near the level of TO, yet they are both younger and supposedly not the locker-room cancers TO is.

What does this have to do with the topic at hand.... That being your comparison of Garrett's situation to TO is worthless. Oh I know. You endlessly feel the need to prop up your hero. When can we expect you to leave this board and go to the Buffalo one?

Uh, my bad, did I whup on you again? Why, yes I did.

I love it when people declare themselves the winner, especially when they have no idea what the debate is about. My only point in this is to tell you how bad your comparison of Garrett's situation to TO's is.

It is obvious I got into your skin because I whalloped you in the discussion on Garrett;s inept game-planning so your trying ever so hard to get me back. It just doesn't work, because I'm always a step ahead of you,

LOL... again declaring yourself the winner. I don't see anyone else agreeing with you.

because unlike you, I actually know football.

Yeah you've proven that Captain hurry up offense.... Tell everyone again how we were always running the hurry up while letting the play clock run down to 5 seconds or less on every play.

You, on the other hand, are a Garrett homer.

Typical... You've admitted you have an agenda against Garrett. Anyone who disagrees with you must be a Garrett Homer. Again, love that "logic." Bet you won a lot of arguments over play doh in kindergarten last year.

 

[Arch Stanton]

I see the crying still continues.....