TO said he's heard rumors of coaching...

[28 Joker]

When the offensive coordinator is getting paid $ 3 million dollars, I don't have a problem with Owens saying, after this game, that Dallas didn't do some of the stuff on offense it did last year, successful stuff.

Now, I wish he wouldn't have done the Deion Sanders interview.


T.O. isn't the problem. His positives out weigh the negatives, imo.

 

[TellerMorrow34]

I think he's one of a few offensive players who are now attempting to undermine Garrett. If you listen to a few of them it seems like a few of them don't like his system or playcalling.

 

[jimmy40]

this "predictable" stuff is hogwash IMO, and is just a scepagoat excuse

nobody in the league was more predictable than we were from 91-95, but nobody could stop it because those guys worked their tails off to be perfect in execution, and the OL coaches (Wise, Houck) took a bunch of lunch pail guys and turned them into a dominant unit

this will never fly, it makes too much sense.

 

[Bach]

I think he's one of a few offensive players who are now attempting to undermine Garrett. If you listen to a few of them it seems like a few of them don't like his system or playcalling.

Interesting showdown.

Jerry's prized superstar player vs. Jerry's wonder boy HC-in-waiting.

 

[AlterEgo]

Make that playerS. Listening to Romo it sounded like he threw Ginger under the bus as well.

Interesting showdown.

Jerry's prized superstar player vs. Jerry's wonder boy HC-in-waiting.

 

[Bach]

Make that playerS. Listening to Romo it sounded like he threw Ginger under the bus as well.

You'd really think Jerry would've seen enough to know Garrett isn't the real deal. Not only should Garrett be replaced as OC, but there should be zero chance now that he becomes our next HC.

Interesting though to see what Jerry ends up doing.

 

[wileedog]

You'd really think Jerry would've seen enough to know Garrett isn't the real deal. Not only should Garrett be replaced as OC, but there should be zero chance now that he becomes our next HC.

Interesting though to see what Jerry ends up doing.

Rational, evidence-based decision making vs. Jerry's ego admitting he is screwing the pooch again.

We lose.

 

[tyke1doe]

Keep spinning it media guy. McNabb had his best season as a player with TO on the team, and he was a significant contributer to that season, no matter which way you look at it. He also showed up in the SB, while McNabb chocked and vomited it away.

Just because you and your media cohorts wield the pen and give some exhorbitant power to one man to destroy a team, doesn't make things that you write with it true.

I'm spinning.
LOLOLOLOLOL!

Again, answer the question.

What did the Eagles do with T.O. that they didn't do without him?

Let's see.

NFC Championship? Nope, the Eagles got there without T.O. on two different occasions.

Super Bowl? Nope, the Eagles won all their playoff games without T.O.

Oh, and I'm not making this a T.O. vs. McNabb issue.

I'm making this a with T.O. vs. without T.O. issue.

The Eagles have done more without T.O. than they did with T.O.

Oh, and the Eagles are in the playoffs and T.O.'s team is not.

So much for spin.

 

[tyke1doe]

UHH i was talking about the Eagles when TO was there. He brought a swagger to that team that they lacked but whatever. I bet more than half the team doesnt want TO gone so who cares what you think

Well, apparently, half the team doesn't want to play hard enough to win and get into the post-season. So who cares what they think. :laugh1:

 

[Bach]

Rational, evidence-based decision making vs. Jerry's ego admitting he is screwing the pooch again.

We lose.

Nah, not Jerry.

 

[I LOVE ME SOME ME!]

I'm spinning.
LOLOLOLOLOL!

Again, answer the question.

What did the Eagles do with T.O. that they didn't do without him?

Let's see.

NFC Championship? Nope, the Eagles got there without T.O. on two different occasions.

Super Bowl? Nope, the Eagles won all their playoff games without T.O.

Oh, and I'm not making this a T.O. vs. McNabb issue.

I'm making this a with T.O. vs. without T.O. issue.

The Eagles have done more without T.O. than they did with T.O.

Oh, and the Eagles are in the playoffs and T.O.'s team is not.

So much for spin.

And TO's team made the playoffs last year and the Eagles didnt. Neither team has a ring and the Giants just won a ring with a TO type reciever so shut up already. Jesus

 

[Royal Laegotti]

TO said in his post game interview that he's heard rumors of coaching changes. Didn't elaborate.

I don't give a rats fecal matter what T.O. has heard. I hope we hear rumors of WR changes starting with him!

 

[I LOVE ME SOME ME!]

Well, apparently, half the team doesn't want to play hard enough to win and get into the post-season. So who cares what they think. :laugh1:

More than half the Eagles team wanted TO to stay too. Dont know why the laughing smiley. You sound dumb as hell.lol Dont know what point you tried to make with that post.

 

[Dave_in-NC]

Brilliant owens. My daughter said the same thing.

 

[SultanOfSix]

I'm spinning.
LOLOLOLOLOL!

Again, answer the question.

What did the Eagles do with T.O. that they didn't do without him?

Let's see.

NFC Championship? Nope, the Eagles got there without T.O. on two different occasions.

Super Bowl? Nope, the Eagles won all their playoff games without T.O.

Oh, and I'm not making this a T.O. vs. McNabb issue.

I'm making this a with T.O. vs. without T.O. issue.

The Eagles have done more without T.O. than they did with T.O.

Oh, and the Eagles are in the playoffs and T.O.'s team is not.

So much for spin.

It is spin you idiot, because you're taking one man's contributions to a team and diminishing them because of your bias. It's what (the only thing) you mediots are good at.

If the goal is to get to a SB and have a chance to win one, he was on the team that made McNabb better and was a significant contributor to the team. And he came to play in the SB, while McChoke did not.

The argument is about doing more with or without TO you fool. One player can make a difference, but a football TEAM is bigger than one player. Thus, one player can or can't destroy a team.

Thanks for proving my point. Mediot.

 

[SultanOfSix]

I'm spinning.
LOLOLOLOLOL!

Again, answer the question.

What did the Eagles do with T.O. that they didn't do without him?

Let's see.

NFC Championship? Nope, the Eagles got there without T.O. on two different occasions.

Super Bowl? Nope, the Eagles won all their playoff games without T.O.

Oh, and I'm not making this a T.O. vs. McNabb issue.

I'm making this a with T.O. vs. without T.O. issue.

The Eagles have done more without T.O. than they did with T.O.

Oh, and the Eagles are in the playoffs and T.O.'s team is not.

So much for spin.

It is spin you idiot, because you're taking one man's contributions to a team and diminishing them because of your bias. It's what (the only thing) you mediots are good at.

If the goal is to get to a SB and have a chance to win one, he was on the team that made McNabb better and was a significant contributor to the team. And he came to play in the SB, while McChoke did not.

The argument isn't about doing more with or without TO you fool. One player can make a difference, but a football TEAM is bigger than one player. Thus, one player can't destroy a team.

Thanks for proving my point. Mediot.

 

[28 Joker]

I'm spinning.
LOLOLOLOLOL!

Again, answer the question.

What did the Eagles do with T.O. that they didn't do without him?

Let's see.

NFC Championship? Nope, the Eagles got there without T.O. on two different occasions.

Super Bowl? Nope, the Eagles won all their playoff games without T.O.

Oh, and I'm not making this a T.O. vs. McNabb issue.

I'm making this a with T.O. vs. without T.O. issue.

The Eagles have done more without T.O. than they did with T.O.

Oh, and the Eagles are in the playoffs and T.O.'s team is not.

So much for spin.

Hmm. That is the only year the Eagles went to the Super Bowl. Owens had one of his very best years. The Falcons couldn't throw the ball in that title game.

While McNabb was puking with a chance to win the game, Owens had over 100 yards receiving, and the Eagles didn't get it to him enough. Plus, they didn't get him in the endzone.

The Eagles fluked their way into the playoffs. They beat the Cowboys down, but they scored 3 points last week and won 2 games in the division. They won't last very long.

 

[tyke1doe]

And TO's team made the playoffs last year and the Eagles didnt. Neither team has a ring and the Giants just won a ring with a TO type reciever so shut up already. Jesus

And T.O.'s team loss their only playoff game.

Meanwhile, the Eagles advanced to the Super Bowl without T.O., only to have him throw his quarterback under the bus.

Oh, and the Giants won because they knew how to run the ball and how to get it to their TO-type receiver when they needed to. But Burress wasn't complaining openly about getting the ball. At least he sucked it up for the "team" when he had to.

I'm still waiting for T.O. to do that. I guess I'll have to wait next year since Dallas won't be going to the playoffs and the T.O.-less Eagles with a wide receiver corps no where near the glitz and glitter of the Cowboys get a fat playoff check and another week to play.

 

[tyke1doe]

More than half the Eagles team wanted TO to stay too. Dont know why the laughing smiley. You sound dumb as hell.lol Dont know what point you tried to make with that post.

I know it probably went wwwaaayyy over your head. But the point was this ... if half the Cowboys players want T.O. on their team yet they can't - with all their talent - get into the playoffs, who cares what they want?

They haven't proven anything so why should we take their word on team chemistry?

These were the same guys chirping that life would be easier under Coach Cupcake rather than Big Bill.

Yeah, they know what it takes to win.

 

[Mash]

this "predictable" stuff is hogwash IMO, and is just a scepagoat excuse

nobody in the league was more predictable than we were from 91-95, but nobody could stop it because those guys worked their tails off to be perfect in execution, and the OL coaches (Wise, Houck) took a bunch of lunch pail guys and turned them into a dominant unit

We have to stop living in the past.....

Staubach didnt run the same offense as Aikman and they did alright.

Romo isnt Aikman....Owens isnt Irvin and Barber isnt Smith.

Also the defenses now are alot more complicated then when Aikman played.

and whats wrong in making the defense guess on what we are trying to do?

Romo isnt accurate like Aikman. Aikman was never the gunslinger Romo is.....our OL isnt dominating like those of the early 90's.....we dont have a E.Smith to take pressure off of Romo.

We havent been able to beat a cover 2 most of the year.....we cant beat the blitz. It took 3 thirds of the game against the Ravens for Garrett and co to figure out what was goin on......today we heard the same thing.....why is that? Shouldnt a gameplan be in place? a adjustment made? or should we just accept that well.......the 90's team ran 5 plays and just executed then thats all we need to do?

Thats Garrett problem....teams have caught on.....and his answer was....just execute...who cares if the defense knows what we are running.

Sorry that doesnt cut it.......imagine if we let our defense have the same attitude? We would be in a 3-4 base all day long....