Why has BP failed to Win?

[Alexander]

I understand that. I don't think there is anything wrong with questioning what you perceive to be a negative but when that is all you see then that can grate on people after a while. Truth is every team out there has their own question marks and strengths Dallas is no different.

Absolutely.

Only the obtuse think everything is great. And some of the complaints are legitimate, provided you can back up your assertions with suggestions or solutions.

Circular logic and vague complaining are quite boring and pointless.

 

[iceberg]

talking about anything else and suggesting answers to problems would be better for me

i did suggest answers - draft an OL. sign hutch or bentley, replace the stud with a stud. stop siging 30+ fa's on the line and go after - if you must - more kosiers.

you seem to miss all these "answers" in your fest - of - hate on me.

 

[superpunk]

http://img217.*************/img217/34/mypostbeatup5lm.gif

 

[WoodysGirl]

http://img217.*************/img217/34/mypostbeatup5lm.gif

Wanna fight

 

[superpunk]

Wanna fight

No.

Your delete button smacks the snot out of my posts.

Simmah down, now! Simmah!

 

[iceberg]

http://img217.*************/img217/34/mypostbeatup5lm.gif

in comes superpunk with the right touch of humor. : )

thanks dude.

 

[Verdict]

Because it's something that nobody wants to talk about, but it's the truth......going 10-6 in 2003 and putting the #1 defense on the field that season was the worst thing that has happened to this organization.

Parcells wanted to change to the 3-4 from the get go, but he also wanted to win. So he stuck with the 4-3 scheme and it worked great in 2003. Meanwhile, he focused on rebuilding the offense.

After 2003 the general consensus was that all we needed was a running back (Julius), a possession receiver (Keyshawn), and some help at right tackle (had Vollers and Tucker, drafted Rogers), a weakside DE (Wiley)

Instead, there were a LOT more issues than that. Quincy couldn't be trusted and was cut...so now they have to find a QB. Julius got hurt, now they need RB depth. Gurode never developed at guard and Tucker, Vollers weren't the answer at RT and Rogers got hurt....so now they need to improve the right side of the O-Line.

Woodson got hurt and it took starting Dixon to realize how awful he is...so now they need a safety opposite of Roy. Hunter got hurt, Donald Mitchell was never the same and was cut....so now they need CB's.

Coakley and Nguyen were getting older. Wiley certainly wasn't the answer...so now they LB's and and weakside DE.

So we went to appearing to only have about 3 needs that we assumed to be filled to having the following needs:

-QB
-RB depth
-RG and RT
-LB's
-Weakside DE
-FS
-At least 2 CB's

Come out of 2005, they attempted to address all of those in some form or fashion, but Flozell went down, Allen completely regressed, the right side of the O-Line was never figured out.....Davis wasn't the answer at FS, they replaced one LB, but couldn't find a replacement for Dat, and our kicking game stunk to high heaven.

Hopefully they've got those issues straightened out somewhat coming into this year. But essentially the main problem is that once they've gotten a bunch of needs fixed, a bunch of new needs arise...usually due to unforseen injuries or age.

The only need that Dallas hasn't made a good, reasonable attempt to fix is the O-Line. Coincidentally, that's probably been our weakest unit in the Parcells era.

Rich..........

Very good analysis.

 

[Doomsday101]

well, doom - when you're told time and again you're FLAT OUT WRONG you do tend to focus on why you feel that way to at least be understood, if not agreed with.

Believe me I go throught that with the TO situation however while I will state what I see are the negitive he brings I also will discuss the positive he can brings. There is no doubt this team has some question marks what we do not know is how these question marks are going to be ansewered good or bad?We will soon find out.

 

[Hostile]

in comes superpunk with the right touch of humor. : )

thanks dude.

SP is one of my favorite newer (less than 1 year) posters. Always has stuff to make me laugh and is a good debate partner.

 

[superpunk]

Seriously guys.....I'm blushing here.

Ya'll know how to make a gal feel special.

 

[Alexander]

Because it's something that nobody wants to talk about, but it's the truth......going 10-6 in 2003 and putting the #1 defense on the field that season was the worst thing that has happened to this organization.

It certainly gave us a false sense of how talented this team was. We completely overachieved in 2003 and took a very laid back approach to the offseason the following year. I still remember us basically standing around and our first signing? Marcellus Wiley.

Parcells wanted to change to the 3-4 from the get go, but he also wanted to win. So he stuck with the 4-3 scheme and it worked great in 2003. Meanwhile, he focused on rebuilding the offense.

I agree that he probably wanted the 3-4, but I am sure Jones convinced him to give Zimmer (and the 4-3) a chance because we were so ill-suited for a wholesale change at that time. Parcells also wants the best chance to win and staying 4-3 then was the best solution to that end. Also, there were bigger fish to fry in terms of turning around the attitudes at Valley Ranch. Adding a defensive scheme change with few players around familiar with it was too much to try in the first year.