Coming Attractions and My Two Cents on Mike Shanahan
by Rafael Vela on Dec 31, 2008 11:27 AM CST
159 comments
One of these things is not like the other. One of these things just didn't recur. Can you guess which one is not like the others and I'll tell you why we're all mad?
- 9-7
- 9-7
- 13-3
- 9-7
I've mused that the players have mired this team in that good-but-so-what purgatory. Here's some evidence. I'm going to begin a series of autopsies on team units, looking for the causes of death. Some places seem obivous, but even there, you find causes and villains you didn't expect.
Tomorrow, we'll start with the most obvious malady on the '08 Cowboys -- special teams. Friday, I'll take a long, long look at the offensive line and suggest that an upgrade is the fastest way out of the malaise.
Whither Shanahan?
Fans are citing a Cris Mortensen interview from today where he claims "Jerry might be interested" in pursuing Mike Shanahan. I don't consider it likely, but what they hey, speculation is what blogs are for. Some points for and against a move:
For:
A. These guys know each other. The Cowboys and Broncos have trained together the last few years and are familiar with each other's personnel.
B. Shanahan's system might be the cure for some young OL flailing in the current system. Doug Free was a highly touted OT prospect in '07. The kid has the smoothest feet of any tackle on the roster. When I saw him in San Antonio I thought one full season with Joe Juraszek and he could maybe push for a starting spot in '08.
Free looked confused in '08. He was beaten regularly at Oxnard, by the Demarcus Wares and by the Erik Waldens alike. He was inactive for Dallas' first 13 games and did not play a down in the three where he suited up. In the current regime, he may be a lost cause. He, and Montrae Holland -- if he gets his weight under control, and that's a big if (pun intended) -- are suddenly more valuable in Shanahan's system.
C. Shanahan and Jerry might actually be a very good fit, personnel wise. Shanahan has been mediocrity defined the last four years. A .500 overall record in that span and no playoff appearances the last three years.
What was his problem? The guy in Denver's GM chair. The guy named Mike Shanahan.
Let's look at the Broncos drafts this decade. Notice the extreme splits:
Offensive draftees:
- Ben Hamilton
- Mike Anderson
- Cooper Carlisle
- Clinton Porits
- Ashley Lelie
- Kevin Kasper
- Tatum Bell
- Jay Cutler,
- Tony Schefler
- Brandon Marshall
- Domenik Hixon
- Chris Kuper
- Ryan Clady
- Eddie Royal
- Peyton Hillis
There's some real talent there. Now, look at the quality defensive starters Shanahan drafted in that span. It's a much shorter list:
- Delpha O'Neal
- Ian Gold
- D.J. Williams
- Darrent Williams
- Alvin McKinley
- Elvis Dumervill
Only three defensive draftees started for the Broncos this year. Shanahan has an eye for offense. He can always find offensive linemen to make his system work. Dallas, on the other hand, has had success drafting defense this decade. It's biggest weakness is finding offensive linemen, a subject I'll treat in detail on Friday.
Put Jerry and Mike together and you might have those two great football tastes that taste great together, to quote the long-departed Reece's ads.
On the other hand:
A. Who runs his defense? Even when Shanahan was winning Super Bowls, his defensive coordinator, Greg Robinson, took heavy abuse from Broncos fans, who felt his unit couldn't hang with the offense. There's more than a little bit of Don Coryell in Shanahan. Are you absolutely sure he can find a coordinator who can keep the pressure coming? The Broncos have been the worst pass rushing team in football the past few years.
B. Dallas would have competition. The Jets are rumored to have Shanahan on their short list. He would prefer Dallas, given they have a younger, better QB, but the Jets would certainly offer him more control than Dallas would.
He would be a shiny new toy, and he would bring great publicity but I'm not sure he solves all this team's ills. He was far from flawless and Dallas might be swapping Wade's problems for Mike's.
And remember, the players, those chronic 9-7 guys, are still in place.
0 recs |
159 comments
Email
Print
Comments
according to PFT
Shan’s departure is interesting. He chose to get fired rather than fire his DC. This could mean that he was standing up to mgmt, or it could mean that he saw a good opportunity (be it dallas, nyj, etc) and finangled a way to get paid to leave Denver and make himself a free agent.
by 325424 on Dec 31, 2008 11:40 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Sounds Like He Pulled A Wade Philips.
~Texas Massacre 08~
by TheHeat on Dec 31, 2008 12:03 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Great Write-up
I don’t see Mike coming here.
They've done studies, you know. 60% of the time it works, every time.
by what_the_crap on Dec 31, 2008 11:43 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
I'm open to it
but if we ever believed Garrette could do it and was a smart man, he should get another chance to learn
by AustonianAggie on Dec 31, 2008 1:36 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Didn't Shanahan QB at Eastern Illinois?
That might be a nice bond between him and Romo. Plus I could see Shanahan getting in Romo’s face at times. He seems intense.
That said, unless Jerry fires Wade I don’t see Shanahan coming here. I guess Garrett could leave and Shanahan somehow accepts a position as Offense Coordinator/Asst Head Coach, but that seems implausible.
by DavidH22 on Dec 31, 2008 11:48 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Shannahan coached a lot of QBs to good years
thats what gets me, he got Plummer to be a winner, he helped elway get 2 SBs, he got Grease to set a record for TD to INT ratio, and he had a 2nd year QB almost in the playoffs.
by AustonianAggie on Dec 31, 2008 1:38 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm taking all the credit for this one, Raf haha
One of these things is not like the other. One of these things just didn’t recur.
by AikmanNailedMySis on Dec 31, 2008 11:51 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
+something relevant
I’ve heard 20 million being tossed around. That is the number they’re paying Shanny to leave, well, the number they owe him for canning his behind. Money is no longer an issue to this guy. Pride, maybe. Will he accept a coordinator’s position? Less responsibility for something he’s good at (offense, I mean)…Who knows?
by AikmanNailedMySis on Dec 31, 2008 11:56 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
The Jets will offer him full control
They just got turned down by Cowher. They have a new stadium. They have PSLs to sell and their fans are PISSED.
I can’t see Shanahan accepting an OC job, when New York would give him the whole store. He might take Dallas’ HC job over New Yorks, because with Romo he has a shorter and surer path to winning than the Jets offer. Favre could bail on him next month. Then, where does his QB come from? He wants to win right away. He’s not a young man.
by Rafael Vela on Dec 31, 2008 11:59 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
money is ALWAYS an issue
don’t throw around fictional statements saying that Shanny doesn’t care about money. He might not just go to the highest bidder but that statement is just weak. I’ll tell you what, if he signs for below market value I’ll buy you a cookie.
by DarrenWoodson92 on Jan 1, 2009 2:45 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I didn't say he doesn't care, just that it may not be the biggest issue for him...
like Raf said, he’s not a young man. Opportunity is the biggest issue. However I do like cookies…
by AikmanNailedMySis on Jan 2, 2009 7:09 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I've said it in another post..
I’d prefer Shanahan as QB coach/offensive consultant for us. I’m sure though, he will get offers for a better coaching position elsewhere.
by troysboys on Dec 31, 2008 11:54 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
that is just crazy
he is a hc with 16 years head coaching experience and 2 lombardis (like jj and landry)
his 28? year old son is already an OC based on his fathers name
i wouldnt expect shanahan to be an assistant any more than i would expect landry, parcells, jimmy or cowher to be one
by 325424 on Dec 31, 2008 12:11 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Shanahan has not done anything special as a head coach
IN A DECADE. It could be reasonably argued that that Elway and Terrell Davis those two rings, not Shanahan. Elway retired after 1998 and Davis suffered a “never the same again” injury in early 1999. Since 1998 the Broncos are a decent 91-69 (or an average of 9-7 per year) and won just one playoff game. So Shanahan is living in the past if he thinks that teams will be overly impressed with his 2 Super Bowl rings or, as Raf noted, his GM skills.
After an unsuccessful stint as Raiders’ head coach, Shanahan went back to Denver as Quarterbacks Coach and then became the 49ers OC. So there is some precedent for him taking a “step back,” although if I were Jerry I’d give him the Assistant Head Coach title as well as OC.
by DavidH22 on Dec 31, 2008 12:19 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
DavidH is right on....I think you guys are putting way too much on Shanny being unacceptive of taken a lesser role...
Shanahan has Always been an Offensive guy…He likes to coach X’s and O’s….be one on one with his players….he hasn’t done that, or was unable to do all that while also being GM/HC…..The prestige of being labeled Head Coach i don’t think merits all this pessimism………Like David reflected on, He HAS TAKEN lesser roles in the past, and I think he WOULD do it again……Campo HAS done it….Capers HAS and WOULD do it…Sam Wyche HAS done it….Mike Martz HAS and WOULD do it……Fassels HAS and WOULD do it………Must I go on ?
Don’t go putting Shanahan up there with Tom Friggin Landry……or other former SB winning Coaches……That’s like saying Brian Billeck wouldn’t take a OC position right now cuz he has too much pride….please…
A true diehard Cowboys fan since 1975.
President - Garrett MUST GO campaign -
by BoyzRback on Dec 31, 2008 2:08 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Yahoo Sports Thinks Shanahan Should Come To Dallas...
~Texas Massacre 08~
by TheHeat on Dec 31, 2008 12:05 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
That LINK should be read by all....and I really think he would come here...EVEN if it was just as OC
A true diehard Cowboys fan since 1975.
President - Garrett MUST GO campaign -
by BoyzRback on Dec 31, 2008 2:26 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
If Shanahan came here
it would be the second time he succeeded Wade Phillips…I just found that interesting.
by DavidH22 on Dec 31, 2008 12:08 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I thought about that too...
thats kind of funny
by AirforceBat on Dec 31, 2008 12:09 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
There was a rumor that Shanahan had something in the works with the Chargers
I read a report indicating that Shanahan had something in the works with the Chargers, but I would bet alot of that depends on the Chargers performance this week against Indy.
If the Chargers cut loose Norv, do any of you think Jerry would bring him in to replace Garrett? This would be the ideal situation IMO
by boysinyabelly on Dec 31, 2008 12:09 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I
would love to have Norv as OC. if that happened though, I think he would go back to the niners as OC.
They've done studies, you know. 60% of the time it works, every time.
by what_the_crap on Dec 31, 2008 12:11 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Lets pay him 3 million to be our Offensive Coordinator
by rioplayer7 on Dec 31, 2008 12:11 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
If I am Mike S.
I am not working for Wade a guy who has never won a playoff game, when I have 2 super bowl rings..
"Protect the Romo, Save the Cowboys!!"
by Wmillion on Dec 31, 2008 12:13 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Why?
It’s just change for change’s sake.
Unless Jerry and his team have a BRIGHT, CLEAR plan that involves bringing in new blood, then this is a mistake
by Joey2zs on Dec 31, 2008 12:19 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I think you are being too negative
Seriously, look at it this way -
1. We have a guy who just got 20 sacks and defense that led the league in sacks.
2. We have the best tight end in the league.
3. We have three quality young running backs who all bring something different to the table.
4. We have youth and talent at CB.
5. We have a decent starting offensive line, probably better at run blocking than pass blocking.
6. We have good linebackers with Spencer, Ware, and James (who should be in the pro bowl).
We finished 9-7 and we aren’t missing much to get to 11-5.
Offense:
1. Sign a veteran backup QB. We had the biggest dropoff statistically from starting to backup QB of any team in the league.
2. Add depth to the o-line. We need a veteran backup C and swing OT. Holland and Gurode would be backup Gs.
3. Hire new offensive line coach and new QB coach
4. Cut Owens and change the entire personality of the team by modifying the offensive scheme to be a run first scheme (like the Titans). This will take advantage of the offensive line we have, the running backs we have, Witten, and take the ball out of Romos hands a little more. Cutting Owens is also important to get control of R. Williams.
Defense:
5. Move Henry to safety
6. Add two NTs through free agency and/or draft
So, we add five additional players capable of contributing (QB, NT, C, swing OT, and S), one capable of starting (NT), two new coaches, and cut Owens. I don’t even think we have to let Pacman go.
That team would go 11-5.
by edubz on Dec 31, 2008 12:47 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Move Henry to safety and draft a safety
nm
by edubz on Dec 31, 2008 12:48 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Sounds good edubz
except letting T.O. go is not going to happen. I don’t think Jerry will let it happen.
T.O.’s a double edged sword. I still believe he can get 1200 yards and 12 TDs next year, and I agree that he has tons of heart and gives his all on the field. On the other hand, I understand those who say that Romo and this offense will never reach their full potential with T.O. on board.
by DavidH22 on Dec 31, 2008 12:53 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Probably not
I have enjoyed him as a fan. I just see a QB who turns the ball over, a line that can run block and not pass block, THREE running backs, an incredible tight end, a D that creates pressure, an aging #1 receiver and a generally slow recieving corps and I think, what the f***?
by edubz on Dec 31, 2008 12:58 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
here's a question
What do you know about anything?
Claire told me what you’re doing for NYE, so I know not to trust your judgment.
What does all you ahve written have to do with Shanahan? It actually supports my position that regime change is probably too drastic. The team’s center of gravity will be all screwed up, and it will take seasons to find it again.
And, the last thing that’s needed is Romo trying to wrap his pea brain around anything new. He needs simpler, not more and more comlex.
by Joey2zs on Dec 31, 2008 1:32 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
here's an answer
I have no other options on NYE. The beer is cold and the drive is short. Plus, Kurt got a Wii. His 5 year old son is unbeatable in the boxing game.
A simpler scheme is what I’m advocating. We should run the hell out of our running backs.
by edubz on Dec 31, 2008 2:56 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Romo's pea brain.
I thought I might be the only one who wondered if Romo’s mental accumen (or lack thereof) might be the reason why this offense was “the simplest” Ray Lewis and company faced all year.
But on the other hand since the simple approach didn’t work out too hot for Romo this year and actually saw him regress, what’s the worst that could happen if Romo was forced to try and learn a more complicated offense? He’s exposed that much sooner as a severely limited QB (particularly in football IQ) if that’s indeed what he is and the search for and grooming of his eventual replacement can begin that much sooner.
By the way, Shanahan did get that big dummy Jack The Snack Plumber to straighten up somewhat. From ‘03-’05 Plummer threw 60 TD/34 INT. That’s a huge improvement over his stint in Arizona althought the obvious point there would be that Plummer was also surrounded with better talent in Denver and that had as much with his ratio improving drastically as Shanahan’s tutelage.
Me personally; I do side more with those who point out that Shanahan has only managed to win a single playoff game without Elway and TD and that bringing him definitely doesn’t guarantee overnight improvement. Now, I’m certainly not against sacking Wade Claus; I just don’t think Shanahan’s any kind of magic genie that will allow this team to realize its potential. Hiring Shanahan would be a “meh” move for me.
by MadMick on Dec 31, 2008 3:06 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!
Romo’s wonderlic score was 38, one of the highest scores ever. He’s easily the smartest player on the team.
In Romo we Trust
by Terry on Dec 31, 2008 3:10 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
It was 37 not 38
and Wonderlic scores don’t translate to good QB’ing. After all, Drew Henson got a 42 and Alex Smith got a 40. Would you want either of those two under center?
Eli got a 39 and Peyton a 28. Which QB would you rather have.
McNabb got a 14. I would take him over any QB other than Brady or Peyton.
by Philosopher on Dec 31, 2008 3:26 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
To add to this, Dan Marino scored a 15.
But I do like how this Super Terry cat manageds to find a way to stand by his man in every single instance.
by MadMick on Dec 31, 2008 3:33 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
he wasn't talking about qbing
he was talking about intelligence which Romo has in spades.
And for the record I’d take Romo over any of them.
In Romo we Trust
by Terry on Dec 31, 2008 3:34 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
yeah, then tell how come Romo doesn't have enough intelligence to throw the ball away once in awhile
instead of taking a sack or throwing an int….
by Deke on Dec 31, 2008 3:39 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
he will this year..
This will be Romo’s most efficient year. It is very possible he takes a major step forward next year.
"Protect the Romo, Save the Cowboys!!"
by Wmillion on Dec 31, 2008 4:07 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Its just as possible he takes a major step backwards
"Ask Philly was it hard tryin' a stop TO, he da main reason that the fans would come fo'."
by aussie_cowboy on Dec 31, 2008 7:59 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
my inner cowboy fanatic
will not let me think like that..
"Protect the Romo, Save the Cowboys!!"
by Wmillion on Dec 31, 2008 8:33 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Well I hope youre right
"Ask Philly was it hard tryin' a stop TO, he da main reason that the fans would come fo'."
by aussie_cowboy on Dec 31, 2008 8:42 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
he's trying to make a play Deke
has nothing to do with intelligence
In Romo we Trust
by Terry on Dec 31, 2008 4:07 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I AGREE
I think he needs to realize, not making a negative play, sometimes better then making a play.
Hey if you break contain and the guy is wide open throw it, if he breaks contain and everyone is covered dump it.
"Protect the Romo, Save the Cowboys!!"
by Wmillion on Dec 31, 2008 4:17 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
You guys are showing your lack of football smarts-
As Romo said, he wasn’t throwing the ball up for grabs, it was sort of a ‘punt’. Now, I admit, he ‘punts’ a lot, but if you had real football IQ, you’d know that!
"He has a peculiar felicity of expression." John Adams
by Jim Vance on Dec 31, 2008 4:14 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm teasing evryone here..
Romo-haters as well as Romo-sexuals.
"He has a peculiar felicity of expression." John Adams
by Jim Vance on Dec 31, 2008 4:16 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
you don't punt on second down
I wouldn’t question someone elses football smarts if I were you
by Deke on Dec 31, 2008 4:19 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Welp, in that case.
Somebody should’ve asked Romo whether he thought he outkicked his coverage or whether the coverage team just sucked. He sure looks like a punter every time he makes the effort to stop the return man.
by MadMick on Dec 31, 2008 4:22 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
He ain't no Paulescu stopping the returner.....
……who coincidentally sucks as an actual punter.
by MadMick on Dec 31, 2008 4:23 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, because the Hall of Fame voters take players' wonderlic scores into consideration.
It’s called “football IQ” for a reason. Of course, you’re the genius who has some formula for how much less costly a turnover is in correlation to what point it occurs in the game. I guess that moronic pass Romo threw against Green Bay into the middle of the end zone in a swarm of three defenders is that much less moronic due to Super Terry’s Super QB Turnover formula.
by MadMick on Dec 31, 2008 3:27 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
then why do scouts have them take the test Einstein?
In Romo we Trust
by Terry on Dec 31, 2008 3:35 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Craig Krenzel got a degree in molecular genetics, was a National Champion and he couldn't even stick on the Bears roster; the Bears
You figure that one out.
by MadMick on Dec 31, 2008 3:43 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
because he didn't have qb skills
Romo has special talent
In Romo we Trust
by Terry on Dec 31, 2008 4:08 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
the reason our offense was so simple
was because of our pea brained OL.
In Romo we Trust
by Terry on Dec 31, 2008 3:11 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Shanahan might have won only one playoff game since 1998 but
his offenses have been consistently solid – including QBs of all stripes, offensive lines and of course we all know the story of their running game. If Shanahan did come here (and I don’t think it will happen) I’d want him to focus solely on offense, particularly making the O-line and Romo mature and play better.
Leave the defense to Wade and the special teams to either Joe Avezanno or some new kid we with tons of enthusiasm who we never heard of.
by DavidH22 on Dec 31, 2008 8:16 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
where he struggled is finding talent on defense
He was a great coach, not a great GM. We already have the players in place.. Let Jerry stock him with talent and Mike would have us like the colts
"Protect the Romo, Save the Cowboys!!"
by Wmillion on Dec 31, 2008 8:34 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
why was the
line not a problem before Romo got injured?
Romo/Flozell/Kosier were all hurt.
It was amazing when everyone was healthy we could run and throw at will.
by oneforthethumb on Dec 31, 2008 1:40 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
i'm not thinking that shanahan is the magic man...
but wade phillips has lost control of this team. they quit on him at the end of the year. getting tougher isn’t going to fix that.
shanahan has made his mark as an offensive guru, and this is a team with some major pieces. if he can get a good dc (can’t see wade wanting to stick around for that), i can see the cowboys making a run.
imo, the problem with the cowboys is that jerry destablizes the organization. he’s arguably better as a ‘football guy’ than he used to be, but his very public presence undermines his coaching staff. i can’t imagine anyone making more than a short-term run with the cowboys as long as jones is in the picture, and i doubt that he’ll ever really take a step back.
by g8tgod on Dec 31, 2008 12:34 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Westside story..
Shanny goes to the Jets…if they offer him the money and the control he wants. QB situation be damned.
Part of his package will be that he has enough time to draft and groom a younf QB to replace Favre, who by the way, will stay again to play for Shanahan. Mike S has shown he can draft and develop offensive talent, he’s a proven name that will put butts in seats in NY and that is what is attractive to Jets ownership.
"He has a peculiar felicity of expression." John Adams
by Jim Vance on Dec 31, 2008 12:37 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I think the reason Jerry kept Wade
is he didn’t see a viable HC in the market. Holmgren – year off. Cowher-won’t get enough authority, wouldn’t stand for the circus when there are so many other options.
Shanahan changes that. Someone WILL hire him, deserving or not. Too many openings, not enough qualified candidates (Mangini on anyone’s short list)?
There are Pros and Cons to MS-significantly on OL philosophy/personnel. But are there any questions about it being an improvement over the status quo?
'You can recognize true genius by this: all the dunces are in confederacy against you' - Sir Francis Bacon
by tdships on Dec 31, 2008 12:47 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
+1
I think that he’ll keep Phillips for the year, then go after Holmgren or Cowher …. whether they fit here is another story.
But I could be wrong … just a gut feeling.
They've done studies, you know. 60% of the time it works, every time.
by what_the_crap on Dec 31, 2008 1:13 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
DNA is still corrupt
All of this speculation regarding who the Cowboys might hire or fire, despite its therapeutic value, is an unfortunate waste of time. Rafael Vela properly diagnosed the problem Sunday night when he referred to the team’s DNA as being corrupt. His focus was on the players, but that corruption cannot be cured, because the more insidious corruption is at the top of the organization. Remember Marcellus Wiley’s idiotic theory that the only common link in the organization for the 12 year period of no playoff wins was the strength coach, Joe Juraszek? He forgot the other common link, our owner/GM. I read yesterday the only sensible thing DMN alum Matt Mosley has ever written: “Jerry would rather lose with a puppet than win with a guy like Parcells.” That is our problem, and until another strong coach and/or GM is hired to run the day to day operations and free up Jerry to pitch Dr Pepper and Nike shoes, we will spend each January speculating and dreaming who the Cowboys might hire or what free agents we might sign to turn the organization around.
by NCCowboy on Dec 31, 2008 12:56 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Huh?
So Mosely was implying that Jerry forced Parcells out?
What nonsense. Parcells got everything he wanted. He got all the free agents he felt were needed, and he bungled that checkbook. Marco Rivera of Mark Wahle? Anthony Henry over Ken Lucas? Mike Vanderjagt? Jason Fabini? Shoot, signing Marcellus Wiley over Bert Berry, who wanted to play in Dallas?
On draft day, Parcells got everybody he wanted, save one. He was forced to take Demarcus Ware, and I’m 100% fine with that.
He did have to accept T.O., but Mosely is grossly oversimplifying things with that statement. Parcells left, as he has everywhere else, on his terms, and with little to no warning. He was not in any way, shape or form ousted.
by Rafael Vela on Dec 31, 2008 1:15 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Premise of your reply is wrong
Mosley was not implying Jerry forced Parcells out. What he meant was that Jerry would not fire Wade Phillips and turn the team over to a Parcells-type personality who controlled everything as Jerry allowed Parcells to do (Owens nothwithstanding).
Here is Mosley’s full quote:
“Suggesting that Jerry swallow his pride is a bigger thing than you think. He loves having Wade as his head coach because it means he can run the show. Jerry would rather lose with a puppet than win with a guy like Parcells.”
by NCCowboy on Dec 31, 2008 1:22 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Jerry hired Parcells in the first place
so where’s the proof that he wouldn’t do it again?
Mosely makes no sense.
by Rafael Vela on Dec 31, 2008 2:03 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Your proof for 2009 at least . . .
“I’m looking for continuity,” Jones said.
by NCCowboy on Dec 31, 2008 2:08 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
well said Raf....if only everyone else could realize that......
A true diehard Cowboys fan since 1975.
President - Garrett MUST GO campaign -
by BoyzRback on Dec 31, 2008 2:16 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Parcells was around for 4 years
10-6
6-10
9-7
9-7
For the money he got paid, he should have been run off.
by elharpo on Dec 31, 2008 4:39 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
A science experiment
Let’s say you’re a mad scientist conducting an experiment that has several ingredients in varying amounts. One of your most recent mixes almost resulted in the compound you are searching for (13-3).
This last mix, after adding some new ingredients, seemed to be a step back from your goal. (9-7)
OK, now you have to figure out what to add and what to possibly subtract from the current mix to get back closer to the perfect compound. Most scientists will only increase or reduce one component at a time, then measure the change to see if they are heading in the right direction. Changing two or more components at a time may cancel out each other’s effect and the scientist never knows what is really working and what isn’t.
My point here is…the smart move is not to make whole sale change for change’s sake because you may be getting rid of something good.
Some have said trade Romo, T.O., Barber…s*** can Wade, Stewart, Read, Garrett., Wilson, Houck…take Jerry’s pencil away from him……cut Hamlin, Canty, Spears, Tank, Proctor…..well, what if we did all of the above and wound up at 2-14? Everyone would be saying..“We cut too far, traded away our future, let the best ones go…threw the baby out with the bath water”
Now, there are some elements from 2007 that were consistent with 2008, that could/should be corrected, but weren’t. Special teams play was bad in 2007 and bad in 2008. It cost us. Even a mad scientist would say, “This has to change immediately.”
Penalties in 2007 were bad and we had the same thing in 2008. Well? Adjust that component, now.
O-line? It seemed better in 2007 than 2008, but was it? Or was Romo better at avoiding rushes, or were the defenses better tuned in this year? That’s what they pay the scientists to figure out.
Let’s make changes that will result in positive results. Calling Wade’s training camp, Camp Cupcake is just buying into the media’s BS. Camp Cupcake looked brilliant in 2007, but now it’s the reason we’re not in the playoffs? I don’t buy that.
Fix special teams and get us better field position. Fix penalties that kill our drives and prolong the opponents drives. Shore up the OL with a couple of quality backups and we are in the playoffs again.
Prove me wrong.
"He has a peculiar felicity of expression." John Adams
by Jim Vance on Dec 31, 2008 1:08 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
+1
They've done studies, you know. 60% of the time it works, every time.
by what_the_crap on Dec 31, 2008 1:13 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Dammit, Jim
You just blew the next two stories I teased.
by Rafael Vela on Dec 31, 2008 1:18 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Your symptoms are focused on the 8-4 Team, not the 1-3 Team
Special teams and spotty OL play were problems all season long. But what about the problems that manifested themselves over the last 4 weeks? A celebrity QB who had a turnover/TD ratio of 2:1 and wants to blame the scheme; a cancer of a WR who has proved that 3 years in any one place for his ego is too long; a football “club” (as Michael Irvin referred to them, not a team) that failed to show up for the 2 biggest games of the year. Are those really problems that can be fixed by tinkering at the edges with maybe a new OL and ST coach? These are the same players that have choked in December (and January) for 4 consecutive years.The DNA is corrupt.
by NCCowboy on Dec 31, 2008 1:44 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
The OL got a lot worse the last month
Romo plays 9 games and is sacked 8 times;
Romo plays his last 4 and is sacked 12 times;
The sack rate tripled in December. The lines play was not constant.
The OL and STs, last I checked are part of the DNA. So is Marion Barber, who tripled
his fumble rate this year.
Or are Romo and T.O. the only DNA in your mind?
by Rafael Vela on Dec 31, 2008 2:06 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
crazy
Out of the last 4 games every single D we played is ranked in the top 5..
"Protect the Romo, Save the Cowboys!!"
by Wmillion on Dec 31, 2008 2:16 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
True, but Dallas was playing two of those Ds for the second time
and could not handle their pressure.
by Rafael Vela on Dec 31, 2008 2:17 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I can't wait
for your O-line write up..
"Protect the Romo, Save the Cowboys!!"
by Wmillion on Dec 31, 2008 3:27 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
The whole team is on my mind
How does this team not show up emotionally for the last 2 games of the year? Its not just Romo or Owens. Romo we keep, have to keep, but who is holding him accountable? Is his regression due wholly to poor OL play? JJT alluded in an article the other day that Romo’s practice habits have slipped. Today, JJT writes that Garrett gives Romo a “free pass” in practice and meetings. Just one source, but I wonder: does this check out with your sources?
Another issue that might be worth checking out—has Garrett allowed the crying of the WRs for the ball affect his playcalling? It sure seemed that a lot of balls were flying toward Roy Williams in Philly last week-with no separation from the Philly DBs. Where is the caudillo that tells these guys to stand down? It might be worth rehiring Todd Haley just to get in Owen’s grill again.
Finally, how bad is the divide over the Witten/Owens feud? A lot of rumors, what of it is truth? Was Newman referring to Witten the other day when he called out the “coward”? How do you heal that?
by NCCowboy on Dec 31, 2008 2:31 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Dude...
I had the most sublime response, it was life changing in it’s depth and insight, then I clicked over to an online dictionary to look up ‘caudillo’, and lost my post! So, you get this one instead.
I can’t explain other people’s emotions, I can’t even explain mine. I do remember when I played a long time ago and I never went into any game thinking I’d get beat. I always thought I’d win, AND that I’d be the guy who made the play. It didn’t always happen that way, in fact, more than once, things got out of hand for us and it seemed like I could do nothing right. It shook my confidence and I remember thinking that I was bad luck for the team and maybe shouldn’t get the ball again. When my number was called I remember thinking, “Jeez, am I gonna fumble again?”, instead of my usual, “I’m going to put #34 right on his ass!”. Intellectually, i knew I was out thinking myself, but but it happened.
The same thing can happen in a win. You’re bullet proof and can do no wrong. I remember laughing in the zone with my buds and saying, “Oh man, what a s*** play, I had no business making that catch.” It happens. I call it the Crazy Horse syndrome. I can’t explain it, but I’m sure it happens at the pro level. I think Landry tried to minimize things like that by his perpetually cool demeanor.
Now, JJT making an allusion to Romo’s practice habits? I guess I’ve become too cynical about the press, to the point that I don’t give them any credence. So, could Romo’s broken hand, and not being able to grip the ball, causing him to take fewer snaps in practice qualify as ‘practice habits have slipped’? For some members of the sporting press, that is exactly the germ of an idea that blossoms into a story, reported by indirect sources who say, “Romo gets a free pass in practice”.
I’m not minimizing your points, because I think they are valid, I just have a real distrust of the press and their, "Man bites Dog’ headline, neglecting to add that the man was at Sonic and the dog was a hotdog.
How do you heal these rifts? If you look at guys in training camp in fist fights, trying to beat the hell out of each other, you would think the season is over, no way these guys can co-exist. The cure for all ills is winning. Fix some of the problems that we can fix, win some games and watch the camraderie flow like water.
I think these guys are proud competitors and they hate to lose. They say stupid things. Winning will make it all better. So, I say, let’s fix those things we can and move forward.
Happy New Year to you.
"He has a peculiar felicity of expression." John Adams
by Jim Vance on Dec 31, 2008 3:32 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
And a Happy New Year to you
Great reply. I was careful to refer to JJT as only one source. But, there is no doubt that Romo regressed this year. The cause of the regression is open and rife for speculation. Thinking back to the Ravens game and that awful throw at the end of the first half that Ed Reed intercepted, and then reading Romo’s quote that he considered the throw like a punt, and I’m thinking, if Parcells was still on the sideline, do you think he would have done that?
Winning is a great deoderant. But we didn’t win in December again which is why we are beating the Cowboys up (and each other).
Happy New Year!
by NCCowboy on Dec 31, 2008 3:39 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Sack rate tripled in December
and we played Pitt, NYG, Ravens, Eagles – hard to pick four tougher Ds with better rushes.
by edubz on Dec 31, 2008 3:01 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Ok, let's kill the celebrity..
Using your premise, we get rid of Romo and TO, and our DNA gets better? I’m not against the idea of trading TO now, while he still has value to some team, but I can still live with him on the team (club, if you will) because he wants to win. Is he the most mature guy emotionally? No, but I like a guys DNA who wants to win, even if he isn’t the most articulate at expressing it or expresses it in politically incorrect ways.
If we could actually seperate the team into 8-4 vs 1-3 maybe we could be in the mid-season playoffs…unfortunately we have to play the whole season and bear the cumulative effect of injuries, and stronger defenses.
I do think tinkering at the edges with a new OL coach and ST coach will help, along with tinkering with some ‘new players’ on those squads.
My symptoms are focused on the 9-7, 2008 version of the Cowboys, and my suggestions are aimed at fixing what can be fixed and what would produce positive results. Giving up on the entire team, replacing every coach and player is unrealistic and unlikely to do any better than 9-7 over the next 5 years.
"He has a peculiar felicity of expression." John Adams
by Jim Vance on Dec 31, 2008 2:07 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
+1
"Ask Philly was it hard tryin' a stop TO, he da main reason that the fans would come fo'."
by aussie_cowboy on Dec 31, 2008 8:07 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
What?
What the hell are you talking about?
What does “celebrity” have to do with Xs and Os? This isn’t Days of Our Lives. Perhaps it is for you, though.
by Joey2zs on Dec 31, 2008 2:11 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm responding to NCCowboys post
"He has a peculiar felicity of expression." John Adams
by Jim Vance on Dec 31, 2008 2:16 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
ok. Me too.
i wasn’t replying to you. I guess i’m just parroting your comments.
I was curious about the terms “celebrity,” “cancer,” “ego,” “owens/witten feud,” “JJT writes,” “get in Owens’ grill,” “crying of the WRs.”
Is this an ESPN or Randy Galloway hatchet piece or what? None of those are football terms or ideas. It’s buying into the soap opera and entertainment of non-football innuendo and make believe.
It’s not Dynasty.
by Joey2zs on Dec 31, 2008 2:43 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Do you buy this?
So, those 53 players running around in uniform are just machines that do not think or feel? Their relationships with each other have no effect, positive or negative, on their performance? Is it non-football innuendo to read Terrence Newman’s quote after the Philly game and 3 weeks after the “meeting with Garrett” fiasco : "It is like the problem when you had the anonymous player saying all that stuff," he said. "They are a coward, you know, and that kind of stuff ruined this season." and then surmise there might be some non-football problems on this team that is affecting their football performance?
by NCCowboy on Dec 31, 2008 3:00 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
+100000
Did you watch the last game Joey2zzzz???
Why is it you can’t admit there are issues on this team besides x/o’s ??
Did the Eagles suddenly get 38 points better than us on the field?
Do you honestly think that game was all about just the physical part of the game??
Oh, your usual argument-We aren’t in the lockerroom , so we don’t know what’s going on, right?
Well, neither are you , so you can’t say there aren’t a lot off-field issues! So there.
(I’m trying hard not to resort to your namecalling, because your constant putdowns of anyone bringing these issues up is ridiculous.)
by Realist Larry on Dec 31, 2008 3:25 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
More Entertainment Tonight reporting.
Anything out of JJTs vivid imagination is unreadable to me anyway.
by Benthere on Dec 31, 2008 3:40 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Its a Parcells phrase
I don’t think Parcells watches the soaps.
by NCCowboy on Dec 31, 2008 2:17 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
You'd think actual quuotes from players
would get people like Joeyzzzzz to pull their heads out (let’s say out of the sand for now) about what happened to this team.
by Realist Larry on Dec 31, 2008 3:26 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Don't bet on it
He doesn’t strike me as the type of person that will let facts get in the way of his preconceived opinions.
by NCCowboy on Dec 31, 2008 3:33 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
No, big on name-calling as his main argument.
You’re dumb, I know it all, so therefore I’m right!
Same on old blog.
by Realist Larry on Dec 31, 2008 3:34 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
pre conceived notions?
good lord. You’re talking about things that AREN’T REAL, and you DON’T KNOW ABOUT. I’m talking about things I’ve seen and know.
Huge difference.
You think Romo’s a celebrity. I don’t even know what that means.
by Joey2zs on Dec 31, 2008 4:45 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
You've been in the lockerroom?
Are you a Cowboys player, anonymous?
You “know” that all these players actually love each other to death and there are no issues?
wow.
by Realist Larry on Dec 31, 2008 4:59 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
love each other?
do you know ANYTHING about them? ANYTHING AT ALL? Love, hate, indifference, anything? No, you don’t.
Your insane point is that if they were solemn Johnny Unitases, everything would be jake and they’d be 16-0. Never mind Kosier, Holland, Felix, Newman, the Punter, Brad Johnson… never mind all those FACTS, you choose to rely on gossip as your barometer. I don’t understand why you make this something like one of yours and your wife’s shows during midday.
by Joey2zs on Dec 31, 2008 6:40 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Good as far as it goes, but
no matter how hard it is to discuss, you can’t avoid the huge elephant in the room, the emotional state of this team.
What you saw last week was a team that completely imploded on itself with an explosion bigger than Texas Stadium will make!
2006-Seattle. 2007-from 11-1 to embarrasses. 2008-well, you know. Football players are human, and these things are compounding.
Yes, on the field those changes you say are obvious to see. But if you don’t fix the larger problem of “Leadership” or whatever you might call it, then forget it.
Also, add cut TO, because that great year came from an offensive explosion that isn’t going to be repeated. Having Owens around (forget the off-field, let’s just talk x/o’s) has contributed to the offensive funk. Others have pointed out how Romo/ Garrett are restricted by having him around, forced to call a certain type of game, and not adjust nor spread the ball around as much as needed.
Also, more pressure is on the OLine as we constantly wit for long patterns to develop, instead of the quick hits that would fit Romo better.
We are like a baseball team that relies on the homerun too much, but can’t move runners around. Win a lot of games, but inconsistent….
by Realist Larry on Dec 31, 2008 2:10 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Something is not right here
Larry, your argument about cutting T.O. makes no sense. When T.O. went down in 2007. our offense came to a standstill and we were 13-3 that year. He goes for over a 1000 yards with 10 TDs but he is contributing to the “offensive funk”??!! Look, there is no receiver in the NFL who is not saying he is open on every pass play. That is just plain life in the league. But if T.O. says he is open, he is a cancer, or selfish, etc.? I want players who want the ball.
On most pass plays there is a primary, secondary, etc.. receiver and QBs go through their progressions to get the first open receiver the ball. If Romo is going to throw the ball to a covered Owens then it is Romo who is the idiot because he did not do his job of going through his progressions as QB. Garret’s offense is a “down the field” type offense. Witten still caught more balls than T.O. so why is it that T.O. should get cut? I’ve seen what happens when T.O. is not playing WR for the Cowboys and it isn’t pretty. Romo needs to recognize the defense, go through his progressions and get the ball to the first open receiver. Period. If he his doing anything else, then he only has himself to blame.
by jevans1729 on Dec 31, 2008 5:51 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't get the whole "The Cowboys would be fine without TO" line of thinking either
Lifetime Cowboys Fan from the Swamps of Jersey
by Seanrude on Dec 31, 2008 6:11 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
+1 it's straight up assinine..............there........i said it..
A true diehard Cowboys fan since 1975.
President - Garrett MUST GO campaign -
by BoyzRback on Dec 31, 2008 7:01 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
let me guess you thought
The giants would be better without Tiki.. 2k runner, pro-bowler starter?
addition by subtraction it is possible.
giants are missing their 2 best pass rushers from last year and their record is even better then last year.. go figure.. conventional thinking says that isn’t possible.
"Protect the Romo, Save the Cowboys!!"
by Wmillion on Dec 31, 2008 8:38 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
If they don't win the Super Bowl are they any better?
by joey7289 on Dec 31, 2008 8:43 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
if..
Are they better team then last year? To this point yes, I don’t have a crystal ball. I know they #1 seed and just beat the 2nd best team in the NFC. Are you saying to this point they aren’t a better team..
Listen I don’t want the Giants to win it, but to think they are finding ways to get it done at high level.
"Protect the Romo, Save the Cowboys!!"
by Wmillion on Dec 31, 2008 8:48 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Not disagreeing
But if they lose in the playoffs how are they better then last year…right now they look better yes but only time will tell.
by joey7289 on Jan 1, 2009 1:55 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I think they are a better team than last year
but they might not be as successful.
"Ask Philly was it hard tryin' a stop TO, he da main reason that the fans would come fo'."
by aussie_cowboy on Jan 1, 2009 3:38 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
That is the exception rather than the rule
When you get rid of a HOFer for an unproven backup, odds are the team is going to get worse.
"Ask Philly was it hard tryin' a stop TO, he da main reason that the fans would come fo'."
by aussie_cowboy on Dec 31, 2008 8:44 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
more like
An example?
Proof that it can happen. So why people act like it is impossible is beyond me..
"Protect the Romo, Save the Cowboys!!"
by Wmillion on Dec 31, 2008 8:52 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
No
Its the same thing as entering the lottery. Sure there are examples of people winning it, but that doesnt mean I should expect to win because while it is possible it isnt likely.
As I said it is the exception rather than the rule.
"Ask Philly was it hard tryin' a stop TO, he da main reason that the fans would come fo'."
by aussie_cowboy on Dec 31, 2008 8:57 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
do you have more examples?
That would make it seem more like a long shot?
"Protect the Romo, Save the Cowboys!!"
by Wmillion on Dec 31, 2008 9:09 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
+1
"Ask Philly was it hard tryin' a stop TO, he da main reason that the fans would come fo'."
by aussie_cowboy on Dec 31, 2008 8:08 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm looking forward to the autopsy
while the cadaver of this year is still warm. this is going to stink
by AustonianAggie on Dec 31, 2008 1:26 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Mike Shannahan to the Raiders
A marriage made in heaven, Mike Shannahan and AL Davis, that could work, couldn’t it!!!! It worked so well in the past, why not again!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! LOL
by Deke on Dec 31, 2008 1:38 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
People say "Such and Such is .500 over this much time"
3 years – shanahan
last 20 games – Wade Phillips…
Jeff Fisher was .500 for 4 straight years… 8-8 each year… 5th year went to SB and lost… how many seasons in the abyss has that man had. What reasons do we have for not doubting him… why is he esteemed?
by AustonianAggie on Dec 31, 2008 1:46 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
My thoughts on Shanny...
On the surface, this may seem really intriguing. The one big (literally and figuratively) problem that I see is the o-line. Shanny likes the 290 lb quick olinemen to run his zone blocking scheme. Outside of Kosier, all of Dallas’ linemen are 325lb+ maulers. All locked up for 2 to 5 more years. Either Shanny would have to change his schemes to fit the linemen, or use the linemen in ways they aren’t best suited. I do think the skill position players would be great for Shanny’s schemes, especially Romo.
Then there’s the defense. Dallas has 3-4 personnel. Shanny, as far as I know, has always run a 4-3. He’d have to bring in a coordinator to run the D. How’s his relationship with Dom Capers or Romeo Crennel?
Complicating things further is Shanny made the personnel decisions in Denver. How does that get worked out? Shanny is used to getting totally different types of players for the oline and the defensive front 7. Making these types of changes take years to implement. So either Dallas totally blows up what they have (highly unlikely), or Shanny has to learn/adapt new systems. That would be a tough thing to do.
by Ridgelake on Dec 31, 2008 1:56 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
do you remember...
… Bruce Coslett’s zany ineffective zone blockign schemes? He was the worst coach, EVER.
by Joey2zs on Dec 31, 2008 2:02 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
bruce Reid has been let go by the cowboys
Special teams are already better by this move, no surprise
by Deke on Dec 31, 2008 2:08 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
good
Was he seen flying out the front doors of Valley Ranch, skidding into the parking lot on his back with a suitcase with papers and socks flowing out of it thrown after him?
by Joey2zs on Dec 31, 2008 2:13 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Bruce Read was the nicest guy I talked to at Oxnard
The nicest, aw-shucks, My God I’m in over my head guy I talked to.
by Rafael Vela on Dec 31, 2008 2:14 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Here's the thing,
that’s not funny. My comment is funny.
by Joey2zs on Dec 31, 2008 2:17 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I hope he takes Pat Watkins with him
More on that tomorrow.
by Rafael Vela on Dec 31, 2008 2:12 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Watkins had surgery the other day on his shoulder the other day
He’s barely a backup
by Deke on Dec 31, 2008 2:18 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
That's a pick that never worked out.
Will you join me in sending Stanback with him too, so I don’t have to listen to fans rave about his ‘potential’ for the next 9 months!
Hurd and Austin are fine (if they can stay healthy, but Stanback’s no better there.)
by Realist Larry on Dec 31, 2008 3:29 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I was actually surprised Watkins even made the roster this year
I had him down as a surprise cut.
Stanback has this upcoming training camp, he he doesn’t show he’s made strides as a receiver and can stay healthy, then i don’t think he makes it out of camp. Hurd can hit the road at any time, he’s nothing special at all. One Crayton is enough…
by Deke on Dec 31, 2008 3:46 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
6'5 with range, sounds like the perfect safety..
"Protect the Romo, Save the Cowboys!!"
by Wmillion on Dec 31, 2008 4:07 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
actually 6.5 is very rare for a safety and really plays too tall
that’s why he’s not that great against the run, more fast than quick, harder to change direction if you’re tall..
by Deke on Dec 31, 2008 4:25 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I hear you
I am just thinking ability to his potential cover more ground and take advantage of height in jump ball situations..
Oh well, time to replace him..
"Protect the Romo, Save the Cowboys!!"
by Wmillion on Dec 31, 2008 4:30 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh...the same "potential" Austin has shown us ??
all of 18 receptions in 3 friggin years……get “real”
A true diehard Cowboys fan since 1975.
President - Garrett MUST GO campaign -
by BoyzRback on Dec 31, 2008 7:05 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
how can he if doesn't get the minutes..
That is how sports work, sometimes you wait your turn.. Micheal Turner, Priest Holmes it is possible. You act like it isn’t possible..
"Protect the Romo, Save the Cowboys!!"
by Wmillion on Dec 31, 2008 8:45 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Hes not saying its not possible just that its unlikely
Austin could come in and play better than TO. There is a reason hes #4 on the depth chart.
"Ask Philly was it hard tryin' a stop TO, he da main reason that the fans would come fo'."
by aussie_cowboy on Dec 31, 2008 8:51 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
yes
He was undrafted and need to hone his skills,now he is on a team stacked with talent. Don’t act like we have the KC wr’s and he can’t crack the rotation. He was our #2 before he got hurt and we traded for Roy.
"Protect the Romo, Save the Cowboys!!"
by Wmillion on Dec 31, 2008 8:54 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
he's weak, frail, and brittle
i lost count of how many times he lost one-on-one game tackles to opposing offensive players. he’s got to be one of the weakest players in the NFL.
and that also explains why he gets hurt a lot.
"I got a fever. And the only prescription is more cowbell." -- Bruce Dickinson
www.brainfriednetwork.com [NEWS/SPORTS/FOOTBALL]
by silverblue5 on Dec 31, 2008 8:36 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Good but so what?
I don’t know if these records were posted, but it looks like the premise of the Cowboys being OK but not really that good of a team has some legs.
Check the Cowboys record against playoff teams:
2-5 (and only the Giants win seemed convincing).
The Cowboys record against non-playoff teams:
7-2
Even if we got into the playoffs, would we have won more than one game (maybe)? Anything could have happened, but I am not confident we would have even beaten MN.
by DCProf on Dec 31, 2008 3:20 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
TO Stats
28th in receptions.
He had over 1000 yards? So did 21-yeah, 21- other guys.
Take the 49er game out and it’d be scary. We’ll give him that, to balance out having Johnson throwing for 3 games!
by Realist Larry on Dec 31, 2008 3:33 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Heres the thing, you can't take that game out.
Catches don’t matter as much as the yards.
Lets say Romo played those 3 games and T.O. averaged just 50 yards in those games. That would put him over 1200 yards.
by houseofprime on Dec 31, 2008 4:33 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I didn't take them out.
My point about TO (Since we signed him, consistently) is not that he’s terrible.
he’s a very good receiver. But he’s not who he was 5 years ago, he’s getting older.
And,
1) a LOT of other guys put up similar stats.
2) We paid Owens WAY too much money. Who could we have signed w/that 10 Mill.? Would we have had more OLine depth, maybe?
3) He’s a headache and distraction.
4) It seems like he is also now affecting how the O is run and playcalling, not allowing Garrett to adjust and call what they rhythm of the game requires. e.g., To hasn’t ‘touched the ball enough’ so we throw that stupid WR quick screen out to him, or force a pass his way, because he ‘has to be involved.’
5) He’s just not a winner. The guy’s an underperformer in big games and has never won squat. Don’t forget, his big year statistically, the Eagles made it TO the SB without him.
by Realist Larry on Dec 31, 2008 5:08 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
He played well in the Super Bowl.
He had 133 yards receiving. Mcnabb was the one throwing up all over the place at the end.
by houseofprime on Dec 31, 2008 6:51 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
You cant say TO is not who he was 5 years ago just because he has had one off year (that was still pretty good)
Last season was the best he has ever had statistically, so until there is a dropoff over multiple seasons I cant buy that argument.
And the reason for the quick screens is not because JG tries to force it to TO but because he is our best offensive playmaker and we try to get the ball into his hands.
"Ask Philly was it hard tryin' a stop TO, he da main reason that the fans would come fo'."
by aussie_cowboy on Dec 31, 2008 8:16 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
By the way, I can't take games out, you can't ADD yards in !
Look what Wes Welker did w/ a backup all year!
A “Great” receiver gets open, and helps a lesser QB.
4 catches a game, for 66 yards. Is that worth 10 Mill. to you? That’s what he did this year.
Knowing what an AHole he’s going to be from now on too?
And next year, he’ll be even older…
by Realist Larry on Dec 31, 2008 5:13 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
You can't compare Cassell to Johnson.
Brad just isn’t a NFL caliber quarterback anymore.
by houseofprime on Dec 31, 2008 6:49 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
and an inaccurate, indecisive Romo throwing wounded ducks in the other 13 games ??
Your point ???
A true diehard Cowboys fan since 1975.
President - Garrett MUST GO campaign -
by BoyzRback on Dec 31, 2008 7:08 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
13 games? SF and Seattle Philly Cleveland
Just to name a few..
"Protect the Romo, Save the Cowboys!!"
by Wmillion on Dec 31, 2008 8:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Mike Shanahan
Would love to have him as our OC and get rid of Jason or demote him I just don’t think Jason is ready and I think he folds under pressure.
by willc23 on Dec 31, 2008 4:29 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Just read Jason is being interviewed by the Lions. Why?
For the HC job. He’d be better off in the Arena League.
by CowboyMan on Dec 31, 2008 5:00 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Read Canned!!!
It should have happened after the Az game.
by Este on Dec 31, 2008 5:08 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
It's all about December. We win just enough to be competitive,
and in the hunt, then comes December and the wheels come off. Romo is not sixteen game season QB, and he’s not even a 60 minute man come December. I see Jake the Snake all over again. Stats and flash, little else.
Romo ‘needs’ a coach that won’t stand for stupid interceptions and fumbles. Wade just looks befuddled when things go wrong. Romo needs coach that will jump in his face when coming off the field after a blunder. I’m sure Romo doesn’t ‘want’ that, but he really needs it.
by CowboyMan on Dec 31, 2008 7:06 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Romo is a 'cutesie boy', still thinking he can...
get by on his talent and charm. It’s a wonder to me that he’s not still living with this mom and dad, or does he? He’s making millions, so he’s doing well in that regard. But to win consistently at the NFL level, talent and charm are not a match for talent, competitive fire, a team first attitude, and an unmitigated fear of losing.
Romo does not fear losing. He just accepts it as part of competition. He has no edge, because he has no fear. He likes to win, but it isn’t necessary to him. What we have here, in Romo, is a failure to give himself totally to the game, or his team. Tony is just out there having fun.
Hey, I enjoy watching Romo when he’s doing well, and think he very well could lead us to the SB eventually. To do that, however, I think he’ll need to do some real soul searching, and recommit himself to his chosen profession. If he learns to fear losing, he and us, will be the better for it. If not, he may as well go golfing for all I care.
by CowboyMan on Dec 31, 2008 7:37 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I agree Romo's attitude leaves something to be desired
but I don’t like the comparison with Jake Plummer. I followed Plummer’s career pretty closely (he helped me win a fantasy title in 1998 so I’ve always had a soft sport for him) and he does not measure up to Romo statistically at all during similar points in their careers. Now, Plummer played on some bad Cardinal teams so that has to be taken into consideration.
The one true advantage that Plummer has over Romo is he won a playoff game in his second year. Of course, it was over the Cowboys so that’s not saying much. I feel like if Romo was able to play against the Dallas Cowboys he’d absolutely kill us.
by DavidH22 on Dec 31, 2008 8:52 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Recent years selictions of
Jay Cutler,
Tony Schefler
Brandon Marshall
Ryan Clady
Eddie Royal
Peyton Hillis
Should make any GM/Owner salivate.. He really started to get it 06.. Those players there make up a Super Bowl contending team.. Pro Bowl QB, WR. Beast at LT and 2nd WR, TE. He just needed to them to hire a VP type that could help with the D.
"Protect the Romo, Save the Cowboys!!"
by Wmillion on Jan 2, 2009 4:57 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
