Snyder / Jones (was Parcells the Quitter)

Primetime42 · Post by **Primetime42** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 5:36 pm

To his credit, Jerrah has done all that he has needed to do AND he has kept his hand out of the cookie jar.

He, unlike Danny Boy, learned his lesson...he's no coach.

cvillehog · Post by **cvillehog** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 5:45 pm

Primetime42 wrote:To his credit, Jerrah has done all that he has needed to do AND he has kept his hand out of the cookie jar.

He, unlike Danny Boy, learned his lesson...he's no coach.

If you are asserting that The Danny has meddled with Gibbs, please show me an example.

diesel44 · Post by **diesel44** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 6:02 pm

Cannot show what doesnt exist- We know Jerry Jones doesnt mess with Parcells too much because Parcells would just quit like he has done everywhere else.

Primetime42 · Post by **Primetime42** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 6:02 pm

cvillehog wrote:
Primetime42 wrote:To his credit, Jerrah has done all that he has needed to do AND he has kept his hand out of the cookie jar.

He, unlike Danny Boy, learned his lesson...he's no coach.

If you are asserting that The Danny has meddled with Gibbs, please show me an example.

Coles comes to mind.

My only reasoning for no big FA splashes thus far is because of that situation. You know full well, if not for that, Danny would have flown someone in on that private jet of his, opened his checkbook and signed some 30+ CB to an outrageous deal.

And before you go on about Rivera, remember he's a lineman, they maintain their playing ability for a little longer.

cvillehog · Post by **cvillehog** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 6:05 pm

Wait. Coles came to the coaches wanting out of his contract, so I don't see how you can blame that on Dan Snyder meddling.

And, exactly how do you see the free-agency so far as a sign that Dan Snyder is meddling, and then in the next breath say that if Snyder had his way there would be wild spending?

BossHog · Post by **BossHog** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 6:14 pm

You guys have completely gone astray from the topic of Parcells now... so here's your own thread.

cvillehog · Post by **cvillehog** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 6:16 pm

BossHog wrote:You guys have completely gone astray from the topic of Parcells now... so here's your own thread.

Sorry. I was thinking it warranted a new thread, but I thought it would just created duplication if I tried to move the conversation -- since people likely would've responded to the original thread as well.

cvillehog · Post by **cvillehog** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 10:42 pm

What's the matter Cowboys fans? You out of ridiculous arguments?

Primetime42 · Post by **Primetime42** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 11:31 pm

cvillehog wrote:What's the matter Cowboys fans? You out of ridiculous arguments?

Sorry to burst your bubble, but I had things to do..

Nice to see BossHog give me credit for starting the thread...even though I didn't. In fact, I don't think I ever have started a thread here. :shock:

So telling a guy that you will see to it that he is benched, then telling him you will buy him a big screen so he can watch ALL the games when you are NOT the head coach is not meddling? If that isn't I don't know what is.

Hell, he should get fined for unrelated player rewards for even saying he'd buy a TV for him :lol:

Clinton Portis · Post by **Clinton Portis** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 11:37 pm

Primetime42 wrote:
cvillehog wrote:What's the matter Cowboys fans? You out of ridiculous arguments?
Sorry to burst your bubble, but I had things to do..

Nice to see BossHog give me credit for starting the thread...even though I didn't. In fact, I don't think I ever have started a thread here.

So telling a guy that you will see to it that he is benched, then telling him you will buy him a big screen so he can watch ALL the games when you are NOT the head coach is not meddling? If that isn't I don't know what is.

Hell, he should get fined for unrelated player rewards for even saying he'd buy a TV for him

So that means about 90% of your posts are useless?

You never start a thread...!

What do you contribute!

Oh yeah mindless banter! We'd be bored out of our mind if you weren't here Prime!

Primetime42 · Post by **Primetime42** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 11:58 pm

Clinton Portis wrote:
Primetime42 wrote:
cvillehog wrote:What's the matter Cowboys fans? You out of ridiculous arguments?
Sorry to burst your bubble, but I had things to do..

Nice to see BossHog give me credit for starting the thread...even though I didn't. In fact, I don't think I ever have started a thread here.

So telling a guy that you will see to it that he is benched, then telling him you will buy him a big screen so he can watch ALL the games when you are NOT the head coach is not meddling? If that isn't I don't know what is.

Hell, he should get fined for unrelated player rewards for even saying he'd buy a TV for him

So that means about 90% of your posts are useless?

You never start a thread...!

What do you contribute!

Oh yeah mindless banter! We'd be bored out of our mind if you weren't here Prime!

EH!! WRONG!

It's more like 99.99% :wink:

But now you know what it is I'm here for

1niksder · Post by **1niksder** » Tue Mar 22, 2005 12:04 am

Primetime42 wrote:Nice to see BossHog give me credit for starting the thread...even though I didn't. In fact, I don't think I ever have started a thread here.

Remember when that team in Texas cut Wiley, you couldn't wait to START that thread ( not the only 1 either

)

Primetime42 wrote:So telling a guy that you will see to it that he is benched, then telling him you will buy him a big screen so he can watch ALL the games when you are NOT the head coach is not meddling? If that isn't I don't know what is.

That's not meddling that's letting the player know that you (the owner) are supporting the coach, and was in response to Coles refusal to agree with a trade that the coach wanted

Primetime42 wrote:Hell, he should get fined for unrelated player rewards for even saying he'd buy a TV for him

They'd take the cost of the TV and prorate it over the remained of his contract, which would give you guys another reason to say we'll be in cap hell

Primetime42 · Post by **Primetime42** » Tue Mar 22, 2005 12:08 am

I say the TV thing jokingly...hence this smiley----> :lol:

I wouldn't use the TV has "cap hell fuel". Promise :twisted:

. It'd only be ~$500-$1000 anyway, right?

I do remember the Wiley thing...thank you :oops:

1niksder · Post by **1niksder** » Tue Mar 22, 2005 12:22 am

Primetime42 wrote:I say the TV thing jokingly...hence this smiley---->

I wouldn't use the TV has "cap hell fuel". Promise . It'd only be ~$500-$1000 anyway, right?

I do remember the Wiley thing...thank you

I forgot the smiley

welch · Post by **welch** » Tue Mar 22, 2005 2:17 pm

So telling a guy that you will see to it that he is benched, then telling him you will buy him a big screen so he can watch ALL the games when you are NOT the head coach is not meddling? If that isn't I don't know what is.

1. Sounds like Snyder was backing Joe's position: if "Gimme the Ball Jr" Coles wants to break a signed contract, then, said Snyder, expect it to have consequences.

In the Redskins balance of decision-making, Gibbs and the coaching staff have the first and loudest say on which players they want. Snyder negotiates contracts, with advice from Gibbs. Cerrato and the scouting staff provide information on the players; Gibbs and the coaches pick from the players based on Cerrato and the scouting staff's information. See the interview with Cerrato, at:

http://www.the-hogs.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=12031

Snyder's threat to Coles fits this model:

- Coles has hurt feelings because Joe Gibbs won't let Coles draw the Redskins offensive game plan.

- Coles and Gardner console each other: Gibbs is a big, bad, blue-meany of a dictator.

- Do I need to compare the experience and knowledge of Gibbs against that of Coles?

- Coles demands that Gibbs change the offense or else.

- Gibbs concludes that Coles is not the kind of player he wants around the Redskins.

- Coles tells the world that he will walk away from the Redskins -- forget contracts -- leaving them with no compensation

- Snyder loses his temper. Gibbs says, simply, tough luck, young man, but we own your contract.

2. Coles had made it clear to Gibbs that he needed to become part of some other team's plans. Colss told reporters that he doesn't trust Joe Gibbs, and Gibbs doesn't trust him. That's enough, but recall that among the first questions New York reporters asked Coles was, approximately, if you can't play for HOF coach Joe Gibbs, then how can you play here? Coles refused to answer the question, indicating that character doesn't change all that much, no matter how many millions you have just been given.

3. Since Snyder did not interfere with Gibbs in the "Coles affair", show us an example where he has. The first question remains.

cvillehog · Post by **cvillehog** » Tue Mar 22, 2005 2:24 pm

Primetime42 · Post by **Primetime42** » Tue Mar 22, 2005 7:02 pm

welch wrote:
So telling a guy that you will see to it that he is benched, then telling him you will buy him a big screen so he can watch ALL the games when you are NOT the head coach is not meddling? If that isn't I don't know what is.

1. Sounds like Snyder was backing Joe's position: if "Gimme the Ball Jr" Coles wants to break a signed contract, then, said Snyder, expect it to have consequences.

In the Redskins balance of decision-making, Gibbs and the coaching staff have the first and loudest say on which players they want. Snyder negotiates contracts, with advice from Gibbs. Cerrato and the scouting staff provide information on the players; Gibbs and the coaches pick from the players based on Cerrato and the scouting staff's information. See the interview with Cerrato, at:

http://www.the-hogs.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=12031

Snyder's threat to Coles fits this model:

- Coles has hurt feelings because Joe Gibbs won't let Coles draw the Redskins offensive game plan.

- Coles and Gardner console each other: Gibbs is a big, bad, blue-meany of a dictator.

- Do I need to compare the experience and knowledge of Gibbs against that of Coles?

- Coles demands that Gibbs change the offense or else.

- Gibbs concludes that Coles is not the kind of player he wants around the Redskins.

- Coles tells the world that he will walk away from the Redskins -- forget contracts -- leaving them with no compensation

- Snyder loses his temper. Gibbs says, simply, tough luck, young man, but we own your contract.

2. Coles had made it clear to Gibbs that he needed to become part of some other team's plans. Colss told reporters that he doesn't trust Joe Gibbs, and Gibbs doesn't trust him. That's enough, but recall that among the first questions New York reporters asked Coles was, approximately, if you can't play for HOF coach Joe Gibbs, then how can you play here? Coles refused to answer the question, indicating that character doesn't change all that much, no matter how many millions you have just been given.

3. Since Snyder did not interfere with Gibbs in the "Coles affair", show us an example where he has. The first question remains.

Keep in mind this is Vince Cerrato you're talking about. Do you really trust him?

So you're saying when Gibbs says it's ok, that Danny Boy can smack Coles in the mouth?

Even though he now needs permission from "the great one", he's still doing it. That constitutes an owner being in the mix selecting and dispersing of the players and personell.

Don't tell me Snyder sits back and lets Gibbs do all the work, because that's a load.Like ot or not, Coles was gonna have to stick around and play under that contract. He wasn't talking about holding out, but Danny Boy said HE would bench Coles.

Isn't that Joe Gibbs' job?

cvillehog · Post by **cvillehog** » Tue Mar 22, 2005 7:17 pm

You are really reaching there. The fact is, you made an unsupportable assertion, and you should take it back.

SkinsJock · Post by **SkinsJock** » Tue Mar 22, 2005 7:19 pm

get on him cville! You are exactly right and he is looking for an escape!

Primetime42 · Post by **Primetime42** » Tue Mar 22, 2005 8:10 pm

nah.

Look at it from this standpoint...for arguments sake, let's say one day down in Texas, Terry Glenn decides that he doesn't like the direction the offense is headed, and doesn't seem to be thrilled with the coaching scheme. So he says he wants to be traded or released.

If ol' JJ had pulled him aside and threatened the things Snyder threatened, all of you and all the media in this country would be up in arms about how "Jerry is undermining Parcells, now there's gonna be a bitter divorce becase Jerry Jones did something he had no business doing." And you'd supposedly be counting the days til Parcells would quit. (Not that he would).

See the double standard here? Owners do not tell players they will bench them. That's the job of the Head Coach.

welch · Post by **welch** » Tue Mar 22, 2005 9:03 pm

f ol' JJ had pulled him aside and threatened the things Snyder threatened, all of you and all the media in this country would be up in arms about how "Jerry is undermining Parcells, now there's gonna be a bitter divorce becase Jerry Jones did something he had no business doing."

1. I followed Parcells from the time he took over the Giants. If Terry Glenn or any other player tried to tell Parcells how to coach, then Parcells would (a) rip his ears off, and (b) find an NFL team of alligators to swallow him up.

2. Gibbs takes the same approach, but without Bill's high drama.

3. In the Glenn example, Jones would back Parcells by getting rid of the guy. And I would support Jones. (I don't like Jones's cufflinks, or his general dress-style, or a dozen other things, and I hated the way he dumped Tom Landry in a trash can, but Jones is a solid owner. The media? They're just entertainers filling time between TV commercials. Ignore them.)

4. That's what Gibbs, Cerrato, and Snyder did with "Gimme the Ball Jr."

5. What would have counted as Snyder interference? If Snyder had, somehow, dropped Coles during the season. Or if Snyder had overruled Gibbs, and ordered Gibbs to make next year's offense look like the one Gibbs developed under Don Coryell, with Coles imitating Charlie Joiner. Or if Snyder had decided to get another veteran QB in the early season, when it was becoming clearer and clearer that something was wrong with Brunnell, in the same way that he decided to acquire <a quarterback I cannot mention> when Brad Johnson had led the team to the playoffs.

6. So, show us an example. Those are what examples would look like.

1niksder · Post by **1niksder** » Tue Mar 22, 2005 9:40 pm

Primetime42 wrote:nah.

Look at it from this standpoint...for arguments sake, let's say one day down in Texas, Terry Glenn decides that he doesn't like the direction the offense is headed, and doesn't seem to be thrilled with the coaching scheme. So he says he wants to be traded or released.

If ol' JJ had pulled him aside and threatened the things Snyder threatened, all of you and all the media in this country would be up in arms about how "Jerry is undermining Parcells, now there's gonna be a bitter divorce becase Jerry Jones did something he had no business doing." And you'd supposedly be counting the days til Parcells would quit. (Not that he would).

See the double standard here? Owners do not tell players they will bench them. That's the job of the Head Coach.

I wouldn't call it a double standard but I can't say for sure because you didn't give BP's position on Glenn if this happened.

Either way there are differences...

"the Danny" wanted Coles ..... Parcell's wanted Ms. Glenn

JJ would back Bill regardless which way he decided (past years or another coach who knows)
"the Danny" back his coach that's what every fan wants.

tcwest10 · Post by **tcwest10** » Tue Mar 22, 2005 10:48 pm

...and she turned out to be quite the receiver, didn't she ?

Not quite the receiver she was when she was in GB, but still...something that she could tell her grandkids about...that she once played for a HOF coach.
How many women can honestly say that ?

The Hogster · Post by **The Hogster** » Wed Mar 23, 2005 12:56 am

What is this Cowgirl fan talking about. Jerry Bones GIVES INTERVIEWS about whether or not Testaverde or their rookie should start at QB...Jerry Bones stands on the sidelines sometimes....Jerry Bones...introduced their free agent signings to the Media on ESPN...Jerry not only has his hand in the cookie jar, the freakin jar is empty, and he has crumbs all over his mouth.

I would never be caught dead on a Cowboy's sight, you must want to be a Hog...how did you even find this site...fantasizing one night about the Skins and got to Googling? T.O. should have pulled an 1nksider, and instead of standing on the star, he should have took a major leak right on the 50.

Primetime42 · Post by **Primetime42** » Wed Mar 23, 2005 1:18 am

The Hogster wrote:What is this Cowgirl fan talking about. Jerry Bones GIVES INTERVIEWS about whether or not Testaverde or their rookie should start at QB...Jerry Bones stands on the sidelines sometimes....Jerry Bones...introduced their free agent signings to the Media on ESPN...Jerry not only has his hand in the cookie jar, the freakin jar is empty, and he has crumbs all over his mouth.

I would never be caught dead on a Cowboy's sight, you must want to be a Hog...how did you even find this site...fantasizing one night about the Skins and got to Googling? T.O. should have pulled an 1nksider, and instead of standing on the star, he should have took a major leak right on the 50.

First of all, the reason Jones gets to do the media things is simple: Parcells hates having to work with the media. Another reason why the JJ/Tuna connection works. Tuna figures out all the X's and O's, gets the right guys, Jones introduces them and gets to brag about them.

That was the mindsight from Day One.

Secondly, never had to Google this site. I came here during the week of a Cowboys/Skins game, got to actually enjoying some of the stimulating conversation some of your comrades bring up. To be frank, I enjoy getting an opposing fan's POV. It keeps my eyes open to what the others think.

I'm willing to bet if anyone here is having little fantasies about anything, it's likely you. :wink: