[quote]mbdix wrote:
I know that Lynch will get a lot of yards. [/quote]
Fixed your typo.
[quote]MattyXL wrote:
The way foster carved you guys up and it didn’t even look he was trying a healthy fear of lynch should be there as well
[/quote]
With Tony Romo going against one of the top secondary’s in the league, on the road, I would be pretty terrified of that as well.
^I’m starting Flacco over Romo in one of my leagues…
[quote]jbpick86 wrote:
[quote]MattyXL wrote:
The way foster carved you guys up and it didn’t even look he was trying a healthy fear of lynch should be there as well
[/quote]
With Tony Romo going against one of the top secondary’s in the league, on the road, I would be pretty terrified of that as well. [/quote]
I’m not though. I am excited to see Romo go against Seattle. Romo is looking very close to being 100%. Seattle should be pretty scared facing this team with their home streak on the line
Quick question: If you are an owner and you had a team that sucked for nearly a decade, brought in a coach who suddenly turned it into an instant perennial SB contender again, and reports start coming in about him losing the locker room, do you get rid of the coach or the poisonous players?
There are very few players on that 49ers roster who are irreplaceable in my opinion, given a few years, a coach as good as Harbough could build you another team. And I am not a Harbough fan but to entertain the idea of getting rid of him is beyond insane in my opinion.
[quote]jbpick86 wrote:
Quick question: If you are an owner and you had a team that sucked for nearly a decade, brought in a coach who suddenly turned it into an instant perennial SB contender again, and reports start coming in about him losing the locker room, do you get rid of the coach or the poisonous players?
There are very few players on that 49ers roster who are irreplaceable in my opinion, given a few years, a coach as good as Harbough could build you another team. And I am not a Harbough fan but to entertain the idea of getting rid of him is beyond insane in my opinion. [/quote]
Ya I boot the players first unless the coach is just that toxic for the org.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]jbpick86 wrote:
Quick question: If you are an owner and you had a team that sucked for nearly a decade, brought in a coach who suddenly turned it into an instant perennial SB contender again, and reports start coming in about him losing the locker room, do you get rid of the coach or the poisonous players?
There are very few players on that 49ers roster who are irreplaceable in my opinion, given a few years, a coach as good as Harbough could build you another team. And I am not a Harbough fan but to entertain the idea of getting rid of him is beyond insane in my opinion. [/quote]
Ya I boot the players first unless the coach is just that toxic for the org.[/quote]
He seems like a total dick and I know Pete Carrol can’t stand him, but results are results in the NFL. He’s not running the Mayor’s welcoming committee or getting paid to be liked or make friends.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]jbpick86 wrote:
Quick question: If you are an owner and you had a team that sucked for nearly a decade, brought in a coach who suddenly turned it into an instant perennial SB contender again, and reports start coming in about him losing the locker room, do you get rid of the coach or the poisonous players?
There are very few players on that 49ers roster who are irreplaceable in my opinion, given a few years, a coach as good as Harbough could build you another team. And I am not a Harbough fan but to entertain the idea of getting rid of him is beyond insane in my opinion. [/quote]
Ya I boot the players first unless the coach is just that toxic for the org.[/quote]
Nothing that toxic about three conference championship appearances in a row. Any player that looks at where they were, and he has brought them, and isn’t happy to be on that team wouldn’t be a player worth having around anyway because they are more concerned with how they feel than with winning.
[quote]jbpick86 wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]jbpick86 wrote:
Quick question: If you are an owner and you had a team that sucked for nearly a decade, brought in a coach who suddenly turned it into an instant perennial SB contender again, and reports start coming in about him losing the locker room, do you get rid of the coach or the poisonous players?
There are very few players on that 49ers roster who are irreplaceable in my opinion, given a few years, a coach as good as Harbough could build you another team. And I am not a Harbough fan but to entertain the idea of getting rid of him is beyond insane in my opinion. [/quote]
Ya I boot the players first unless the coach is just that toxic for the org.[/quote]
Nothing that toxic about three conference championship appearances in a row. Any player that looks at where they were, and he has brought them, and isn’t happy to be on that team wouldn’t be a player worth having around anyway because they are more concerned with how they feel than with winning. [/quote]
I don’t think just because you’re a winner you can’t be toxic to an organization. I’ve no idea about this particular case though. Jim seems fine from what I’ve seen.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]jbpick86 wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]jbpick86 wrote:
Quick question: If you are an owner and you had a team that sucked for nearly a decade, brought in a coach who suddenly turned it into an instant perennial SB contender again, and reports start coming in about him losing the locker room, do you get rid of the coach or the poisonous players?
There are very few players on that 49ers roster who are irreplaceable in my opinion, given a few years, a coach as good as Harbough could build you another team. And I am not a Harbough fan but to entertain the idea of getting rid of him is beyond insane in my opinion. [/quote]
Ya I boot the players first unless the coach is just that toxic for the org.[/quote]
Nothing that toxic about three conference championship appearances in a row. Any player that looks at where they were, and he has brought them, and isn’t happy to be on that team wouldn’t be a player worth having around anyway because they are more concerned with how they feel than with winning. [/quote]
I don’t think just because you’re a winner you can’t be toxic to an organization. I’ve no idea about this particular case though. Jim seems fine from what I’ve seen. [/quote]
Maybe not, but being a winner should buy you some, “This is the way I do things, you don’t like it, tough shit” clout. And if you are a player you should want to play for a winner and just take whatever shit comes in 99% of cases because whatever it is he’s doing, its working. He took a loser and made them into a winner the year he arrived. That is hard to argue. The reasons for a player or players not liking him and contributing to the spread of discord in the locker room would have to be really really compelling for me to not cut them, not the coach, loose.
[quote]jbpick86 wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]jbpick86 wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]jbpick86 wrote:
Quick question: If you are an owner and you had a team that sucked for nearly a decade, brought in a coach who suddenly turned it into an instant perennial SB contender again, and reports start coming in about him losing the locker room, do you get rid of the coach or the poisonous players?
There are very few players on that 49ers roster who are irreplaceable in my opinion, given a few years, a coach as good as Harbough could build you another team. And I am not a Harbough fan but to entertain the idea of getting rid of him is beyond insane in my opinion. [/quote]
Ya I boot the players first unless the coach is just that toxic for the org.[/quote]
Nothing that toxic about three conference championship appearances in a row. Any player that looks at where they were, and he has brought them, and isn’t happy to be on that team wouldn’t be a player worth having around anyway because they are more concerned with how they feel than with winning. [/quote]
I don’t think just because you’re a winner you can’t be toxic to an organization. I’ve no idea about this particular case though. Jim seems fine from what I’ve seen. [/quote]
Maybe not, but being a winner should buy you some, “This is the way I do things, you don’t like it, tough shit” clout. And if you are a player you should want to play for a winner and just take whatever shit comes in 99% of cases because whatever it is he’s doing, its working. He took a loser and made them into a winner the year he arrived. That is hard to argue. The reasons for a player or players not liking him and contributing to the spread of discord in the locker room would have to be really really compelling for me to not cut them, not the coach, loose. [/quote]
I understand what you’re saying, but we’re talking about A LOT of ego under the same roof. From what I’ve heard (not sure if true) Jim and ownership don’t get along either. Even a proven winner like Harbaugh only has so much “winner’s clout.”
Again, I don’t really know what’s going on in this case except the little I’ve read and seen on ESPN. I would say if Jim acts like he’s more important than the team or the game while in private/the locker room, that’s toxic for an organization.
If John did that I’d want him out of Baltimore ring and all.
^Remember too, he’s a winner, but he hasn’t won the big game yet. You can only be a bridesmaid so many times.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
^Remember too, he’s a winner, but he hasn’t won the big game yet. You can only be a bridesmaid so many times. [/quote]
True, but how many times does switching from a coach that almost won the big game a few times to a new coach actually work out for the better? And usually organizations were the owner gets his feathered ruffled by coaching decisions and runs them off are destined to wallow in mediocrity (see Dallas and Oakland).
I would rather be their with a shot to win most years than set myself back 10 years with a coaching flip. Look at the Steelers as a prime example. They may stick with coaches too long for some but they are the most successful franchise of all time and they stick with and get soundly behind their coaches. How this recipe for success escapes most teams is beyond me.
[quote]jbpick86 wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
^Remember too, he’s a winner, but he hasn’t won the big game yet. You can only be a bridesmaid so many times. [/quote]
True, but how many times does switching from a coach that almost won the big game a few times to a new coach actually work out for the better? And usually organizations were the owner gets his feathered ruffled by coaching decisions and runs them off are destined to wallow in mediocrity (see Dallas and Oakland).
I would rather be their with a shot to win most years than set myself back 10 years with a coaching flip. Look at the Steelers as a prime example. They may stick with coaches two long for some but they are the most successful franchise of all time and they stick with and get soundly behind their coaches. How this recipe for success escapes most teams is beyond me. [/quote]
Hey, I’m with you. I think Andy Reid is a good example. Philly hasn’t won since he left (very short sample I realize).
You bring up a good point about the Steeler’s. Same thing with New England. I think one underlying variable not often talked about is the goal of ownership. I think Kraft is more interested in winning than Jones for example and that “attitude” trickles down. Pats fans aren’t out numbered at homes games like the Cowboys. That’s on Jerry, imo. No one wants to see a perennial loser.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]jbpick86 wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
^Remember too, he’s a winner, but he hasn’t won the big game yet. You can only be a bridesmaid so many times. [/quote]
True, but how many times does switching from a coach that almost won the big game a few times to a new coach actually work out for the better? And usually organizations were the owner gets his feathered ruffled by coaching decisions and runs them off are destined to wallow in mediocrity (see Dallas and Oakland).
I would rather be their with a shot to win most years than set myself back 10 years with a coaching flip. Look at the Steelers as a prime example. They may stick with coaches two long for some but they are the most successful franchise of all time and they stick with and get soundly behind their coaches. How this recipe for success escapes most teams is beyond me. [/quote]
Hey, I’m with you. I think Andy Reid is a good example. Philly hasn’t won since he left (very short sample I realize).
You bring up a good point about the Steeler’s. Same thing with New England. I think one underlying variable not often talked about is the goal of ownership. I think Kraft is more interested in winning than Jones for example and that “attitude” trickles down. Pats fans aren’t out numbered at homes games like the Cowboys. That’s on Jerry, imo. No one wants to see a perennial loser. [/quote]
Exactly. Kraft is a football fan. And he realizes that knowledgeable fans are still not on the level of coaches and the guys who get paid for it. He puts football minds in place, gives them the resources and gets out of the way. Jerry wants the credit for building the team and as such is threatened by anyone considered a good football mind because they may detract from his own personal accolade.
Yall are crazy if you think Jerry Jones doesn’t want to win more than any other owner in the NFL. Jerry Jones is a football guy. He has been a football guy his whole life. Yes, he wants to make money, yes he wants to keep the Cowboys America’s team, but that man wants to WIN. He is a champion.
A champion in College, a Champion in oil, a Champion in the NFL, and a champion in life. He IS winning. And now, thank GOD almighty, so are my Cowboys again. Go Cowboys
[quote]mbdix wrote:
Yall are crazy if you think Jerry Jones doesn’t want to win more than any other owner in the NFL. Jerry Jones is a football guy. He has been a football guy his whole life. Yes, he wants to make money, yes he wants to keep the Cowboys America’s team, but that man wants to WIN. He is a champion.
A champion in College, a Champion in oil, a Champion in the NFL, and a champion in life. He IS winning. And now, thank GOD almighty, so are my Cowboys again. Go Cowboys[/quote]
I agree Jones wants to win, and probably as much or more than any owner in sports, but only if he can do it on his terms and as the GM. He doesn’t want to win bad enough to give the GM spot to someone else who is better qualified.
[quote]jjackkrash wrote:
He doesn’t want to win bad enough to give the GM spot to someone else who is better qualified. [/quote]
Nailed it.
He doesn’t need to give the GM job to anyone else to win it all. We have the talent, we have the right head coach, and it is finally starting to come together like it should.
[quote]doogie wrote:
[quote]jjackkrash wrote:
He doesn’t want to win bad enough to give the GM spot to someone else who is better qualified. [/quote]
Nailed it.[/quote]
Doogie, after reading your post about going to the oilers training camp as a kid. I don’t believe you when you say you are a Cowboys fan. Either start showing some positive support for this team or turn in your (possible fake) fan card.