 |
Texie
Native Texan
|
Shottie? Got a wine that goes with abacked? 
____________________
\W/
|
|
|
Ed in East Texas
|
Mark S wrote: jellowrestling wrote: The Cowboys are 1-5.
Which of these are factors (yes or no):
Schedule....yes
Talent....yes (O-line, safety)
Coaching....YES
Effort....Yes
Focus....yes
Luck....yes
Officiating....yes
Player Intelligence....no
Other (identify)...is there anything else?
Effort and focus or lack thereof stem from coaching. A coach does more than draw up and determine which plays are run - a computer can do that. A coach provides loads of many intangibles if he is good and not so many if he is not. I've heard the argument that these players are professional and therefore don't need to be pumped up and given direction and focus - wrong, otherwise, coaches would not be necessary.
|
|
|
jellowrestling
Messenger
|
Bump
____________________
Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between govt and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by govt, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all - Bastiat
|
|
|
jody
|
Orphie wrote: Soup wrote: jody wrote: And I'm not sure why suggesting that someone is wrong should be an affront to them. I assume it has already happened at some point before, no? Maybe this then is only the second time, unless of course, I am. Goodness, this may put me into the thirties. Suggesting that they are wrong is great. Telling them they are "absolutely wrong" about a subjective issue is probably the sticking point.
Snort bhwhahahahaaa I wasn't affronted..Or abacked...
But I am not wrong for having an opinion. ..Just like your opinions are not fact.
Alot of people believe what they say is factual.. when in fact..they just think they know it all.
So I don't come on and say .. You are wrong.. it's a discussion board...not a school.
No one is wrong for having an opinion. That does not mean every opinion is accurate.
There's a reason they measure intelligence in scouting and at the combine. But flash a great 40 time at some franchises and they go for the glitter. Do that too many times and you wind up with athletes, but few players. They so completely depend on their physical skills that maybe knowing where to line up becomes an afterthought, as if their talent will always compensate.
|
|
|
jellowrestling
Messenger
|
Ed in East Texas wrote: Mark S wrote: jellowrestling wrote: The Cowboys are 1-5.
Which of these are factors (yes or no):
Schedule....yes
Talent....yes (O-line, safety)
Coaching....YES
Effort....Yes
Focus....yes
Luck....yes
Officiating....yes
Player Intelligence....no
Other (identify)...is there anything else?
Effort and focus or lack thereof stem from coaching. A coach does more than draw up and determine which plays are run - a computer can do that. A coach provides loads of many intangibles if he is good and not so many if he is not. I've heard the argument that these players are professional and therefore don't need to be pumped up and given direction and focus - wrong, otherwise, coaches would not be necessary.
Landry's focus wasn't on getting players pumped up. He assembled a group of intelligent players and showed them how to exploit their opponents weaknesses. Landry believed in preparation, not motivation. His philosophy was more or less that if a player needed to be motivated, he wasn't worth keeping.
____________________
Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between govt and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by govt, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all - Bastiat
|
|
|
LEB
LEB
|
jellowrestling wrote: Landry's focus wasn't on getting players pumped up. He assembled a group of intelligent players and showed them how to exploit their opponents weaknesses. Landry believed in preparation, not motivation. His philosophy was more or less that if a player needed to be motivated, he wasn't worth keeping.
 I doubt Landry ever gave a rah-rah or "win one for the gipper" speech in his professional life. As Jello said correctly, Landry believed in preparation. He left it to the players to motivate themselves and he had some pretty good leaders. Guys like Dandy Don, Roger, TonyD, Randy, Harvey were leaders by voice or example. I don't know this team well enough to say if those guys are here today.
Maybe, they're just not as talented as everyone thought. Perhaps they were vastly overrated. I'm not a smart enough guy to know that.
Gotta be a lot of disappointment and with the very real possibility that Romo might miss the rest of the year, The Cowboys could be looking at a top 5 draft pick. We'll see what they're made of.
|
|
|
dublusk
Member
|
jody wrote: Orphie wrote: Soup wrote: jody wrote: And I'm not sure why suggesting that someone is wrong should be an affront to them. I assume it has already happened at some point before, no? Maybe this then is only the second time, unless of course, I am. Goodness, this may put me into the thirties. Suggesting that they are wrong is great. Telling them they are "absolutely wrong" about a subjective issue is probably the sticking point.
Snort bhwhahahahaaa I wasn't affronted..Or abacked...
But I am not wrong for having an opinion. ..Just like your opinions are not fact.
Alot of people believe what they say is factual.. when in fact..they just think they know it all.
So I don't come on and say .. You are wrong.. it's a discussion board...not a school.
No one is wrong for having an opinion. That does not mean every opinion is accurate.
There's a reason they measure intelligence in scouting and at the combine. But flash a great 40 time at some franchises and they go for the glitter. Do that too many times and you wind up with athletes, but few players. They so completely depend on their physical skills that maybe knowing where to line up becomes an afterthought, as if their talent will always compensate.
Well that's your opinion.
|
|
|
Twiggler!
|
jody wrote: Orphie wrote: Soup wrote: jody wrote: And I'm not sure why suggesting that someone is wrong should be an affront to them. I assume it has already happened at some point before, no? Maybe this then is only the second time, unless of course, I am. Goodness, this may put me into the thirties. Suggesting that they are wrong is great. Telling them they are "absolutely wrong" about a subjective issue is probably the sticking point.
Snort bhwhahahahaaa I wasn't affronted..Or abacked...
But I am not wrong for having an opinion. ..Just like your opinions are not fact.
Alot of people believe what they say is factual.. when in fact..they just think they know it all.
So I don't come on and say .. You are wrong.. it's a discussion board...not a school.
No one is wrong for having an opinion. That does not mean every opinion is accurate.
There's a reason they measure intelligence in scouting and at the combine. But flash a great 40 time at some franchises and they go for the glitter. Do that too many times and you wind up with athletes, but few players. They so completely depend on their physical skills that maybe knowing where to line up becomes an afterthought, as if their talent will always compensate.
|
|
|
Current time is 06:37 pm | Page:   ... 4 5 6 7 8 9 |
|
|
|
