WHY ARE THE COWBOYS INTERESTED IN TERRELL OWENS?
Peter King's Monday Morning QB
Season of change
Trying to keep up with NFL's major personnel moves
Posted: Tuesday March 14, 2006 4:21PM; Updated: Wednesday March 15, 2006 9:51AM
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...ter/index.html
WHY ARE THE COWBOYS INTERESTED IN TERRELL OWENS? From Tim Novak of Pittsburgh: "Say it isn't so! I have been reading that the Cowboys have shown definite interest in Terrell Owens. How can that be? After shipping Antonio Bryant to Cleveland due to attitude problems, why would they entertain the idea of adding T.O.?''
Bill Parcells has always been fond of saying that he doesn't treat everyone on his teams the same, he just treats all of them fairly. In other words, the rules for Lawrence Taylor were different than the rules for Phil Simms. Parcells wants Owens because T.O. is a Taylor-type talent who could well have the best year of any offensive player in football in 2006. Maybe not beyond '06, but he'll be on his best behavior this year. My money is on this being Parcells' last year coaching, so why wouldn't he want one of the greatest players in football to try to help him win -- particularly when he knows he can keep him under control?
STOP RIPPING THE REDSKINS. From Jeff of Philadelphia: "Since 2000, all of the experts have been telling me how bad the Cap Hell will be for the 'Skins. In 2003 they were supposed to be in Hell from the 2000 signings. They weren't. I was told that the 'Skins would then have to pay the piper in 2004 ... didn't happen. Then it was supposed to be 2005 for sure ... didn't happen. Then it was a stone-cold guarantee the 'Skins would be in undeniable Cap Hell in 2006. There was no way they could get out of it.... Um, didn't happen. Mr. King, how can this be true? How can the predictions constantly be wrong? At what point does the media correctly predict the 'Skins Cap Hell? Or is it just that Dan Snyder & Co. do a much better job at cap management than anybody in the media is willing to give them credit for?''
Maybe they do. But what have they won in the Snyder Era? That's the point here. Winning. And building a good, consistent team year to year. The reason the Redskins got out of a historic cap jail situation this year is very simple: The cap went up $16.5 million, far more than in any other year in the 12-year history of the system. And let's remember that this about the Redskins: To get to the cap they had to whack good players like LaVar Arrington, Cory Raymer and, soon, Patrick Ramsey, who cost the Redskins a first-round pick in '02. What bothers me about the Redskins management in general is how they dart almost willy-nilly from one way of doing things to another. I mean, you spend a first-round pick on Ramsey and never give him a serious chance to win the job. Ever. Sooner or later, that's going to haunt you.
MORE REDSKINS SUPPORT, THIS TIME FROM NEW YORK. From Anthony of New York City: "Mr. King, I love your work and I mean no disrespect, but why do you and other media figures criticize the Redskins' free-agent moves? Every year it's the same thing, that they spend too much money, that the players they get are overrated. I know Snyder is not a lovable figure, but don't you think that the Redskins improved greatly last year? They have had some good offseason moves in recent years (Washington, Griffin, the Moss trade worked out well and Portis is a good, hard-nosed RB). They've hired good coaches. They have been running pretty smooth since Gibbs returned. So why would you say that they are out of their minds for getting two young receivers in Lloyd and Randle El? Maybe you don't agree, but it seems like they have a plan. Don't you think an organization being run by a Hall of Fame coach deserves the respect to see how these moves play out before calling the team's decisions this offseason 'crazy'?"
We'll see.
Season of change
Trying to keep up with NFL's major personnel moves
Posted: Tuesday March 14, 2006 4:21PM; Updated: Wednesday March 15, 2006 9:51AM
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...ter/index.html
WHY ARE THE COWBOYS INTERESTED IN TERRELL OWENS? From Tim Novak of Pittsburgh: "Say it isn't so! I have been reading that the Cowboys have shown definite interest in Terrell Owens. How can that be? After shipping Antonio Bryant to Cleveland due to attitude problems, why would they entertain the idea of adding T.O.?''
Bill Parcells has always been fond of saying that he doesn't treat everyone on his teams the same, he just treats all of them fairly. In other words, the rules for Lawrence Taylor were different than the rules for Phil Simms. Parcells wants Owens because T.O. is a Taylor-type talent who could well have the best year of any offensive player in football in 2006. Maybe not beyond '06, but he'll be on his best behavior this year. My money is on this being Parcells' last year coaching, so why wouldn't he want one of the greatest players in football to try to help him win -- particularly when he knows he can keep him under control?
STOP RIPPING THE REDSKINS. From Jeff of Philadelphia: "Since 2000, all of the experts have been telling me how bad the Cap Hell will be for the 'Skins. In 2003 they were supposed to be in Hell from the 2000 signings. They weren't. I was told that the 'Skins would then have to pay the piper in 2004 ... didn't happen. Then it was supposed to be 2005 for sure ... didn't happen. Then it was a stone-cold guarantee the 'Skins would be in undeniable Cap Hell in 2006. There was no way they could get out of it.... Um, didn't happen. Mr. King, how can this be true? How can the predictions constantly be wrong? At what point does the media correctly predict the 'Skins Cap Hell? Or is it just that Dan Snyder & Co. do a much better job at cap management than anybody in the media is willing to give them credit for?''
Maybe they do. But what have they won in the Snyder Era? That's the point here. Winning. And building a good, consistent team year to year. The reason the Redskins got out of a historic cap jail situation this year is very simple: The cap went up $16.5 million, far more than in any other year in the 12-year history of the system. And let's remember that this about the Redskins: To get to the cap they had to whack good players like LaVar Arrington, Cory Raymer and, soon, Patrick Ramsey, who cost the Redskins a first-round pick in '02. What bothers me about the Redskins management in general is how they dart almost willy-nilly from one way of doing things to another. I mean, you spend a first-round pick on Ramsey and never give him a serious chance to win the job. Ever. Sooner or later, that's going to haunt you.
MORE REDSKINS SUPPORT, THIS TIME FROM NEW YORK. From Anthony of New York City: "Mr. King, I love your work and I mean no disrespect, but why do you and other media figures criticize the Redskins' free-agent moves? Every year it's the same thing, that they spend too much money, that the players they get are overrated. I know Snyder is not a lovable figure, but don't you think that the Redskins improved greatly last year? They have had some good offseason moves in recent years (Washington, Griffin, the Moss trade worked out well and Portis is a good, hard-nosed RB). They've hired good coaches. They have been running pretty smooth since Gibbs returned. So why would you say that they are out of their minds for getting two young receivers in Lloyd and Randle El? Maybe you don't agree, but it seems like they have a plan. Don't you think an organization being run by a Hall of Fame coach deserves the respect to see how these moves play out before calling the team's decisions this offseason 'crazy'?"
We'll see.
posted by The Gryphon at 6:34 PM
<< Home