Cowboys considering starting Michael/Collins

[skidadl]

Maybe it's just me but I prefer a coach who knows how to make adjustments on the fly during the game.

If a player is clearly struggling during a game, which those players clearly were, then make the change during the game. Who knows, maybe the decision to make that change in-game actually tips momentum in your favor and you end up winning the game.

I don't understand why coaches like Garrett don't think this way. They're being paid way too much not to exercise basic common sense.

Some of the best coaches are singularly minded with their vision and can communicate that vision as well as see it through multiple seasons until success happens. That is the good part. Most of those types aren't flexible on the fly or as creative. Parcells is one of those IMO.

 

[Jiggyfly]

Nothing at all. I think Townsend just has a personal dislike for the guy because anyone who has watched the 5 games this year can clearly see that Randle has out-performed McFadden.

Which is surprising because he was decidedly in his camp during the offseason.

 

[Cotton]

It is a big deal...we have all wanted Cassel, Michael, and Collins to start.

It really is a big deal. This could be the difference between winning and losing. Huge deal.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

It really is a big deal. This could be the difference between winning and losing. Huge deal.

When you hear of wide spread changes like this it's usually because the team is giving up on the season and wants to get some young guys experience. I don't think that is the case at all here. I think guys like Collins and Michael have earned the opportunity. Cassel, well he is playing by default. Glad to see we are at least going to make the Collins switch and get Michael a bigger role in the offense.

 

[townsend]

Which is surprising because he was decidedly in his camp during the offseason.

I was. But he's proven to be inconsistent, and too immature to be trusted. He has a better top gear. But frankly he is everything that people were afraid of. A guy who can hit it deep a few plays and is useless for the rest of the game. He had one really good half in Atlanta and his been useless otherwise, in the same half McFadden also performed well with his limited touches.

There isn't a big difference between the two, but if I have to choose I'm gonna pick the one who's less of a moron, and is more consistent. The Randle experiment was a complete failure and frankly once his time is up in Dallas, I'd be surprised to see him on another active roster.

 

[townsend]

It is a big deal...we have all wanted Cassel, Michael, and Collins to start.

I wasn't being sarcastic, I guess it's pretty rare for people to say "big deal." When they mean it, but that's what that was.

 

[dallen]

Some of the best coaches are singularly minded with their vision and can communicate that vision as well as see it through multiple seasons until success happens. That is the good part. Most of those types aren't flexible on the fly or as creative. Parcells is one of those IMO.

You sound like you know a lot about coaching

 

[Jiggyfly]

I was. But he's proven to be inconsistent, and too immature to be trusted. He has a better top gear. But frankly he is everything that people were afraid of. A guy who can hit it deep a few plays and is useless for the rest of the game. He had one really good half in Atlanta and his been useless otherwise, in the same half McFadden also performed well with his limited touches.

There isn't a big difference between the two, but if I have to choose I'm gonna pick the one who's less of a moron, and is more consistent. The Randle experiment was a complete failure and frankly once his time is up in Dallas, I'd be surprised to see him on another active roster.

McFadden is not more consitent than Randle, why do you keep saying this?

The fact that you keep pushing McFadden as having done anything warranting more carries is mind boggling no matter how you feel about Randle.

 

[L.T. Fan]

You sound like you know a lot about coaching

Stiffled snicker.

 

[L.T. Fan]

McFadden is not more consitent than Randle, why do you keep saying this?

The fact that you keep pushing McFadden as having done anything warranting more carries is mind boggling no matter how you feel about Randle.

Yes sir. McFadden is displaying what he has done so everywhere else. Zip.

 

[Texas Ace]

I'm not a big fan of Randle, but he's at least had some productive plays in both the run and pass.

McFadden has done absolutely nothing to help this team and has been a total waste. We wouldn't miss a single thing if we cut the guy tomorrow.

With that said, Michael needs to start so we can see what he's capable of bringing because Randle has proven what most of us already thought - he is not a starting NFL RB and needs to go back to his role as s change of pace guy where he can be more productive.

 

[kidd]

I'm not a big fan of Randle, but he's at least had some productive plays in both the run and pass.

McFadden has done absolutely nothing to help this team and has been a total waste. We wouldn't miss a single thing if we cut the guy tomorrow.

With that said, Michael needs to start so we can see what he's capable of bringing because Randle has proven what most of us already thought - he is not a starting NFL RB and needs to go back to his role as s change of pace guy where he can be more productive.

Agreed.

Randle could easily fill McFadden's role.

 

[Cotton]

When you hear of wide spread changes like this it's usually because the team is giving up on the season and wants to get some young guys experience. I don't think that is the case at all here. I think guys like Collins and Michael have earned the opportunity. Cassel, well he is playing by default. Glad to see we are at least going to make the Collins switch and get Michael a bigger role in the offense.

Yeah, I think it's because we desperately trying to save the season instead of tanking on it.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

I get the QB story, because that's too big a move to hide. But why announce the part about who's starting at LG and RB?

I really think these moves are Jerry-driven. Or at least Steve-driven.

 

[1bigfan13]

Some of the best coaches are singularly minded with their vision and can communicate that vision as well as see it through multiple seasons until success happens. That is the good part. Most of those types aren't flexible on the fly or as creative. Parcells is one of those IMO.

But you'd think after the eighth straight 3 and out that a light bulb would come on and the coach would consider different personnel, scheme adjustments, etc.

It felt like Garrett was sitting in a boat that was sinking and instead of grabbing a bucket and trying to bail water from the boat he just sat there, did nothing, and went down with the boat.

That rationale doesn't make any sense to me.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

Agreed.

Randle could easily fill McFadden's role.

Yeah, not sure what McFadden has shown anybody to make them believe he still deserves any role in this offense. For a guy with size and all world speed he falls down way too easy. It's like the worst combination. If you're going to go down that easily then you want to at least be smaller to present a target that is harder to hit for defenders.

To me if you want to start Michael, then you shift Randle into the McFadden role and then basically make McFadden your special teams, emergency RB. Personally I'd sooner just replace McFadden but I can't see that happening.

 

[boozeman]

I get the QB story, because that's too big a move to hide. But why announce the part about who's starting at LG and RB?

I really think these moves are Jerry-driven. Or at least Steve-driven.

They are PR moves too. They know the locker room is probably fracturing and the fans are getting antsy too.

 

[Carp]

I'm not a big fan of Randle, but he's at least had some productive plays in both the run and pass.

McFadden has done absolutely nothing to help this team and has been a total waste. We wouldn't miss a single thing if we cut the guy tomorrow.

With that said, Michael needs to start so we can see what he's capable of bringing because Randle has proven what most of us already thought - he is not a starting NFL RB and needs to go back to his role as s change of pace guy where he can be more productive.

I have no issue with McFadden...he did whiff on a block, but he is what I expected. He runs hard and while Randle has done better running the ball, they have pretty much the same stats in the passing game.

 

[boozeman]

But you'd think after the eighth straight 3 and out that a light bulb would come on and the coach would consider different personnel, scheme adjustments, etc.

It felt like Garrett was sitting in a boat that was sinking and instead of grabbing a bucket and trying to bail water from the boat he just sat there, did nothing, and went down with the boat.

That rationale doesn't make any sense to me.

Lookit, you don't want to lose the player, okay?

 

[boozeman]

I have no issue with McFadden...he did whiff on a block, but he is what I expected. He runs hard and while Randle has done better running the ball, they have pretty much the same stats in the passing game.

Eff McFadden.