If the season ended today, would Quincy Carter's job be safe? - Dallas-Mavs.com Forums

Murphy3 · 11-17-2003, 06:00 PM

Let's try this again...and keep it on topic.

This is an interesting discussion ..a great topic if I do say so myself. But, let's keep it civil. There's no reason for another poll. Just give me your thoughts.

LRB · 11-17-2003, 06:02 PM

KEEP ALL POSTS ON TOPIC

Murphy has a good thread and it's unfair to clutter it up and get it locked trading insults.

FilthyFinMavs · 11-17-2003, 06:06 PM

This is incredible. Quincy has had some pretty good games and some horrible games like yesterday. You add them all up and you get a pretty average season. I think his job is safe and he will be here next season. This is one of the rare games that Quincy use to give us alot last season. He is struggling right now but in order for this team to make it to the playoffs he is going to have to step his game up. All he needs to do is go 2-4 here on out to atleast be awarded the Wild Card. So far this season he has gotten us to a 7-3 record. His job is safe. You can say that he has only lost us 3 games this season out of 10. That isn't bad at all. Our defense is going to be there. IT is up to our offense to win us games. Our defense doesn't have that playmaking ability to win us games yet.

kingrex · 11-17-2003, 06:07 PM

It seems this is quite the hot issue, in that it's making everyone hot under the collar.

Anyway, avoiding redundancy, Quincy's effectiveness has obviously been hampered by the loss of Galloway. Suddenly, Bryant became the 2nd option rather than the 3rd. So, to say that the Cowboys lost because of Quincy is shortsighted. The question to ask is would the Cowboys be at 7-3 without Quincy? No, Quincy has done everything that can be expected from him. He has done nothing to lose his job, but there is no doubt that more can be expected at that position. So, I expect Quincy will have competition next year.

Chiwas · 11-17-2003, 06:16 PM

What's the job of Quincy?

If Parcells finds a better QB, Quincy would be the backup.

What's the point then?

If he could keep being the starting QB? The topic is in extreme speculative. Is Carter the best QB for the present Cowboys? Hardly to deny it. If he wasn't, now he is, undoubtely. He has improved a lot with 10 regular season games more than Harrington, and 10 games after Parcells chose him instead of Harrington.

Would Parcells look for another QB today? We don't have any clue.

Edit: Who the hell is Harrington? Every time I want to write "Hutchinson", I write "Harrington".

LRB · 11-17-2003, 06:18 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by: kingrex
It seems this is quite the hot issue, in that it's making everyone hot under the collar.

Anyway, avoiding redundancy, Quincy's effectiveness has obviously been hampered by the loss of Galloway. Suddenly, Bryant became the 2nd option rather than the 3rd. So, to say that the Cowboys lost because of Quincy is shortsighted. The question to ask is would the Cowboys be at 7-3 without Quincy? No, Quincy has done everything that can be expected from him. He has done nothing to lose his job, but there is no doubt that more can be expected at that position. So, I expect Quincy will have competition next year.

Kingrex to answer that question you would need to know who was replacing Quincy. If it was Chad Hutch then I'd say noway would we be as good as 7-3 at this point. Now if it was say Brett Farve, then you might get another answer. I don't think that Parcells' will throw QCar out for just any body that that throw a football, but if QCar continues to slide the Tuna might start looking for someone that he thinks will be better equiped to do the job next year. I certainly don't think Quincy can afford to start taking games off. He needs to continue to work his butt off if he wants to keep his job. And he's going to need to show something in our final 6 games to keep Bill from seriously looking for a possible alternative during the offseason. But if QCar finishes strong, then his job is probably as safe as can reasonably be expected for someone with his level of experience.

LRB · 11-17-2003, 06:20 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by: Chiwas
What's the job of Quincy?

If Parcells finds a better QB, Quincy would be the backup.

What's the point then?

If he could keep being the starting QB? The topic is in extreme speculative. Is Carter the best QB for the present Cowboys? Hardly to deny it. If he wasn't, now he is, undoubtely. He has improved a lot with 10 regular season games more than Harrington, and 10 games after Parcells chose him instead of Harrington.

Would Parcells look for another QB today? We don't have any clue.

Well Chiwas, finding a better quarterback will cost the cowboys whether in a draft pick or salary cap space. That cost could be applied to other needy position is the Tuna feels Quincy is good enough to get the job done. The Cowboys have many needs. If Qunicy can be at least adequate then Bill can focus on filling those other needs.

FilthyFinMavs · 11-17-2003, 06:20 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by: kingrex
It seems this is quite the hot issue, in that it's making everyone hot under the collar.

Anyway, avoiding redundancy, Quincy's effectiveness has obviously been hampered by the loss of Galloway. Suddenly, Bryant became the 2nd option rather than the 3rd. So, to say that the Cowboys lost because of Quincy is shortsighted. The question to ask is would the Cowboys be at 7-3 without Quincy? No, Quincy has done everything that can be expected from him. He has done nothing to lose his job, but there is no doubt that more can be expected at that position. So, I expect Quincy will have competition next year.

Who won us that NY Giants game? You could argue that the Giants did but Quincy was the one who put us in field goal range in less then 10 seconds. Out of those 3 losses the defense has only lost 1 and that was the first game of the season and haven't lost since. Two of those losses were all 0 points by the Cowboys. The defense isn't going to score points for us. IMO, Quincy is the guy who fuels this offense and he is the guy who has gotten us 7 wins with alot of help from the D.

kingrex · 11-17-2003, 06:23 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by: LRB

Quote:

Originally posted by: kingrex
It seems this is quite the hot issue, in that it's making everyone hot under the collar.

Anyway, avoiding redundancy, Quincy's effectiveness has obviously been hampered by the loss of Galloway. Suddenly, Bryant became the 2nd option rather than the 3rd. So, to say that the Cowboys lost because of Quincy is shortsighted. The question to ask is would the Cowboys be at 7-3 without Quincy? No, Quincy has done everything that can be expected from him. He has done nothing to lose his job, but there is no doubt that more can be expected at that position. So, I expect Quincy will have competition next year.

Kingrex to answer that question you would need to know who was replacing Quincy. If it was Chad Hutch then I'd say noway would we be as good as 7-3 at this point. Now if it was say Brett Farve, then you might get another answer. I don't think that Parcells' will throw QCar out for just any body that that throw a football, but if QCar continues to slide the Tuna might start looking for someone that he thinks will be better equiped to do the job next year. I certainly don't think Quincy can afford to start taking games off. He needs to continue to work his butt off if he wants to keep his job. And he's going to need to show something in our final 6 games to keep Bill from seriously looking for a possible alternative during the offseason. But if QCar finishes strong, then his job is probably as safe as can reasonably be expected for someone with his level of experience.

Quincy has gotten where he is with hard work. Parcells recognizes that and appreciates that. I can definitely see a scenario where he makes no off-season moves just to reward Quincy for all his hard work. Judging by what Bill has been saying, I think he believes he can win with Quincy, and that may not change next year.

Murphy3 · 11-17-2003, 06:25 PM

well, quincy had quite a bit to do with the first loss..it's not all on the defenses shoulders.
he missed a wide ope TE at the 5 yard line for a first down..also missed a couple of wide open deep throws....but, who's counting?

I'm not sure why you're just examining the losses. Surely the Cowboys can find plenty of things to improve upon even in their wins...

kingrex · 11-17-2003, 06:31 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by: Murphy3
well, quincy had quite a bit to do with the first loss..it's not all on the defenses shoulders.
he missed a wide ope TE at the 5 yard line for a first down..also missed a couple of wide open deep throws....but, who's counting?

I'm not sure why you're just examining the losses. Surely the Cowboys can find plenty of things to improve upon even in their wins...

Agreed. As from my previous post, I agree there is room for improvement at that position period. The question is, does Bill believe he has enough at the QB position for next year? And, I'm saying that judging by Bill's comments, he may think that Quincy can still improve next year thus eliminating the need to replace him.

FilthyFinMavs · 11-17-2003, 06:34 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by: Murphy3
well, quincy had quite a bit to do with the first loss..it's not all on the defenses shoulders.
he missed a wide ope TE at the 5 yard line for a first down..also missed a couple of wide open deep throws....but, who's counting?

I'm not sure why you're just examining the losses. Surely the Cowboys can find plenty of things to improve upon even in their wins...

Maybe the Bills game but that is the only game I recall Quincy just playing horribly. I have noticed that Quincy plasy horrible against bad defenses then that results into the offense playing bad. The difference between Quincy earlier this season and the Quincy now is that Parcells isn't letting Quincy do anything. He won't let him go deep until Galloway is hurt. Didn't even trust Quincy to get a couple of inches and would rather trust Hambrick to do so.

Carter had something to do with that Falcons game but no way the Falcons should score over 20 points against this defense or any defense in the league with Mike VIck being hurt. The Cowboys D had Cowboys fans upset we didn't draft Doug Johnson a couple of years ago.

Murphy3 · 11-17-2003, 06:35 PM

Well, Kingrex, I believe that Bill thinks that Quincy is a bit fragile. So, Parcells probably says all the right things in the media while he does his thing in private or on the sidelines.

If the season were to end today, I'd be shocked if the cowboys didn't make a serious run at picking up another QB that could compete with Carter for the job.

kingrex · 11-17-2003, 06:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by: Murphy3
Well, Kingrex, I believe that Bill thinks that Quincy is a bit fragile. So, Parcells probably says all the right things in the media while he does his thing in private or on the sidelines.

If the season were to end today, I'd be shocked if the cowboys didn't make a serious run at picking up another QB that could compete with Carter for the job.

Good point, but then again that's what they said this year, and Bill still didn't bring someone in. Right?

FilthyFinMavs · 11-17-2003, 06:40 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by: Murphy3
Well, Kingrex, I believe that Bill thinks that Quincy is a bit fragile. So, Parcells probably says all the right things in the media while he does his thing in private or on the sidelines.

If the season were to end today, I'd be shocked if the cowboys didn't make a serious run at picking up another QB that could compete with Carter for the job.

Why should Quincy have to compete again? I mean I just don't get that logic. Sure these last 4 games have been mediocre and horrible but those previous 6 games should be taken inconsideration also.

Murphy3 · 11-17-2003, 06:49 PM

Why would he have to compete again?

I'll answer your question with another question.

Why wouldn't he have to compete considering he's been a very mediocre QB this year?

And I'm sorry, but the last 4 weeks is 40% of the season. It might be different if he had been superb in the first 6 games. However, for every great game he had early in the season, he had a bad one to match.

So why would he have to compete again for the starting job? Because he has not proven that he's the long term answer up to this point in the season.

FilthyFinMavs · 11-17-2003, 06:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by: Murphy3
Why would he have to compete again?

I'll answer your question with another question.

Why wouldn't he have to compete considering he's been a very mediocre QB this year?

And I'm sorry, but the last 4 weeks is 40% of the season. It might be different if he had been superb in the first 6 games. However, for every great game he had early in the season, he had a bad one to match.

So why would he have to compete again for the starting job? Because he has not proven that he's the long term answer up to this point in the season.

Without a consistent running game or offensive line, is being mediocre bad? You put Stephen Davis(WHo was out there for the Cowboys to take) on this Cowboys team do you not think it will keep the defense honest? Our offense is too predictable for any qb to be successful under. Excuses aside, I think that is all the Cowboys wanted. An average qb. If the guy isn't average i'm pretty sure he won't be in the free agency pool for the Cowboys to get.

Murphy3 · 11-17-2003, 07:41 PM

I don't get knocking the line. The line has done a good job for the vast majority of the season.

As for not having a consistent running game, they are #7 in the league in yards per game. Yes, I know that their yards per attempt aren't as high as some would like (me for one).

I'm not saying that the running game has been great by any means, but I believe you're trying to cover-up any blame that could be pointed at Carter with excuses.

Would a better running game help Carter? Yes, of course. Would a better QB help the running game? Yes, most definitely.

Does the running game need to be addressed in the off season? Yes, probably so. Do the Cowboys need to bring in a QB to compete with Carter this off season? Based on what he's done to this point of the season, I'd go with 'yes'.

bogey · 11-17-2003, 08:09 PM

So far, the Carter fans have been blinded by mediocrity. They accept it and defer blame to the running game (which needs improvement) the offensive line (which played poorly early but has been fairly solid...except for some stupid penalties), etc.

The facts are that Carter has earned his way into the starters role. Noone wants Hutch to play. Not this year not next year. However, mediocre quarterbacking will inspire review of the position and I guarantee you that Parcells keeps his options open. He always has before and nothing indicates he will change. Carter has put up very mediocre numbers. The best number is 7-3 which I am very pleasantly surprised by and one I can live with.

But, if a veteran guy...like Kurt Warner...like him or not....were to be made available to the Cowboys, I am 100% confident that the Cowboys would do it if it made economic sense. Until something like that happens...carter is the #1 guy now and going into next season. There is noone else on the roster right now to supplant him and he has played well enough to not lose the job. But that does not mean his job is secure. Noone's job is secure on a Bill Parcells team. Training camp is the time to earn your job. Do you not remember Parcells saying that some veterans would be very disappointed during this years camp? It has always been that way with Parcells and always will be. Carter will have to compete each year because his coach says he will. it is not a difficult concept to understand or master. even non-football people can grasp this patently simple yet brilliant concept.

However...to be brutally honest (for those of you capable), carter has been nothing more than mediocre and lately has begun to digress. I hope he comes out against Carolina and throws 3 td's, no picks and 300 yards, but doubt he can. Average qb's are a dime a dozen. carter strikes me as a Kitna type who may bloom late but never be a superstar. It's the best he can hope for.

bogey · 11-17-2003, 08:10 PM

BTW, nice post murph.

FilthyFinMavs · 11-17-2003, 09:21 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by: Murphy3
I don't get knocking the line. The line has done a good job for the vast majority of the season.

As for not having a consistent running game, they are #7 in the league in yards per game. Yes, I know that their yards per attempt aren't as high as some would like (me for one).

I'm not saying that the running game has been great by any means, but I believe you're trying to cover-up any blame that could be pointed at Carter with excuses.

Would a better running game help Carter? Yes, of course. Would a better QB help the running game? Yes, most definitely.

Does the running game need to be addressed in the off season? Yes, probably so. Do the Cowboys need to bring in a QB to compete with Carter this off season? Based on what he's done to this point of the season, I'd go with 'yes'.

No matter what I say will be an excuse Murph lol. Carter hasn't been playing well. Don't be blinded by some users on this board who say Quincy supporters don't see how bad Quincy is playing because it is untrue. Quincy has alot of work to do. But I get the impression you are saying that the reason why the offense isn't playing well is Quincy's fault. Now that I just can't agree with. How would a better qb help the running game? It's not like our opponents are going to blitz us like we do other teams. We don't have the luxury of a pass rush so we have to use our safetys and linebackers as a pass rush. I just don't get how you can sit here and honestly say we need to replace a guy who has us winning 70% of the time. He is struggling against the Buccs and Bills. He will bounce back.

veruca salt · 11-17-2003, 09:24 PM

Can I just say, without taking this off topic, I was watching an Australian World Sports
show last night and they refered to Quincy as "The Controversial Quincy Carter"...and I just thought
to myself, dude, you don't know the half of it [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img]

Anyhoo...so Quincy....

Murphy3 · 11-17-2003, 09:31 PM

Quote:

just don't get how you can sit here and honestly say we need to replace a guy who has us winning 70% of the time

With this type of 'logic', the Cowboys should make no changes during the off season because they had a good record this season.

Needless to say, this type of 'logic' makes absolutely no sense.

FilthyFinMavs · 11-17-2003, 11:16 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by: Murphy3

Quote:

just don't get how you can sit here and honestly say we need to replace a guy who has us winning 70% of the time

With this type of 'logic', the Cowboys should make no changes during the off season because they had a good record this season.

Needless to say, this type of 'logic' makes absolutely no sense.

No,.no, no. They should make changes to not LOSE any games. Maybe it won't happen but that should be there goal coming into the season. I felt Quincy shouldn't have been benched when this team was 3-4. That was even more stupid then looking for a replacement when he is 7-3.

Murphy3 · 11-17-2003, 11:32 PM

the fact is, Carter's season on the whole isn't much better than what he did last year. After the good start that he got off to, that's just depressing. I cannot believe that it's good enough to secure him his job for next year.

Ummmmm Ok · 11-17-2003, 11:33 PM

Quincy is the QB this year strictly because Parcells doesn't have anybody else. End of Story!

Quincy has been doing OKAY this year ONLY because Parcells limites what Quincy can do. All you see is short yardage plays to crossing routes and drop off to screens and the little flip to the TE. You won't ever see Quincy just sit back and throw the rock like a Favre or a Brady does. How many times this year have we seen a 3rd and 10 and the Boys either run it, or throw a 5 yard pass? It comes down to Parcells not TRUSTING Quincy, for 1) not making a dumb play and 2) He hasn't proven in the times he is given that he Can make those kinda plays.

The thing that kills Quincy is that he has yet to Impress Parcells, so Bill won't let go of the leash and let him loose. Is there a reason for this? Maybe. Think of it this way. Offensively is there one person that the defense has to watch? Nope there isn't. Hambrick, Quincy, Bryant, Anderson, Galloway: None of these guys scare opponents defensively. Now is any of this Quincy's Fault? As hes the one leading the offense, some of it has to rest on his shoulders. Now of course the rumor going around is that Dillian probably won't be in Cincy next year.

If the boys got Dillian, Parcells would have more faith in Quincy because if worse comes to worse, he can turn the game into a drag it out running game with Dillian.

Murphy3 · 11-17-2003, 11:43 PM

There may not be 'one' person that opponents are scared of. However, i'm sure they're scared of the receiving corp as a whole. But, they're not scared by the QB that throws them the ball. Well, with the exception of the deep ball. Once you take that away from the Cowboys, they are very pedestrian offensively to say the least.

Fah Q · 11-18-2003, 12:06 AM

This is a quote from FFM

The difference between Quincy earlier this season and the Quincy now is that Parcells isn't letting Quincy do anything. He won't let him go deep until Galloway is hurt. Didn't even trust Quincy to get a couple of inches and would rather trust Hambrick to do so.

Do you not think there is a reason that Parcell's is doing that? It's because Q hasn't done anything to make Bill trust him.

The guy hasn't proven anything in this league and you want him to be a starter next year without any competition?

I guess some people have gotten used to not having Super Bowl plans.

bogey · 11-18-2003, 12:09 AM

It is easy to wallow in mediocrity. If you set your goals low, you have no trouble reaching them. Unfortunately, the Super Bowl is a higher calling.

Chiwas · 11-18-2003, 01:17 PM

I'm thinking, very likely if Roger Staubach was playing for Dallas today, in his prime, he wouldn't have that many threads as Carter.

[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-shocked.gif[/img]

LRB · 11-18-2003, 01:21 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by: Chiwas
I'm thinking, very likely if Roger Staubach was playing for Dallas today, in his prime, he wouldn't have that many threads as Carter.

[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-shocked.gif[/img]

Yes but if it was at the start of his pro career where he and Craig Morton were competing for the starting position, we'd have hundreds more. And the better the Cowboys get, the more scrutiny that will be applied to Quincy.

Chiwas · 11-18-2003, 01:29 PM

Yeah, seems right, but didn't Staubach have better performers?

I think Carter has not the weaponry that Roger had.

In other words, Parcells is short-handed compared to Tom Landry.

kingrex · 11-18-2003, 01:58 PM

Quincy has his limitations as all quarterbacks do. He has improved from a bad quarterback (not able to throw a tight spiral) to a an average quarterback (able to throw the rudimentary passes) to a sometimes above average quarterback (able to throw the deep ball at times and fairly consistently throws the out pattern and slants).

There are 2 question here:
1) Do you think Parcells SHOULD make a change at QB next year?
2) Do you think Parcells WILL make a change at QB next year?

my answer:
1) Yes, Parcells should at least get a veteran quarterback to compete for the job next year. As Jimmy has proven, competition is good. It drives a player to be better. This might prove whether or not Quincy has more room in his ceiling or not.

2) No, Parcells will most likely keep Quincy, judging by what he says (and yes Murph I realize what he says to the media could be different). However, he doesn't demand as much from the QB position, and I think Parcells feels that Quincy just needs more time to be the QB he wants him to be. Now after next year, Quincy might prove him wrong.

Murphy3 · 11-18-2003, 02:47 PM

I realize that Parcells doesn't always demand alot from the QB spot. However, not throwing the ball to the other team alot is one thing that Parcells does demand.

LRB · 11-18-2003, 02:49 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by: Chiwas
Yeah, seems right, but didn't Staubach have better performers?

I think Carter has not the weaponry that Roger had.

In other words, Parcells is short-handed compared to Tom Landry.

Yes Staubach joined a much more relatively talented Cowboys team than Carter. Also Staubach didn't come in with the expectation of being a starter right off the bat. Roger went through 4 full years of college and then 4 years of military service before he began his career as well. Therefore he had the advantage of much more maturity that QCar.

But coming into a talented Cowboys team has it's own set of expectations. I'm sure if there had been internet boards like this one at that time they would have been filled with posts over the quarterback controversey at that time.

kingrex · 11-18-2003, 03:12 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by: Murphy3
I realize that Parcells doesn't always demand alot from the QB spot. However, not throwing the ball to the other team alot is one thing that Parcells does demand.

That is exactly the point I made on a previous post. For Parcells it will be about turnovers. I hope that Quincy turns that part of his game around, and I also hope Witten doesn't had the ball over to the defensive back like he did to Ty Law. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img]

FilthyFinMavs · 11-18-2003, 04:44 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by: Fah Q
This is a quote from FFM

The difference between Quincy earlier this season and the Quincy now is that Parcells isn't letting Quincy do anything. He won't let him go deep until Galloway is hurt. Didn't even trust Quincy to get a couple of inches and would rather trust Hambrick to do so.

Do you not think there is a reason that Parcell's is doing that? It's because Q hasn't done anything to make Bill trust him.

The guy hasn't proven anything in this league and you want him to be a starter next year without any competition?

I guess some people have gotten used to not having Super Bowl plans.

What is competition? Grabbing a 30+ year old qb like Mark Brunell and signing him as if he is the future of our team? Is it gambling on a rookie qb(When is the last time a franchise qb has been drafted and succeeded with the exception of Mike Vick?)? I can't decide if Quincy needs competition after going 7-3. We are first in the NFC East. The whole question is premature in the first place but as of right now Quincy has had 3 bad games out of 10. That isn't too bad at all.

FilthyFinMavs · 11-18-2003, 04:46 PM

And oh yeah to answer your question yes Quincy has showed Bill enough to get that leash off of him. After that NY game the leash should've been taken off completely.

FilthyFinMavs · 11-18-2003, 04:51 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by: Murphy3
the fact is, Carter's season on the whole isn't much better than what he did last year. After the good start that he got off to, that's just depressing. I cannot believe that it's good enough to secure him his job for next year.

Carter has already surpassed everything he has done last season. He only played 7 games.

Murphy3 · 11-18-2003, 04:59 PM

How can you say that with a straight face?

Carter's QB rating is worse this year so far
Carter's completion percentage is worse this year so far
Carter's yards per game is worse this year so far
Carter's TD to interception ratio is worse this year so far

Do I think he's had a worse season this year compared to last? No, not at all. Howeve, he has not done enough to wrap up the position for next year.