LaTunaNostra
10-20-2004, 10:31 PM
Lighten Up On The Blame
By BRAD SHAM
DallasCowboys.com Columnist
Oct. 20, 2004, 5:58 p.m. (CDT)
IRVING, Texas - I'm reminded today of two of my all-time favorite football quotes.
One was attributed to the late John McKay, when he was coach of the expansion and winless Tampa Bay Bucs.
A reporter, according to the story, asked McKay after yet another hapless performance, "What do you think of your team's execution?"
McKay is said to have responded, "I'm for it."
The other is one of the countless memorable utterances of former Cowboys '60s-vintage star guard Blaine Nye, who once said, "It's not if you win or lose, it's who gets the blame."
The Cowboys lost this past Sunday to the Pittsburgh Steelers. Someone must get the blame.
Give it to Vinny Testaverde. He fumbled. Give it to Richie Anderson. He bumped into Vinny trying to block a blitzing James Farrior , causing the fourth-quarter fumble, which basically gave the Steelers the game,.
Give it to Bill Parcells. He called the pass play that resulted in the fumble, instead of a safe third-and-13 run.
But whatever you do, don't credit the Steelers. That would be un-American.
When it comes to sports, Blaine Nye was right. We can't accept the fact that our team was beaten. They lost. Someone is responsible. Heads must roll.
Thirty years ago, I caught a lot of flak broadcasting some thoroughly unmemorable basketball game for crediting the other team for being better. I learned the lesson then. Fans don't want to hear that the other team was good. They want to know why their team lost.
But here's the truth: Sometimes your horse is the second best in a two-horse race.
Could the Cowboys have won that game against Pittsburgh? Of course. Should they have won? You can make the case. You can make the case that any team that has a 10-point lead with 12 minutes to play should win the game.
But if you read the Pittsburgh papers Monday morning (I didn't), you'd have read about the gritty, gutsy Steelers comeback. And that account would have been correct.
Can we have it both ways?
Football usually comes down to execution, John McKay notwithstanding, and the fact is on two big plays back to back in the fourth quarter, the Steelers executed better than the Cowboys.
On Terry Glenn's second-down reverse with 2:46 remaining (a play which Parcells insisted Monday should have gone for a touchdown, because "We had two guys blocking the guy who made the tackle"), a study of the tape is revealing. (That, I did.) Larry Allen whiffs on Steelers linebacker Clark Haggans in the middle of the field. Haggans then streaks to the ball, where he appears to run through the block of Al Johnson to get to Glenn.
And on the fateful third-down blitz, Farrior just did his job better. Was Anderson slow getting to him? Was the problem Testaverde shortening his drop to three steps because he saw the blitz coming and needed to get rid of the ball faster, thus unwittingly putting himself in harm's (and Anderson's) way? Was it a 1-in-10,000 fluke? Who knows?
But bottom line, the Steelers were better.
It's hard to fault Parcells for wanting to, as he put it, "win the game."
"I don't question that at all," he said Monday, and it says here his reasoning was sound. For crying out loud, he had just watched rookie quarterback Ben Roethlisberger run the table on a 74-yard drive that made it 20-17. You can say the safe thing to do was run on third down and punt the ball away with 2:00 left.
But why would he think his defense would keep Big Ben from at least going the 60 yards he needed to set up a tying field goal? If he thought he had a safe play to render the debate moot, why not use it? Which he did. The Steelers just did their job better.
The blame game, though, could obscure what else might have happened at Texas Stadium Sunday. Pittsburgh went into that game a better team by a greater margin than it came out.
Sometimes, this happens in the NFL: A team loses a game in which it gets better, and you don't see it for a week or two.
The first time I saw that happen was in 1978. The Cowboys were defending Super Bowl champions but hit a little midseason slump. They lost at home to Minnesota and in Miami to slip to 6-4, and the buzzards were circling.
But on the flight home from Miami, players were talking about things that went right, things they had found.
Dallas didn't lose again that season until they met the (sorry, kids) Steelers in Super Bowl XIII. Granted, these Cowboys aren't those. But other Cowboys have experienced it. La'Roi Glover and Dan Campbell and Eddie George were talking in the locker room Monday about having been on teams that did that very thing.
By the way, that 1978 win streak started with a road game against the Packers, and never mind it was in Milwaukee. Let's not let the facts get in the way of a good story.
It's not who wins or loses, it's who gets the blame. So blame the Steelers, and let the Cowboys players hope that Parcells is not a devotee of John McKay.
By BRAD SHAM
DallasCowboys.com Columnist
Oct. 20, 2004, 5:58 p.m. (CDT)
IRVING, Texas - I'm reminded today of two of my all-time favorite football quotes.
One was attributed to the late John McKay, when he was coach of the expansion and winless Tampa Bay Bucs.
A reporter, according to the story, asked McKay after yet another hapless performance, "What do you think of your team's execution?"
McKay is said to have responded, "I'm for it."
The other is one of the countless memorable utterances of former Cowboys '60s-vintage star guard Blaine Nye, who once said, "It's not if you win or lose, it's who gets the blame."
The Cowboys lost this past Sunday to the Pittsburgh Steelers. Someone must get the blame.
Give it to Vinny Testaverde. He fumbled. Give it to Richie Anderson. He bumped into Vinny trying to block a blitzing James Farrior , causing the fourth-quarter fumble, which basically gave the Steelers the game,.
Give it to Bill Parcells. He called the pass play that resulted in the fumble, instead of a safe third-and-13 run.
But whatever you do, don't credit the Steelers. That would be un-American.
When it comes to sports, Blaine Nye was right. We can't accept the fact that our team was beaten. They lost. Someone is responsible. Heads must roll.
Thirty years ago, I caught a lot of flak broadcasting some thoroughly unmemorable basketball game for crediting the other team for being better. I learned the lesson then. Fans don't want to hear that the other team was good. They want to know why their team lost.
But here's the truth: Sometimes your horse is the second best in a two-horse race.
Could the Cowboys have won that game against Pittsburgh? Of course. Should they have won? You can make the case. You can make the case that any team that has a 10-point lead with 12 minutes to play should win the game.
But if you read the Pittsburgh papers Monday morning (I didn't), you'd have read about the gritty, gutsy Steelers comeback. And that account would have been correct.
Can we have it both ways?
Football usually comes down to execution, John McKay notwithstanding, and the fact is on two big plays back to back in the fourth quarter, the Steelers executed better than the Cowboys.
On Terry Glenn's second-down reverse with 2:46 remaining (a play which Parcells insisted Monday should have gone for a touchdown, because "We had two guys blocking the guy who made the tackle"), a study of the tape is revealing. (That, I did.) Larry Allen whiffs on Steelers linebacker Clark Haggans in the middle of the field. Haggans then streaks to the ball, where he appears to run through the block of Al Johnson to get to Glenn.
And on the fateful third-down blitz, Farrior just did his job better. Was Anderson slow getting to him? Was the problem Testaverde shortening his drop to three steps because he saw the blitz coming and needed to get rid of the ball faster, thus unwittingly putting himself in harm's (and Anderson's) way? Was it a 1-in-10,000 fluke? Who knows?
But bottom line, the Steelers were better.
It's hard to fault Parcells for wanting to, as he put it, "win the game."
"I don't question that at all," he said Monday, and it says here his reasoning was sound. For crying out loud, he had just watched rookie quarterback Ben Roethlisberger run the table on a 74-yard drive that made it 20-17. You can say the safe thing to do was run on third down and punt the ball away with 2:00 left.
But why would he think his defense would keep Big Ben from at least going the 60 yards he needed to set up a tying field goal? If he thought he had a safe play to render the debate moot, why not use it? Which he did. The Steelers just did their job better.
The blame game, though, could obscure what else might have happened at Texas Stadium Sunday. Pittsburgh went into that game a better team by a greater margin than it came out.
Sometimes, this happens in the NFL: A team loses a game in which it gets better, and you don't see it for a week or two.
The first time I saw that happen was in 1978. The Cowboys were defending Super Bowl champions but hit a little midseason slump. They lost at home to Minnesota and in Miami to slip to 6-4, and the buzzards were circling.
But on the flight home from Miami, players were talking about things that went right, things they had found.
Dallas didn't lose again that season until they met the (sorry, kids) Steelers in Super Bowl XIII. Granted, these Cowboys aren't those. But other Cowboys have experienced it. La'Roi Glover and Dan Campbell and Eddie George were talking in the locker room Monday about having been on teams that did that very thing.
By the way, that 1978 win streak started with a road game against the Packers, and never mind it was in Milwaukee. Let's not let the facts get in the way of a good story.
It's not who wins or loses, it's who gets the blame. So blame the Steelers, and let the Cowboys players hope that Parcells is not a devotee of John McKay.