Sturm good read The defensive front: A difference in philosophy

[RS12]

January 9, 2012


It is extremely difficult to watch the NFL playoffs a week after the Dallas Cowboys crash-and-burn routine ended without thinking about them at every turn. Here is a former Cowboys player, and here is a former Cowboys coach. Over here is another QB who has pulled even with Tony Romo for career playoff wins (TJ Yates) and then the next day, here is another QB who has pulled even with Tony Romo for career playoff wins (Tim Tebow).

But, no game makes you think about the Cowboys all afternoon quite like watching the New York Giants.

Not only because of the way they dismissed the Cowboys from the 2011 season, but because they are rivals. There is venom. There is jealousy. And there is a distinct difference in philosophy about how to build a playoff-ready power.

We can certainly go on and on about how Ernie Accorsi and Jerry Reese see football differently than Jerry Jones in many regards, but let's stick to what jumps off the screen when you flip on the Giants this time of year.

http://www.foxsportssouthwest.com/01/09/12/The-defensive-front-A-difference-in-phil/landing_cowboys.html?blockID=642488&feedID=4680

[Alexander]

But, no game makes you think about the Cowboys all afternoon quite like watching the New York Giants.

Seeing Chris Canty applying pressure in passing situations and being a rock on short yardage was pretty hard to watch.

His contract was high, but it seems he is starting to earn it. Meanwhile the Olshanskys of the world are gone and the Kenyon Colemans are not far behind.

[burmafrd]

Seeing Chris Canty applying pressure in passing situations and being a rock on short yardage was pretty hard to watch.

His contract was high, but it seems he is starting to earn it. Meanwhile the Olshanskys of the world are gone and the Kenyon Colemans are not far behind.

there is NO way Canty deserves the money he is making. Jerruh was absolutely right to let him go.

[Alexander]

there is NO way Canty deserves the money he is making. Jerruh was absolutely right to let him go.

And we probably will be saying the same thing about Stephen Bowen in a few years.

As much as we want to praise Jones for not paying the farm, we have to consider how not prudently spending your money is the issue. Had we not extended aging players with but a few years of serviceable life left (Newman, Gurode, Colombo, Davis) we could have paid Canty what the market dictated and still have a player with prime years left.

[stasheroo]

Seeing Chris Canty applying pressure in passing situations and being a rock on short yardage was pretty hard to watch.

His contract was high, but it seems he is starting to earn it. Meanwhile the Olshanskys of the world are gone and the Kenyon Colemans are not far behind.

Canty was good, but I don't think he'll ever prove worthy of what the Giants paid.

I think the Cowboys have room for improvement, but I would consider the Giants' investment of money and draft picks to border on excessive.

And where was all of this talent all season long?

It's not like they've had a dominating defense all season.

[AbeBeta]

Seeing Chris Canty applying pressure in passing situations and being a rock on short yardage was pretty hard to watch.

His contract was high, but it seems he is starting to earn it. Meanwhile the Olshanskys of the world are gone and the Kenyon Colemans are not far behind.

I don't know that Canty is worth that money.

What is clear is that if you have a bunch of really good DL they will make each other better.

[EGG]

The fact that the Giants are willing to devote a higher percentage of their cap in order to field a physically dominant team with a strong DL is the reason they are usually contenders and it's a BIG reason they beat the 2007 Cowboys and then Brady and his perfect Patriots in the Superbowl.

Maybe Canty was overpaid, but I seriously doubt the Giants care, that was the price of admission to maintain a strong group and Jerry Jones needs to start devoting more of his drafts and cap space to the trenches or his team will be forever punked by the Giants.

[visionary]

Canty was good, but I don't think he'll ever prove worthy of what the Giants paid.

I think the Cowboys have room for improvement, but I would consider the Giants' investment of money and draft picks to border on excessive.

And where was all of this talent all season long?

It's not like they've had a dominating defense all season.

stash

would you, all of us, and JJ consider it worth it if we were in the playoffs this year?

i think the answer to that would be yes

[Zimmy Lives]

And we probably will be saying the same thing about Stephen Bowen in a few years.

As much as we want to praise Jones for not paying the farm, we have to consider how not prudently spending your money is the issue. Had we not extended aging players with but a few years of serviceable life left (Newman, Gurode, Colombo, Davis) we could have paid Canty what the market dictated and still have a player with prime years left.

I think that the Cowboys might have tried to keep Canty if they played the 4-3. He is much more solid as a tackle in the Giants defense than he ever was as a Cowboy end.

[Wolfpack]

I think a main (if understated) point from the excellent article, is that the Giants have a plan or philosophy. Accorssi, and now, Reese work toward executing that plan as GMs knowing that the Coaching staff wants those types of players and also knows what to do with them when they get them.

This type of system allows a team to take a macro view of free agencey and make consistent choices in terms of personal fitting scheme.

Dallas does not have much of a plan nor any sort of macro view of anything. Red is having to push his version of a plan back up the food chain but that doesnt deal with the macro view of things.

A clear example is having 4 RBs to start the season and go short elsewhere. 8 weeks later, there isnt a healthy RB to be found. Its a see-saw of micro problem solving that passes as a front office in Dallas.

[bbailey423]

the writer could have written the same article about their OL! Eli dropped back like 105 straight times to pass the ball against Dallas without getting touched!

[Eskimo]

The fact that the Giants are willing to devote a higher percentage of their cap in order to field a physically dominant team with a strong DL is the reason they are usually contenders and it's a BIG reason they beat the 2007 Cowboys and then Brady and his perfect Patriots in the Superbowl.

Maybe Canty was overpaid, but I seriously doubt the Giants care, that was the price of admission to maintain a strong group and Jerry Jones needs to start devoting more of his drafts and cap space to the trenches or his team will be forever punked by the Giants.

But no one on this board agrees with this philosophy.

For example, most of the board is happy to give Laurent Robinson a premium contract even though he is our 4th receiving option. The Giants would just let him go and try to find a cheaper replacement while they continue to build their OL, DL and secondary. If you look at their roster very little resources are allocated to WR, RB and TE compared to us. This is why we fail. I don't entirely blame Jerry as this is what the fanbase wants.

We really need to avoid a bidding war for Robinson. Jerry made a mistake by not offering him a larger contract or a deal that could be extended mid-season.

We need to strengthen our OL, DL and secondary to compete and that is where we have to start spending resources in the draft and FA.

[burmafrd]

The market will bear? One owner throws a lot of stupid money at someone and that is the market? Wrong. Market is multiple offers for around the same amount of money. Canty is WAY over paid. Not even close to earning what he is getting.

[Aven8]

I'm still trying to figure out why we extended Witten and Rat when they were still under there curremt deals?

Witten had NO idea what he was being called in for and next thing he knows he is signing a big contract. (True story)

It just doesn't make sense what we do with players!

[TheFinisher]

Good read, your front is the foundation of your defense. Until we start investing some resources into that pool (and hit on them) we'll continue to be searching for answers in January.

[stasheroo]

stash

would you, all of us, and JJ consider it worth it if we were in the playoffs this year?

i think the answer to that would be yes

I honestly don't know if I can say 'Yes' for sure.

There's a part of me that is actually glad that this flawed team isn't still in the hunt, perpetrating a myth and giving folks like Jerry Jones the false sense that his 'creation' is better than it really is.

I'm not absolving the Cowboys of mistakes (for sure!), but I'm not sure that defensive line completely covers it.

I think we can point to holes on the offensive line as well as bad investments in the secondary as valid reasons as well.

[visionary]

I honestly don't know if I can say 'Yes' for sure.

There's a part of me that is actually glad that this flawed team isn't still in the hunt, perpetrating a myth and giving folks like Jerry Jones the false sense that his 'creation' is better than it really is.

I'm not absolving the Cowboys of mistakes (for sure!), but I'm not sure that defensive line completely covers it.

I think we can point to holes on the offensive line as well as bad investments in the secondary as valid reasons as well.

you and i are on the same page there

DL alone definitely does not cover it

our priorities for upgrade should be:

1) OL
2) front 7 (including DL and edge rusher)
3) secondary

i was referencing DL in the context that for a 4-3 team like NYG, DL is a huge piece of the puzzle in terms of pressuring the QB and the giants have focused on it

we need to devote more resources to our front 7 as well

[stasheroo]

you and i are on the same page there

DL alone definitely does not cover it

our priorities for upgrade should be:

1) OL
2) front 7 (including DL and edge rusher)
3) secondary

i was referencing DL in the context that for a 4-3 team like NYG, DL is a huge piece of the puzzle in terms of pressuring the QB and the giants have focused on it

we need to devote more resources to our front 7 as well

I certainly will not disagree with you there.

I'm wondering if maybe we can't pull a 'two-fer' and strengthen our front 7 while weakening the Giants at the same time?

[InmanRoshi]

The Giants load up on pressure players. Whether they overpay for one guy is rather irrelevant in the grand scheme of things, as long as they reach the cumulative effect of having a great pass rushing collective unit. It's the same thing with drafting players ... they'll have a bust like Jay Alford, but they're going to throw so many numbers at it they're still end up okay.

Meanwhile, we collect players who "do everything well but rush the passer". No doubt Spencer will get his extension, just like Marcus Spears did. We haven't spent a high pick pick on a DL in 5 drafts and no one seems that concered with it. Even now people are wanting to take interior offensive linemen over defensive pressure players, after we took a OL top ten just a year before. When people do talk about adding a defensive front 7 player they want a big fat tub of goo in the middle, because they're enamored with Jay Ratliff's size more than anything else in the entire universe. Then we wonder why we have no pass rush. Neither Jerry nor his fans seem to think it's very important.

[newnationcb]

This same ferocious D-line missed the playoffs the last 3 years right? After their booming inauguration in 2007 right?

Oh my, this live in the moment world!

[CCBoy]

But no one on this board agrees with this philosophy.

For example, most of the board is happy to give Laurent Robinson a premium contract even though he is our 4th receiving option. The Giants would just let him go and try to find a cheaper replacement while they continue to build their OL, DL and secondary. If you look at their roster very little resources are allocated to WR, RB and TE compared to us. This is why we fail. I don't entirely blame Jerry as this is what the fanbase wants.

We really need to avoid a bidding war for Robinson. Jerry made a mistake by not offering him a larger contract or a deal that could be extended mid-season.

We need to strengthen our OL, DL and secondary to compete and that is where we have to start spending resources in the draft and FA.

Just off the top, do you really think that Dallas competes against this current Giant team in a tit for tat competition against the scoring of their offense, without keeping as good a receiving group on the Dallas roster as is currently on theirs? I would think that the quicker and cheaper route would be to sign both Robinson and a Carl Nicks and try to hit them head to head. The Dallas offensive strength against the Giant defensive strength.

But this would allow for a couple defensive free agents and the top of the draft to add to the Dallas defense. Two years of hitting on the defense in the draft, should about change the current dynamics in the Dallas defensive strength as well. But instill and early on lower cost at it's upgrade in cap space.

At present, Dallas is operting with a lower cost trio of Coleman, Hatcher, and Spears and must start changing that and upgrading it over the next two seasons. Period. But that trio cost about equal to what Washington paid for Stephen Bowen in free agency.

[Eskimo]

Just off the top, do you really think that Dallas competes against this current Giant team in a tit for tat competition against the scoring of their offense, without keeping as good a receiving group on the Dallas roster as is currently on theirs? I would think that the quicker and cheaper route would be to sign both Robinson and a Carl Nicks and try to hit them head to head. The Dallas offensive strength against the Giant defensive strength.

But this would allow for a couple defensive free agents and the top of the draft to add to the Dallas defense. Two years of hitting on the defense in the draft, should about change the current dynamics in the Dallas defensive strength as well. But instill and early on lower cost at it's upgrade in cap space.

At present, Dallas is operting with a lower cost trio of Coleman, Hatcher, and Spears and must start changing that and upgrading it over the next two seasons. Period. But that trio cost about equal to what Washington paid for Stephen Bowen in free agency.

I really think we can compete with them offensively without Robinson so long as we shore up our OL. The key is having a healthy Miles Austin and a polished Dez Bryant. If those two play up to their potential next year there won't be enough balls to feed to the #3 WR anyways so I don't see the point in investing heavily in FA. If someone wants to pay him more than $4M/yr we should just let him walk.

The big reason I don't want to spend a premium salary on Robinson is it takes away from money we can spend at OL, DL and secondary. Spending on Robinson likely means going with a JAG at another core position of weakness. We can't patch all our problems in the draft and we can't expect in-house solutions from recent drafts because 09 was a bust and 10 and 11 produced some good players but not much depth that we can expect to contribute. The only potential new starters I see emerging from the kids on our roster are Bruce Carter, Sean Lissemore, Kowalski and Arkin. These players cannot fill in all our holes so we need to save money in FA to patch up these weaknesses.

I really have nothing against Robinson and would sign him for 3 years $12M but I don't want to go higher than that given his lack of a proven track record. He had four prior years to this one in which he didn't do much.

[CCBoy]

I really think we can compete with them offensively without Robinson so long as we shore up our OL. The key is having a healthy Miles Austin and a polished Dez Bryant. If those two play up to their potential next year there won't be enough balls to feed to the #3 WR anyways so I don't see the point in investing heavily in FA. If someone wants to pay him more than $4M/yr we should just let him walk.

The big reason I don't want to spend a premium salary on Robinson is it takes away from money we can spend at OL, DL and secondary. Spending on Robinson likely means going with a JAG at another core position of weakness. We can't patch all our problems in the draft and we can't expect in-house solutions from recent drafts because 09 was a bust and 10 and 11 produced some good players but not much depth that we can expect to contribute. The only potential new starters I see emerging from the kids on our roster are Bruce Carter, Sean Lissemore, Kowalski and Arkin. These players cannot fill in all our holes so we need to save money in FA to patch up these weaknesses.

I really have nothing against Robinson and would sign him for 3 years $12M but I don't want to go higher than that given his lack of a proven track record. He had four prior years to this one in which he didn't do much.

You can really look me in the eye here and now, and say with certainty that Miles Austin and Dez Bryant, hub bub set aside, are without doubt all you are banking on here? I think there are questions here. No one on the entire team, and in a good throwing season by Tony Romo, reached a 1,000 yards. Close to a bottom line good standard doesn't quite cut it.

Then there is this:

Laurent Robinson had eleven touchdown receptions this season, and in a partial season at this. In the entire history of the Cowboys, this was duplicated by four Cowboy receivers. That was Terrell Owens, Frank Clarke, Bob Hayes, and Lance Rentzel. Not a really insignificant statistic.

But you are correct in money left around will be a factor. I could be either he or Anthony Spencer...but the reasons there, are a different group of considerations.

[Doomsday]

I dont think the Cowboys have ignored the front 7 quite as much as the article made it out to be. To me the difference is NY has hit on players in the draft where Dallas is missed with almost all of their LB picks. Excluding Lee of coarse. We are a 3-4 so there is going to be a higher priority on finding LBs instead of DEs, unfortunately for Dallas they have wasted most of picks on guys who didnt pan out in the 2nd to 4th rounds the last few years.

[Bigdog24]

I dont think the Cowboys have ignored the front 7 quite as much as the article made it out to be. To me the difference is NY has hit on players in the draft where Dallas is missed with almost all of their LB picks. Excluding Lee of coarse. We are a 3-4 so there is going to be a higher priority on finding LBs instead of DEs, unfortunately for Dallas they have wasted most of picks on guys who didnt pan out in the 2nd to 4th rounds the last few years.

Well said, :bow: Cowboys need to do a better job of hitting on players no matter if its the draft or FA. They need a better bang for their buck

[CCBoy]

I dont think the Cowboys have ignored the front 7 quite as much as the article made it out to be. To me the difference is NY has hit on players in the draft where Dallas is missed with almost all of their LB picks. Excluding Lee of coarse. We are a 3-4 so there is going to be a higher priority on finding LBs instead of DEs, unfortunately for Dallas they have wasted most of picks on guys who didnt pan out in the 2nd to 4th rounds the last few years.

This was the 2010 draft under Wade Phillips:

2 23 55 Sean Lee Linebacker Penn State
4 28 126 Akwasi Owusu-Ansah Safety Indiana (PA)


And this was the 2011 draft under Jason Garrett:

2 8 40 Bruce Carter Linebacker North Carolina
3 7 71 DeMarco Murray Running Back Oklahoma
4 13 110 David Arkin Guard Missouri State


That shows a solid four of five picks in rounds 2-4 for the past two years. And under Garrett, 3 for 3.

[stasheroo]

This was the 2010 draft under Wade Phillips:

2 23 55 Sean Lee Linebacker Penn State
4 28 126 Akwasi Owusu-Ansah Safety Indiana (PA)


And this was the 2011 draft under Jason Garrett:

2 8 40 Bruce Carter Linebacker North Carolina
3 7 71 DeMarco Murray Running Back Oklahoma
4 13 110 David Arkin Guard Missouri State


That shows a solid four of five picks in rounds 2-4 for the past two years. And under Garrett, 3 for 3.

How is Arkin considered 'solid' or '3 for 3'?

[CCBoy]

How is Arkin considered 'solid' or '3 for 3'?

Try starting before injured...or do you imply that means nothing due to it being for the Cowboys?

We now talk direction at position for Dallas, not at least a start value for that drafted player.

[burmafrd]

Arkin was mediocre as a starter so one should not boast about him at this time

starting on a poor O line is no reccomendation

[CCBoy]

Arkin was mediocre as a starter so one should not boast about him at this time

starting on a poor O line is no reccomendation

Mediocre is completely subjective. You fail to embrace the topic of discussion. That was a projection of no attempt by Dallas at gaining improvement at offensive line. Not on it's development with a player drafted just for that purpose. And starting players are always good draft picks.

You merely discounting the original statement trying to replace that instead, of whether a player, developing, then is a stud in his 'rook' season. That is asinine to the discussion involved.

As to role in the offensive line, that would have to be judged by the product ON THE FIELD WHILE HE WAS PLAYING.

As to a team that accumulated a franchise high tide mark of 6,000 combined yards, slander presented solely subjectively as you did, doesn't present any indicator of what level of contribution that player played in a quality production level.

Whether total score was there, doesn't refelct upon issue at hand. And it could well be stated that Tyron Smith had a very strong season, despite what you banter as disqualification as applied generally as you just did.

Now act as if you don't understand English as well as building a view. Here, the original premise was more in overview even.

And you even chose to cherry pick around the fact that during Jerry Jone's tenure to here, one in five picks in all drafts have positionally been for an offensive lineman. And that includes the entire time that Bill Parcells was head coach as well....but there goes that Jerry word you so detest and toss insult around no matter the points presented for observation. Rushing to remove them from sight by conjecture. Prove YOUR case, for once without an return to attempted internet brow beat.:rolleyes:

[visionary]

I really think we can compete with them offensively without Robinson so long as we shore up our OL. The key is having a healthy Miles Austin and a polished Dez Bryant. If those two play up to their potential next year there won't be enough balls to feed to the #3 WR anyways so I don't see the point in investing heavily in FA. If someone wants to pay him more than $4M/yr we should just let him walk.

The big reason I don't want to spend a premium salary on Robinson is it takes away from money we can spend at OL, DL and secondary. Spending on Robinson likely means going with a JAG at another core position of weakness. We can't patch all our problems in the draft and we can't expect in-house solutions from recent drafts because 09 was a bust and 10 and 11 produced some good players but not much depth that we can expect to contribute. The only potential new starters I see emerging from the kids on our roster are Bruce Carter, Sean Lissemore, Kowalski and Arkin. These players cannot fill in all our holes so we need to save money in FA to patch up these weaknesses.

I really have nothing against Robinson and would sign him for 3 years $12M but I don't want to go higher than that given his lack of a proven track record. He had four prior years to this one in which he didn't do much.

great post
as much as i would like robinson re-signed, we need to shore up our OL, front 7, secondary first

[InmanRoshi]

I dont think the Cowboys have ignored the front 7 quite as much as the article made it out to be. To me the difference is NY has hit on players in the draft where Dallas is missed with almost all of their LB picks. Excluding Lee of coarse. We are a 3-4 so there is going to be a higher priority on finding LBs instead of DEs, unfortunately for Dallas they have wasted most of picks on guys who didnt pan out in the 2nd to 4th rounds the last few years.

Only drafting 1 DL high in a 5 year span is pretty much ignoring. We "hit" on Lissemore, but when you're only throwing 1 late round pick at the position every 3 years it really doesn't amount to much.

[stasheroo]

Try starting before injured...or do you imply that means nothing due to it being for the Cowboys?

We now talk direction at position for Dallas, not at least a start value for that drafted player.

Sorry, but he's not a 'hit' or any sort of success story. He's an unknown commodity that didn't play. Despite a plethora of injuries at his position, he never factored into the equation.

If anything is to be assumed, it is that he's not ready.

[CCBoy]

Sorry, but he's not a 'hit' or any sort of success story. He's an unknown commodity that didn't play. Despite a plethora of injuries at his position, he never factored into the equation.

If anything is to be assumed, it is that he's not ready.

Opinions are akin to posteriors, everyone has both...and final assumption based upon just that, don't pass any litmus test. Put some proof into the pudding, as the saying goes, or go without desert.

AS to being removed by injury, alone, you can't further project the degree that a true 'rook' would gain by actually being on the carpet during games. That leap in improvements is great for all getting game experience. Don't act a tool and project that you can then project a tool waiting to merely be broken or embarrased more instead. Kyle Kosier, had his play decline from last season. But that was an injury repurcussion. Gross excuse doesn't equate to discussion on merit. Here, you rush to quickly to hit stereotypes. The kid is a player, to what extent is for the Cowboys to determine. And really not at core yet, for this discussion.

Wouldn't you be interested in a Upshaw to develop behind Spencer this season?

Well, Arkin may prove useful as well. Oh, and low draft place worked quite well for the Dynasty team. Do some checking in there. And NO ONE on that offensive line clicked their first year. But they came around....

[stasheroo]

Opinions are akin to posteriors, everyone has both...and final assumption based upon just that, don't pass any litmus test. Put some proof into the pudding, as the saying goes, or go without desert.

AS to being removed by injury, alone, you can't further project the degree that a true 'rook' would gain by actually being on the carpet during games. That leap in improvements is great for all getting game experience. Don't act a tool and project that you can then project a tool waiting to merely be broken or embarrased more instead. Kyle Kosier, had his play decline from last season. But that was an injury repurcussion. Gross excuse doesn't equate to discussion on merit. Here, you rush to quickly to hit stereotypes. The kid is a player, to what extent is for the Cowboys to determine. And really not at core yet, for this discussion.

Wouldn't you be interested in a Upshaw to develop behind Spencer this season?

Well, Arkin may prove useful as well. Oh, and low draft place worked quite well for the Dynasty team. Do some checking in there. And NO ONE on that offensive line clicked their first year. But they came around....

And for every one of them, I can give you five James Martens or Jacob Rogers.

The fact is that despite several injuries, the team never attempted to put Arkin out there.

Nagy was starting, when he was injured, we brought Holland back in, not Arkin. When he got injured, it was Dockery's turn, again not Arkin. And when Kosier went down, it was Kowalski who got the call, not Arkin. In fact, I don't think Arkin was even active for the vast majority of the season.

If anything, his career path so far looks more like Marten's and McQuistan's than anything else.

To assume that this is a good pick for the Cowboys is simply wishful thinking.

A more apt grade would be 'Incomplete' and to wait and see what he does in year 2.

[CCBoy]

And for every one of them, I can give you five James Martens or Jacob Rogers.

The fact is that despite several injuries, the team never attempted to put Arkin out there.

Nagy was starting, when he was injured, we brought Holland back in, not Arkin. When he got injured, it was Dockery's turn, again not Arkin. And when Kosier went down, it was Kowalski who got the call, not Arkin. In fact, I don't think Arkin was even active for the vast majority of the season.

If anything, his career path so far looks more like Marten's and McQuistan's than anything else.

To assume that this is a good pick for the Cowboys is simply wishful thinking.

A more apt grade would be 'Incomplete' and to wait and see what he does in year 2.

Hey, at least you are now paying attention to some of the details at position.

The point of departure was no effort at filling the positional needs. A list that includes Nagy, Costa, Arkin, and Kowalski only goes to show that the team has been diligent within the constraints of both cap and draft picks available.

As to top two rounds, Dallas tried two years to move up and draft an inerior lineman, or where they sat, and they were moved around for the selection targeted. To say there was no effort is from premise false.

For the past three drafts, the Cowboys took best players available. That is what it is. The past two drafts yielded only: Dez Bryant, Sean Lee, Tyron Smith, Bruce Carter, and DeMarco Murray at it's top. To even insenuate that was irresponsible drafting due to a conceived positional need by yourself, or others, is ill conceived in applications.

Your throwing ring tapping names such as Marten and Rogers is off mark as well. Just who was at the helm as Head Coach then, and who is at the helm now? Don't insult intelligence and say lamely...JERRY!:cool:

Supposedly Ireland was a relevant piece of the puzzle. And scouting was done solidly...a trade by Jerry affected process in 2009, that I'll grant. But the draft system has been good as of a recent view.

As to Arkin, that he fought from camp due to sweat equity speaks up for him. Applied with strength conditioning and technique work in an actual off season, and I wouldn't be rushing too fast at trying to judge that lineman's heart.

And to the side, Costa's nickname by players is bulldog. I wouldn't be closing doors on him, just yet as well.

[RS12]

And for every one of them, I can give you five James Martens or Jacob Rogers.

The fact is that despite several injuries, the team never attempted to put Arkin out there.

Nagy was starting, when he was injured, we brought Holland back in, not Arkin. When he got injured, it was Dockery's turn, again not Arkin. And when Kosier went down, it was Kowalski who got the call, not Arkin. In fact, I don't think Arkin was even active for the vast majority of the season.

If anything, his career path so far looks more like Marten's and McQuistan's than anything else.

To assume that this is a good pick for the Cowboys is simply wishful thinking.

A more apt grade would be 'Incomplete' and to wait and see what he does in year 2.

I'm with you Stash. I hope Arkin makes it but being inactive 16 games when the line was a mess and the continual resiging and cutting of Loper (not even a JAG) is ominous IMO.

[CCBoy]

I'm with you Stash. I hope Arkin makes it but being inactive 16 games when the line was a mess and the continual resiging and cutting of Loper (not even a JAG) is ominous IMO.

Have you ever looked at a Basic Trainee after haircut and one size fits all fitting of uniform? Some of those unheralded and scragly recruits earn the Medal of Honor.

[stasheroo]

Hey, at least you are now paying attention to some of the details at position.

The point of departure was no effort at filling the positional needs. A list that includes Nagy, Costa, Arkin, and Kowalski only goes to show that the team has been diligent within the constraints of both cap and draft picks available.

As to top two rounds, Dallas tried two years to move up and draft an inerior lineman, or where they sat, and they were moved around for the selection targeted. To say there was no effort is from premise false.

Try to stay on this topic rather than bringing in stuff from the other battles you're fighting. I'm talking about Arkin specifically here and the incorrect characterization of calling someone who did not play and wasn't even active a 'hit' as a draft pick.

For the past three drafts, the Cowboys took best players available. That is what it is. The past two drafts yielded only: Dez Bryant, Sean Lee, Tyron Smith, Bruce Carter, and DeMarco Murray at it's top. To even insenuate that was irresponsible drafting due to a conceived positional need by yourself, or others, is ill conceived in applications.

Who mentioned 'irresponsible drafting'? Again, you're spilling one topic into another. Save that for the 'Draft Myths' topic.

And Carter would be another guy deserving of an 'Incomplete' grade rather than any assumption he was a great pick in the 2nd round.

Your throwing ring tapping names such as Marten and Rogers is off mark as well. Just who was at the helm as Head Coach then, and who is at the helm now? Don't insult intelligence and say lamely...JERRY!:cool:

Why not, would that not be the case? 'Socks to jocks' after all...

Supposedly Ireland was a relevant piece of the puzzle. And scouting was done solidly...a trade by Jerry affected process in 2009, that I'll grant. But the draft system has been good as of a recent view.

No complaints over the past two years, some great pieces added there.

As to Arkin, that he fought from camp due to sweat equity speaks up for him. Applied with strength conditioning and technique work in an actual off season, and I wouldn't be rushing too fast at trying to judge that lineman's heart.

Not rushing to judgement, but asking that you do the same. I'm not labeling him a bust or a mistake, but likewise, I don't think you can consider him a 'plus' at this point either. The jury is still out either way.

And to the side, Costa's nickname by players is bulldog. I wouldn't be closing doors on him, just yet as well.

I'm not writing him off, but if it were me, he'd be in a pitched fight with Kowalski and Nagy for that starting job in 2012.

[stasheroo]

I'm with you Stash. I hope Arkin makes it but being inactive 16 games when the line was a mess and the continual resiging and cutting of Loper (not even a JAG) is ominous IMO.

I'm willing to wait and see and give him the benefit of the doubt, but you certainly can't consider him a 'plus' when he never played. We'll see what he can do in 2012.

[RS12]

Have you ever looked at a Basic Trainee after haircut and one size fits all fitting of uniform? Some of those unheralded and scragly recruits earn the Medal of Honor.

I had high hopes for the guy in light of the fact that was a LT at MS and draft experts were touting him (I never saw him play in college). I am willing to give him time to develop but now I am just hoping he doesnt turn out to be another disapointment.

[Eskimo]

I dont think the Cowboys have ignored the front 7 quite as much as the article made it out to be. To me the difference is NY has hit on players in the draft where Dallas is missed with almost all of their LB picks. Excluding Lee of coarse. We are a 3-4 so there is going to be a higher priority on finding LBs instead of DEs, unfortunately for Dallas they have wasted most of picks on guys who didnt pan out in the 2nd to 4th rounds the last few years.

We have spent a lot of picks at LB but that isn't readily apparent because Carpenter was a first round bust and we let Burnett walk. Jason Williams also was a 3rd round bust.

We haven't been as bad drafting LBs as we have been at OL but still there were some major misses there. Where we haven't invested much is DL and it sure would be great to add a catalytic player there now that Rat has burned out and is declining rapidly as a pressure player.

[CCBoy]

Try to stay on this topic rather than bringing in stuff from the other battles you're fighting. I'm talking about Arkin specifically here and the incorrect characterization of calling someone who did not play and wasn't even active a 'hit' as a draft pick.



Who mentioned 'irresponsible drafting'? Again, you're spilling one topic into another. Save that for the 'Draft Myths' topic.

And Carter would be another guy deserving of an 'Incomplete' grade rather than any assumption he was a great pick in the 2nd round.



Why not, would that not be the case? 'Socks to jocks' after all...



No complaints over the past two years, some great pieces added there.



Not rushing to judgement, but asking that you do the same. I'm not labeling him a bust or a mistake, but likewise, I don't think you can consider him a 'plus' at this point either. The jury is still out either way.



I'm not writing him off, but if it were me, he'd be in a pitched fight with Kowalski and Nagy for that starting job in 2012.

Neat how you take a comment as to value of another topic completely, and then try to run on with a different storyline and argument which was proven irrelevant on discussion started already. That is called a pompous interlude.

I have only pointed out that draft picks of value have been used. That threw your very first argument out of he kiddie pool. Your contention was that they couldn't succeed due to lower position in a draft. No, drive in a player's heart is as relevant as anything.

That a 'rook' started his rookie year, is value. For MOST credable evaluations on drafts start around that very element. Whether or not a draft pick starts at some point.

Maybe you should just start posting your own draft measureables and evaluations, and publicly inform every one else in the field they are irrelevent.

Your keep on expanding upon your own descriptive terms. Get real, you haven't proven didly squat even as to value of Nagy, Kowalski, or Arkin. The three included only goes to prove you leaped before thinking and rushed to throw flames at Jerry. And after being called for not even supporting your claim, you just attacked abstractly. Until starting, and playing for TWO seasons, Lee was questionable in your vein of things. The same aspect involved with Murray and now Carter would have been the same.

But follow this logic, once they DID start, things started to change. They had comparables that no longer projected. Only the degree of change from there was in question.

Your point on Carter fails as well. You didn't follow closely enough to note that he received progressively more time on the field and not in the special team's arena. He earned his way onto the field, and with veterans such as Brookings and James on roster. I'd say that time on the field matters, myself.

But to the 'rook's along the offensive interior. The team made a decision to go with the veterans, injuries permitting, but when line dynamics had changed. That as well, to someone paying attention, might indicate a relationship with experience and demonstrated skillsets.

As to top picks, they are put into starting roles, due to cap cost, whether they are ready or not. That doesn't mean the quality of play is any better although. Their adjustments are actually less and thus failure at a pretty high level. A lower expectation at start, can as well build a better player as he adjusts at his own rates an speed. That's why the Dynasty era lineman were all not from the top of a draft... second round, Larry Allen and Flozell Adams, or lower...with a pair of them even undrafted free agents.

But trying define out logic, and how it reassembles at the team level is articulated chaos. You think mental clarifications are battles, and probably why you couldn't see your way around something as simple as approaching problems on the defensive side creatively as well.

But you like a non-stop argument attacking style, your own transfered motives, and ignoring of actual and topic information presented for discussion. No, you like to talk conflict and claim high ground for merely offering a disagreeing attitude. And changing what was said so that your thoughts dominate the picture. You missed my words as well, but on directions and points for distinction.

Not for missed point, or poor structure, not even words selected. You miss because that is your intent as well as convenience.

You even ignore: Dallas, since Jerry arrived, has drafted 1 in 5 players drafted, at the offensive line position. You deaf?

You even fail to admit that the past two drafts have been very good.

No, you would prefer to explain all of that away trying to prove a sought for incompetance in myself. You try to base that departure, and your own insult upon an abstract, or even minor consideration of possible failure. That doesn't change the present picture of today, and BOTH drafts were based upon great Scouting and the draft process itself was very good.

Whether or not Arkin is a starting possibility next season or not, is NOT at issue. The fact that a solid draft the past two seasons IS.

You haven't stepped up to the plate and stated that Bryant/Lee and Smith/Carter were very strong picks at the top of the draft. If you are unable to agree with that....quite simply, seek medical assistance. You are merely arguing with yorself, as all media are scoring that part of the deal a strong Cowboys success.

Your argument would next be to question that statement and attempt to disprove that strong contribution to a current Cowboy picture with an I don't know, it's not as good as when Jimmy was here. Well, JIMMY used a 2nd rounder, a third rounder, two undrafted free agents, and a fourth rounder.

Then attempt to state Jerry is stupid for not using first and second rounders the past five years. Now, what sounds odd about that? You do some thinking on subject, for a change.:rolleyes:

My pointing out aspects, and you attempting to instead lead what you consider the blind, is condescending, arrogance, and not sticking to the truth of situations. Attitude doesn't determine the truth, but it can lead to it. But truth is the object, not support in attitude. Attitudes change.

[CCBoy]

I had high hopes for the guy in light of the fact that was a LT at MS and draft experts were touting him (I never saw him play in college). I am willing to give him time to develop but now I am just hoping he doesnt turn out to be another disapointment.

I like that he is a scrapper and is physical. That alone helps to improve the team as a whole. We need more of that attitude and heart. I hope that he succeeds and wins a starter's role. I'll wait to watch that part. But he will make a possitive influence overall, whether he starts in the future or not. As to that role, I won't complain an ounce.

[stasheroo]

Neat how you take a comment as to value of another topic completely, and then try to run on with a different storyline and argument which was proven irrelevant on discussion started already. That is called a pompous interlude.

Newsflash! You're the guy who put it here, where it didn't belong. Don't try to give me attitude about it.

I have only pointed out that draft picks of value have been used.

In the wrong thread!

That threw your very first argument out of he kiddie pool.

Drop the 'kiddie pool' junk, it's never been relevant and it isn't now. A completely asinine line that should be put out to pasture never to return.

Your contention was that they couldn't succeed due to lower position in a draft. No, drive in a player's heart is as relevant as anything.

Again, you're confusing two different topics here.

My 'contention' is that you cannot call David Arkin - a guy who did not play at all during the regular season - a 'plus' or a successful draft pick.

That a 'rook' started his rookie year, is value. For MOST credable evaluations on drafts start around that very element. Whether or not a draft pick starts at some point.

OK, Arkin didn't. Where the 'plus'? Where's the 'value'?

Maybe you should just start posting your own draft measureables and evaluations, and publicly inform every one else in the field they are irrelevent.

Your keep on expanding upon your own descriptive terms. Get real, you haven't proven didly squat even as to value of Nagy, Kowalski, or Arkin. The three included only goes to prove you leaped before thinking and rushed to throw flames at Jerry. And after being called for not even supporting your claim, you just attacked abstractly. Until starting, and playing for TWO seasons, Lee was questionable in your vein of things.

You need to cut back on the meds. I don't know who you're referring to but it isn't me. You're taking two unrelated topics and smashing them together into a big ball of nonsense.

The same aspect involved with Murray and now Carter would have been the same.

But follow this logic, once they DID start, things started to change. They had comparables that no longer projected. Only the degree of change from there was in question.

Your point on Carter fails as well. You didn't follow closely enough to note that he received progressively more time on the field and not in the special team's arena. He earned his way onto the field, and with veterans such as Brookings and James on roster. I'd say that time on the field matters, myself.

I 'followed' well enough. He wasn't drafted in the second round to play special teams. And he didn't contribute much of anything in terms of playing linebacker. Not his fault as he was recovering from a major knee operation, but it is what it is.

You can't tell me he was any sort of key contributor to the team and therefore he can't be labeled as a great draft pick. He - like Arkin - gets a 'mulligan' for his rookie year and we'll look forward to see what he can bring next year. Hopefully we'll get another Sean Lee rather than another Jason Williams.

But to the 'rook's along the offensive interior. The team made a decision to go with the veterans, injuries permitting, but when line dynamics had changed. That as well, to someone paying attention, might indicate a relationship with experience and demonstrated skillsets.

Or it might indicate that Arkin wasn't the best candidate for the job to anyone with a functioning set of eyes.

As to top picks, they are put into starting roles, due to cap cost, whether they are ready or not. That doesn't mean the quality of play is any better although. Their adjustments are actually less and thus failure at a pretty high level. A lower expectation at start, can as well build a better player as he adjusts at his own rates an speed. That's why the Dynasty era lineman were all second round, Larry Allen and Flozell Adams, or lower...with a pair of them even undrafted free agents.

But trying define out logic, and how it reassembles at the team level is articulated chaos. You think mental clarifications are battles, and probably why you couldn't see your way around something as simple as approaching problems on the defensive side creatively as well.

But you like a non-stop argument attacking style, your own transfered motives, and ignoring of actual and topic information presented for discussion. No, you like to talk conflict and claim high ground for merely offering a disagreeing attitude. And changing what was said so that your thoughts dominate the picture. You missed my words as well.

Not for missed point, or poor structure, not even words selected. You miss because that is your intent as well as convenience.

You even ignore: Dallas, since Jerry arrived, has drafted 1 in 5 players drafted, at the offensive line position. You deaf?

You even fail to admit that the past two drafts have been very good.

No, you would prefer to explain all of that away trying to prove a sought for incompetance in myself. You try to base that departure, and your own insult upon an abstract, or even minor consideration of possible failure. That doesn't change the present picture of today, and BOTH drafts were based upon great Scouting and the draft process itself was very good.

You have honestly got some serious issues. You can't keep track of one fight over another or differentiate one poster from another. The problem is not mine, it's yours.

Whether or not Arkin is a starting possibility next season or not, is NOT at issue. The fact that a solid draft the past two seasons IS.

No, the fact that Arkin contributed nothing is the issue - nothing else. You can try to take it down whatever water-log ride of intellectual gobbledy**** you might try, but I'll keep coming back to my point.

Arkin is not a 'win' as a draft pick, he's not a 'plus', he's not even a 'contributor' at this point. He's simply and unknown commodity who gets an Incomplete as his grade for 2011.

But apparently, you can't handle that and feel compelled to turn it into some sort of an attack and therefore a fight. It is you who has chosen thisroute and nobody else.

You haven't stepped up to the plate and stated that Bryant/Lee and Smith/Carter were very strong picks at the top of the draft. If you are unable to agree with that....quite simply, seek medical assistance. You are merely arguing with yorself, as all media are scoring that part of the deal a strong Cowboys success.

Read my prior post, I did that very thing!

No complaints over the past two years, some great pieces added there.

What does that sound like?

Again, I don't have any idea where you're getting your information and who you should actually be spitting your venom at?

Your argument would next be to question that statement and attempt to disprove that strong contribution to a current Cowboy picture with an I don't know, it's not as good as when Jimmy was here. Well, JIMMY used a 2nd rounder, a third rounder, two undrafted free agents, and a fourth rounder.

Then attempt to state Jerry is stupid for not using first and second rounders the past five years. Now, what sounds odd about that? You do some thinking on subject, for a change.:rolleyes:

On subject?

You're not even in the right topic!

You're dragging your ramblings from one topic to a completely different one, attempting to argue something completely unrelated to what I'm talking about.

Don't dare to attempt to lecture anyone about staying 'on subject'.

Check yourself first!

Look back on this thread and then try to figure out what it is that is actually being talked about.

[Alexander]

Burn.

Barrel.

[stasheroo]

Burn.

Barrel.

Don't encourage him!

:laugh2:

[CCBoy]

Newsflash! You're the guy who put it here, where it didn't belong. Don't try to give me attitude about it.



In the wrong thread!



Drop the 'kiddie pool' junk, it's never been relevant and it isn't now. A completely asinine line that should be put out to pasture never to return.



Again, you're confusing two different topics here.

My 'contention' is that you cannot call David Arkin - a guy who did not play at all during the regular season - a 'plus' or a successful draft pick.



OK, Arkin didn't. Where the 'plus'? Where's the 'value'?



You need to cut back on the meds. I don't know who you're referring to but it isn't me. You're taking two unrelated topics and smashing them together into a big ball of nonsense.



I 'followed' well enough. He wasn't drafted in the second round to play special teams. And he didn't contribute much of anything in terms of playing linebacker. Not his fault as he was recovering from a major knee operation, but it is what it is.

You can't tell me he was any sort of key contributor to the team and therefore he can't be labeled as a great draft pick. He - like Arkin - gets a 'mulligan' for his rookie year and we'll look forward to see what he can bring next year. Hopefully we'll get another Sean Lee rather than another Jason Williams.



Or it might indicate that Arkin wasn't the best candidate for the job to anyone with a functioning set of eyes.



You have honestly got some serious issues. You can't keep track of one fight over another or differentiate one poster from another. The problem is not mine, it's yours.



No, the fact that Arkin contributed nothing is the issue - nothing else. You can try to take it down whatever water-log ride of intellectual gobbledy**** you might try, but I'll keep coming back to my point.

Arkin is not a 'win' as a draft pick, he's not a 'plus', he's not even a 'contributor' at this point. He's simply and unknown commodity who gets an Incomplete as his grade for 2011.

But apparently, you can't handle that and feel compelled to turn it into some sort of an attack and therefore a fight. It is you who has chosen thisroute and nobody else.



Read my prior post, I did that very thing!



What does that sound like?

Again, I don't have any idea where you're getting your information and who you should actually be spitting your venom at?



On subject?

You're not even in the right topic!

You're dragging your ramblings from one topic to a completely different one, attempting to argue something completely unrelated to what I'm talking about.

Don't dare to attempt to lecture anyone about staying 'on subject'.

Check yourself first!

Look back on this thread and then try to figure out what it is that is actually being talked about.

This was a thread on defensive direction...a direction removed from immediate discussion can provide detachment. Something you ignored from onset. But principal applies to both examples.

I won't attempt to address your run on trying to justify your own thought processes.

It hasn't embraced much picture of actual accountabilty and sound decisions at much any level...yet.

Unless you count ridicule with cherry picked points only to take yourself off the hook.

Two points, first the foundation of stability on the offensive side depended upon a veteran group of offensive linemen. When Colombo became injured beyond recovery; Leonard Davis slowed down too much to be effective; and Andre Gurodes cap cost had to be cut to allow cap recovery... the picture of the offensive line changed. But the additions of Arkins, Nagy, Kowalski, and Costa with Smith, shows the team wasn't siting on it's hands and being inattentive in the mean time.

You have a change from Free, Kosier, Gurode, Davis, and Colombo to a picture of Free, Holland, Costa, Kosier, and Smith. Both lines produced franchise high totals of 6,000 combined yardage for a season. That is NOT total system failure. Either by management or players.

It does show system change. But that is not limited to your picture of incompetance, irresponsibility, or ineptness. It was how things went down. But the same picture includes direction for a back change as well.

Now, take that to the defensive side. And on topic you elude amusing yourself.

The Cowboys have drafted a defensive line base. It included commitment high up for Spears, and realistic commitment in the draft to pick up Canty, Hatcher, and further add Ratliff, Bowen, and recently both Brent and Lissimore. That is from draft sources since Bill Parcells arrived and the 3-4 scheme became the Cowboy way. That isn't irresponsible effort by the Cowboys. The present group, includes only Coleman from an outside source. But change is in a projection that could affect pressure in passing situations.

As to the defensive picture, development could occur with integration of Rob Ryan's defense and further maturing of both Lissimore and Brent, similar to that of Bowen.

Myself, I like the picture of a dominant nose being added, who occupies blockers with no movement, and Ratliff moved to defensive end. That would be cheapest and quickest in solution.

The fastest way to affect dynamics is better outside pressure to match DeMarcus Ware.

And to improve the defense, the ability to cover in single matchups and better safety response ability in both running and passing games.

As to your one directional spoutings on proper, try a realistic duscussion, or get on back to the burn barrels....or pick up on some of the facts being added in now, after earlier being presented, and carry on a realistic discussion that includes not just your own biased view.

Jerry isn't perfect, but his organization isn't the crap load you present it as being...nor am I. :cool:

[stasheroo]

This was a thread on defensive direction...a direction removed from immediate discussion can provide detachment. Something you ignored from onset. But principal applies to both examples.

I won't attempt to address your run on trying to justify your own thought processes.

It hasn't embraced much picture of actual accountabilty and sound decisions at much any level...yet.

Unless you count ridicule with cherry picked points only to take yourself off the hook.

Two points, first the foundation of stability on the offensive side depended upon a veteran group of offensive linemen. When Colombo became injured beyond recovery; Leonard Davis slowed down too much to be effective; and Andre Gurodes cap cost had to be cut to allow cap recovery... the picture of the offensive line changed. But the additions of Arkins, Nagy, Kowalski, and Costa with Smith, shows the team wasn't siting on it's hands and being inattention in the mean time.

You have a change from Free, Kosier, Gurode, Davis, and Colombo to a picture of Free, Holland, Costa, Kosier, and Smith. Both lines produced franchise high totals of 6,000 combined yardage for a season. That is NOT total system failure. Either by management or players.

It does show system change. But that is not limited to your picture of incompetance, irresponsibility, or ineptness. It was how things went down. But the same picture includes direction back up as well.

Now, take that to the defensive side. And on topic you elude amusing yourself.

The Cowboys have drafted a defensive line base. It included commitment high up for Spears, and realistic commitment in the draft to pick up Canty, Hatcher, and further add Ratliff, Bowen, and recently both Brent and Lissimore. That is from draft sources since Bill Parcells arrived and the 3-4 scheme became the Cowboy way. That isn't irresponsible effort by the Cowboys. The present group, includes only Coleman from an outside source. But change is in a projection that could affect pressure in passing situations.

As to the defensive picture, development could occur with integration of Rob Ryan's defense and further maturing of both Lissimore and Brent, similar to that of Bowen.

Myself, I like the picture of a dominant nose being added, who occupies blockers with no movement, and Ratliff moved to defensive end. That would be cheapest and quickest in solution.

The fastest way to affect dynamics is better outside pressure to match DeMarcus Ware.

And to improve the defense, the ability to cover in single matchups and better safety response ability in both running and passing games.

As to your one directional spoutings on proper, try a realistic duscussion, or get on back to the burn barrels....or pick up on some of the facts being added in now, after early being presented, and carry on a realistic discussion that includes not just your own biased view.

Again, what does any of this have to do with David Arkin being called a 'plus' or a solid draft pick or 'hitting' on him when he wasn't a factor at all?

That was the point you apparently left behind to meander in a million different directions.

That was my one point, that was what I took issue with.

Not all that hard to understand.

Save the 'burn barrel' nonsense and check yourself before you talk about someone else being off topic.

Jerry isn't perfect, but his organization isn't the crap load you present it as being...nor am I. :cool:

Again, try to keep up, we're talking about David Arkin here, not Jerry Jones.

Try to keep focus.

Unfortunately, I've let you pull me and this thread off the rails, and for that I apologize to the OP for hijacking this thread.

[Carl23]

Again, try to keep up, we're talking about David Arkin here, not Jerry Jones.

Try to keep focus.

Unfortunately, I've let you pull me and this thread off the rails, and for that I apologize to the OP for hijacking this thread.


Somehow, I don't think that he's going to come around. His arguments and 'logic' lack some serious focus. Am I the only one having difficulty following his posts?

[stasheroo]

Somehow, I don't think that he's going to come around. His arguments and 'logic' lack some serious focus. Am I the only one having difficulty following his posts?

No, they sometimes remind me of that scene from the Adam Sandler movie Billy Madison:

"Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."

:laugh2:

[cowboystar55]

The fact that the Giants are willing to devote a higher percentage of their cap in order to field a physically dominant team with a strong DL is the reason they are usually contenders and it's a BIG reason they beat the 2007 Cowboys and then Brady and his perfect Patriots in the Superbowl.

Maybe Canty was overpaid, but I seriously doubt the Giants care, that was the price of admission to maintain a strong group and Jerry Jones needs to start devoting more of his drafts and cap space to the trenches or his team will be forever punked by the Giants.

I agree 10000% especially when it TOOK our best DL player from our starting DEFENSE....yes, Canty's been hurt with the Giants but he could have been healthy with us......the football gods dictate that he WAS healthy in the two years that the Giants Defense kicked our butts all over the field. Rookies on this board need to start realizing that DEFENSE normally wins CHAMPIONSHIPS.....even the Packers and Saint's defenses made BIG PLAYS when they won their respective NFL TITLES!!!!!

[CCBoy]

Somehow, I don't think that he's going to come around. His arguments and 'logic' lack some serious focus. Am I the only one having difficulty following his posts?

Focus is engaging and destroying three tanks in the first five seconds of an attempted breakout by two Divisions of Elite guard almost immediately after the surrender of Iraq at the conclusion of the Three Days War.

And you wouldn't begin to understand focus...as to following thought process, it's easier to follow insults and act pompous.

Perhaps you would like to jump in on topic instead clinging to the insult and not approaching the topic.

Your concept of a conscience is humor...and that makes an analysis by yourself and that never attempts to touch topic even more desperate in view. But pure attitude....so, meet the burn barrel you so seek.:cool: Now, I'll explain....

Oh, Stash will probably offer his own Fractured Fairie Tale of meaning, as he does on most topics he attempts to look fully in tune with. On this thread, he started out by saying that the investments by the Giants were excessive. Implying the thought the high draft as well as free agency efforts were out of place by the organization. His expressed stance. But the character of the team surrounds the dependability of the defensive line to dominate on the defensive side. They continued bring in free agents and drafting high to ensure they could withstand any combination of injure scenarios and still dominate upfront. This is the characer of that team and why they are making yet another end of season run. Focus?

He then states that he is somewhat glad that the team lost out in the end, because it gave Jerry Jones a false sense of value in his team. That started his own, and now denied stance on topic and crap shot at Jerry as an excuse. Then in explaing problem areas, used a description of:

'he wasn't absolving Cowboys of mistakes, he wasn't sure the defensive line covers it, and then in that post concludes:

'I think we can point to holes on the offensive line as well as bad investments in the secondary as valid reasons as well.'

I can see why you would rush to agreeing he presents a complete and concise picture as well. You don't attempt at the level of Stash.

After a series of posts between myself and Eskimo and Doomsday, that was aimed at expanding the effort etended at the offensive line position and the draft for the past two seasons.

Stash merely attempted to post pot hole details of an explanation that didn't just trash Cowboys efforts recently, because then his trash talking about the team would have come in question. He already establishing at the begining of the thread, that his trash was immediately intended for Jerry, and now, anyone talking in a more positive manner to analysis and correction of errors.

No he was busy trying to place blame and insult anyone that wasn't bad mouthing on the issues as well. But that was his MO before the start of last season, when anyone pointing out player's contributions to the Lockout was his personal agenda for ridiculing and insulting as well. But you seem fully into that high ground of sarcasm yourself.

I included the second, third, and fourth pics of the draft as examples that the projected levels of the draft had been adequately used to increase value on the team this previous draft. Showing a responsible use of picks.

Stash as usual, attempted to brow beat a feature and present his badgering as reason for a faliure of issue. First off, that is NOT a contributory addition to discussion. It was obvious he was tying to merely down play an aspect as an insult to myself...and not topic. Only a foul would define solid as NOT inclusive of a 'rook' that fought through training camp and earned trust enough to have started for the Cowboys. I've never seen the Cowboys to walk someone in, who at least couldn't battle at the NFL level, into a starter's role. Cowboy starters at least earn the right to be there. How far they will go, not being the draft's top talent, is a matter of adjustments. After picking up Montrae Holland, the Cowboys decided to go more with the veterans of Holland and Derrick Dockery.

Obviously, there were more problems with a rookie from a smaller program, with technique and very much still adjusting to actions and intensity in real games at the NFL. He was included to touch and open the view of a pretty involved effort by the Cowboys to change the dynamics of the Dallas offensive line in decay, as well as change situations for cap rebalancing.

None of that was picked up on and discussed. But disorganized in premise?

I then pointed to intended direction with a discussion, not burn barrel escapade...

We now talk direction at position for Dallas, not at least a start value for that drafted player.

Burma stepped in and used an attempted clarifying term of mediocre.

I had been presenting valid evidence of effort to improve the position at question, but the principal was the reason. So I defined the parameters of value by the standard generally used to evaluate merit accomplished in a specific year's draft. Those require time down stream to be more accurate, but the rely to a good extent on whether or not they have in fact started in their careers.

Certainly no one will mistake David Arkin for Tyron Smith, at least at this phase of his career, but he did fill the role of a starter and in game conditions. To point this direction, I then added the comment to burma's post of:


Mediocre is completely subjective. You fail to embrace the topic of discussion. That was a projection of no attempt by Dallas at gaining improvement at offensive line. Not on it's development with a player drafted just for that purpose. And starting players are always good draft picks.

I had already established and now defined my stance...but not to be detoured in his own agenda, Stash digressed and stated:

Sorry, but he's not a 'hit' or any sort of success story. He's an unknown commodity that didn't play. Despite a plethora of injuries at his position, he never factored into the equation.

If anything is to be assumed, it is that he's not ready.

He merely ignored the build up to that point and rudely, and in compliance with his own agenda, reverted instead of merely developing a superimposed stroyline of his own.

Since you think all is merely a circle jerk and great fun for yourself, then someone should introduce Brother Daryl and his other Brother Daryl now.

But I trust you both can now can make it back to the burn barrel without adult supervision...

[CCBoy]

My apologies for time running out and my not being able to correct all the eyesores of spelling...I would have.

[CCBoy]

Since you chose not to discuss the topic with myself, and only attempted to be a heckler from the crowd, here's your one chance....:laugh2:

Four chefs, three challenges, and only one Champion. Now who will be Chopped Champion!:lmao2:

Remember, if you don't cut it, you will be chopped.:lmao:

Time starts, now.....:cool: What, you only brought one knife?:rolleyes:

Maybe you could insert how a new secondary coach will affect what you have developed up to here...:D Don't forget to let your cooked meat roast, before you cut it so that it remains juicy. Now, what is your strategy? Now, what goes with a slice of beef? To a Chef, a starch with a colorful contrast, such as salad or fruit.

But such comments divert focus and requires a mental connection to application...and you just didn't do that throughout your comments, unless it came back to your own agendas and progressive attitude. Oh yes, you must wash off that knife before using it....two minute warning, so stick a fork in it and see if it's done. Final warning, alright, serve it up...oops, you chose turkey. Now, wasn't that silly? That's allright, I'll be your Huckleberry, but you knew this was coming...the chopping block. Did you pass or fail? Was being Chef your real dream? But what was on your turkey? Sauce or honey?

In preparation, theres no excuse for not presenting a good dish. But taste dominates, and not just appearance. But when using a knife, make sure your own cutting skills are consistent, or things will cook at different rates. And that leaves something cooked and something undercooked. If not even, then don't expect it to fly.

Now apply your analytical skills at football and don't see any meaning throughout now. Now explain what your real chef skills are.....

as Hos stated, he said he likes the Tacos.

Oh, you say the trick is to start off with no skills and to burn the food. Then enter a contest of from worst to first - Chef. But you already blew off the part on knife skills and preparation.