Gosselin: I would have stayed at 14 and taken Brockers....

[Risen Star]

On if the Cowboys have the players to execute Ryan’s defensive plan:

Gosselin: “No. I think (Morris) Claiborne is going to come in and eventually be a Pro Bowler, but in this league, you build from the front back. The Cowboys are trying to build from the back up. You win up front and for the Cowboys to trade up in the first to get a cornerback, as good as Claiborne is, I hated giving up a second. They gave up a chance to get a front seven player, and that’s where you’re winning in this league. I would have stayed there and taken (Michael) Brockers and had a second round pick.”

http://www.dallasnews.com/sports/dallas-cowboys/headlines/20120503-gosselin-on-dallas-draft-i-would-have-stayed-at-14-taken-michael-brockers-and-had-a-second-round-pick.ece

[Risen Star]

Hammer. Nail.

[Bluestang]

The Vikings had a pretty damn good front 7.

[ThreeandOut]

By all indications that second front seven player was going to be the ILB Wagner. He might be a good player but I question the value of spending that pick on a 4th ILB.

[Sasquatch]

I agree with his philosophy of building outside-in, but I also think Cliaborne is the superior talent.

I guess time will tell. It seems that every draft spawns one of these debates (e.g. Ware v. Merriman, Carpenter v. Lawson, etc.).

[MichaelWinicki]

The Vikings had a pretty damn good front 7.

Yep.

Not too mention I'm not sold on Brockers being anything more than a "Spears' clone".

The big problem with this defense was inability to defend the pass. Yeah, more pass rush would be great but the back 8 were less than average vs the pass.

Brockers looks to be a very good run stuffer... but what else he got? ;)

[Dash28]

Hammer. Nail.

You say take the BPA and draft the talent but are fine with taking Brockers over Clai? This doesn't count here due to it fitting your agenda?

[Risen Star]

You say take the BPA and draft the talent but are fine with taking Brockers over Clai? This doesn't count here due to it fitting your agenda?

If Claiborne fell to 14 where we were originally, you might have a point. But since he didn't, you don't.

He didn't fall into our lap. We aggressively got into position to take him. And it cost us our 2nd round pick.

Sorry. I refuse to check my brain at the door to support this team. Goose is 100% correct in that you build from the front back. Claiborne is a true blue chip CB prospect on a team weak in the trenches. Just doesn't make any sense to me.

Maybe in two years he can be a great playmaker once this team fixes the lines, if they do fix it. Right now he's a complete non factor. Like Newman. Like Jenkins. Like Nnamdi, DRC, and Asante in Philly, or any other cornerback on a team that can't win at the line of scrimmage.

[BraveHeartFan]

I'm even happier now that we moved up and took Mo.

[AmishCowboy]

You say take the BPA and draft the talent but are fine with taking Brockers over Clai? This doesn't count here due to it fitting your agenda? Oh, yeah!!

[CoCo]

If Claiborne fell to 14 where we were originally, you might have a point. But since he didn't, you don't.

He didn't fall into our lap. We aggressively got into position to take him. And it cost us our 2nd round pick.

Sorry. I refuse to check my brain at the door to support this team. Goose is 100% correct in that you build from the front back. Claiborne is a true blue chip CB prospect on a team weak in the trenches. Just doesn't make any sense to me.

Maybe in two years he can be a great playmaker once this team fixes the lines, if they do fix it. Right now he's a complete non factor. Like Newman. Like Jenkins. Like Nnamdi, DRC, and Asante in Philly, or any other cornerback on a team that can't win at the line of scrimmage.

I respect your opinion, or maybe better said, your preference on this issue.

But I do believe that you WAY overstate it as if there is only a SINGULAR way to build an effective defense.

If the Cowboy D improves in 2012, will it be solely because of improved front 7 play? That is what you suggest by calling Claiborne a non-factor. Presumably Carr too is a non-factor? So if the D improves in 2012 will you give any credit to the upgraded secondary or will you claim its ALL a result of improved front 7 play that could have happened just as easily with our 2011 secondary?

[Bluestang]

I hate saying this but the Redskins also have a darn good front 7 too.

[Risen Star]

I respect your opinion, or maybe better said, your preference on this issue.

But I do believe that you WAY overstate it as if there is only a SINGULAR way to build an effective defense.

If the Cowboy D improves in 2012, will it be solely because of improved front 7 play? That is what you suggest by calling Claiborne a non-factor. Presumably Carr too is a non-factor? So if the D improves in 2012 will you give any credit to the upgraded secondary or will you claim its ALL a result of improved front 7 play that could have happened just as easily with our 2011 secondary?

Yes. If the Cowboys front seven plays this year as they did last year, Morris Claiborne won't provide any impact to the defense.

Until we can make opposing QBs uncomfortable, our secondary will get picked apart. I know Randy Galloway mentioned this a while ago in his farewell to Terence Newman. That no CB on the planet could have succeeded in this defense last year.

It's like we just drafted Calvin Johnson. But Rex Grossman is our QB.

I do think there's only one way to build a defense. I've never seen it work the other way. You first must win at the line of scrimmage. Until you do, nothing else matters.

[dthahn]

Ummmm....

What do you call our third round and fourth round picks?!!!!!!!

Did you know that the NFL draft lasts longer than the first round?

[WoodysGirl]

Ummmm....

What do you call our third round and fourth round picks?!!!!!!!

Did you know that the NFL draft lasts longer than the first round?For some, it's all about the 1st and 2nd picks..

Everything after those, or in this case, the 1st pick, doesn't matter.

[Double Trouble]

Yes. If the Cowboys front seven plays this year as they did last year, Morris Claiborne won't provide any impact to the defense.

Until we can make opposing QBs uncomfortable, our secondary will get picked apart. I know Randy Galloway mentioned this a while ago in his farewell to Terence Newman. That no CB on the planet could have succeeded in this defense last year.

It's like we just drafted Calvin Johnson. But Rex Grossman is our QB.

I do think there's only one way to build a defense. I've never seen it work the other way. You first must win at the line of scrimmage. Until you do, nothing else matters.:hammer:

[67CowboysFan]

Yes. If the Cowboys front seven plays this year as they did last year, Morris Claiborne won't provide any impact to the defense.

Until we can make opposing QBs uncomfortable, our secondary will get picked apart. I know Randy Galloway mentioned this a while ago in his farewell to Terence Newman. That no CB on the planet could have succeeded in this defense last year.

It's like we just drafted Calvin Johnson. But Rex Grossman is our QB.

I do think there's only one way to build a defense. I've never seen it work the other way. You first must win at the line of scrimmage. Until you do, nothing else matters.
If our secondary improves so will our line.

[MonsterD]

:laugh1: There is no comparison of Brockers to Spears or Jackson or Dorsey, he was not even close to being as good as those guys in college. Lousy combine numbers lack of production, oh but he will be a real force in the NFL. :rolleyes:

[MoClaiborne24]

Ummmm....

What do you call our third round and fourth round picks?!!!!!!!

Did you know that the NFL draft lasts longer than the first round?For some, it's all about the 1st and 2nd picks..

Everything after those, or in this case, the 1st pick, doesn't matter.

:signmast:

[PlayMaker88]

Why in the world would anybody care what Gosslin would do?

[jblaze2004]

Yessss I see how brockers would help. We are 7th vs the run (what brockers does best). We are 7th in sacks but our pass d was 23th and our cb's barely got picks. Heck i think sean lee lead us in picks? or almost did.

So basically we upgrade the cb position that needed upgrade and we still get criticized....lol...We get the best corner to come out the draft in a while and it only cost us a 2nd rouder yet everyone is up in arms about it. I mean yeah we would of like to get a safety but the safties in this class seem like so poo. I rather us throw a pick a rambo in the supp. draft. Barron was the best but I have my doubts about him also. Give me Mo over barron anyday.

[CowboyChris]

If Claiborne fell to 14 where we were originally, you might have a point. But since he didn't, you don't.

He didn't fall into our lap. We aggressively got into position to take him. And it cost us our 2nd round pick.

Sorry. I refuse to check my brain at the door to support this team. Goose is 100% correct in that you build from the front back. Claiborne is a true blue chip CB prospect on a team weak in the trenches. Just doesn't make any sense to me.

Maybe in two years he can be a great playmaker once this team fixes the lines, if they do fix it. Right now he's a complete non factor. Like Newman. Like Jenkins. Like Nnamdi, DRC, and Asante in Philly, or any other cornerback on a team that can't win at the line of scrimmage.

so Brockers and Wagner would be starting from day 1? and are considered future pro-bowlers? the fact we moved up 8 spots for just a 2nd rounder is practically a steal. Washington gave up 2 1st rounders and a 2nd to move up 4 spots!! and more importantly we got a cb who some say is rated up there with the Deion's of the world coming out of college.

oh and by the way lets not forget prior to the draft we only had one starting cb on the roster, Jenkins is recovering from major shoulder surgery, and is in a contract year, and we all know he isnt going to get Carr money, who's to say when he returns he will be back to form?? need anymore reason why we made this trade?

Gosselin is an idiot for writing that article, just goes to show you he doesnt know squat about football.

[GloryDaysRBack]

Hammer. Nail.

Didn't you not want Brockers?

[GloryDaysRBack]

If Goose is so good at this, why is he available?

[theogt]

When Gosselin speaks about football, you listen -- and do the opposite.

[CowboyChris]

If Claiborne fell to 14 where we were originally, you might have a point. But since he didn't, you don't.

He didn't fall into our lap. We aggressively got into position to take him. And it cost us our 2nd round pick.

Sorry. I refuse to check my brain at the door to support this team. Goose is 100% correct in that you build from the front back. Claiborne is a true blue chip CB prospect on a team weak in the trenches. Just doesn't make any sense to me.

Maybe in two years he can be a great playmaker once this team fixes the lines, if they do fix it. Right now he's a complete non factor. Like Newman. Like Jenkins. Like Nnamdi, DRC, and Asante in Philly, or any other cornerback on a team that can't win at the line of scrimmage.

so if Brockers and Barron were both there at #14, you wouldve took Brockers? i dont think even Goose wouldve took Brockers, the pick wouldve been Barron by a landslide.

[Risen Star]

:laugh1: There is no comparison of Brockers to Spears or Jackson or Dorsey, he was not even close to being as good as those guys in college. Lousy combine numbers lack of production, oh but he will be a real force in the NFL. :rolleyes:

I'm not an advocate of Brockers as much as I am the philosophy of building the front seven first.

But if my choice was Brockers and Wagner (who I really like) or Claiborne, I would choose the former and hope Brockers surprises me.

With the way the draft shook out, Cordy Glenn and Peter Konz would have been Dallas Cowboys if I made the decision.

[EGG]

The Claiborne pick, in a vacuum and by itself, can easily be seen as a good move,,, he has a good chance to become a special player. Unfortunately Jerry Jones has continually shown that he does not value the offensive and defensive lines as much as he does the flashy players and he tries to get by with bargain bin big bodies and UDFAs. The end product speaks for itself.

If the team invests quality picks on the DL and OL players over the next few drafts then the Claiborne pick will not be wasted,,, if it's "Jerry as usual" for the next few drafts then Gosselin will be right and the drought will continue.

[Risen Star]

so if Brockers and Barron were both there at #14, you wouldve took Brockers? i dont think even Goose wouldve took Brockers, the pick wouldve been Barron by a landslide.

Who else is there? If it's just those two players I'd choose Barron. I'm not talking about forcing front seven picks. Just when there's value with one take him over anything in the secondary.

We failed to seriously upgrade our lines in FA. I was told no worries, we still have the draft. Then we packaged our top two picks on a player playing the same position we just spent 50 million on in March. With first round pick Mike Jenkins and the world's highest paid slot corner Orlando Scandrick already on the roster. This is a clear case of emphasizing the secondary over the front seven and it's flawed.

I believe this is a product of our top two personnel guys not being legitimate. There's no vision in our front office. Shiny new toys wins out. Nuts and bolts football just isn't showy enough.

[Risen Star]

The Claiborne pick, in a vacuum and by itself, can easily be seen as a good move,,, he has a good chance to become a special player. Unfortunately Jerry Jones has continually shown that he does not value the offensive and defensive lines as much as he does the flashy players and he tries to get by with bargain bin big bodies and UDFAs. The end product speaks for itself.

If the team invests quality picks on the DL and OL players over the next few drafts then the Claiborne pick will not be wasted,,, if it's "Jerry as usual" for the next few drafts then Gosselin will be right and the drought will continue.

Great post. You basically said what I think better than I could.

I'd only add we sacrificed the 2012 season and another year of Tony Romo in the process.

[Risen Star]

Didn't you not want Brockers?

I didn't want Brockers.

You know what I wanted even less? Packaging our top 2 picks for a cornerback.

If that's my only two choices, I'm taking Brockers.

[nickjamesw43]

If Goose is so good at this, why is he available?

Ok that was funny. :laugh1:

By any measure we had one of the better pass rushes in the league last year. Yet our pass defense was near the bottom of the league. I don't know exactly how you rationalize that with the "only front seven matters" theory.

[Primetime42]

Yes. If the Cowboys front seven plays this year as they did last year, Morris Claiborne won't provide any impact to the defense.

Until we can make opposing QBs uncomfortable, our secondary will get picked apart. I know Randy Galloway mentioned this a while ago in his farewell to Terence Newman. That no CB on the planet could have succeeded in this defense last year.

It's like we just drafted Calvin Johnson. But Rex Grossman is our QB.

I do think there's only one way to build a defense. I've never seen it work the other way. You first must win at the line of scrimmage. Until you do, nothing else matters.
I'm sorry, that's just asinine.

Newman had how many picks last year?

[CowboyChris]

I didn't want Brockers.

You know what I wanted even less? Packaging our top 2 picks for a cornerback.

If that's my only two choices, I'm taking Brockers.

what would you have done about cb?

[Risen Star]

For some, it's all about the 1st and 2nd picks..

Everything after those, or in this case, the 1st pick, doesn't matter.

I don't need anybody to explain to me how the NFL Draft works. But when a team fails to add a significant FA or a top 2 pick in the draft to the trenches you'd be hard pressed to say there's a heavy emphasis in that area.

[EGG]

Great post. You basically said what I think better than I could.

I'd only add we sacrificed the 2012 season and another year of Tony Romo in the process.

agreed, it's a football tragedy that the Romo and Ware years are being frivolously squandered away. We can only hope that Jerry hits on some of these long shots and the team makes the most out of Romo/Ware's remaining years.

[Risen Star]

what would you have done about cb?

You're asking the wrong guy. What you see as a huge issue, I see as about as irrelevant as they come with the current state of the roster.

That would be down there on the list next to punter.

[Risen Star]

agreed, it's a football tragedy that the Romo and Ware years are being frivolously squandered away. We can only hope that Jerry hits on some of these long shots and the team makes the most out of Romo/Ware's remaining years.

Yeah. I'm hoping against all odds that Livings, Bernadeau, Lissemore, Crawford, Carter and Spencer become big time success stories this year. That's the only way we can seriously contend, IMO.

Maybe even add Leary to that mix.

[Gameover]

The Cowboy aren't "building" from the back up. The Cowboys drafted a good football player.

The Cowboys feel they have a good enough front already "built"

I'm not saying I agree with the Cowboys. I'm saying Goose is talking out his...

[Gameover]

The Vikings had a pretty damn good front 7.

And a garbage secondary for years.

[CowboyChris]

You're asking the wrong guy. What you see as a huge issue, I see as about as irrelevant as they come with the current state of the roster.

That would be down there on the list next to punter.

lets put 9 guys in the box and leave 2 safeties back, and hope we win the trench battles.

[Bluestang]

And a garbage secondary for years.

I know, but hey they had the top front 7 in the league.

[AdamJT13]

It's always fun to save Gosselin's "I would have ..." comments, then go back a few years later and look at how horribly wrong he was.

[PlayMaker88]

Did no one notice how many times the defense just missed a sack last year because the QB's got the ball off so quick..They were able to get it off so quick because the recievers were always open immediately...Carr and Claiborne being able to play press coverage will certainly help the pass rush..

[Idgit]

Hammer, finger. Gosselin is out of his element. And out of his gourd if he didn't like the Claiborne pick. That was value at a position of importance and need. You do that every time and count yourself lucky.

[muck4doo]

Sorry. CB's of the talent that Claiborne offers only come around once in a blue moon. When you see one, you try to get him. We don't need another DeMarcus Ware to rush the passer, just someone who can give him a hand. The Cowboys did the smart thing by grabbing Claiborne.

[el_chevo]

Some people are just determined to say the dumbest things.

[Bluestang]

Here is some more stuff on the Vikings front 7:

They held their opponents to a 3.9 yds rushing avg that was good enough to be tied 6th in the league.

They were 11th in the league in holding opponent rushing yds/game (107 yds/game).

They only allowed 10 rushing touchdowns all year, along with 8 other teams, that was also tied for 6th in the league.

They were tied for 1st in the league with 50 sacks. Wow!

[CowboyChris]

Here is some more stuff on the Vikings front 7:

They held their opponents to a 3.9 yds rushing avg that was good enough to be tied 6th in the league.

They were 11th in the league in holding opponent rushing yds/game (107 yds/game).

They only allowed 10 rushing touchdowns all year, along with 8 other teams, that was also tied for 6th in the league.

They were tied for 1st in the league with 50 sacks. Wow!

who were they tied with the 50 sacks?

[Bluestang]

who were they tied with the 50 sacks?


The E-gals.

[speedkilz88]

Hammer, finger. Gosselin is out of his element. And out of his gourd if he didn't like the Claiborne pick. That was value at a position of importance and need. You do that every time and count yourself lucky.
Agreed, any time I have a chance to move up for one of the blue chip players for just a second. I would do it every time. It's just rare that a team has that kind of opportunity.

[Dough Boy]

Yep.

Not too mention I'm not sold on Brockers being anything more than a "Spears' clone".

The big problem with this defense was inability to defend the pass. Yeah, more pass rush would be great but the back 8 were less than average vs the pass.

Brockers looks to be a very good run stuffer... but what else he got? ;)

I agree Mike. What Goose overlooks, no pass rush is going to stop a 3-step drop. At some point, you have to cover them!

Brockers is not a pass rusher. He is a run stopper. A darn good run stopper. His pass rush leaves a lot to be desired. Cox was best interior pass rusher and oh by the way, Philly had to trade up to get him.

[SilverStarCowboy]

Brockers was my pick staying at 14, Claiborne all day long, even without whoever in the 2nd.


Now, a Free Agent NT would be a real luxery. Lisemore and Brent arn't raising my sword.

[jnday]

I have went out of the way not to say anything negative about this draft class, but I will be the first to say that this year would have been a great time to upgrade the trenches. I disagree with the approach that the Cowboys take to team-building. My opinion means nothing just like the rest of the posters on this board, but if I was GM, the trenches would be the strength of this football team. Strength in the trenches wins football games.

[muck4doo]

Risen Star I am sure you had the best intentions, but you should feel bad for even posting your suggestions.

[Risen Star]

Risen Star I am sure you had the best intentions, but you should feel bad for even posting your suggestions.

I've been right for years. I'm just as right now.

You probably celebrated the Newman pick. I told you it was a mistake. You did the same with Jenkins. I knew it meant nothing. Now I'm telling you, correctly, that Brandon Carr and Morris Claiborne will make zero impact on this defense unless there's a complete turnaround in the front seven.

You can either accept what I'm saying and be right. Or act like you know better and be wrong. It's up to you. I didn't roll out of bed this morning with a theory on cornerbacks. I've simply paid attention over the years and saw how even the best don't matter when the QB operates in a comfortable pocket.

[silverbear]

Sorry. I refuse to check my brain at the door to support this team.

You talk as if yours is the definitive take, and there is no debate to it...

Well, sorry, hoss, but no less than Jimmy Johnson himself said you win in the NFL with playmakers... he said you do what you can to get playmakers...

Mo Claiborne is a playmaker...

It's a strange kind of arrogance you're afflicted with, your apparent belief that there is one way, and one way only, to build a team, and that you have the "secret" to that methodology... you're one of my favorite posters in here, have been ever since that mock draft exercise you ran, but when it comes to the Cowboys, you almost always turn to snarling...

No, RS, you do not have the answer here... and neither does Gosselin; he might be quite the draft guru when it comes to making up mock drafts, but when has he ever built a football program??

Goose has no special insight into how to build a team, either, all he has is his opinion... you agree with it, I suspect because it fits your anti-Cowboys agenda... I say anti-Cowboys when it comes to personnel decisions, I know you're a devoted fan... perhaps it would be more accurate to say you're anti-Cowboys management...

Which would have a certain amount of legitimacy, if you were talking about past "regimes" (Phillips, Campo, et cetera)... but you seem to be totally unwilling to step back for even one season and see if Jason Garrett's input, along with that of his assistant coaches, makes a difference here...

I'm quite sure that trade was made with Rob Ryan's enthusiastic approval, and if that's the case, perhaps you should think about tempering your hatred of it... unless, of course, you'd have us believe that you know more about building a good defense than Rob does...

That would bring us back to your peculiar form of arrogance...

I oftgen disagree with personnel moves, sometims I'm proven right, sometimes I'm proven wrong... but I have learned that it's wise to wait and see how a move works out, rather than declaring it wrong at the outset...

Surely you recognize the hostility that your campaign of negativity causes in here, but of course you pass it off as pure homerism... in some cases, you're right, but in some cases the posters are just disgusted by the way you constantly attack every move the Cowboys make, no matter what that move is...

The truth is, the Cowboys DID address their front 7 in the draft, with one defensive linemen, and two linebackers... throw in the free agent signing of Dan Connor, and that makes 4 new prospects to work their way into the front 7 rotation... I call that building from the front...

But you act as if they're going with the status quo... all of which is my typically long-winded way of saying you HAVE checked your brain... your reactions to the moves the Cowboys have made in the recent past aren't well-thought out, reasonable reactions, they're preconditioned, knee-jerk reflexes...

[rkstevens]

The Claiborne pick, in a vacuum and by itself, can easily be seen as a good move,,, he has a good chance to become a special player. Unfortunately Jerry Jones has continually shown that he does not value the offensive and defensive lines as much as he does the flashy players and he tries to get by with bargain bin big bodies and UDFAs. The end product speaks for itself.

If the team invests quality picks on the DL and OL players over the next few drafts then the Claiborne pick will not be wasted,,, if it's "Jerry as usual" for the next few drafts then Gosselin will be right and the drought will continue.

Jerry Jones doesn't value the offensive and defensive lines? Hatcher was a 3rd round pick. Other members of the defensive front 7 were high picks -- Ware and Spencer were 1st rounders and Lee and Carter were 2nd rounders. That's 4 out of 7 players on the front 7 who were taken in the 1st and 2nd routes and 5 out of 7 players taken in the first three rounds. Victor Butler was a 4th rounder as was Brady James and Chris Canty and Kevin Burnett was another 2nd rounder. That's hardly ignoring your defensive line.

I agree they haven't spent high picks on the offensive line but even there they currently have a 1st and 4th rounder. Gurode, Al Johnson, Jacob Rogers and Stephen Peterman were all 2nd rounders and Brewster was a 3rd rounder.

You can't spend every pick on the offensive and defensive lines. The team has other needs as well and it's not smart to force a pick at a position based on need over a better overall player. I'd like to see the Cowboys use some more high picks on the offensive line but other than that, they've been pretty balanced in their draft approach.

[Bluestang]

You talk as if yours is the definitive take, and there is no debate to it...

Well, sorry, hoss, but no less than Jimmy Johnson himself said you win in the NFL with playmakers... he said you do what you can to get playmakers...

Mo Claiborne is a playmaker...

It's a strange kind of arrogance you're afflicted with, your apparent belief that there is one way, and one way only, to build a team, and that you have the "secret" to that methodology... you're one of my favorite posters in here, have been ever since that mock draft exercise you ran, but when it comes to the Cowboys, you almost always turn to snarling...

No, RS, you do not have the answer here... and neither does Gosselin; he might be quite the draft guru when it comes to making up mock drafts, but when has he ever built a football program??

Goose has no special insight into how to build a team, either, all he has is his opinion... you agree with it, I suspect because it fits your anti-Cowboys agenda... I say anti-Cowboys when it comes to personnel decisions, I know you're a devoted fan... perhaps it would be more accurate to say you're anti-Cowboys management...

Which would have a certain amount of legitimacy, if you were talking about past "regimes" (Phillips, Campo, et cetera)... but you seem to be totally unwilling to step back for even one season and see if Jason Garrett's input, along with that of his assistant coaches, makes a difference here...

I'm quite sure that trade was made with Rob Ryan's enthusiastic approval, and if that's the case, perhaps you should think about tempering your hatred of it... unless, of course, you'd have us believe that you know more about building a good defense than Rob does...

That would bring us back to your peculiar form of arrogance...

I oftgen disagree with personnel moves, sometims I'm proven right, sometimes I'm proven wrong... but I have learned that it's wise to wait and see how a move works out, rather than declaring it wrong at the outset...

Surely you recognize the hostility that your campaign of negativity causes in here, but of course you pass it off as pure homerism... in some cases, you're right, but in some cases the posters are just disgusted by the way you constantly attack every move the Cowboys make, no matter what that move is...

The truth is, the Cowboys DID address their front 7 in the draft, with one defensive linemen, and two linebackers... throw in the free agent signing of Dan Connor, and that makes 4 new prospects to work their way into the front 7 rotation... I call that building from the front...

But you act as if they're going with the status quo... all of which is my typically long-winded way of saying you HAVE checked your brain... your reactions to the moves the Cowboys have made in the recent past aren't well-thought out, reasonable reactions, they're preconditioned, knee-jerk reflexes...

Golden...every word.

[Risen Star]

I have went out of the way not to say anything negative about this draft class, but I will be the first to say that this year would have been a great time to upgrade the trenches. I disagree with the approach that the Cowboys take to team-building. My opinion means nothing just like the rest of the posters on this board, but if I was GM, the trenches would be the strength of this football team. Strength in the trenches wins football games.

Fast forward a calendar year, you'll be proven right. But by that time the minions will convince themselves we're another cornerback or two from the promised land. Yeah, Claiborne and Carr were cool, but think of adding another second or two for the pass rushers with more high priced corners. It's brilliant. Don't upgrade mediocre players. Attempt to create an environment where even mediocre can excel. Even though one has never existed in the history of the NFL.

The Steelers stocked the trenches in the draft. So did the Packers and Eagles. All three teams are superior to the Cowboys. As much as I hate to say it.

[Risen Star]

You talk as if yours is the definitive take, and there is no debate to it...

That's because mine is the definitive take and there isn't a debate about it.

There's opinion and then there's fact. It's a fact that games are won or lost in the trenches.

[big dog cowboy]

Morris Claiborne won't provide any impact to the defense.


You must not have seen the way TNew was utterly abused last year.

[Bluestang]

They were 32nd in the league for defensive passer rating allowing a 107.6 QB rating.

They also allowed 34 TDs through the air that put them at 32nd in the league too.

One more thing too, they only managed to get 8 interceptions all year that unfortunately put them tied for last in the league as well.

[silverbear]

Yes. If the Cowboys front seven plays this year as they did last year, Morris Claiborne won't provide any impact to the defense.

There goes that agenda again... there is absolutely no reason not to expect improvement from our front seven, but you're curiously eager to write them off...

Dan Connor will make a difference on that front 7... he is an upgrade over what we had at ILB...

Kyle Wilber will make a difference on that front 7... he will see time in the DL rotation (obviously, all of these points depend on the player not getting hurt), and will be an improvement over the player he replaces in that rotation... ..

Caleb McSurdy will... OK, McSurdy will probably contribute most on special teams this year...

It is entirely possible that either Adrian Hamilton or Aston Whiteside will claim a roster spot from either Alex Albright or Victor Butler...

Tyrone Crawford will make a difference in that front 7... he will factor into the DL rotation, likely replacing Kenyon Coleman... if he is what the Cowboys think he is, he will upgrade the pass rush from the DL...

Those are just the personnel reasons why it's quite ridiculous to assume that our front 7 is not improved... there are, of course, scheme reasons as well:

The returning front 7 vets will have their first full offseason in Ryan's defense, and that will result in them executing his schemes better...

Improved coverage in the secondary should result in more coverage sacks...

Given all of that, how can you possibly act as if the front seven has not been upgraded?? Answer-- a...g...e...n...d...a...

Bottom line, if these were the moves that Rob Ryan signed off on, I'll trust his judgement over yours... at least until you can show me where you've built a good NFL defense...

I do think there's only one way to build a defense.

You're wrong... but again, permit me to BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA at your suggestion that you know better than Ryan does... it's arrogant, but amusingly so...


You first must win at the line of scrimmage. Until you do, nothing else matters.

Again, you talk as if the Cowboys did absolutely nothing to address that front seven... either that, or you've convinced yourself that Michael Brockers is a future superstar... if the latter is true, I'd be curious as to what you see in his college career that suggests he's a can't miss prospect, rather than the second coming of Marcus Spears...

[silverbear]

Ummmm....

What do you call our third round and fourth round picks?!!!!!!!

Did you know that the NFL draft lasts longer than the first round?

Apparently only first round picks count... LOL...

[silverbear]

For some, it's all about the 1st and 2nd picks..

Everything after those, or in this case, the 1st pick, doesn't matter.

Look at this, RS, even WG is gently mocking your posts in this thread, and I don't know if I've EVER seen her do that to another poster...

That says a lot about your posting style here lately, all by itself...

[silverbear]

I'm not an advocate of Brockers as much as I am the philosophy of building the front seven first.

But if my choice was Brockers and Wagner (who I really like) or Claiborne, I would choose the former and hope Brockers surprises me.

I see-- you'd rather HOPE that the front 7 was improved, instead of KNOWING our dismal CB situation was fixed...

Amazing... simply amazing...

With the way the draft shook out, Cordy Glenn and Peter Konz would have been Dallas Cowboys if I made the decision.

OK, I would have liked that draft... but I like this one, too...

[SilverStarCowboy]

Now I'm telling you, correctly, that Brandon Carr and Morris Claiborne will make zero impact on this defense unless there's a complete turnaround in the front seven.

You can either accept what I'm saying and be right. Or act like you know better and be wrong. It's up to you. I didn't roll out of bed this morning with a theory on cornerbacks. I've simply paid attention over the years and saw how even the best don't matter when the QB operates in a comfortable pocket.



:rolleyes:


TNew and Jenkins severely sucked for the last two consecutive seasons and loved bailing out on plays, it was sickening.


Claiborne and Carr alone make the Front 7 better.

That's discounting Johnson/Pool improving the D, other aquired competing Safties on the Roster, Jenkins being healthy and the new Defensive Backs Coach.

There is more than one way to skin a rabbit.

[silverbear]

I don't need anybody to explain to me how the NFL Draft works. But when a team fails to add a significant FA or a top 2 pick in the draft to the trenches you'd be hard pressed to say there's a heavy emphasis in that area.

Perhaps the Cowboys consider both Bernadeau and Livings to be "significant"...

So once again, we're treated to spectacle of your peculiar form of arrogance, blithely assuming that your opinion is superior to Bill Callahan's...

I don't mean to shock you here, wild man, but just because you don't like a player, it doesn't mean that player sucks... your judgement hardly definitive...

I think what I'm saying here is rather than ranting about your agenda in post after post after post, why don't you sit back and wait to see how the assorted moves pan out in camp, and early in the season?? Is there some urgency to pass judgement today??

I'd think there would be plenty of time to rant if and when you're proven correct... but even more than the static you're running into in this thread, your credibility will be absolutely zero if after all of that ranting, the Boys end up with a significantly improved defense... if they're top 10 at the end of the season, you're gonna look really silly... but if they're unimproved, THEN you'll have reason to rant...

[dstew60105]

I'm not an advocate of Brockers as much as I am the philosophy of building the front seven first.

But if my choice was Brockers and Wagner (who I really like) or Claiborne, I would choose the former and hope Brockers surprises me.

With the way the draft shook out, Cordy Glenn and Peter Konz would have been Dallas Cowboys if I made the decision.


We are all thankful you are not running the team.

[BraveHeartFan]

You talk as if yours is the definitive take, and there is no debate to it...

Well, sorry, hoss, but no less than Jimmy Johnson himself said you win in the NFL with playmakers... he said you do what you can to get playmakers...

Mo Claiborne is a playmaker...

It's a strange kind of arrogance you're afflicted with, your apparent belief that there is one way, and one way only, to build a team, and that you have the "secret" to that methodology... you're one of my favorite posters in here, have been ever since that mock draft exercise you ran, but when it comes to the Cowboys, you almost always turn to snarling...

No, RS, you do not have the answer here... and neither does Gosselin; he might be quite the draft guru when it comes to making up mock drafts, but when has he ever built a football program??

Goose has no special insight into how to build a team, either, all he has is his opinion... you agree with it, I suspect because it fits your anti-Cowboys agenda... I say anti-Cowboys when it comes to personnel decisions, I know you're a devoted fan... perhaps it would be more accurate to say you're anti-Cowboys management...

Which would have a certain amount of legitimacy, if you were talking about past "regimes" (Phillips, Campo, et cetera)... but you seem to be totally unwilling to step back for even one season and see if Jason Garrett's input, along with that of his assistant coaches, makes a difference here...

I'm quite sure that trade was made with Rob Ryan's enthusiastic approval, and if that's the case, perhaps you should think about tempering your hatred of it... unless, of course, you'd have us believe that you know more about building a good defense than Rob does...

That would bring us back to your peculiar form of arrogance...

I oftgen disagree with personnel moves, sometims I'm proven right, sometimes I'm proven wrong... but I have learned that it's wise to wait and see how a move works out, rather than declaring it wrong at the outset...

Surely you recognize the hostility that your campaign of negativity causes in here, but of course you pass it off as pure homerism... in some cases, you're right, but in some cases the posters are just disgusted by the way you constantly attack every move the Cowboys make, no matter what that move is...

The truth is, the Cowboys DID address their front 7 in the draft, with one defensive linemen, and two linebackers... throw in the free agent signing of Dan Connor, and that makes 4 new prospects to work their way into the front 7 rotation... I call that building from the front...

But you act as if they're going with the status quo... all of which is my typically long-winded way of saying you HAVE checked your brain... your reactions to the moves the Cowboys have made in the recent past aren't well-thought out, reasonable reactions, they're preconditioned, knee-jerk reflexes...


It's his typical way of doing everything. If you don't agree with the what he thinks you either checked your brain at the door, his cute and not so clever way of implying people are stupid, or whatever other form of insult he can come up with.


While I, and probably everyone out there agrees, that you need to play well in the trenches I've never seen any great front win championships with a secondary full of corners who can't cover more than 2 seconds.

It doesn't matter if you have 5 D-Wares out there. If you secondary is being beaten within 2 seconds you're not going to do much in the way of pressure, or sacks.



It's why defense has, and always will, go hand in hand. You can't be great at one and bad at the other and expect to win.


Dallas has a solid front. It's not elite, by any means, (Though it does have 1 elite player) but it's a good front that was capable of putting up 40+ sacks with a secondary that was, at the best of times, below average.


Improved secondary play leads to improved line play, which of course in turn leads to even more improved secondary play and over all defensive play.

[BraveHeartFan]

Perhaps the Cowboys consider both Bernadeau and Livings to be "significant"...

So once again, we're treated to spectacle of your peculiar form of arrogance, blithely assuming that your opinion is superior to Bill Callahan's...

I don't mean to shock you here, wild man, but just because you don't like a player, it doesn't mean that player sucks... your judgement hardly definitive...

I think what I'm saying here is rather than ranting about your agenda in post after post after post, why don't you sit back and wait to see how the assorted moves pan out in camp, and early in the season?? Is there some urgency to pass judgement today??

I'd think there would be plenty of time to rant if and when you're proven correct... but even more than the static you're running into in this thread, your credibility will be absolutely zero if after all of that ranting, the Boys end up with a significantly improved defense... if they're top 10 at the end of the season, you're gonna look really silly... but if they're unimproved, THEN you'll have reason to rant...

Excellent post.

But of course there is reason to rush judgment. This way, in case it doesn't work out, he can come in puffing out his chest and saying "See I called it."

Which, believe me, is not something that is new or unique to him. It's a disease on the forums at times.

[BraveHeartFan]

They were 32nd in the league for defensive passer rating allowing a 107.6 QB rating.

They also allowed 34 TDs through the air that put them at 32nd in the league too.

One more thing too, they only managed to get 8 interceptions all year that unfortunately put them tied for last in the league as well.


Oh but man they have a great front seven! This can't possibly be true because with a great front you can live with below average in the back.

[Bluestang]

Oh but man they have a great front seven! This can't possibly be true because with a great front you can live with below average in the back.


I believe the word you are looking for is "mediocre" or that's what I've been told.

[MoClaiborne24]

That's because mine is the definitive take and there isn't a debate about it.

There's opinion and then there's fact. It's a fact that games are won or lost in the trenches.

That's a bold statement. :lmao: (pun intended)

[Randy White]

Gosselin is an idiot for writing that article, just goes to show you he doesnt know squat about football.

:hammer:

[Randy White]

The Claiborne pick, in a vacuum and by itself, can easily be seen as a good move,,, he has a good chance to become a special player. Unfortunately Jerry Jones has continually shown that he does not value the offensive and defensive lines as much as he does the flashy players and he tries to get by with bargain bin big bodies and UDFAs. The end product speaks for itself..

http://www.knowyourdallascowboys.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/98ellis.jpg

over

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/images/10/06/c1main.randy.moss.gi.jpg

furthermore:

From 2000 to 2011 the Cowboys drafted:

23 defensive backs
18 offensive linemen
13 linebackers
11 defensive linemen
8 wide receivers
8 running backs
6 tightends.
2 quarterbacks
2 kickers


And that does not include the amount of money spent in free agency on D-linemen AND O-linemen.

I just want to know when are people going to stop making up their own facts ?

[casmith07]

Dumb article.

[Randy White]

It's a fact that games are won or lost in the trenches.


Then, by all means, the Colts are idiots for picking Luck #1 overall. The Deadskins are truly morons for not only giving up 2 #1s and a #2, but passing on Kalil for this " buss driver " called RGIII. And the Dullphins ? Whew, they're truly stupid for spending a top 10 pick on a QB. They didn't get the memo, I guess.

Since the games are won in the trenches, only idiotic teams spend great amount of resources on the QB position.

[muck4doo]

I've been right for years. I'm just as right now.

You probably celebrated the Newman pick. I told you it was a mistake. You did the same with Jenkins. I knew it meant nothing. Now I'm telling you, correctly, that Brandon Carr and Morris Claiborne will make zero impact on this defense unless there's a complete turnaround in the front seven.

You can either accept what I'm saying and be right. Or act like you know better and be wrong. It's up to you. I didn't roll out of bed this morning with a theory on cornerbacks. I've simply paid attention over the years and saw how even the best don't matter when the QB operates in a comfortable pocket.

Pretty bold statement, but you are still wrong. A Claiborne isn't the type of player that can fall into your lap everyday. How many Everson Walls have we had? Now, how many 5-7 sack type players fell into our lap during that same period? Cowboys absolutely did the right thing here. This is what you aren't getting. The Cowboys front 7 needs help, not complete re-doing. It is our secondary that needed to be completely re-done. The Cowboys did a major step forward in getting Carr and Claiborne to that end.

[SaltwaterServr]

Someone call Child Protective Services. Risen Star's childish agenda is getting beaten again.

[Beast_from_East]

Who else is there? If it's just those two players I'd choose Barron. I'm not talking about forcing front seven picks. Just when there's value with one take him over anything in the secondary.

We failed to seriously upgrade our lines in FA. I was told no worries, we still have the draft. Then we packaged our top two picks on a player playing the same position we just spent 50 million on in March. With first round pick Mike Jenkins and the world's highest paid slot corner Orlando Scandrick already on the roster. This is a clear case of emphasizing the secondary over the front seven and it's flawed.

I believe this is a product of our top two personnel guys not being legitimate. There's no vision in our front office. Shiny new toys wins out. Nuts and bolts football just isn't showy enough.

How do you know this? Look at the stats from last year.....

7th against the rush
7th in sacks
25th in pass defense


Do you not think it is possible that maybe the team analyzed the situation and thought that the secondary was indeed the problem? When you have to play your corners 8-10 yards off the WRs and its 3rd and 5, you dont think having a pair of press corners is "sound football"?


I can clearly see what the strategy is at Valley Ranch, I see what Garrett and Ryan are trying to do and there is nothing "flawed" about it.

My .02

[Beast_from_East]

I've been right for years. I'm just as right now.

You probably celebrated the Newman pick. I told you it was a mistake. You did the same with Jenkins. I knew it meant nothing. Now I'm telling you, correctly, that Brandon Carr and Morris Claiborne will make zero impact on this defense unless there's a complete turnaround in the front seven.

You can either accept what I'm saying and be right. Or act like you know better and be wrong. It's up to you. I didn't roll out of bed this morning with a theory on cornerbacks. I've simply paid attention over the years and saw how even the best don't matter when the QB operates in a comfortable pocket.

Dam dude, why the hell are you not working in somebody's front office with all of this great knowledge and expertise you have?

Somebody of your stature and brain power should not be mingling with us "commoners".

:rolleyes:

[Idgit]

I've been right for years. I'm just as right now.

You probably celebrated the Newman pick. I told you it was a mistake. You did the same with Jenkins. I knew it meant nothing. Now I'm telling you, correctly, that Brandon Carr and Morris Claiborne will make zero impact on this defense unless there's a complete turnaround in the front seven.

You can either accept what I'm saying and be right. Or act like you know better and be wrong. It's up to you. I didn't roll out of bed this morning with a theory on cornerbacks. I've simply paid attention over the years and saw how even the best don't matter when the QB operates in a comfortable pocket.

If you say anything--anything--emphatically enough, it sounds...emphatic. Crazy, maybe, but emphatic.

[ScipioCowboy]

I wasn't enamored of the move when it was first made; however, I didn't realize Claiborne was so highly regarded.

Having said that, if I were going to do something other than what they did, I would've tried to trade down in the first round, snagged DeCastro, and then selected Konz with the second pick.

[ScipioCowboy]

Someone call Child Protective Services. Risen Star's childish agenda is getting beaten again.

So a blonde, brunette, and redhead are working in a pizza parlor...

[silverbear]

Golden...every word.

Let me hasten to stress that I like RS... he's a good guy, he just gets on these kicks where he seems to think he knows the game more than anybody else around, up to and including the Cowboys' staff...

[silverbear]

Fast forward a calendar year, you'll be proven right.

There's that arrogance again...

Listen, if you're so good at predicting the future, can you give me the numbers for the next Mega Millions drawing??

[silverbear]

That's because mine is the definitive take and there isn't a debate about it.

There's opinion and then there's fact.

The fact is, you aren't the expert on the game of football that you fancy yourself to be...

In fact, you're not even close to that good... real football people seem to be nearly unanimous in the opinion that the Cowboys were smart to aggressively upgrade their cornerbacks, that that position cost them several games last year...

Rant on, RS, it's what makes you so popular in here... :D

[silverbear]

We are all thankful you are not running the team.

Amen to that, brutha...

[silverbear]

While I, and probably everyone out there agrees, that you need to play well in the trenches I've never seen any great front win championships with a secondary full of corners who can't cover more than 2 seconds.

It doesn't matter if you have 5 D-Wares out there. If you secondary is being beaten within 2 seconds you're not going to do much in the way of pressure, or sacks.

Clearly, RS doesn't have any grasp on how Rob Ryan's defense works... it can't possibly be successful if you don't have good corners... not just good corners, but corners excel in press coverage...

He doesn't understand that the Cowboys couldn't generate any pass rush last year because Ryan didn't DARE send the blitz... with two good press corners locking down the outside receivers this year, Ryan will be able to dial up those exotic blitzes that he was noted for before coming to Dallas...

That would be true even if the Boys didn't add a single player to their front 7 in the offseason, but of course they did...

[silverbear]

Excellent post.

But of course there is reason to rush judgment. This way, in case it doesn't work out, he can come in puffing out his chest and saying "See I called it."

If that's what he'sw all about, it's a dangerous game, because if it DOES work out, a lot of us are gonna remember his agenda in the offseason, and will take great pleasure in reminding him of it every time he expresses another opinion...

Basically, he has staked all his credibility on the Cowboys' defense not being any better than it was last season... if he's wrong about that, it will be a long time before his opinion is ever taken seriously again on this forum...

I'm as fond of expressing an opinion as anybody in here, but I purely hope I never express those opinions as arrogantly as he does...

That boy has clearly convinced himself that his crap doesn't stink... :D

[silverbear]

That's a bold statement. :lmao: (pun intended)

Uhhhh, you mis-spelled "asinine"... or perhaps you meant "ridiculous"??

[silverbear]

Then, by all means, the Colts are idiots for picking Luck #1 overall. The Deadskins are truly morons for not only giving up 2 #1s and a #2, but passing on Kalil for this " buss driver " called RGIII. And the Dullphins ? Whew, they're truly stupid for spending a top 10 pick on a QB. They didn't get the memo, I guess.

Since the games are won in the trenches, only idiotic teams spend great amount of resources on the QB position.



Yeah, it looks like there's a lot of really dumb teams in the league...

Perhaps one of them should hire Risen Star... :laugh2:

[silverbear]

Pretty bold statement, but you are still wrong.

Think about it, he's telling us that Jimmy Johnson was full of crap when he said in the NFL, you win with playmakers...

So now, he wants us to believe that he has a deeper understanding of the game than Jimmy Johnson...

RIIIIIIIIIIGGGGGGHHHHHHHHTTTTTTTTTT...

[silverbear]

Someone call Child Protective Services. Risen Star's childish agenda is getting beaten again.

When I'm being charitable, I think that it's admirable the way RS sticks to his guns in the face of near universal condemnation... I once went through the same thing on another board when I had the temerity to suggest that Randal Williams sucked... oh man, did I catch heat on that one...

But when I'm in a more realistic than charitable mood, I suspect that he has a masochistic streak, and is doing this because he enjoys being the board's pinata...

[CowboysYanksLakers]

Ummm wrong... Give me a play-maker like Claiborne right now, someone who can take away half of the field, this allows a free man on defense to create havoc.

[muck4doo]

Think about it, he's telling us that Jimmy Johnson was full of crap when he said in the NFL, you win with playmakers...

So now, he wants us to believe that he has a deeper understanding of the game than Jimmy Johnson...

RIIIIIIIIIIGGGGGGHHHHHHHHTTTTTTTTTT...

He means well, but he's just wrong.

[CoCo]

Fast forward a calendar year, you'll be proven right. But by that time the minions will convince themselves we're another cornerback or two from the promised land. Yeah, Claiborne and Carr were cool, but think of adding another second or two for the pass rushers with more high priced corners. It's brilliant. Don't upgrade mediocre players. Attempt to create an environment where even mediocre can excel. Even though one has never existed in the history of the NFL.

The Steelers stocked the trenches in the draft. So did the Packers and Eagles. All three teams are superior to the Cowboys. As much as I hate to say it.

Of course that is precisely what you are adamantly proposing regarding our mediocre CB's.

I would have no problem with your contention of D-line play being more important if your mantra included some balance to it, but it doesn't.

[dooomsday]

:starspin Fast forward a calendar year, you'll be proven right. But by that time the minions will convince themselves we're another cornerback or two from the promised land. Yeah, Claiborne and Carr were cool, but think of adding another second or two for the pass rushers with more high priced corners. It's brilliant. Don't upgrade mediocre players. Attempt to create an environment where even mediocre can excel. Even though one has never existed in the history of the NFL.

The Steelers stocked the trenches in the draft. So did the Packers and Eagles. All three teams are superior to the Cowboys. As much as I hate to say it.

Had you said the same thing after the Giants selected Price Wakawa, Kenny Phillips, Hakeem Nix or Aaron Ross and ignored the trenches in the first you'd be dead wrong today. Youd have to go back to Wiliiam Jopeph in 2003 to find a 1 round pick in the trenches for them, aside from JPP and Mk, or who are edge players. They won 2 SBs during that time.

Eagles signed Namdi even though they had capable starters a year ago and their sacks went thru the roof. From 10th to first in the league.

I am also pretty sure we drafted 3 OLs last year. One of whom rated as a top rookie cornerstone player.

So because you don't really like Brockers but are just arguing the "idea" of taking a better player before him, the idea would have won us games? Lol. Brilliant. Brockers is where the focus needs to be. He would be redundant. We need more pressure and better coverage - not more slobs. He would do nothing for this team. Dime a dozen.

[The Realist]

Yes. If the Cowboys front seven plays this year as they did last year, Morris Claiborne won't provide any impact to the defense.

Until we can make opposing QBs uncomfortable, our secondary will get picked apart. I know Randy Galloway mentioned this a while ago in his farewell to Terence Newman. That no CB on the planet could have succeeded in this defense last year.

It's like we just drafted Calvin Johnson. But Rex Grossman is our QB.

I do think there's only one way to build a defense. I've never seen it work the other way. You first must win at the line of scrimmage. Until you do, nothing else matters.

Last year we were 7th in sack and vs. the run.

We could't cover anyone to save our lives.

[burmafrd]

Let me hasten to stress that I like RS... he's a good guy, he just gets on these kicks where he seems to think he knows the game more than anybody else around, up to and including the Cowboys' staff...

well lets be honest here: just how often have the Staff screwed things up?
That point is not without SOME merit.

[newlander]

The Claiborne pick, in a vacuum and by itself, can easily be seen as a good move,,, he has a good chance to become a special player. Unfortunately Jerry Jones has continually shown that he does not value the offensive and defensive lines as much as he does the flashy players and he tries to get by with bargain bin big bodies and UDFAs. The end product speaks for itself.

If the team invests quality picks on the DL and OL players over the next few drafts then the Claiborne pick will not be wasted,,, if it's "Jerry as usual" for the next few drafts then Gosselin will be right and the drought will continue.




.............this is correct: but Risen Star is right as well and I've been screaming it for 15 years on BOTH sides of the line: DOMINATE ON THE INTERIOR.......but they don't want to build the team like that. They are stubborn and stupid and they've only won 1 playoff game in that time because of it. The Giants, Steelers, Pack, etc....are all built this way....

[newlander]

When I'm being charitable, I think that it's admirable the way RS sticks to his guns in the face of near universal condemnation... I once went through the same thing on another board when I had the temerity to suggest that Randal Williams sucked... oh man, did I catch heat on that one...

But when I'm in a more realistic than charitable mood, I suspect that he has a masochistic streak, and is doing this because he enjoys being the board's pinata...



......as usual you are wrong and attack anyone who disagrees with you. The proof is in the pudding. Are you happy with this team's results and their drafting philosophy? Of course you aren't but you'd rather walk across hot coals and rip people on this board than admit it. Pathetic............:rolleyes:

[Bluestang]

......as usual you are wrong and attack anyone who disagrees with you. The proof is in the pudding. Are you happy with this team's results and their drafting philosophy? Of course you aren't but you'd rather walk across hot coals and rip people on this board than admit it. Pathetic............:rolleyes:


The Minnesota Vikings have a great front 7 but somehow they managed to place dead last in defending the pass.

I get upgrading the trenches (which I agree with) but RS's philosophy of using mediocre corners is where I draw the line because the two go hand in hand.

Our front 7 was top ten last year, but the coverage was not. There was a clear need to improve it.

[EGG]

Wow, I'm gone 24hrs and come back to find the usual suspects have constructed an entire straw man army! I applaud your industriousness :)

[Dodger12]

Risen Star has been consistent in his opinion from day one that we needed an emphasis on the lines. Pre-draft and pre-free agency, most people here agreed. In mock after mock, posters here emphasized the line(s) and many were pimping DeCastro and poster after poster sent accolades and threw roses at each other for such a fine mock. A real mutual admiration society.

Fast forward to post draft and RS questions our philosophy (not the pick or quality of the player) and the typical lynch mob comes out in force.

One of our esteemed posters wrote the following prior to the draft:

The Giants proved once again this season that impact an elite pass rusher can have. Having 2 or 3 of them is like having a huge bottle of wart-be-gone. It doesn't hardly matter what the rest of the defense is doing when the opposing QB is eating dirt every other play. ……………… However, I think the Giants have laid out a very simple blueprint, you just keep drafting pass rushers, every draft. It doesn't matter if you already have Tuck, Kiwanuka, and Umenyoira, you take JPP anyway. This is why I think you'll see the Cowboys select someone they think can translate to the next level as a pass rusher. If none of those guys are there when they pick, then they take Decastro. Just my gut feeling.

And, as typical, people here rode his jock and didn't so much as mention the arguments they're making here.

Now all of a sudden, the trenches don't matter. Somehow people think we didn't blitz when this team has lived (and died) by the blitz from the time Wade was here. I saw a front 7 that, with the exception of Ware, hit a wall and couldn't so much as pressure the QB. We approved of Rob Ryan as DC because we thought his "exotic" blitzes could help our front 7 get to the QB and hide our deficiencies because Wade was "too vanilla." Yes, that's it....it was the scheme, not the players. I also saw our QB under duress for two seasons and miss playing time because he got pummeled.

Another of our esteemed posters wrote the following:

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury. When was this once proud franchise a dynasty? When we had an OL that was opening holes for our running game and protecting our QB.

2011...5 rushing TDs
2010...10 rushing TDs
2009...14 rushing TDs
2008...12 rushing TDs

41 TDs over a 4 year span.

Contrast that to Emmitt Smith alone over the 4 year span of our Dynasty years.

1992...18 rushing TDs
1993...9 rushing TDs
1994...21 rushing TDs
1995...25 rushing TDs

73 rushing TDs over a 4 year span and this doesn't even allow for the rest of the team.

Fix the OL, open holes for Murray and protect Tony Romo. This team cannot be beat.

Again, very few posters questioned this philosophy and continued to sing praises.......that is, until after the draft and now, once again, the trenches don't matter. If there's one thing that's consistent around here it's that the usual posters will be inconsistent. It all depends what the Cowboys do and then they'll turn on a dime to defend it.

Think about it, he's telling us that Jimmy Johnson was full of crap when he said in the NFL, you win with playmakers...

So now, he wants us to believe that he has a deeper understanding of the game than Jimmy Johnson...

RIIIIIIIIIIGGGGGGHHHHHHHHTTTTTTTTTT...

Funny that you used Jimmy to defend a position. Jimmy built the most dominant OL and DL in the game during that era. Jimmy understood the missing piece at that time was a DL (Haley) who could pressure the QB and was quite content to take the field with Larry Brown.

[dwmyers]

When Gosselin speaks about football, you listen -- and do the opposite.

Some time after Leonard Davis was drafted by Arizona, Goose went off on a long essay about how oversized lines were the future and the Arizona line was the prototype for how offensive lines should be built.

That line was never better than average, soon was torn apart. Lines never got that big again, though the Cowboys 2007 line approached it, with Flo and Bigg. And big lines in general seem to have problems with small nifty pass rushers.

I have to agree with theo, when Rick is a reporter, he's good, and when he delivers an opinion, it's noise, in the Nassim Taleb (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fooled_by_Randomness) sense.

D-

[MetalHead]

If Claiborne fell to 14 where we were originally, you might have a point. But since he didn't, you don't.

He didn't fall into our lap. We aggressively got into position to take him. And it cost us our 2nd round pick.

Sorry. I refuse to check my brain at the door to support this team. Goose is 100% correct in that you build from the front back. Claiborne is a true blue chip CB prospect on a team weak in the trenches. Just doesn't make any sense to me.

Maybe in two years he can be a great playmaker once this team fixes the lines, if they do fix it. Right now he's a complete non factor. Like Newman. Like Jenkins. Like Nnamdi, DRC, and Asante in Philly, or any other cornerback on a team that can't win at the line of scrimmage.

For the love of God,please stop crying already.
It's done,nothing you can do about it.
Get.Over.It.

[dwmyers]

Jerry Jones doesn't value the offensive and defensive lines? Hatcher was a 3rd round pick. Other members of the defensive front 7 were high picks -- Ware and Spencer were 1st rounders and Lee and Carter were 2nd rounders. That's 4 out of 7 players on the front 7 who were taken in the 1st and 2nd routes and 5 out of 7 players taken in the first three rounds. Victor Butler was a 4th rounder as was Brady James and Chris Canty and Kevin Burnett was another 2nd rounder. That's hardly ignoring your defensive line.

Marcus Spears is a 1st rounder. So by your count, 5 of the 7 front liners are 1st or 2nd round draft picks.

It should be noted though, that Joe Dallas Cowboy DE got between 400 to 500 snaps. If a defense has 1000 snaps in a season, a typical Dallas DE only plays 40 to 45% of the time.

Stephen Bowen, by contrast, played over 800 snaps for the Redskins.

D-

[rocyaice]

If Claiborne fell to 14 where we were originally, you might have a point. But since he didn't, you don't.

He didn't fall into our lap. We aggressively got into position to take him. And it cost us our 2nd round pick.

Sorry. I refuse to check my brain at the door to support this team. Goose is 100% correct in that you build from the front back. Claiborne is a true blue chip CB prospect on a team weak in the trenches. Just doesn't make any sense to me.

Maybe in two years he can be a great playmaker once this team fixes the lines, if they do fix it. Right now he's a complete non factor. Like Newman. Like Jenkins. Like Nnamdi, DRC, and Asante in Philly, or any other cornerback on a team that can't win at the line of scrimmage.


Cowboys did not only trade up for a cornerback but they also traded up for a player who has a bigger chance of being a playmaker in this league than who they could've got at Brockers. What if Brockers flops? Claiborne could flop as well but you can't sit here and tell me you feel more confident about Brockers being a starter in this league and having a huge impact as you do about Claiborne.

For the Cowboys to trade up and get Brockers tells me they feel more confident about their defensive line than they do their secondary.

[Eddie]

Washington gave up 2 1st rounders and a 2nd to move up 4 spots!!

Why do we always try to compare ourselves to the Redskins? It's like saying, "Hey, I'm not the dumbest kid in the class ... Danny is!"

Does that make you feel better?

I'm not thrilled with giving up a premium pick either. It wasn't necessary. We need help ALL over.

Had we REALLY coveted a CB, Kirkpatrick was there for us at #14 ... AND we could have retained our 2nd rounder for Konz.

But the world is filled with What-if's. I'm hoping for the best. I'll believe it when I see it.

We went 1-4 and have had horrible December stretches for the primary reason of lack of depth. We have a solid group of starters, but once they start getting hurt ... we have nothing behind them. That's why we get killed in December.

[Avenger]

"Gosselin: I would have stayed at 14 and taken Brockers...."


Who's Gosselin? Another locker room glimpser with an opinion?

I rest my case.

[TheSport78]

Didn't Rex Ryan build from the secondary in?

The Jets aren't even close to having an elite front 7, but they get the job done because they believe in the system.

[BraveHeartFan]

Let me hasten to stress that I like RS... he's a good guy, he just gets on these kicks where he seems to think he knows the game more than anybody else around, up to and including the Cowboys' staff...

Good people don't feel the need to try and proclaim everyone else stupid if they don't agree with them. Which is exactly what this guy does.

With everything.

Don't agree with him? You're an idiot.

Don't think he's right? You checked your brain at the door.

Don't think he's the God of football knowledge you're stupid.


He's actually one of the worst posters that this forum has had. Thank God for the ignore button.


If that's what he'sw all about, it's a dangerous game, because if it DOES work out, a lot of us are gonna remember his agenda in the offseason, and will take great pleasure in reminding him of it every time he expresses another opinion...

Basically, he has staked all his credibility on the Cowboys' defense not being any better than it was last season... if he's wrong about that, it will be a long time before his opinion is ever taken seriously again on this forum...

I'm as fond of expressing an opinion as anybody in here, but I purely hope I never express those opinions as arrogantly as he does...

That boy has clearly convinced himself that his crap doesn't stink... :D

His opinion lost all credibility long ago. He's about as credible as Bob at this point.

[Future]

If our secondary improves so will our line.
Yup. Defense is reciprocal. It's also quite possible that the Cowboys brass feels comfortable with where we are at in the front 7. Whether they're right or not, idk. But it seems like that's probably their approach.

I really think DB was the right approach this season. Just think of all the passes Sheli completed on 1 and 3 step drops. Dozens. Doesn't matter who you have rushing the passer if quick slants and WR screens are going for 8 yards every time they are attempted.

[Marktui]

Wasn't Goose the one that stated that you win with blue chippers on your squad?

I know that the pass rush helps out the secondary. But the secondary could also help out the pass rush. The Giants had a fierce pass rush, but they also went 9-7 and had to fight to get into the playoffs. They did have a good blueprint and their pass rush got hot at the right time.

But who's to say what we did will not work out for us? It makes for good debating, but no one really knows how this is going to play out until we get in Oxnard and the live bullets start to fly.

[Ender]

If Claiborne fell to 14 where we were originally, you might have a point. But since he didn't, you don't.

He didn't fall into our lap. We aggressively got into position to take him. And it cost us our 2nd round pick.

Sorry. I refuse to check my brain at the door to support this team. Goose is 100% correct in that you build from the front back. Claiborne is a true blue chip CB prospect on a team weak in the trenches. Just doesn't make any sense to me.

Maybe in two years he can be a great playmaker once this team fixes the lines, if they do fix it. Right now he's a complete non factor. Like Newman. Like Jenkins. Like Nnamdi, DRC, and Asante in Philly, or any other cornerback on a team that can't win at the line of scrimmage.

Dude, give it a rest already. Your arguments were old a week ago.

[Ender]

Risen Star has been consistent in his opinion from day one that we needed an emphasis on the lines. Pre-draft and pre-free agency, most people here agreed. In mock after mock, posters here emphasized the line(s) and many were pimping DeCastro and poster after poster sent accolades and threw roses at each other for such a fine mock. A real mutual admiration society.

Fast forward to post draft and RS questions our philosophy (not the pick or quality of the player) and the typical lynch mob comes out in force.

One of our esteemed posters wrote the following prior to the draft:



And, as typical, people here rode his jock and didn't so much as mention the arguments they're making here.

Now all of a sudden, the trenches don't matter. Somehow people think we didn't blitz when this team has lived (and died) by the blitz from the time Wade was here. I saw a front 7 that, with the exception of Ware, hit a wall and couldn't so much as pressure the QB. We approved of Rob Ryan as DC because we thought his "exotic" blitzes could help our front 7 get to the QB and hide our deficiencies because Wade was "too vanilla." Yes, that's it....it was the scheme, not the players. I also saw our QB under duress for two seasons and miss playing time because he got pummeled.

Another of our esteemed posters wrote the following:



Again, very few posters questioned this philosophy and continued to sing praises.......that is, until after the draft and now, once again, the trenches don't matter. If there's one thing that's consistent around here it's that the usual posters will be inconsistent. It all depends what the Cowboys do and then they'll turn on a dime to defend it.



Funny that you used Jimmy to defend a position. Jimmy built the most dominant OL and DL in the game during that era. Jimmy understood the missing piece at that time was a DL (Haley) who could pressure the QB and was quite content to take the field with Larry Brown.

Thats great. Now what do other posters here suppose to do? Complain all day, because the team isn't addressing position you feel are a need? Regardless whose right or wrong, there nothing anyone here could do about it. Moreover, regardless what you and others who are complaining about the o an d lines, the fact of the matter the secondary were arguably worst than both those units for the last 2 seasons.

[ringmaster]

You talk as if yours is the definitive take, and there is no debate to it...

Well, sorry, hoss, but no less than Jimmy Johnson himself said you win in the NFL with playmakers... he said you do what you can to get playmakers...

Mo Claiborne is a playmaker...

It's a strange kind of arrogance you're afflicted with, your apparent belief that there is one way, and one way only, to build a team, and that you have the "secret" to that methodology... you're one of my favorite posters in here, have been ever since that mock draft exercise you ran, but when it comes to the Cowboys, you almost always turn to snarling...

No, RS, you do not have the answer here... and neither does Gosselin; he might be quite the draft guru when it comes to making up mock drafts, but when has he ever built a football program??

Goose has no special insight into how to build a team, either, all he has is his opinion... you agree with it, I suspect because it fits your anti-Cowboys agenda... I say anti-Cowboys when it comes to personnel decisions, I know you're a devoted fan... perhaps it would be more accurate to say you're anti-Cowboys management...

Which would have a certain amount of legitimacy, if you were talking about past "regimes" (Phillips, Campo, et cetera)... but you seem to be totally unwilling to step back for even one season and see if Jason Garrett's input, along with that of his assistant coaches, makes a difference here...

I'm quite sure that trade was made with Rob Ryan's enthusiastic approval, and if that's the case, perhaps you should think about tempering your hatred of it... unless, of course, you'd have us believe that you know more about building a good defense than Rob does...

That would bring us back to your peculiar form of arrogance...

I oftgen disagree with personnel moves, sometims I'm proven right, sometimes I'm proven wrong... but I have learned that it's wise to wait and see how a move works out, rather than declaring it wrong at the outset...

Surely you recognize the hostility that your campaign of negativity causes in here, but of course you pass it off as pure homerism... in some cases, you're right, but in some cases the posters are just disgusted by the way you constantly attack every move the Cowboys make, no matter what that move is...

The truth is, the Cowboys DID address their front 7 in the draft, with one defensive linemen, and two linebackers... throw in the free agent signing of Dan Connor, and that makes 4 new prospects to work their way into the front 7 rotation... I call that building from the front...

But you act as if they're going with the status quo... all of which is my typically long-winded way of saying you HAVE checked your brain... your reactions to the moves the Cowboys have made in the recent past aren't well-thought out, reasonable reactions, they're preconditioned, knee-jerk reflexes... Ouch you tell him SB.

[AdamJT13]

Wasn't Goose the one that stated that you win with blue chippers on your squad?

Goose's M.O. is to change his argument as necessary to make the Cowboys look worse. If we had stayed at 14 and taken Brockers, he would have criticized us for not trading up to get "an impact player" at "a premier position" after Claiborne fell to sixth overall. He would have said that Brockers is not a pass-rusher or a difference-maker. If we had traded down and added another pick in the second round, he would have criticized us for not getting one of the 15 best players in the draft and would have pointed out our previous failures in the second round. Instead, we traded up for one of the elite players in the draft and a premier position, so he criticizes us for not keeping our second-round pick.

It's easy to see that this is how he operates when you go back and see what he said before the draft, such as this article with the title "Why Cowboys should dig deep to take away ballhawking CB from draft."

http://www.dallasnews.com/sports/columnists/rick-gosselin/20120223-gosselin-why-cowboys-should-dig-deep-to-take-away-ballhawking-cb-from-draft.ece

A few pre-draft comments from Goose in this article --

"the most pressing need is at cornerback"

"a failure in pass coverage doomed the Cowboys"

"The Cowboys forced only 25 turnovers last season with 15 interceptions. The Super Bowl champion Giants with their 29th-ranked pass defense had five more interceptions and five more takeaways."

"forget the 40 times. Look at the interception count. Look for cornerbacks whose game is making plays"

"Takeaways are a defensive culture, but that culture has been dormant at Valley Ranch for better than two decade now. The Cowboys need to add some ballhawks on defense."


Of course, now that we've added the best cornerback in the draft, who also happens to be the best ballhawk in the draft, not to mention the safety who had the most interceptions in the draft (a "small-school prospect" like the ones who Goose said we should look at), he has changed his tune and hasn't said anything about the creating turnovers, which was so uber-important to him before the draft.

[SilverStarCowboy]

It would be nice to see a dominant interior on both sides of the ball, the best the Draft had to Offer was taking Brockers at 14 to play NT or Trading down for G/C DeCastro.

Instead Dallas totally trumped both scenarios talentwise. As it stands Dallas still has a chance in Free Agency before/after cuts and training camp for addressing the trenches.


Meanwhile there is nothing to complain about because the Secondary has been secured with a Premium Player. After tossing TNew to the curb, another weakness had to be adressed.


Besides, hard to argue that Dallas didn't aquire the very best player that was available in the entire 2012 Draft process in CB Morris Claiborne.

[muck4doo]

Goose's M.O. is to change his argument as necessary to make the Cowboys look worse. If we had stayed at 14 and taken Brockers, he would have criticized us for not trading up to get "an impact player" at "a premier position" after Claiborne fell to sixth overall. He would have said that Brockers is not a pass-rusher or a difference-maker. If we had traded down and added another pick in the second round, he would have criticized us for not getting one of the 15 best players in the draft and would have pointed out our previous failures in the second round. Instead, we traded up for one of the elite players in the draft and a premier position, so he criticizes us for not keeping our second-round pick.

It's easy to see that this is how he operates when you go back and see what he said before the draft, such as this article with the title "Why Cowboys should dig deep to take away ballhawking CB from draft."

http://www.dallasnews.com/sports/columnists/rick-gosselin/20120223-gosselin-why-cowboys-should-dig-deep-to-take-away-ballhawking-cb-from-draft.ece

A few pre-draft comments from Goose in this article --

"the most pressing need is at cornerback"

"a failure in pass coverage doomed the Cowboys"

"The Cowboys forced only 25 turnovers last season with 15 interceptions. The Super Bowl champion Giants with their 29th-ranked pass defense had five more interceptions and five more takeaways."

"forget the 40 times. Look at the interception count. Look for cornerbacks whose game is making plays"

"Takeaways are a defensive culture, but that culture has been dormant at Valley Ranch for better than two decade now. The Cowboys need to add some ballhawks on defense."


Of course, now that we've added the best cornerback in the draft, who also happens to be the best ballhawk in the draft, not to mention the safety who had the most interceptions in the draft (a "small-school prospect" like the ones who Goose said we should look at), he has changed his tune and hasn't said anything about the creating turnovers, which was so uber-important to him before the draft.

Bravo! You nailed it.:hammer:

[Bluestang]

Goose's M.O. is to change his argument as necessary to make the Cowboys look worse. If we had stayed at 14 and taken Brockers, he would have criticized us for not trading up to get "an impact player" at "a premier position" after Claiborne fell to sixth overall. He would have said that Brockers is not a pass-rusher or a difference-maker. If we had traded down and added another pick in the second round, he would have criticized us for not getting one of the 15 best players in the draft and would have pointed out our previous failures in the second round. Instead, we traded up for one of the elite players in the draft and a premier position, so he criticizes us for not keeping our second-round pick.

It's easy to see that this is how he operates when you go back and see what he said before the draft, such as this article with the title "Why Cowboys should dig deep to take away ballhawking CB from draft."

http://www.dallasnews.com/sports/columnists/rick-gosselin/20120223-gosselin-why-cowboys-should-dig-deep-to-take-away-ballhawking-cb-from-draft.ece

A few pre-draft comments from Goose in this article --

"the most pressing need is at cornerback"

"a failure in pass coverage doomed the Cowboys"

"The Cowboys forced only 25 turnovers last season with 15 interceptions. The Super Bowl champion Giants with their 29th-ranked pass defense had five more interceptions and five more takeaways."

"forget the 40 times. Look at the interception count. Look for cornerbacks whose game is making plays"

"Takeaways are a defensive culture, but that culture has been dormant at Valley Ranch for better than two decade now. The Cowboys need to add some ballhawks on defense."


Of course, now that we've added the best cornerback in the draft, who also happens to be the best ballhawk in the draft, not to mention the safety who had the most interceptions in the draft (a "small-school prospect" like the ones who Goose said we should look at), he has changed his tune and hasn't said anything about the creating turnovers, which was so uber-important to him before the draft.


This applies to the all DFW media.

[BraveHeartFan]

Goose's M.O. is to change his argument as necessary to make the Cowboys look worse. If we had stayed at 14 and taken Brockers, he would have criticized us for not trading up to get "an impact player" at "a premier position" after Claiborne fell to sixth overall. He would have said that Brockers is not a pass-rusher or a difference-maker. If we had traded down and added another pick in the second round, he would have criticized us for not getting one of the 15 best players in the draft and would have pointed out our previous failures in the second round. Instead, we traded up for one of the elite players in the draft and a premier position, so he criticizes us for not keeping our second-round pick.

It's easy to see that this is how he operates when you go back and see what he said before the draft, such as this article with the title "Why Cowboys should dig deep to take away ballhawking CB from draft."

http://www.dallasnews.com/sports/columnists/rick-gosselin/20120223-gosselin-why-cowboys-should-dig-deep-to-take-away-ballhawking-cb-from-draft.ece

A few pre-draft comments from Goose in this article --

"the most pressing need is at cornerback"

"a failure in pass coverage doomed the Cowboys"

"The Cowboys forced only 25 turnovers last season with 15 interceptions. The Super Bowl champion Giants with their 29th-ranked pass defense had five more interceptions and five more takeaways."

"forget the 40 times. Look at the interception count. Look for cornerbacks whose game is making plays"

"Takeaways are a defensive culture, but that culture has been dormant at Valley Ranch for better than two decade now. The Cowboys need to add some ballhawks on defense."


Of course, now that we've added the best cornerback in the draft, who also happens to be the best ballhawk in the draft, not to mention the safety who had the most interceptions in the draft (a "small-school prospect" like the ones who Goose said we should look at), he has changed his tune and hasn't said anything about the creating turnovers, which was so uber-important to him before the draft.

Yep. Typical Goose. Which is exactly why I feel that much better about what Dallas did. If Goose says he doesn't like it then it was definately the right way to go.

[silverbear]

Goose's M.O. is to change his argument as necessary to make the Cowboys look worse. If we had stayed at 14 and taken Brockers, he would have criticized us for not trading up to get "an impact player" at "a premier position" after Claiborne fell to sixth overall. He would have said that Brockers is not a pass-rusher or a difference-maker. If we had traded down and added another pick in the second round, he would have criticized us for not getting one of the 15 best players in the draft and would have pointed out our previous failures in the second round. Instead, we traded up for one of the elite players in the draft and a premier position, so he criticizes us for not keeping our second-round pick.

It's easy to see that this is how he operates when you go back and see what he said before the draft, such as this article with the title "Why Cowboys should dig deep to take away ballhawking CB from draft."

http://www.dallasnews.com/sports/columnists/rick-gosselin/20120223-gosselin-why-cowboys-should-dig-deep-to-take-away-ballhawking-cb-from-draft.ece

A few pre-draft comments from Goose in this article --

"the most pressing need is at cornerback"

"a failure in pass coverage doomed the Cowboys"

"The Cowboys forced only 25 turnovers last season with 15 interceptions. The Super Bowl champion Giants with their 29th-ranked pass defense had five more interceptions and five more takeaways."

"forget the 40 times. Look at the interception count. Look for cornerbacks whose game is making plays"

"Takeaways are a defensive culture, but that culture has been dormant at Valley Ranch for better than two decade now. The Cowboys need to add some ballhawks on defense."


Of course, now that we've added the best cornerback in the draft, who also happens to be the best ballhawk in the draft, not to mention the safety who had the most interceptions in the draft (a "small-school prospect" like the ones who Goose said we should look at), he has changed his tune and hasn't said anything about the creating turnovers, which was so uber-important to him before the draft.

Man, you know how to debate-- bring the facts...

I wonder if Gosselin knows he just got *****-slapped... :D

[Dash28]

Goose's M.O. is to change his argument as necessary to make the Cowboys look worse. If we had stayed at 14 and taken Brockers, he would have criticized us for not trading up to get "an impact player" at "a premier position" after Claiborne fell to sixth overall. He would have said that Brockers is not a pass-rusher or a difference-maker. If we had traded down and added another pick in the second round, he would have criticized us for not getting one of the 15 best players in the draft and would have pointed out our previous failures in the second round. Instead, we traded up for one of the elite players in the draft and a premier position, so he criticizes us for not keeping our second-round pick.

It's easy to see that this is how he operates when you go back and see what he said before the draft, such as this article with the title "Why Cowboys should dig deep to take away ballhawking CB from draft."

http://www.dallasnews.com/sports/columnists/rick-gosselin/20120223-gosselin-why-cowboys-should-dig-deep-to-take-away-ballhawking-cb-from-draft.ece

A few pre-draft comments from Goose in this article --

"the most pressing need is at cornerback"

"a failure in pass coverage doomed the Cowboys"

"The Cowboys forced only 25 turnovers last season with 15 interceptions. The Super Bowl champion Giants with their 29th-ranked pass defense had five more interceptions and five more takeaways."

"forget the 40 times. Look at the interception count. Look for cornerbacks whose game is making plays"

"Takeaways are a defensive culture, but that culture has been dormant at Valley Ranch for better than two decade now. The Cowboys need to add some ballhawks on defense."


Of course, now that we've added the best cornerback in the draft, who also happens to be the best ballhawk in the draft, not to mention the safety who had the most interceptions in the draft (a "small-school prospect" like the ones who Goose said we should look at), he has changed his tune and hasn't said anything about the creating turnovers, which was so uber-important to him before the draft.

Hammer. Nail.

[jnday]

Thats great. Now what do other posters here suppose to do? Complain all day, because the team isn't addressing position you feel are a need? Regardless whose right or wrong, there nothing anyone here could do about it. Moreover, regardless what you and others who are complaining about the o an d lines, the fact of the matter the secondary were arguably worst than both those units for the last 2 seasons.

You are right when you say that there is nothing that can be done about the way that the draft played out, but I do think Risen should be able to voice his opinion. Like it or not, Dallas could use some upgrades in the trenches. Risen doesn't have a problem expressing his opinion on it. His stance on the trenches has been the same for a long time. I agree with a previous post that stated he has been constant with his views when many others have flip flopped. Risen has taken a bad wrap at times, but he brings a good bit of info to this board. He post some good articles in the News Forum, many more than some of the ones bashing him. This place would be boring if everybody agreed with every move the Cowboys make.

[Bluestang]

You are right when you say that there is nothing that can be done about the way that the draft played out, but I do think Risen should be able to voice his opinion. Like it or not, Dallas could use some upgrades in the trenches. Risen doesn't have a problem expressing his opinion on it. His stance on the trenches has been the same for a long time. I agree with a previous post that stated he has been constant with his views when many others have flip flopped. Risen has taken a bad wrap at times, but he brings a good bit of info to this board. He post some good articles in the News Forum, many more than some of the ones bashing him. This place would be boring if everybody agreed with every move the Cowboys make.


Well when you post an article from a media source that flip flops on the issue at hand it doesn't really bring any sort of real contribution to the forum does it?

[Dodger12]

Well when you post an article from a media source that flip flops on the issue at hand it doesn't really bring any sort of real contribution to the forum does it?

Sure it does. But your initial beef was with the content of the article not the fact that he may have flip flopped on the subject.

[Bluestang]

Sure it does. But your initial beef was with the content of the article not the fact that he may have flip flopped on the subject.


My beef has not been with the article because I take what the entire DFW media reports with a grain of salt.

My beef has been RS's stance on building an elite front 7 backed with a mediocre secondary. The Vikings are a good example of what he wants and that doesn't translate to more Ws.

[burmafrd]

My beef has not been with the article because I take what the entire DFW media reports with a grain of salt.

My beef has been RS's stance on building an elite front 7 backed with a mediocre secondary. The Vikings are a good example of what he wants and that doesn't translate to more Ws.

In 2007 the Giants won the SB. Name their secondary. But everyone remembers their D Line. And frankly it was their D line that got it done

[Dodger12]

My beef has not been with the article because I take what the entire DFW media reports with a grain of salt.

My beef has been RS's stance on building an elite front 7 backed with a mediocre secondary. The Vikings are a good example of what he wants and that doesn't translate to more Ws.

It's his opinion and it's probably shared by good football men, including Jimmy Johnson who realized the value of Charles Haley. We became a dynasty (partly) with dominant lines. I just don't see a whole lot of debate to a position that getting pressure is the key to a dominant defense.

And having a good front 7 won't always translate to wins when you don't have a QB to put points on the board. Having a franchise QB hides a lot of warts.

[dfense]

If Claiborne fell to 14 where we were originally, you might have a point. But since he didn't, you don't.

He didn't fall into our lap. We aggressively got into position to take him. And it cost us our 2nd round pick.

Sorry. I refuse to check my brain at the door to support this team. Goose is 100% correct in that you build from the front back. Claiborne is a true blue chip CB prospect on a team weak in the trenches. Just doesn't make any sense to me.

Maybe in two years he can be a great playmaker once this team fixes the lines, if they do fix it. Right now he's a complete non factor. Like Newman. Like Jenkins. Like Nnamdi, DRC, and Asante in Philly, or any other cornerback on a team that can't win at the line of scrimmage.Sorry, I disagree. Brockers doesn't appear to be anything special. They were able to get possibly the best CB to come out in years. When you get a chance to get a blue chip player, especially one that comes cheap for four years, is a brilliant move. Taking Brockers would have been business as usual. They need to take chances. Way to go Jerrah.

[Bluestang]

In 2007 the Giants won the SB. Name their secondary. But everyone remembers their D Line. And frankly it was their D line that got it done

Starters:

Aaron Ross, Sam Madison, James Butler, Gibril Wilson - they had 12 interceptions between the four of them.



You get a cookie if you can tell me what rounds the two corners drafted in.

[Bluestang]

It's his opinion and it's probably shared by good football men, including Jimmy Johnson who realized the value of Charles Haley. We became a dynasty (partly) with dominant lines. I just don't see a whole lot of debate to a position that getting pressure is the key to a dominant defense.

And having a good front 7 won't always translate to wins when you don't have a QB to put points on the board. Having a franchise QB hides a lot of warts.


Let me be clear here:

I thought our front 7 was good last season. Could it have used an upgrade?

Of course it could have but the secondary needed alot more help. Specifically Terrance Newman would play 10 yds off man coverage on the guy across him on 3rd and short situations. Whether it was due to injury of loss of confidence he got abused so much so that Rob had to use a safety to help him alot which restricted his defense. Our defensive passer rating was atrocious despite the fact that we were able to be tied in top 10 in sacks in the league.

Jenkins is coming off a major shoulder injury that will sideline him through camp. Relying on his shoulder to hold up the entire season is a huge gamble, one that doesn't give me the warm fuzzies.

The first FA we targeted was Carr, a press man physical corner that will play to the style rob wants his corners to play. Up until the draft we only had 3 corners on the roster, one of them still recovering from a major injury.

About a month before the draft, in Wulfman's threads, I had the feeling that Dallas would target a CB with the first pick. I thought it would be Gilmore, but Claiborne is a nice prize instead.

[MichaelWinicki]

Someone should forward Adam's response to "the goose".

[jnday]

Well when you post an article from a media source that flip flops on the issue at hand it doesn't really bring any sort of real contribution to the forum does it?

It brings several pages pages of debate. What would this place be without it?

[Risen Star]

My beef has not been with the article because I take what the entire DFW media reports with a grain of salt.

My beef has been RS's stance on building an elite front 7 backed with a mediocre secondary. The Vikings are a good example of what he wants and that doesn't translate to more Ws.

My stance is when your front seven is so flawed, nothing you do in the secondary will matter.

It's why we saw no impact with the additions of Terence Newman or Mike Jenkins. It's also why all of our corners looked bad last year. It wasn't that they couldn't play. They were never put into a position to play well. Carr and/or Claiborne would have also struggled on this defense last year.

You build from the front back. Always. Or you don't know what you're doing.

[Risen Star]

Someone should forward Adam's response to "the goose".

I know what his response would be. That he never suggested packaging your 1st and 2nd round picks for that player. Which is kind of the whole point he was making with his comments in this thread.

[Smith22]

It's like we just drafted Calvin Johnson. But Rex Grossman is our QB.



Yeah. If you disregard the fact that we have Ware and Ratliff up front....................

[Risen Star]

Yeah. If you disregard the fact that we have Ware and Ratliff up front....................

Ware.

Ratliff hasn't been an impact player in a couple of years.

We have Ware. And Sean Lee. Who isn't a pressure player.

[Chocolate Lab]

Goose's M.O. is to change his argument as necessary to make the Cowboys look worse.:fact:

Always has been. He's basically a professional Cowboys troll.

Some complaining about the media is just whining, but with Gosselin it's legit.

[Canada180]

:fact:

Always has been. He's basically a professional Cowboys troll.

Some complaining about the media is just whining, but with Gosselin it's legit.

Are Brockers or any other DL gonna get us a SB this year? Probably not.

We got the best D player in the draft.That suits me just fine

[Bluestang]

My stance is when your front seven is so flawed, nothing you do in the secondary will matter.

It's why we saw no impact with the additions of Terence Newman or Mike Jenkins. It's also why all of our corners looked bad last year. It wasn't that they couldn't play. They were never put into a position to play well. Carr and/or Claiborne would have also struggled on this defense last year.

You build from the front back. Always. Or you don't know what you're doing.


I think the biggest difference we might see these two is actually making a play on the ball rather than riding a WR like a cape for a TD, giving up a quick screen because they are playing 10+ yds off coverage, or drawing a PI call. Even a one-armed Jenkins could make plays when he was in the game. Ryan's defense is going to leave corners on an island, there is no other way around it because that's what his defense does schematically. The other thing he likes to do is play 9, 8, or 7 man coverages on 3rd and long. I'm not a big fan of that but again that is something he does quite a bit. 3 to 4 man rushes is something we weren't very good at with Bradie James or Keith Brooking being asked to cover a RB in space.

Newman couldn't even cover Cruz on a simple out route where the ball was released in less than two seconds. (Eli rolled to his left also) I don't know of a pass rush that can get there in that short amount of time.

[CoCo]

My stance is when your front seven is so flawed, nothing you do in the secondary will matter.

It's why we saw no impact with the additions of Terence Newman or Mike Jenkins. It's also why all of our corners looked bad last year. It wasn't that they couldn't play. They were never put into a position to play well. Carr and/or Claiborne would have also struggled on this defense last year.

You build from the front back. Always. Or you don't know what you're doing.

You're never content to just state it as your opinion, your strong opinion or even your belief. You always have to insist on insulting those who might have a different perspective. It really does make me wonder what your real gig is.

[Risen Star]

You're never content to just state it as your opinion, your strong opinion or even your belief. You always have to insist on insulting those who might have a different perspective. It really does make me wonder what your real gig is.

There are certain truths about football that are irrefutable. If you try to challenge one of those truths I'm not going to pretend you make a good point. Because you don't.

If you believe you can build a dominant NFL defense from the secondary in, you don't know what you're talking about. That beast doesn't exist. It's never existed. Teams do not win this way.

You might as well tell me QB isn't the most important position on the field. It would make as much sense.

And who was I insulting in that post anyway? I'm talking about teams.

[Hostile]

Yet one more reason why the only thing Gosselin will ever do around football is write about it using just his opinions.

[SilverStarCowboy]

Claiborne is twice the player of Brockers or DeCastro for any NFL team.

Dallas plain and simple, stole Mo.

[AdamJT13]

In the past eight drafts, we've drafted twice as many front-seven players in the first round as the Giants. They've drafted twice as many defensive backs in the first round.

And when the Giants didn't have a first-round pick, they used their first pick on a defensive back. When we didn't have a first-round pick, we used our first pick on a front-seven player.

Now, do we need to review what wins in the NFL?

[BraveHeartFan]

In the past eight drafts, we've drafted twice as many front-seven players in the first round as the Giants. They've drafted twice as many defensive backs in the first round.

And when the Giants didn't have a first-round pick, they used their first pick on a defensive back. When we didn't have a first-round pick, we used our first pick on a front-seven player.

Now, do we need to review what wins in the NFL?

Wasting your time bro.

Some people believe their thoughts and opinion on the subject of football are the only thoughts and opinions on it and the only ones that can possibly be right.


Little details like this don't matter when it comes to an agenda that must be pushed.

[Bluestang]

In the past eight drafts, we've drafted twice as many front-seven players in the first round as the Giants. They've drafted twice as many defensive backs in the first round.

And when the Giants didn't have a first-round pick, they used their first pick on a defensive back. When we didn't have a first-round pick, we used our first pick on a front-seven player.

Now, do we need to review what wins in the NFL?


Hammer. Nail. :lmao2:

[CowboyFan74]

I agree with his philosophy of building outside-in, but I also think Cliaborne is the superior talent.

I guess time will tell. It seems that every draft spawns one of these debates (e.g. Ware v. Merriman, Carpenter v. Lawson, etc.).

The consensus thought is that Claiborne is a Future HOF, and that Brockers will be a bust... Or at least that's the vibe on CZ.....AC.....and I'm sure most of America to some degree.....

But if it's the reverse well then Jerry is The Jonah of Football......:starspin

[SilverStarCowboy]

Hammer. Nail. :lmao2:

Not really, New Yorks secondary was limited because of injuries, the DLine carried the Giants to two Superbowls at 9-7.

[Bluestang]

Not really, New Yorks secondary was limited because of injuries, the DLine carried the Giants to two Superbowls at 9-7.


And our secondary wasn't?

Despite those injuries they played good enough down the stretch.

[jterrell]

If Claiborne fell to 14 where we were originally, you might have a point. But since he didn't, you don't.

He didn't fall into our lap. We aggressively got into position to take him. And it cost us our 2nd round pick.

Sorry. I refuse to check my brain at the door to support this team. Goose is 100% correct in that you build from the front back. Claiborne is a true blue chip CB prospect on a team weak in the trenches. Just doesn't make any sense to me.

Maybe in two years he can be a great playmaker once this team fixes the lines, if they do fix it. Right now he's a complete non factor. Like Newman. Like Jenkins. Like Nnamdi, DRC, and Asante in Philly, or any other cornerback on a team that can't win at the line of scrimmage.

You are checking your brain at the door.

This isn't 1960 anymore.
Philly had the best OL and DL in our conference. They sucked at QB and LB.

The Giants won because Victor Cruz exploded.
The 49ers put a workman like team together from a lot of high end draft picks that had seriously underachieved but edge pass rushers and CBs lead that defense. They also had a VERY highly drafted WR and TE and QB in the mix.
The Pats had Brady and Welker.

NFL teams spread you out. They seldom try to beat you up the middle.
If up the middle was a way to win Denver would have kept Tim Tebow.

Dallas needs to be able to handle supreme edge rushers and thus drafted Tyron Smith and paid Doug Free big bucks. They don't need 5 highly paid OL. No team does. And they actually scored fairly well in the front 7. Ratliff, Lee and Ware are all top 5 at their positions.

The point you so badly want to make is just plain wrong.
Dallas already had its best players in the front 7 and and in the interior.
Tyron Smith, Sean Lee, Jay Ratliff, Tony Romo. Those are "up the middle" guys.

The best member of our secondary (which was abysmal) was Mike Jenkins who is coming off of a major injury. We lost our 3rd and 4th CBs and starting FS to free agency. We had no choice but to upgrade the secondary. IT wasn't optional and it couldn't be filled with mediocre players. Guys on the edge play on an island. You can't put guys out there that can't swim.

[jterrell]

Not really, New Yorks secondary was limited because of injuries, the DLine carried the Giants to two Superbowls at 9-7.

The Giants secondary is light years better than ours was in 2011.

That group was much better at the end of the year once they got healthy.

Corey Webster is a better player than Mike Jenkins. Antrel Rolle is a top flight coverage FS. Kenny Phillips is a coveted 1st round Safety as well. They had back up CBs to 4 deep who are ALL former top 100 picks.

The Giants had 5 more INTs than us. 33% more than us. That's during the regular season when they really werent very good!

[Bluestang]

The Giants secondary is light years better than ours was in 2011.

That group was much better at the end of the year once they got healthy.

Corey Webster is a better player than Mike Jenkins. Antrel Rolle is a top flight coverage FS. Kenny Phillips is a coveted 1st round Safety as well. They had back up CBs to 4 deep who are ALL former top 100 picks.

The Giants had 5 more INTs than us. 33% more than us. That's during the regular season when they really werent very good!


No matter how many times you say it, it just won't register because it makes their argument crumble.

[Dodger12]

In the past eight drafts, we've drafted twice as many front-seven players in the first round as the Giants. They've drafted twice as many defensive backs in the first round.

Ware (2005), Carpenter (2006) and Spencer (2007).

William Joseph (2003), Mathius Kiwanuka (2006) and Jason Pierre-Paul (2010)

What am I missing? Where did we draft twice as many front 7 seven players in the first round of the past 8 drafts than the Giants? And the Giants hit on Tuck in the 3rd round (2005) and didn't have a first round pick (in 2005) because of the Eli trade the year prior.

In 2005 they had Strahan and Osi Umenyiora who both went to the pro bowl but they still used their first round pick on a front 7 player in 06.

In 2009 they signed Chris Canty and still drafted a front 7 player with their first round pick in 2010 (JPP).

We haven't come near giving the front 7 the same level of attention as the Giants and it's not even close.

[dooomsday]

Ware (2005), Carpenter (2006) and Spencer (2007).

William Joseph (2003), Mathius Kiwanuka (2006) and Jason Pierre-Paul (2010)

What am I missing? Where did we draft twice as many front 7 seven players in the first round of the past 8 drafts than the Giants? And the Giants hit on Tuck in the 3rd round (2005) and didn't have a first round pick (in 2005) because of the Eli trade the year prior.

In 2005 they had Strahan and Osi Umenyiora who both went to the pro bowl but they still used their first round pick on a front 7 player in 06.

In 2009 they signed Chris Canty and still drafted a front 7 player with their first round pick in 2010 (JPP).

We haven't come near giving the front 7 the same level of attention as the Giants and it's not even close.

You forgot Spears and 2003 is longer than 8 years. It's Spears, Ware, Spencer, Barbie to JJP/ Kiwanuka. 4 is 2x 2. We also hit on Rat if we're expanding the criteria. Hit on Canty as well. Only the Gints must have needed him due to poor drafting of DTs in round one.

[MichaelWinicki]

The whole "Front 7 is flawed" argument is pure crapolla.

7th in sacks says otherwise.

23rd vs the pass should (but obviously doesn't) speak volumes.


And I'm still waiting for the "It's all about pass rush when it comes to pass defense crowd" to explain the Minnesota Vikings situation where they were 1st in sacks but 30th defending the pass.

[dstew60105]

The whole "Front 7 is flawed" argument is pure crapolla.

7th in sacks says otherwise.

23rd vs the pass should (but obviously doesn't) speak volumes.


And I'm still waiting for the "It's all about pass rush when it comes to pass defense crowd" to explain the Minnesota Vikings situation where they were 1st in sacks but 30th defending the pass.

You won't get it from RS. He's too blinded by his "my opinion is right regardless of how stupid it sounds" position.

[Risen Star]

You are checking your brain at the door.

This isn't 1960 anymore.
Philly had the best OL and DL in our conference. They sucked at QB and LB.

The Eagles were extremely weak in the middle of their defense. Their DTs were awful as well as their entire LB corp and both Ss.

There was a reason why they coveted Fletcher Cox so much in the draft.

[Risen Star]

The whole "Front 7 is flawed" argument is pure crapolla.

7th in sacks says otherwise.

23rd vs the pass should (but obviously doesn't) speak volumes.


And I'm still waiting for the "It's all about pass rush when it comes to pass defense crowd" to explain the Minnesota Vikings situation where they were 1st in sacks but 30th defending the pass.

Well, my answer would be sack totals don't tell the whole story. It would seem to me if you are a bad offensive team like the Vikings who can't move the ball and teams have success moving the ball on you, you're gonna have more opportunities for sacks. But you're also gonna give up more passing yards and TDs.

It's like a LB on a bad team with high tackle numbers. You have to look inside the numbers for the true meaning of it.

Your problem is you religiously follow these number crunchers as if it's gospel. You can't break down the game that way. I pay absolutely no attention to it whatsoever. I trust my eyes or the eyes of people I respect.

[SilverStarCowboy]

Nothing tells the whole story, k.


Eagles went for Cox because of talent, mmm k.


Giants willed there way to 2 titles because kids are weak minded and self deserving. mmm k.


Uhmm...Drugs are bad....,k.

[dooomsday]

Well, my answer would be sack totals don't tell the whole story. It would seem to me if you are a bad offensive team like the Vikings who can't move the ball and teams have success moving the ball on you, you're gonna have more opportunities for sacks. But you're also gonna give up more passing yards and TDs.

It's like a LB on a bad team with high tackle numbers. You have to look inside the numbers for the true meaning of it.

Your problem is you religiously follow these number crunchers as if it's gospel. You can't break down the game that way. I pay absolutely no attention to it whatsoever. I trust my eyes or the eyes of people I respect.

Then your eyes should tell you the weakest unit on the team was its D backfield.

I dont see how drafting one player at a need position suggests we are building from the back. The next 2 picks were front 7 players. We've done the opposite. Neglected the D backfield so badly it became a need.

Trenches are key, but defending the pass in pass happy NFL with all the rules changes is equally important. So says NFL braintrust.

Bill Belichick has drafted a DB in the top 2 rounds of every draft since 2007. I think we have taken a total of 2 DB that highly during that time. Maybe we're just catching up.

Cornerbacks a premium in NFL draft

Originally Published: May 1, 2012
By Gregg Easterbrook | ESPN.com
176
96
191
EMAIL
PRINT

Kurt Snibbe/ESPN.com
The football draft is assumed to be about muscular giants whose crushing man-hugs threaten the ribs of commissioner Roger Goodell. Here's a little secret -- the skinny guys recently have ruled the NFL draft.

This past weekend's was the fourth consecutive "NFL selection meeting" at which cornerbacks, the least imposing football players (other than kickers), have been the most popular choice. In 2012, 34 cornerbacks were chosen; in 2011, 39 corners were picked; in 2010, 33 cornerbacks; in 2009, 36 corners came off the board. In previous drafts, either linebacker or wide receiver was the most popular choice, because teams have three to four starters at those positions. Now, for four straight drafts, it's been cornerbacks.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/draft2012/story/_/id/7874622/tmq-says-skinny-guys-cornerbacks-rule-modern-nfl-draft

[dstew60105]

Well, my answer would be sack totals don't tell the whole story. It would seem to me if you are a bad offensive team like the Vikings who can't move the ball and teams have success moving the ball on you, you're gonna have more opportunities for sacks. But you're also gonna give up more passing yards and TDs.

It's like a LB on a bad team with high tackle numbers. You have to look inside the numbers for the true meaning of it.

Your problem is you religiously follow these number crunchers as if it's gospel. You can't break down the game that way. I pay absolutely no attention to it whatsoever. I trust my eyes or the eyes of people I respect.

If you are a bad offensive team and teams can score on your defense, then the opposite usually happens. Teams get the lead and then try to pound th clock, not pass all over you.

[Mash]

Our OL sucks......Romo has to buy more time....more 3 step drops....check

Our DL sucks....we get no pressure.....but QB buying time and teams using more 3 step drop is no excuse......check

Giants don't spend on DB's.......all resources go yo DL .....check

Eagles spend money on CB...and traded for another and sucked defensively....because their front was weak....even tho they signed. babin and Jenkins. ....check


http://espn.go.com/blog/nfceast/post/_/id/30814/scouts-inc-eagles-d-line-is-top-5


Teams that are poor on offense have unfair advantage because their defense will now have more opportunity for sacks......teams with lead will have more pass plays and more 5 step drops :)...therefore teams with poor offense leads to their defense having inflated sack totals .....check :)

:)

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :lmao2:

[Dallas31]

The Cowboy aren't "building" from the back up. The Cowboys drafted a good football player.

The Cowboys feel they have a good enough front already "built"

I'm not saying I agree with the Cowboys. I'm saying Goose is talking out his...


i agree, for what its worth.....

better corners will help our front 7 get there....

and won't blow our big leads like last year

[jterrell]

The Eagles were extremely weak in the middle of their defense. Their DTs were awful as well as their entire LB corp and both Ss.

There was a reason why they coveted Fletcher Cox so much in the draft.

The Eagles have the best DE tandem in football with Cole and Babin.
To that they added Cullen Jenkins for beef inside. They certainly can use Fletcher Cox but he isn't even a sure fire starter and has been listed as a rotational guy by their coaching staff.

They also had by far the best OG in the division with Evan Mathis.

They did have terrible LB but that is the price they paid to upgrade other areas.


PFF ranked them easily the highest team in the NFCE along the both lines.
http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2012/4/15/2948011/dallas-cowboys-roster-and-position-groups-a-comparison-vs-nfc-east

[Dallas31]

potential front 7:

LB:
ware - 1st round pick
lee - 2nd round pick
carter - 2nd round pick
spencer - 1st round pick

DL:
Spears- 1st round pick
Hatcher - 3rd round pick (or Crawford - 3rd round pick)
Ratliff - 7th round gift

how again are we not addressing the front 7?

With 2 good corners, safety is our only potential defensive weakness, not the front 7.....

[cml750]

What Risen Star doesn't realize is we upgraded the secondary so we can apply more pressure. Not with "coverage sacks" but by dialing up blitzes. Last year we got burned a lot with the blitz because our secondary couldn't cover their man and had to stay 8 - 10 yards off the receiver. The QB simply had to make the quick throw to a receiver and the pass rush was neutralized. We have upgraded our secondary with press corners so the opposing QB makes the quick read to avoid the blitz, he will not have anyone to throw to or he will force a throw that we can pick off. Blitzes are the hallmark of the Ryan defense and why the Jets are so good on D without a super front 7. Would it be good to be stacked with all pros up front, sure, but in this draft there were no sure fire all pro front 7 guys. There was an almost sure fire all pro CB. You have to be able to apply pressure to be good on D. Having a good backfield will allow the Boys to apply pressure with the blitz.

[SilverStarCowboy]

Nose Tackle helps set up the front 7 which allows the LBs to flow to the ball, beit run or pass.


Nothing helps Dallas more in 2012 than a 1 technique NT... still luv the Mo pick.

[MichaelWinicki]

Well, my answer would be sack totals don't tell the whole story. It would seem to me if you are a bad offensive team like the Vikings who can't move the ball and teams have success moving the ball on you, you're gonna have more opportunities for sacks. But you're also gonna give up more passing yards and TDs.

It's like a LB on a bad team with high tackle numbers. You have to look inside the numbers for the true meaning of it.

Your problem is you religiously follow these number crunchers as if it's gospel. You can't break down the game that way. I pay absolutely no attention to it whatsoever. I trust my eyes or the eyes of people I respect.


What a stunningly bad explanation.

You should consider a membership in the "Flat Earth Society".

[SilverStarCowboy]

Nose Tackle helps set up the front 7 which allows the LBs to flow to the ball, beit run or pass.


Nothing helps Dallas more in 2012 than a 1 technique NT... still luv the Mo pick.

Meanwhile DTs Rogers and Warren just signed with the Giants and Patriots respectively.


:angry: f u a o

[Bluestang]

Well, my answer would be sack totals don't tell the whole story. It would seem to me if you are a bad offensive team like the Vikings who can't move the ball and teams have success moving the ball on you, you're gonna have more opportunities for sacks. But you're also gonna give up more passing yards and TDs.

It's like a LB on a bad team with high tackle numbers. You have to look inside the numbers for the true meaning of it.

Your problem is you religiously follow these number crunchers as if it's gospel. You can't break down the game that way. I pay absolutely no attention to it whatsoever. I trust my eyes or the eyes of people I respect.


Wait a minute here...so now you are saying that because Minnesota had a poor offense that was the reason why the secondary gave up all those passing TDs? (34 most in the league)


Even with the increased snaps that the defense played why would teams that are ahead just keep passing the ball instead of running the ball to milk out the clock?

[MichaelWinicki]

Wait a minute here...so now you are saying that because Minnesota had a poor offense that was the reason why the secondary gave up all those passing TDs? (34 most in the league)


Even with the increased snaps that the defense played why would teams that are ahead just keep passing the ball instead of running the ball to milk out the clock?

He may not answer immediately, he separated his shoulder "reaching" for that explanation.

[Chuck 54]

Brockers and anyone available in round two at #45 would not turn this team around.

Rome was not built in a day, and neither will the Cowboys in one draft. The move from #14 to #6 to get what you believe is the best CB since Deon Sanders for giving up only #45 was unimaginable; Claibourne being there at #6 was unthinkable.

For one year and one draft, in this instance with our board, how we rated the players, and who went before us, Claibourne looks easily to be of greater impact on this team than Brockers and the LB who would be fighting for playing time just like the LB we got later.

Yes, our front 7 needs to improve, and I was all over Brockers at 14 over DeCastro because I never dreamed this scenario. However, we were also desperate for a CB...no one knows if Jenkins will even be healthy to start the season, and we had nothing behind Carr and Scandrick.

If we believe that Claibourne is the best since Deon, then there's no questioning this move. Had this been Claibourne vs Cox and Ingram or another top ranked LB, then I'd be all for the front seven.

As it stands, we have turned a weakness into a strength with the secondary, and we still added a DE and OLB who may contribute and help our pass rush. Now we can look at a Stud on the DL, etc. next year.

The alternative would be to hope Brockers would be a star at DE, hope that 2nd round LB wouldn't be behind Ware and Spencer anyway, and hoping we'd find a CB in round 3 who could start in preseason and play in case Jenkins isn't ready or in case someone else gets nicked.

Nope, I love what we did...we know what we got at CB...we know that position is a strength, we know we still have the run-stuffers on DL, and we hope we've added two guys to the rotations that can get after the QB.

[jterrell]

Brockers and anyone available in round two at #45 would not turn this team around.

Rome was not built in a day, and neither will the Cowboys in one draft. The move from #14 to #6 to get what you believe is the best CB since Deon Sanders for giving up only #45 was unimaginable; Claibourne being there at #6 was unthinkable.

For one year and one draft, in this instance with our board, how we rated the players, and who went before us, Claibourne looks easily to be of greater impact on this team than Brockers and the LB who would be fighting for playing time just like the LB we got later.

Yes, our front 7 needs to improve, and I was all over Brockers at 14 over DeCastro because I never dreamed this scenario. However, we were also desperate for a CB...no one knows if Jenkins will even be healthy to start the season, and we had nothing behind Carr and Scandrick.

If we believe that Claibourne is the best since Deon, then there's no questioning this move. Had this been Claibourne vs Cox and Ingram or another top ranked LB, then I'd be all for the front seven.

As it stands, we have turned a weakness into a strength with the secondary, and we still added a DE and OLB who may contribute and help our pass rush. Now we can look at a Stud on the DL, etc. next year.

The alternative would be to hope Brockers would be a star at DE, hope that 2nd round LB wouldn't be behind Ware and Spencer anyway, and hoping we'd find a CB in round 3 who could start in preseason and play in case Jenkins isn't ready or in case someone else gets nicked.

Nope, I love what we did...we know what we got at CB...we know that position is a strength, we know we still have the run-stuffers on DL, and we hope we've added two guys to the rotations that can get after the QB.

I like Brockers just fine and he is a solid pick at 14 for the Rams. He probably is only average for a couple seasons but will grow into a monster power player up front imho.

All that said, Mo Claiborne, was a straight up un-questioned blue chip prospect. He was 2 to 4 on anyone's board that wasn't QB desperate. Getting him at 6 was a steal. And we got a bargain on the trade up to 6.

Add it all up and we got what many including national football post calls the 2nd best prospect from this draft for a power DT/DE and an inside linebacker. I'll take that every day of the week.

You win with star quality players. They make the game easier on the other 10 guys. Claiborne is graded out as such.

If the Cowboys had taken Brockers then Wagner this place would have exploded with criticism. A non-pass rushing DL and an another ILB? Wow! This place woulda flipped its wig.

We take Claiborne to NY week 1 and he can cover Victor Cruz or Hakeem Nicks while we double the other guy. That's a luxury Ryan didn't have last year.

[jswalker1981]

The problem with this entire "secondary is non-factor because front 7 'suck'" talk is that you are assuming that our secondary will play the same kind of football as last year. The one thing to notice about Carr and Claiborne is that they are physical corners that can play at the line and bump and run. That is something we hardly did last year. So now, QBs can't just hit a guy quick off the line, he will have to wait for him to get open. And while he waits, our front 7 can get to him, give him some pressure, and create sacks. I understand the talk of "if we get pressure from our front seven, our secondary can make plays". For one thing, you probably rarely bring all of the front 7 on a blitz. Secondly, all it takes is a FB to pick up the blitzing backer and the "instant QB pressure" is voided. If you can't get instant pressure, then your secondary gets exposed. I think it is more likely that we get sacks from our coverage holding up then from guys getting straight to the QB, untouched, on a blitz. Rob Ryan wants to do some different things with the front 7, but he needs to know that they have more than two seconds to get to the QB to get pressure on him. That's why we went from Newman and Jenkins to Carr and Claiborne in ONE offseason. To assume that position groups are going to be the same this year as they were last year is just asinine.

[MichaelWinicki]

We take Claiborne to NY week 1 and he can cover Victor Cruz or Hakeem Nicks while we double the other guy. That's a luxury Ryan didn't have last year.

Exactly.

It wasn't that long ago when the guy for the Giants remarked that there wasn't any "fear" about Carr covering Victor Cruz.

We'll see how Cruz does against Claiborne. :)