micks mail may 20 - Dallas Cowboys Forum

Hoov · 05-20-2005

By Mickey Spagnola
DallasCowboys.com Columnist
May 20, 2005, 3:12 PM (CDT)

Welcome to Mick's Mail, where at least once a week DallasCowboys.com Columnist Mickey Spagnola will answer some of the very best questions submitted via e-mail on DallasCowboys.com. If you would like to submit a question, click here, or go to Mick's Mail. And then don't forget to check-in to see if your question is answered online.

[font=Arial,Helvetica]Matthew Browning, San Antonio: [/font]Does Bill Parcells have any thoughts of getting Drew Henson a small amount of playing time each game or does he plan to put him in when he is ready?

Mickey: The plan is to treat Drew Bledsoe as any other starter. He plays, and then treat Henson, assuming he beats out Tony Romo for the backup spot, as any other backup. He backs up until a game is out of hand either way or there is an injury. Why would you do anything else? The object here is to win games. I think after this training camp and season we will know a lot more about what Henson will become.

[font=Arial,Helvetica]Kevin McConnell, Waterloo, Iowa: [/font]Just saw today that L.J. Shelton of the Cardinals was released. Any chance the Cowboys will go after him as an insurance policy right tackle?

Mickey: Not as this time. Read the Mick Shots in my latest column. I figured you guys would be all over this. While I'm told Shelton is in better shape now than he has been since Denny Green arrived in Arizona, the guy just isn't a big workout guy, and that won't float with Parcells. The Cards tried trading him to the Cowboys before and during the draft, and they were unequivocally disinterested. Now maybe if Torrin Tucker and Kurt Vollers just bomb in next weekends mini-camp they might change their tune, but for now, I'm guessing they are passing on the guy. But . . . you never know what a team might do if a guy is willing to play for dirt cheap.

[font=Arial,Helvetica]Marcus Gresham, Corydon, Ind.: [/font]If things go as planned, I think getting Chris Canty in the fourth round may be a coup. I recall you saying the Cowboys swung a deal with the Eagles to move up to select him. What did they give up?

Mickey: The Cowboys gave the Eagles their fifth-round pick in 2005 and their fourth in 2006 for the Eagles' fourth-rounder in 2005 (Canty) and their sixth in 2006. Whew, got that?

[font=Arial,Helvetica]Bill Kemp, Sherman Oaks, Calif.: [/font]Good one, Mickey! It's not often that a reference is made that I don't get! Can you tell us what a "Lis Franc" foot injury is, and how that applies to (one of the several reasons) why the 'Boys aren't interested in Lance Schulters?

Mickey: My bad, I guess I threw that term out with little explanation and it's not exactly a common injury, especially in football. So I started doing some research and discovered it's indeed a rare football injury, and dates back to Napoleon days. Evidently French surgeon Lis Franc was Napoleon's surgeon, and this injury was common injury for soldiers on horseback getting their feet caught in the stirrup. The injury takes place in the midfoot area, involving the Lis Franc ligament, which connects a bone to the base of the second metatarsal - the long, thin bone next to the big toe. Not only is this a painful injury, it also is a long recovery. You just have to be careful with players in their 30's with foot injuries.

[font=Arial,Helvetica]Shawn Boggs, Dallas: [/font]Can you explain to us why Pete Hunter would rather play a back up cornerback than compete for a starting job at safety? What's he got against free safety?

Mickey: I'm dumbfounded on this one, and hopefully when we see him next weekend during the mini-camp we can get his side of the story. But I'm guessing he's more comfortable playing corner, and doesn't want to chance changing positions in his last season before entering free agency. And I'm guessing he's been told corners make more money than safeties. But I wonder if someone also told him, safeties make more money than out-of-work corners.

[font=Arial,Helvetica]Dave Starr, Las Vegas, Nev.: [/font]Isn't all this concern about Woody's replacement a little premature? I don't want to take anything away from one of the great players to ever play the position, but if this front seven develops (and make no mistake folks, this group has the potential to be legendary), is free safety really that much of an issue? Isn't it gonna be difficult for Donavan McNabb to see down the field if he's constantly having to look out the ear hole of his helmet?

Mickey: I'm sure that is the rationale here for not going out and spending big money on a free safety. If you look at the history of the free safety position, the Cowboys have always had just a guy there, it seems. Cliff Harris made the club as a rookie free agent, as did Michael Downs. James Washington was a Plan B pickup. Thomas Everett was acquired in a trade. Brock Marion was a seventh-round pick. Izell Reese was a sixth-round pick. Omar Stoutmire was a seventh-rounder. George Teague was picked up for next to nothing. You starting to get the idea? And let's remember, until Roy Williams got here, Darren Woodson was a strong safety.

[font=Arial,Helvetica]Jarrett Trusty, Euless, Texas: [/font]I was curious about the status of Tyson Walter and what Parcells and his staff think of him. At Ohio State, he played tackle, but the Cowboys have never really seemed to view him as anything more than a backup center or guard. I was a little surprised that in Coach Parcells rookie camp press conference, he practically mentioned every lineman on the roster (even Ben Noll) as a possibility for the open right tackle spot, but didn't even mention Walter. In addition, if Gurode is going to compete at center, where does that leave Walter?

Mickey: Basically competing for a backup job at center and guard. He's valuable since he can play all three interior positions, and in a pinch, could move out to take snaps at tackle. There is real value in a versatile guy like that. But as for competing for the tackle position, he's just not big enough, and that might sound strange, being 6-4, 300. I know he played tackle at Ohio State, but he just doesn't seem the tackle type in the NFL. Not tall and rangy enough to keep guys off him.

[font=Arial,Helvetica]Paul D'Amore, Boston: [/font]Why are the Cowboys holding on to guys like Greg Ellis and La'Roi Glover? They're good players, but it seems they don't fit Parcells' 3-4 scheme and they're taking up cap space. It doesn't look like Glover is going to get time with Jason Ferguson here now, and there is Marcus Spears who could get an opportunity if Ellis is gone. If Spears doesn't work out they could just slide Willie Blade into that spot.

Mickey: You were doing well until you mentioned Blade. He's out, remember. Blade tore his Achilles during NFL Europe training camp. Who knows, he may never play again. Now then, don't be so sure these rookies just step in and start from Day One. And let's remember how valuable Ellis has been to this team. I'll find a spot for him, no matter who I've drafted. And I'm willing to make a little wager with ya on Glover: He plays. He will be on the field, and with the rotation I think Parcells envisions, Glover might have one of his best pass-rushing seasons. He'll be much more fresh, not having to play like 70 of 72 possible plays, as he was repeatedly last year.

[font=Arial,Helvetica]Mariano Farias, San Antonio:[/font] How come we have so many players? I mean come, on seven tight ends and nine tailbacks! Aren't you all wasting too much money?

Mickey: No. First of all, NFL rosters expand to 80 players plus NFL exemptions in the off-season. Secondly, only the top 51 base salaries at this point count against the salary cap. And finally, nobody in the NFL gets paid any salary until the season starts. So the only money being "wasted" on all these guys would be whatever signing bonus they receiver, workout stipends and training camp per diem. So if you are going to get bent out of shape about something, better pick another topic.

[font=Arial,Helvetica]Scottie Montford, Cordele, Ga.:[/font] If we judge drafts three years after they actually happen, we notice that this is Year Three for Bill Parcells' first draft class in Big D. From the looks of it, we are going to have four starters from that draft on the team this year. Could you review those picks for me because I can't remember picks 5-7.

Mickey: Let's see, his first draft would have been in 2003, and from the looks of things, starting should be first-round pick Terence Newman, second-rounder Al Johnson and third-rounder Jason Witten. Fourth-rounder Bradie James will be given every opportunity to start inside next to Dat Nguyen in the middle of the 3-4 alignment. After that, B. J. Tucker is gone, Zuriel Smith is back, trying to catch on as a fifth receiver/return guy and Justin Bates is long gone. But if you go four-for-four with your first four picks, that's pretty darn good, especially since one already has been to the Pro Bowl.

[font=Arial,Helvetica]Kyle Nance, Washington D.C.: [/font]Are the Cowboys going to settle on keeping Billy Cundiff this season? I hope they are going to bring in some competition at least. Billy is a decent kicker but doesn't have much deep range. He was nine of 13 from 40-49 and none of two from 50+ yards. It seems like they don't have that kicker that can really nail the ball on kickoffs, either. Any chance of them bringing in a big leg?

Mickey: Well, that competition will come from Brett Visintainer, a rookie kicker out of Fresno State where he was pretty good on kickoffs. I'd say the biggest knock on Cundiff would be consistently getting his kickoffs deep enough. As for field goals, look, how many 50-yarders in a game do you actually attempt, even if you can hit them? At the end of halves, desperation attempts at the end of games? Normally, coaches hate to attempt 50-plus yarders because a miss gives the opponent great field position. Yep, he must be better from 40-49, where he was nine of 13. But I remember one hitting the upright and another just missing. So say he hits one of those, and he's 10 of 13. That would be 77 percent from that range, which is pretty good.

[font=Arial,Helvetica]Anthony Nguyen, Arlington, Texas:[/font] With his size and speed, do you think Dat Nguyen really fits into Coach Parcells' 3-4 defensive scheme? He already let the other "small" linebacker go!

Mickey: I guess he does since the Cowboys balked at trading Dat to New Orleans in a potential trade to acquire defensive end Darren Howard. You can handle a smaller linebacker inside on the 3-4 than you can a Dexter Coakley on the outside in the 3-4 since those guys must be big-time run-stoppers, too. [font=Arial,Helvetica]Seth Ross, Dewitt, Iowa:[/font] Do you think the reason they passed on Cory Hall is that they are waiting for someone to become available on June 1? Such as Lance Schulters or any other possibilities? Plus I hear that the reason they didn't sign Hall was because he didn't look that impressive. Mickey: Well, you got that part right about Hall. Heard he ran like a 4.8. And it's not as if there are a bunch of teams knocking down his door to sign him. Not sure if they will be after Schulters or not, but know the Cowboys weren't high on him when he was drafted. And as I said earlier, beware the foot injury belonging to DB's.

RECENT STORIES

**WoodysGirl** · 05-20-2005

good read, Hoov. Thx.

Chocolate Lab · 05-20-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by Woody'sGirl

good read, Hoov. Thx.

I agree... But have to admit, I don't get the money links...

**WoodysGirl** · 05-20-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chocolate Lab

I agree... But have to admit, I don't get the money links...

Hadn't noticed, but after checking, I don't either. Looks like a code thing from the copy/paste function, cuz it doesn't show up like that on dc.com.

Chief · 05-20-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hoov

[[font=Arial,Helvetica]Dave Starr, Las Vegas, Nev.: [/font]Isn't all this concern about Woody's replacement a little premature? I don't want to take anything away from one of the great players to ever play the position, but if this front seven develops (and make no mistake folks, this group has the potential to be legendary), is free safety really that much of an issue? Isn't it gonna be difficult for Donavan McNabb to see down the field if he's constantly having to look out the ear hole of his helmet?

[View Full Quote]

"Just a guy?"

Whatever you say, Mick.

Harris was named to four Pro Bowls and is in the Ring of Honor.

Michael Downs was named All Pro in 1984.

Thomas Everett made a Pro Bowl in 1993.

James Washington could easily have been named the MVP of a Super Bowl and was more than "just a guy."

He forgot to mention Dennis Thurman who played some free safety and was a standout.

Brock Marion went to three Pro Bowls after leaving Dallas.

Maybe Dallas didn't give up a lot to acquire some of these guys, but they were outstanding players.

This team has a pretty good history of having outstanding play at free safety.

Hoov · 05-20-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chief

"Just a guy?"

Whatever you say, Mick.

Harris was named to four Pro Bowls and is in the Ring of Honor.

Michael Downs was named All Pro in 1984.

Thomas Everett made a Pro Bowl in 1993.

James Washington could easily have been named the MVP of a Super Bowl and was more than "just a guy."

He forgot to mention Dennis Thurman who played some free safety and was a standout.

Brock Marion went to three Pro Bowls after leaving Dallas.

Maybe Dallas didn't give up a lot to acquire some of these guys, but they were outstanding players.

This team has a pretty good history of having outstanding play at free safety.

i agree chief, most of those guys were solid players

**WoodysGirl** · 05-20-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chief

"Just a guy?"

Whatever you say, Mick.

Harris was named to four Pro Bowls and is in the Ring of Honor.

Michael Downs was named All Pro in 1984.

Thomas Everett made a Pro Bowl in 1993.

James Washington could easily have been named the MVP of a Super Bowl and was more than "just a guy."

He forgot to mention Dennis Thurman who played some free safety and was a standout.

Brock Marion went to three Pro Bowls after leaving Dallas.

Maybe Dallas didn't give up a lot to acquire some of these guys, but they were outstanding players.

This team has a pretty good history of having outstanding play at free safety.

Not to redirect the heat from Mickey to me, but I think he meant the boys always had safeties who supposedly didn't have alot of pedigree when they got them and just hoped they hit the jackpot. All those guys were drafted low or undrafted and more than exceeded everyone's expectations. By a long ways.

Hoov · 05-20-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by Woody'sGirl

Not to redirect the heat from Mickey to me, but I think he meant the boys always had safeties who supposedly didn't have alot of pedigree when they got them and just hoped they hit the jackpot. All those guys were drafted low or undrafted and more than exceeded everyone's expectations. By a long ways.

well he's also playing up to the idea that with a new revamped defense, we dont need to get a good player, just one who can hold their own as long as the pass rush is there.

InmanRoshi · 05-20-2005

Its usually spyware that creates a hyperlink to their site on certain keywords (money).

**WoodysGirl** · 05-20-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hoov

well he's also playing up to the idea that with a new revamped defense, we dont need to get a good player, just one who can hold their own as long as the pass rush is there.

This is true and I'm beginning to think the 'boys are gonna just go with what they have, as well.

Not because I don't think we don't need an upgrade, but there just aren't any FAs at this point who seem that much better than what's already on the roster. And being that they are vets, they will cost more than the young guys we have for similar production.

Hoov · 05-20-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by InmanRoshi

Its usually spyware that creates a hyperlink to their site on certain keywords (money).

probably because i posted on my roomates computer and he doesnt have a firewall set up and we are always getting spyware updates on this thing. he keeps saying hes gonna fix it.

Hoov · 05-20-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by Woody'sGirl

This is true and I'm beginning to think the 'boys are gonna just go with what they have, as well.

Not because I don't think we don't need an upgrade, but there just aren't any FAs at this point who seem that much better than what's already on the roster. And being that they are vets, they will cost more than the young guys we have for similar production.

agreed, and i want to see what Davis can do.

playit12 · 05-20-2005

I'm not disagreeing that the cowboys haven't in the past exactly taken first round picks to play FS, but does anyone on this board not think with the current rules and offenses that FS aren't more valuable now than they were during the 60s and 70s?

Here are some interesting stats...

In the Top 50 total yearly receptions for a player in a year since 1960,

The Top 22 are from the 90s and 2000s.

Only 3 aren't from the 90s and 2000s.

Since 1990 only one year has gone by where a player did not get at least 100 receptions.

In 2002 Marvin Harrison broke the reception record by over 20 receptions.

Teams pass more. Teams pass more effectively. Team can beat you with the pass.

This really isn't a power rushing league anymore. There was a time when the MLB needed to be a star, but these days it's the pass rushers, Corner backs, and free Safties that need to lead your defense. That's why I don't want to start just another guy. Sure a good pass rush will make our FS look better. But a good FS combined with a good pass rush sounds even more apealing.

**WoodysGirl** · 05-20-2005

Just to add to my point, did anyone notice this re: Cory Hall?? This is just another reason to just go w/the young guys.

Quote:

[font=Arial]Seth Ross, Dewitt, Iowa:[/font] Do you think the reason they passed on Cory Hall is that they are waiting for someone to become available on June 1? Such as Lance Schulters or any other possibilities? Plus I hear that the reason they didn't sign Hall was because he didn't look that impressive.

Mickey: Well, you got that part right about Hall. Heard he ran like a 4.8. And it's not as if there are a bunch of teams knocking down his door to sign him. Not sure if they will be after Schulters or not, but know the Cowboys weren't high on him when he was drafted. And as I said earlier, beware the foot injury belonging to DB's.

Hoov · 05-20-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by playit12

I'm not disagreeing that the cowboys haven't in the past exactly taken first round picks to play FS, but does anyone on this board not think with the current rules and offenses that FS aren't more valuable now than they were during the 60s and 70s?

Here are some interesting stats...

In the Top 50 total yearly receptions for a player in a year since 1960,

The Top 22 are from the 90s and 2000s.

Only 3 aren't from the 90s and 2000s.

Since 1990 only one year has gone by where a player did not get at least 100 receptions.

In 2002 Marvin Harrison broke the reception record by over 20 receptions.

Teams pass more. Teams pass more effectively. Team can beat you with the pass.

[View Full Quote]

i wont disagree with wanting good fs, but i still think you win running the ball and playing good D. granted the new rule change makes it easier for wr to get open and passing yards go up (hate the way they call PI anymore). still look at the eagles and colts - passing teams, but if you cant run consistently, you cant put the other team away.