Discussion in 'Fan Zone' started by AsthmaField, Sep 25, 2013.
Agreed, 100 percent. Fantastic post.
There are two things that really excite me about this team and program. Rod Marinelli has guys playing with their hair on fire. The twists and stunts we used to run were lazy and imprecise. Rod has these guys playin hard and fast and when they go to some up front games there is a level of precision and timing that is special.
Secondly our personnel department both college and pro are doing a good job and the gm seems to be listening to them.
IMHO, Romo wasn't Romo in that game. I truly believe his ribs affected his passing ability in that game. He looked back to normal against STL.
The OP made a great, well thought out post.
I agree with you.
Rod has the d line playing great.
Excellent post for the OP and I agree with much of it but the jury is still out on Garrett. I am extremely grateful he was relieved of play calling and sincerely hope this year is the start of a long successful coaching career. Only time will tell. If we go 8 - 8 again (or worse) then it will be time to move on from the Garrett experiment. I for one am excited this will be a very good year, maybe even a " SUPER " year.
awwww! cher baby.... Hey that looks like Bernard Hill!
I agree with most of your assessment of the "current' Cowboys- this is a much grittier team that can no long be bullied for sure. Credit RHG and his RKG ways. I love the fact we have good people on our team that want to play smashmouth football and start knocking people out vs worrying about self-preservation.
However. If not for some COACHING errors the past two season, the arrival of this Cowboys team might have been exacerbated. And I hold Jason Garrett responsible for that.
We have a lot invested in Garrett being a walk around HC. I like his focus, I'm not thrilled to death with his X's and O's and to be frank his ability to hit start on his joystick while squaring off on in Madden to get a TO called at the appropriate time.
I'm a forgiving fan and I also like what I see. Romo said in an interview that you don't know where you are in terms of the say..."4 year plan" until you arrive at the destination. And he's right.
That time could be now, and it might not. But I do agree that finally we have a team that is willing to compete to find out where it stands week in and week out, regardless of circumstance, setting, or intangibles either real or assumed. It's nice to see the Cowboys as a team that the media and fans might have to stop joking about for fear of an epic beatdown like the Rams got the other day.
I agree with everything in this post except the parcells part of it. They committed more penalties while he was coaching and the drafts he had, was not all that. Besides Ratliff, he did not want Ware, where are all of his drafted players? on the street somewhere working like I am. I have been watching the Cowboys since I was a year old. I was born in 1964, I have never missed a game, ever.
I said that Garrett was the right guy. When Jerry hired Garrett he had full intentions of naming him as HC. I believe someone convinced him that Garrett was not ready so he named him OC and then hired Phillips to be HC, basically to be a mentor or just hold the spot until he thought Garrett was ready. Phillips stayed true to form, a 500 coach, he always does well his first season and then it is down hill after that
Too long for me, I don't read books
That's what's wrong with kids today. Don't want to pick up a book a read anymore.
great post ... agree with you on most of it but still dont trust jj to draft.
I appreciate your enthusiasm, but until I see the kind of offensive game plan we saw in the Rams game, at away games I'm not eating the cheese. I said it before, Garrett goes conservative and plays not to lose when on the road. He did again in KC, and I expect a struggle offensively in SD. That's just the way it is with Garrett. I am very happy with the attacking defense implemented by Kiffin and Marinelli. But I wish that the offense would go out there and attack and dictate to the defense and not be passive on the road.
Yep, I agree.
Although there has been some improvement in alot of different areas of this team and reason to be excited, I am not going to do what I have done the last few years and get my hopes up.
This bunch just hasn't been consistent and to this point hasn't proven that it can play well week after week. I'm not saying that they can't change or have not changed, but I will believe it when I see us string some wins together and start playing with balance and consistency.
I think this team will finish 11-5........and win a playoff game. And make it a competitive game in the second playoff game with a chance at a win.......sometimes, luck is needed....but, i don't expect more then that. If they can accomplish that i think that is a good season for team/organization just learning how to win again....
I dont consider getting blown out and manhandled by the Vikings in a wildcard game a good season......
So if Dallas doesnt win, whats the excuse?
You tried to account for what you thought was the formula for a well run organization. Did you take into account trends? Other teams being injuried, the teams injuries? Staffing? Off field problems? So on and so forth, when the Giants were 6-6, did they think they had all you mentioned and just turn on the switch and go for the SB, because it was all right there? Or did they strike lightning in a bottle and ride it out?
So many factors out there its insane to name them all, but they all contribute in one face or another. The bottom lines still matter, the higher score wins the game, all other factors after that case need not apply because we dont give wins back.
I tell people this and its hard to get through to them until they see the evidence, some teams dont play for the SB, if they win (cardinals) great, they will take the spoils, but its not their main goal. Filling their playgorunds (stadiums, because now everyone wants a new one) and selling their merchandise (tickets or clothes) is their goal.
Now that aside, Jerry, Synder, and a host of others play to win the big boy game, and thats the SB and all the glory that comes with it. Has Dallas always been running it correctly, no, but can we be sure, no, because we dont know what other things were going on. Parcells wanted the 3-4 and Marcus SPears over Demarcus Ware, and we are still feeling the hit of the 3-4. If it panned out tho, whoa would there be a lot of gloating, but it didnt, we still have Spencer (thats a poke at all the fans who told me we would see a drop if hes not on the field) and this orgnaization is looking spectaular after 2 wins. Go us, its been so bad, 2 wins is time for the champagne, (considering some had their SB on the first game of the season), but here we are, still doing the right things, because there are so many its hard to fix one, without the others falling apart. Fix the Oline, still have safety, fix those might lose DL, fix that qb is to old.
The game is played 1 game at a time because its hard for these sport to chug for long stretches and keep that path they want to be on for a long time.
Some organizations are winning because they have easier teams to beat, no one brings that up. Some organizations win because their philosophies stick regardless of trends. (Giants and their sticking to a hard defense and good running game) At the end of the season tho, its the teams that give up on the factors and take their chance at the core of the game that never ever changes, play your game and score more points than the other team, because at the end, its the score that dictates the winner, not stats and not what your organization did. Believe me, ive never heard, "hey Kraft, your team won because the gm believed in that 4th WR who came out and made the game winning TD because the defense pretty much assumed he d never catch the ball so they doubled up on your 1st WR"
(that NEVER happened, dont go researching it)
Was that a Freudian slip?