Free practicing at...RG

erod said:
Good defensive lines would utterly destroy an offensive line that included Arkin and Bernadeau.

There needs to be a strong guard with veteran presence between our rookie center and our very average right tackle.
Click to expand...

Cards have a good DL and they were tough against the run but certainly did not destroy them.
 
I read the Hill tweet to mean that Parnell, not Costa was our fifth best lineman if Leary is out. This is an attempt to get our best players on the field.

When Leary returns does Bern go back to right guard or the bench?
 
Its
Corso said:
He said no one trusts Parnell? I missed that. I see in that sentence that no one trusts Arkin- is that what you were referring to?
Click to expand...
confusing.

Is he saying no one trusts Arkin and Parnell as top five linemen or is he saying no one trusts Arkin; Parnell one of top five linemen?
 
erod said:
Who else is concerned about going up that Cincinnati front this weekend in the "dress rehearsal"?

Romo had better be ready to run for his life.
Click to expand...

Fortunately, the Bengals don't have a good defensive line. :rolleyes::cool::eek: Hey, at least we'll know where we really stand, it doesn't get much better than that Cinci front.
 
Mr Cowboy said:
Here we go, Costa had a bad camp because he is not very good, never has been very good. Arkin has never been an NFL caliber player and is not NFL caliber now, thus necessitating the experiment. They're are saying that Parnell is considered one off the top 5 linemen.

I don't buy the "best 5" because if you're best 5 are all OTs are you going to have an OL of all Tackles? They may be good tackles but that doesn't make them good guards or center.
Click to expand...

You are making a ton of unsubstantiated assumptions based one day experiment. Every team does this kind of thing.
 
TheRomoSexual said:
Yeah, that's what I thought, but the former doesn't make much sense considering they moved Free to add Parnell to the top five.
Click to expand...

No, just means that Parnell is closer to the top 5 than Arkin is. But I think the team would rather neither start.
 
To summarize, this is absolutely no big deal, but because it involves a new RG, people are going to overreact to it and proclaim in the next new OL crisis. Meanwhile, we're still looking to add a veteran to bolster depth at RG but are otherwise very happy with every offseason move we've made at OL and expect to have every one of our projected starters back to start the season.
 
Garrett just praised Costa as their back up at C and G. I think this look with Free at RG is for 45 man roster decisions, not 53. This look would allow them to only bring 7 to game day. If Fred were to get injured in a game, Costa could come in. If one of the tackles, Parnell. If one or both of the guards, Costa/Free could be plugged in.
 
TheRomoSexual said:
Yeah, that's what I thought, but the former doesn't make much sense considering they moved Free to add Parnell to the top five.
Click to expand...

cowboys2233 said:
No, just means that Parnell is closer to the top 5 than Arkin is.
Click to expand...

Well, in fairness, somebody has to be in the top five.
If anything, I take this juggling today as a nod to Parnell and the work he's done getting back up to speed. So, I guess that's a good thing, at least. They might not be trying it if they were just worried about swing OT.
 
Nirvana said:
Garrett just praised Costa as their back up at C and G. I think this look with Free at RG is for 45 man roster decisions, not 53. This look would allow them to only bring 7 to game day. If Fred were to get injured in a game, Costa could come in. If one of the tackles, Parnell. If one or both of the guards, Costa/Free could be plugged in.
Click to expand...

That's what I think, too.
 
Nirvana said:
Garrett just praised Costa as their back up at C and G. I think this look with Free at RG is for 45 man roster decisions, not 53. This look would allow them to only bring 7 to game day. If Fred were to get injured in a game, Costa could come in. If one of the tackles, Parnell. If one or both of the guards, Costa/Free could be plugged in.
Click to expand...

This is what I'm think is the reasoning behind the experimenting. Probably considering going long at another position.
 
TheRomoSexual said:
You are making a ton of unsubstantiated assumptions based one day experiment. Every team does this kind of thing.
Click to expand...

the only unsubstantiated is saying every team does this..... The Cowboys are working on contingencies because their back ups suck. Most teams have or strive to have serviceable backups. We have stuck with bums like Costa and Arkin knowing they are not NFL players. A serviceable backup is someone like Bernardeau, who happens to start here. Furthermore, if they're saying that Parnell is part of the best 5, it may be more than a contingency.
 
Idgit said:
That's what I think, too.
Click to expand...

Eh, they could plug in anybody, doesn't mean they'll be any good at it. Seriously, how much good to they really think Free would be to them at RG after putting him there for a single practice? This sounds like a colossal waste of time to me.
 
After this weekend, we'll know whether or not some hand wringing over the line is warranted. Cincinnati has a great defensive front, one of the best in the league. They'll tell us precisely where the Cowboys line is and how far it needs to go.
 
ScipioCowboy said:
After this weekend, we'll know whether or not some hand wringing over the line is warranted. Cincinnati has a great defensive front, one of the best in the league. They'll tell us precisely where the Cowboys line is and how far it needs to go.
Click to expand...

Yup, hopefully we still have a starting QB too. LOL.
 
CowboyMcCoy said:
This is a mistake. Leave Free where he belongs, at right tackle.
Click to expand...


Im sure they are just practicing things for emergency situations.

Doug Free would get drove back into Romo consistently as a guard. No chance he ever plays there unless it's an emergency.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

... and 66 more.
Total: 10,425 (members: 166, guests: 10,259)
Robots: 2,310

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
475,026
Messages
14,577,091
Members
24,214
Latest member
whoami2066
Back
Top