Antuan Woods and Christian Covington

jaybird · Sep 16, 2019

ESisback said:
Until we win another Lombardi, some will continue to complain how full of JAGS this team is.

JAG tag is overused

ESisback · Sep 16, 2019

panchucko said:
You know we can’t win the Lombardi in week 3, and neither can anyone else. Give it time see how it plays out

In the meantime, enjoy the ride!

ESisback · Sep 16, 2019

Doomsday101 said:
Every team has the so called JAGS and yet they are important parts of the puzzle. JAGS are the blue collar workers, they don't get the praise as star players but they go out and do their jobs to help their teams win.

Agreed. A small, very vocal contingent, however, tirelessly promote the negative perception of JAGS, as well as the notion that Dallas has more of them than most teams.

Doomsday101 · Sep 16, 2019

ESisback said:
Agreed. A small, very vocal contingent, however, tirelessly promote the negative perception of JAGS, as well as the notion that Dallas has more of them than most teams.

Fact is no team can field a team of 53 stud players cap would not allow that to happen. We have what I call some solid lunch pale guys or JAGS as some like to say. These guys are not pro bowl bound but they come in work hard week in and week out and do what is asked of them by the team.

TwoCentPlain · Sep 16, 2019

America's Cowboy said:
Ugh. I'm disliking the Trysten Hill pick more and more each week. We've been begging for a big, hole-plugging, double team taking 1-tech DT for years, but Marinelli only sees value in light-footed, nimble 3 techs.

Talk about trying to fit a square peg into a round hole.

That guy Donald for the Rams seems to be pretty good.

xwalker · Sep 16, 2019

L9

ESisback said:
Agreed. A small, very vocal contingent, however, tirelessly promote the negative perception of JAGS, as well as the notion that Dallas has more of them than most teams.

Posters that used that term often are usually the ones that should use it on themselves...

xwalker · Sep 16, 2019

America's Cowboy said:
Ugh. I'm disliking the Trysten Hill pick more and more each week. We've been begging for a big, hole-plugging, double team taking 1-tech DT for years, but Marinelli only sees value in light-footed, nimble 3 techs.

Talk about trying to fit a square peg into a round hole.

The Cowboys issue with Hill in the preseason was that his instinct is the play the run instead of pass rush.

His 2018 college coaches had the same issue.

In the AAC championship game against the run heavy Memphis team with Tony Pollard and Darrell Henderson (3rd Rams), Memphis only scored 10 points on drives with Hill on the field vs 31 points when he was not on the field for those drives. Even the 1 TD with him on the field, that was with Memphis starting the drive near the redzone due to a turnover by the UCF offense.

People continually rant about getting a bigger 1-tech (4-3 Nose Tackle) but the other method to improve the run dense is to get big 3-tech DTs. Collins 6-2, 311 is a big 3-tech but last year Crawford started the first 7 games at 3-tech DT when Collins missed 3 games and was not close to 100% in the other 4.

Crawford was 6-4, 275 when drafted and plays at about 280 to 285.

Hill was 308 in the draft and rumored to have played at over 320 some years in college.

Hill did show in the preseason that he needs work against Zone Running Teams but he has a general instinct to play the run and the size to do it.

Hennessy_King · Sep 16, 2019

ESisback said:
Agreed. A small, very vocal contingent, however, tirelessly promote the negative perception of JAGS, as well as the notion that Dallas has more of them than most teams.

You take it as negative. It's just a stated fact. I don't know why ppl get upset here when you keep it real about a player's ability.

Creeper · Sep 16, 2019

I like what I saw from Covington. He is big and strong in the middle. I think he'll be fine. The could use a guy in the middle to get a push. Irving was that guy but he turned out to be a bad character.

As far as the Cowboys line play, I expected more from Collins. Disappointment. Against the Giants, it was the DEs getting pushed around more than the DTs (who also got pushed around. What concerned me in that game was once the holes were opened, there were not LBs or safeties to fill them. No one was getting penetration. Moving Crawford back to DT and having Quinn at DE may help. They can use more than that though. Maybe if Gregory gets back? Taco appears to be a total unmitigated bust.

I am not giving up on Hill yet. Two games is not enough to make a call. Landry used to say that it takes 3 or 4 years for defensive linemen to reach their potential. This is why Collins is so disappointing. He should be starting to peak.

Fredbeard · Sep 16, 2019

Covington was a highly rated free agent and might be better than woods. I just worry about how it was reported that he lost thirty pounds prior to the season

. Washington also struggled to run the ball against
The eagles so it’s difficult to gauge how well or poorly the defense did against Washington’s running game

QuincyCarterEra · Sep 16, 2019

DanA said:
Is it hard? They seem to go pretty cheaply. There's plenty of guys in that 3-8m range that I would consider an upgrade and a few in the 8-12m range that went in free agency that I would love to have signed.

Which free agents did you think would be an upgrade there?

Keithfansince5 · Sep 16, 2019

America's Cowboy said:
Ugh. I'm disliking the Trysten Hill pick more and more each week. We've been begging for a big, hole-plugging, double team taking 1-tech DT for years, but Marinelli only sees value in light-footed, nimble 3 techs.

Talk about trying to fit a square peg into a round hole.

The issue is MARINELLI. He absolutely resists these hole plugging run staffers. Even if he gets one, he makes them lose weight and slim down so they can rush the passer better. While that is great, they usually suck against the run because they get pushed around. We need to retire Marinelli and bring in a much more aggressive type defensive coach who values stopping the run with 2 monster hole plugging DT's. Then go pass rush specialists on the ends and you have a great DL.

ESisback · Sep 16, 2019

Hennessy_King said:
You take it as negative. It's just a stated fact. I don't know why ppl get upset here when you keep it real about a player's ability.

So JAG is NOT a negative? Does Dallas have more JAGS than other teams, and if so, is that due to an incompetent FO?

Keithfansince5 · Sep 16, 2019

ESisback said:
So JAG is NOT a negative? Does Dallas have more JAGS than other teams, and if so, is that due to an incompetent FO?

JAG is not a negative. Anyone who earns his way onto an NFL roster is special. That feat should never be over looked. They are real good at what they do or they would not be on an NFL roster period. However, there are players who are special (a notch better than a jag) and players who are extra special or elite who are in the top 5 of their positions. Obviously not every team has one of those elite guys. I think Dallas has a lot of jags on the DL. Dlaw is a special player, sometimes an elite player. He vacillates between the two categories too much. He is our best DL player for sure though. None of the remaining players are special and all are jags. If Dallas upgraded just one of those guys to a special player, they as a group would improve mightily.

DCCowboys11 · Sep 16, 2019

Hennessy_King said:
I mean we have a thread about a jag filling in for a jag

Antwan Woods in no JAG. He’s one of the better DTs against the run in the league when he’s healthy. Just because a guy isn’t a “big name” and 340+ pounds like many want, doesn’t mean he’s a jag.

Tussinman · Sep 16, 2019

QuincyCarterEra said:
Which free agents did you think would be an upgrade there?

This off-season was actually a damn good one for DT pick-ups.

Danny Shelton, Malcom Brown, Jonathan Hankins, and Margus Hunt where significant upgrades from what we have and none where high dollar at all. Even mid-tier guys like McCoy and Henry Anderson where good values

This would of actually been the perfect off-season to upgrade DT.......

DanA said:
Is it hard? They seem to go pretty cheaply. There's plenty of guys in that 3-8m range that I would consider an upgrade and a few in the 8-12m range that went in free agency that I would love to have signed.

As I stated above you are 100% correct. This free-agency class was stacked with mid level DT starters at affordable prices

Hennessy_King · Sep 16, 2019

ESisback said:
So JAG is NOT a negative? Does Dallas have more JAGS than other teams, and if so, is that due to an incompetent FO?

The FO is incompetent. But this team does not have more jags than other teams. But this team likes to hold on to Jags instead of moving on from them quickly

Hennessy_King · Sep 16, 2019

DCCowboys11 said:
Antwan Woods in no JAG. He’s one of the better DTs against the run in the league when he’s healthy. Just because a guy isn’t a “big name” and 340+ pounds like many want, doesn’t mean he’s a jag.

He's a JAG go watch other teams DT on tape. Has nothing to do with his name.

cern · Sep 16, 2019

when you consider the entire spectrum of the nfl, there are few players the caliber of aaron Donald, Khalil mac, fletcher cox, etc. ergo, jags are essential pieces to the puzzle. the rest is coaching and scheme. the cowboys have just one d-line star, tank Lawrence, who to date has not quite lived up to expectations, mostly due to missing so much time with the rehab process. hopefully, he will continue to improve weekly.

cern · Sep 16, 2019

Hennessy_King said:
The FO is incompetent. But this team does not have more jags than other teams. But this team likes to hold on to Jags instead of moving on from them quickly

I cannot agree with your front office stance. mcclay and Stephen are among the best in the nfl.

Antuan Woods and Christian Covington

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Numbnuts

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member