about those depth issues....

bbgun;2897429 said:
Agreed. Who is the impostor who has taken the normally levelheaded dbair's place? The radical personality change is unsettling, not to mention unexpected.

At first I thought he was being sarcastic.
 
RainMan;2897530 said:
I was surprised by Steve Octavien. I thought he was all over the place.

Jason Williams really showed his speed. Gave a glimpse into what he can become.

And the backup corners actually, well, covered.

All the quarterbacks seemed to have ample time. Romo got dinged once. It seemed like no one else ever hit the turf lol.

I like him alot more than Jacob Rodgers
 
dbair1967;2897331 said:
guess you were one of said chicken little's eh?

On Jenkins, if the coaches are starting him, doesnt that answer your question?

Have no idea what you are talking about with the scorebaord? What does that have to do with the price of cheese on the world market?

These coaches are still placing Newman back there to return punts.
 
dcfanatic;2897561 said:
At first I thought he was being sarcastic.

He wasn't. Here's the arithmetic around here: if we do poorly, don't overreact because after all, it's just-preseason (sound advice, btw). If we do well, then we're the real deal and it's a sure sign of good things to come. Terrible against Raider backups? Irrelevant. Better against Titan backups? Very significant. That way, the Boys can never lose. Clever, no?
 
bbgun;2897584 said:
He wasn't. Here's the arithmetic around here: if we do poorly, don't overreact because after all, it's just-preseason (sound advice, btw). If we do well, then we're the real deal and it's a sure sign of good things to come. Terrible against Raider backups? Irrelevant. Better against Titan backups? Very significant. That way, the Boys can never lose. Clever, no?

Bingo!

:bow:
 
bbgun;2897584 said:
He wasn't. Here's the arithmetic around here: if we do poorly, don't overreact because after all, it's just-preseason (sound advice, btw). If we do well, then we're the real deal and it's a sure sign of good things to come. Terrible against Raider backups? Irrelevant. Better against Titan backups? Very significant. That way, the Boys can never lose. Clever, no?

Actually, dbair is saying (I think) that last week preseason supposedly was a sign of something significant. So why is it suddenly not this week?
 
Everlastingxxx;2897336 said:
Everyone has said the depth is an issue, but you chose to pound your chest like you are some smart ***. Dude you know crap about football. Jerry Jones has Jenkins starting because he is a first round pick, Scan has out played him all training camp. So go thump your chest somewhere else.

dbair's a very knowledgeable poster. When you can hold your own in a football debate with him, you'll be in a position to talk crap about his understanding of the game. You're not anywhere near, yet.
 
Chocolate Lab;2897652 said:
Actually, dbair is saying (I think) that last week preseason supposedly was a sign of something significant. So why is it suddenly not this week?

I just typed something similar in the post above, then went and deleted the paragraph because it wasn't a debate I wanted to get sucked into. But since you mention it. Yes. If there's an overreaction to the team's depth and talent after a preseason loss last week, it's a reasonable question to ask where's the equal and opposite reaction the following week. dbair'd be the first to acknowledge that preseason games don't mean anything in terms of evaluating how the team as a whole is likely to play when the games count.
 
bbgun;2897584 said:
He wasn't. Here's the arithmetic around here: if we do poorly, don't overreact because after all, it's just-preseason (sound advice, btw). If we do well, then we're the real deal and it's a sure sign of good things to come. Terrible against Raider backups? Irrelevant. Better against Titan backups? Very significant. That way, the Boys can never lose. Clever, no?
Reverse the roles.
Tennessee was opening a new stadium. Had 100,000 for a preseason game. They were playing like it was their Super Bowl and we treated it like a preseason game. We would have heard it all.
 
dbair1967;2897252 said:
do we still have zero depth whatsoever, as the chicken little's cried last week?

our backups kicked the crap out of Tennessee's guys

I suppose someone will contend it was a fluke

:rolleyes:
 
:hammer:
bbgun;2897584 said:
He wasn't. Here's the arithmetic around here: if we do poorly, don't overreact because after all, it's just-preseason (sound advice, btw). If we do well, then we're the real deal and it's a sure sign of good things to come. Terrible against Raider backups? Irrelevant. Better against Titan backups? Very significant. That way, the Boys can never lose. Clever, no?
 
dbair1967;2897252 said:
do we still have zero depth whatsoever, as the chicken little's cried last week?

our backups kicked the crap out of Tennessee's guys

I suppose someone will contend it was a fluke

It goes both ways. Can't judge our depth as being good after one game either.

Two cents.
 
Double Trouble;2897695 said:
:laugh2: knew it was coming from somewhere

I thought our depth was OK at best last night. The DLine didn't impress me all that much, and the Oline impressed me even less. Other than that I thought pretty much everybody looked good.

And I know he's a rookie and 3rd stringer, but McGee almost looked lost to me at times out there. I'll give him a bit of a pass for now, but he was no good IMO.
 
silverbear;2897370 said:
To stick my nose into this little argument, I'll just say that I have respect for dbair's opinions... over time, he has proven to be a good, knowledgeable poster... we have argued in the past (mildly), but I generally find myself in agreement with him...

His point, of course, was to mock the knee-jerk, utterly predictable overreactions of the Chicken Littles in here after last week's PRESEASON game... and his point is quite valid; even after the total butt-kicking the Boys put on the Titans (a very good team) tonight, I'm still reading more negative threads than positive...

Seems there's no pleasing some Cowboys fans... if they ever did play the perfect game that some folks seem to demand, that crew would probably be pissed that they didn't have anything to whine about...

Silver
I ususally keep my nose out of the little mild argument, however, I too agree that there are more negative post and only after 2 preseason games. Do the team have more work to do? Yes, for sure. Are there some individuals the team need to cut tides with (Proctor, McQ, Watkins,IMO)? No doubt But overall I was very impressed with the overall outing they had last night. They played with confidence, more understanding of their assignments, their steps seem much faster and with a little chip on their shoulder.

My point is when things does not pan out every play does not mean you scrap what you have and start all over. For instance, poster are saying the ST was bad last night. I disagree!!!! Yes there were assignment mistakes, but oerall they played that game better than anything we saw from last year ST. They will continue to improve and so will other aspets of the team. Thank for the minute to share.
 
dcfanatic;2897558 said:
So that game solved the depth problems for you on the Offensive Line? OLB? and CB?

Cause it didn't for me.

Proctor still can't snap. McQuistan and Holland would still be targets if they had to start. The rookie OLB's are still unproven and one now may be hurt for a period of time. And I cringe thinking of Courtney Brown or Mike Mickens having to cover anyone.

And let's remember who was playing QB for the Titans.

Vince Young may be on his way to a 3rd team QB and then out of league in a short time. He's only hanging on now because of his name.

My first reaction (I haven't been able to break down the game yet), is that I feel VERY comfortable with Free at backup tackle. He seemed to hold up very well against one of the better backup DL's in football.
 
dcfanatic;2897558 said:
So that game solved the depth problems for you on the Offensive Line? OLB? and CB?

Cause it didn't for me.

Proctor still can't snap. McQuistan and Holland would still be targets if they had to start. The rookie OLB's are still unproven and one now may be hurt for a period of time. And I cringe thinking of Courtney Brown or Mike Mickens having to cover anyone.

And let's remember who was playing QB for the Titans.

Vince Young may be on his way to a 3rd team QB and then out of league in a short time. He's only hanging on now because of his name.

Fine, so in your opinion Patrick Ramsay is better than Vince Young. In that case our 3rd team guys handled him as well. Now what? DC, we can't have number 1 depth at all positions. It just isn't possible nor is it realistic to expect it. Every team has weaknesses somewhere in depth and they have to protect it just like we do. Is it ok to admit that this position or that position has a depth concern? Yes but that doesn't mean we suck. It just means that we have identified a potential problem IF our starter goes down. Of all the "potential" depth concerns on this team, the only one I'm really concerned about is NT. That guy is actually going to be on the field a good amount of time giving Ratliff a breather. THe backup center, hopefully, will never see the field.
 
Everlastingxxx;2897336 said:
Everyone has said the depth is an issue, but you chose to pound your chest like you are some smart ***. Dude you know crap about football. Jerry Jones has Jenkins starting because he is a first round pick, Scan has out played him all training camp. So go thump your chest somewhere else.

:rolleyes:
 
Last nights game dosent change my opinion one bit, the 06 and 07 drafts have offered little to nothing in terms of impact players. Free has potential to be a decent backup. If Spencer dosent come thru, both of those drafts are a complete disaster.
 
I wonder, in the Old Days, whether Dave Edwards would have been criticized for not being Howley, or Cornell Green run out of town for not being Renfro.

Would we have fretted about Jethro Pugh, because he wasn't Lilly?

How much time might we have spent aghast that the depth was thin behind John Niland and Blaine Nye?

Most people, I think, enjoy realistic give and take about the team's strengths and weaknesses, but where is the line between realism and pipe dream?

In the era of the salary cap, depth is relative. There probably will never be the ability to trade backups like Ron East and Billy Parks, et al, for prime draft choices. And maybe depth was overrated, even then. Many of the perceived would-be stars the Cowboys traded were revealed to be pedestrian as starters elsewhere.

Some of the marginal starters and backups from the 90s dynasty were exposed when they left in free agency.

I understand concerns about the quality of depth in some areas, and certainly about holes in the starting lineup. It is fun to read opinions regarding such weaknesses, great to have a forum in which we have those discussions.

I also understand and share the frustration of some that nothing ever seems good enough to please folks.

Yes, Dallas bobbled some drafts. I challenge anyone to go back to the drafts of the 60s and study some of those dogs. Take a look at some of the 90s fiascos.

This is not to say there hasn't been and won't be cause for concern with the performance of the current regime. There aren't new skins on the wall, and until there are, criticism is well founded.

But I have been very encouraged about the direction of this franchise - and last year's meltdown hasn't changed that. Nor did the prior playoff failures.

Depth takes time to accumulate, and mistakes will be made. But the team has begun again to find talent in nooks and crannies, in the later rounds and in original free agency. That had been missing.

Last year was difficult - injuries and distractions. Let's see what this year brings. Let's see.
 
bbgun;2897584 said:
He wasn't. Here's the arithmetic around here: if we do poorly, don't overreact because after all, it's just-preseason (sound advice, btw). If we do well, then we're the real deal and it's a sure sign of good things to come. Terrible against Raider backups? Irrelevant. Better against Titan backups? Very significant. That way, the Boys can never lose. Clever, no?
Thank you!!....people are finally starting to understand. To many Fanatics here and not enough level headed fans. Sickens me sometimes.
 

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
474,007
Messages
14,506,192
Members
24,207
Latest member
TomGiantsfan
Back
Top