Sir Isaac Newton had three laws for the mechanisms of life. One of them stated this...
For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
This law is evident not just in mechanics, but also in sports; especially football. In 1985 the Chicago Bears unleashed a Defense they called the 46, and it's results on the NFL were devastating. It caused a reaction from the Offenses of 4 and 5 WR sets. Chess matches such as this help make football an absolute blast to watch. No other sport can equal it as a joust of minds as well as bodies. Think about it, how often can pitchers invent new pitches to strike out batters?
But every year Coordinators and Coaches emerge from their dark rooms with new ideas on how to attack the other team.
Mickey Spagnola has a line that he used to write that exemplifies what Jerry Jones idea of attacking might have been. Mickey says, "you can't have a steak on every plate." What he meant by this was that in a salary cap driven NFL you cannot afford to have superstar players at every position. Jerry being Jerry, he tried to disprove this theory.
It's hard to argue the talent of the 2007 team that sent 13 players to the Pro Bowl. They scored a lot of points and beat some very good teams. But in the end their actions were counter attacked by a team's reactions. The New York Giants negated all the assembled talent by simply rushing the passer like their lives depended on it. They became the aggressors and Dallas had no response because the top 2 WRs were both coming off of injuries and the 3rd WR, Patrick Crayton may not have had his heart in the game since he had been the #2 all year only to be pushed to #3 when Glenn attempted his return.
Am I suggesting Crayton tanked the game on purpose? Absolutely not, but I cannot deny that it probably had an effect on him to be demoted for a guy who had not put in his effort to that point. There is little doubt in the world that Terry Glenn was far more talented that Patrick Crayton.
2008's biggest waiver was probably Jerry getting rid of Terry Glenn. If you remember Jerry wanted injury guarantees written into Glenn's contract and they refused. Ultimately Jerry parted ways. The risks outweighed the rewards.
That is essentially what addition by subtraction is all about. Each player is a risk and at the same time a reward. Take Tony Romo for instance. You don't have to have graduated Summa Cum Laude to see that Tony Romo is an extremely talented athlete. You also have to acknowledge that there are some turnover issues and December fades as part of the package.
There was a risk in bringing in a player such as Terrell Owens. Jerry believed at the time that the rewards outweighed the risks. It was a steak on the plate. Jerry believed at the time that the rewards outweighed the risks. For 2007 I agree with Jerry. I am not sure I do for 2006 given it probably cost us Bill Parcells. I definitely do not think the rewards outweighed the risks of 2008. Putting it bluntly, Owens was not good enough in 2008 to keep around given the atmosphere surrounding the team. The risks began to outweigh the rewards.
Kudos to Stephen Jones who saw this immediately. Grudgingly Jerry came around and ultimately a steak was taken off the menu. Much like with Terry Glenn, the Cowboys are gambling on another Law, this one from Economics, the Law of Diminishing Returns. Owens production was declining and his drama was increasing. It led to less production and contributed to a poor atmosphere. Owens fan please note, I said contributed not caused.
I personally not only agree with this move, I applaud it wholeheartedly. I do believe it will result in addition by subtraction. In other words I believe the action will elicit a positive reaction.
I believe athletes and coaches are driven by ego. Pride has been hurt. I don't think there is any way around that in the case of the Cowboys. The 2008 season is being described as the most disappointing season in Cowboys History. These men know the fingers are pointed at them. Rightfully so.
By losing players such as Owens, Ellis, Pacman, and Tank the Cowboys know that they are removing some very real talent from the locker room and therefore the field. They are gambling that young players will feel a sense of responsibility and pride and step up to account for the loss of production. I contend that there really isn't a huge loss to cover. It was a perfect time to excise a player like Owens. Doing it after 2007 would have been laughable. In 2008 he really wasn't all that special.
I find it laughable to think a WR such as Roy Williams cannot produce between 1000 and 1100 yards and 10 potential TDs. In fact, I believe even Patrick Crayton could if targeted as a #1 WR. Those numbers are simply not earth shattering folks.
So replacing the production is not the focus as much as improving the chemistry is. I think in recent player interviews you can tell that they are starting to believe in the chemistry. Some are grasping it enthusiastically. The Cowboys are banking on the loss of talented veterans means younger players step up their production and reach their potential.
You can disagree with any move made by the organization. That's the freedom we have. It's pretty hard to deny that the circus atmosphere last year didn't yield professional results. The passing game in 2009 may not be as feared as when the Popcorn Machine was the focus. I think you're kidding yourself if you think it will grind to a screeching halt.
Meanwhile the team will respect each other more than ever and pride will push them harder. All they need is a little belief in themselves and they can clear that hurdle. The Cowboys added opportunity to the formula. That was the action. Now we all await the reaction.
First experiment gets under way in just over 8 days. Will 2009 be better than 2008? Bet on it.
And before you spout that Sparano nonsense at me, please don't try and tell me that Big Bill has no say in how the team is run and the game is called.
