Are Bernie and Livings guaranteed back now?

[Stash]

I don't see much difference between the two groups, but that's great.

Everybody gets to believe what choose to believe. It's obvious enough who's believing things for good reasons and who's uninformed on any particular topic.

A .500 record since 1996 clearly shows that.

 

[Idgit]

A .500 record since 1996 clearly shows that.

That's a simplistic way of looking at it. It's a mistake to reduce the analysis of the team down to it's record over a span of time that includes 5 coaches and who knows how much personnel.

Like any team, there are things we do well, and things we've done poorly. Discussing options for areas that need improvement leaves plenty of room for legitimate debate. You can't really blame posters who want to talk about, say, the cap implications for triggering the team restructure options for Mack and Livings to react negatively when that interesting debate is sidetracked into yet another discussion of 'Jerry Jones sucks at managing our cap.'

Or can you?

 

[jnday]

No one defends anything. It's people like you and some others who whine about this team constantly in which grates on people's nerves. You can't go into a thread without someone whining about this team or Jerry Jones. A lot of fans know the Cowboys have been mediocre for a while, but they decide to not whine about it every second of every day and talk about what this team can do to improve itself. But you can't do that because people come into every thread and spew the same whining, "I hate Jerry Jones" spew. It's extremely annoying because you can't discuss football anymore around here. It's impossible.

I didn't mention Jerry. You did. Don't you think someone should shoulder the blame for an oline that has cost this team the careers of Romo, Ware and Witten? That's right, three very good players that will waste careers because this team has subpar "football men" running things. Direct your anger at the cause of this mess, not the ones that are pointing it out.

 

[InmanRoshi]

If only we had a real football guy who would have spent $35 million guaranteed on Nicks and the 13th pick on DeCastro. With resources properly allocated like that, we would have been playing in the Superbowl instead of Tampa Bay and Pittsburgh. Thanks a lot, Jerrah.

Resources well allocated, Pittsburgh and Tampa Bay!!!! I bet Tampa Bay is glad they got "quality over quantity" when Nicks went on IR in October.

 

[jnday]

There's an ignore button.

If you have such an issue with my opinions, feel free to use it.

I'm disgusted by how my favorite team is being run into the ground and I have every right to discuss it.

Blame the people responsible, don't blame the people not happy about it.

Well said. If a poster doesn't want to read our opinions, there are options. If they want to cheer for a team with a solid oline, there are options as well. Dallas just isn't one of those options. Some of us want the problem fixed and choose not to ignore it.

 

[InmanRoshi]

I think all of us want to watch a good OL, we just find the idea that the Cowboys haven't allocated tons of resources to the OL over the last 15 years or that the OL has singlehandedly has kept us out of the Superbowl to be pants on the head ********. It's okay to say things that are pants on the head ********, just expect to be called out on it.

 

[Kristen82]

...pants on the head ********...

Maybe it's because I'm an airhead and thus easily amused, but got a giggle out of that phrase. Never heard it before. Who wears their pants on their head?

 

[TheCount]

If only we had a real football guy who would have spent $35 million guaranteed on Nicks and the 13th pick on DeCastro. With resources properly allocated like that, we would have been playing in the Superbowl instead of Tampa Bay and Pittsburgh. Thanks a lot, Jerrah.

Resources well allocated, Pittsburgh and Tampa Bay!!!! I bet Tampa Bay is glad they got "quality over quantity" when Nicks went on IR in October.

lol, as opposed to the 49ers and Ravens who have clearly spent neither money nor high picks on their offensive lines. Oh... Wait.

 

[jnday]

I think all of us want to watch a good OL, we just find the idea that the Cowboys haven't allocated tons of resources to the OL over the last 15 years or that the OL has singlehandedly has kept us out of the Superbowl to be pants on the head ********. It's okay to say things that are pants on the head ********, just expect to be called out on it.

Do your research before posting. Dallas has spent fewer draft picks on the oline than most teams over the last few years. I read recently that it was the fewest. There is no defending that approach, unless you are ********. To say that the oline hasn't cost this team wins could be considered ******** as well. I never said Super Bowl. That is your attempt to overstate a point to call me out on a position that I am right about.

 

[Stash]

That's a simplistic way of looking at it. It's a mistake to reduce the analysis of the team down to it's record over a span of time that includes 5 coaches and who knows how much personnel.

You may think so, but I feel it's valid reason for many of our frustrations.

Keep in mind the one single constant.

Like any team, there are things we do well, and things we've done poorly. Discussing options for areas that need improvement leaves plenty of room for legitimate debate. You can't really blame posters who want to talk about, say, the cap implications for triggering the team restructure options for Mack and Livings to react negatively when that interesting debate is sidetracked into yet another discussion of 'Jerry Jones sucks at managing our cap.'

Or can you?

I don't blame them, and I really haven't.

When one looks they can see who is doing the blaming.

Folks are getting upset by hearing what they don't want to hear.

Again, don't blame people for being upset, blame those who made it that way.

Don't shoot the messenger.

 

[Idgit]

Folks are getting upset by hearing what they don't want to hear.

Again, don't blame people for being upset, blame those who made it that way.

Don't shoot the messenger.

Except, that's not really what's happening. There are plenty of threads where the same posters 'getting upset' are the ones criticizing. It really does matter whats being criticized. The structure of brand new contracts. The way the team handled coach's challenges. The conditioning program. The team's medical staff. When these are the things getting complained about, the complaints are unfounded, and you're going to see some of the smarter/more argumentative posters pushing back hard.

Turnovers. Problems on the right side of the OL. Red zone offense. Red zone running game. Jerry Jones talking. Certain historical contract extensions or personnel decisions. There are dozens of topics where people can hear things they don't want to hear, and have great conversations on those topics.

And then there's a wide variety of topics in between valid criticisms and invalid ones that are going to get varying levels of debate.

That's all as it should be. The better arguments should 'win,' because they are proven to be both valid and more likely to be true. But let's not pretend that the only reason people contest weak arguments is because they can't tolerate negative opinons. And let's not pretend that the team's recent record justifies believing everything the team does also has to be mediocre. You're right that it's the reason why people act that way, but it doesn't follow logically that the people that act that way are right when it comes to a particular topic. Just being disappointed generally doesn't require us to behave like everything the team doe is pitiful and worthy of ridicule.

 

[Stash]

Except, that's not really what's happening. There are plenty of threads where the same posters 'getting upset' are the ones criticizing. It really does matter whats being criticized. The structure of brand new contracts. The way the team handled coach's challenges. The conditioning program. The team's medical staff. When these are the things getting complained about, the complaints are unfounded, and you're going to see some of the smarter/more argumentative posters pushing back hard.

Sorry , your use of the term 'smarter ' is subjective - at best.

Turnovers. Problems on the right side of the OL. Red zone offense. Red zone running game. Jerry Jones talking. Certain historical contract extensions or personnel decisions. There are dozens of topics where people can hear things they don't want to hear, and have great conversations on those topics.

And then there's a wide variety of topics in between valid criticisms and invalid ones that are going to get varying levels of debate.

That's all as it should be. The better arguments should 'win,' because they are proven to be both valid and more likely to be true. But let's not pretend that the only reason people contest weak arguments is because they can't tolerate negative opinons. And let's not pretend that the team's recent record justifies believing everything the team does also has to be mediocre. You're right that it's the reason why people act that way, but it doesn't follow logically that the people that act that way are right when it comes to a particular topic. Just being disappointed generally doesn't require us to behave like everything the team doe is pitiful and worthy of ridicule.

Nor does it foster good feelings.

People are disappointed and frustrated

Don't blame them for that - as so many do - blame those who made, and continue to make, the decisions that have lead us here.

I'm certainly not apologizing for saying that this isn't good enough.

Not for my money.

And soon I fear, not for my time.

 

[Idgit]

Sorry , your use of the term 'smarter ' is subjective - at best.

It's subjective by definition. I wasn't implying that the smarter posters are on the happy side of the fence and that the dumb ones are on the sad side. Only that smart posters are going to zoom in on bad arguments and dispute them because bad arguments invite good ones.

People are disappointed and frustrated

Don't blame them for that - as so many do - blame those who made, and continue to make, the decisions that have lead us here.

I'm certainly not apologizing for saying that this isn't good enough.

Not for my money.

And soon I fear, not for my time.

I've yet to see a single post blaming people for being disappointed or frustrated. I've seen many, many posts criticizing arguments that are bad because they're based on emotions and not on anything defensible.

I don't think it's asking too much to expect posters who are frustrated to still chose to believe things that can be demonstrated or proven. If they chose to complain, also, about things that can't be supported or proven, well, then they should expect to get some replies. That's not anything new around here, and it's, frankly, kind of the point of a message board.

 

[jnday]

Except, that's not really what's happening. There are plenty of threads where the same posters 'getting upset' are the ones criticizing. It really does matter whats being criticized. The structure of brand new contracts. The way the team handled coach's challenges. The conditioning program. The team's medical staff. When these are the things getting complained about, the complaints are unfounded, and you're going to see some of the smarter/more argumentative posters pushing back hard.

Turnovers. Problems on the right side of the OL. Red zone offense. Red zone running game. Jerry Jones talking. Certain historical contract extensions or personnel decisions. There are dozens of topics where people can hear things they don't want to hear, and have great conversations on those topics.

And then there's a wide variety of topics in between valid criticisms and invalid ones that are going to get varying levels of debate.

That's all as it should be. The better arguments should 'win,' because they are proven to be both valid and more likely to be true. But let's not pretend that the only reason people contest weak arguments is because they can't tolerate negative opinons. And let's not pretend that the team's recent record justifies believing everything the team does also has to be mediocre. You're right that it's the reason why people act that way, but it doesn't follow logically that the people that act that way are right when it comes to a particular topic. Just being disappointed generally doesn't require us to behave like everything the team doe is pitiful and worthy of ridicule.

One question... Don't you think the way that the oline has been handled is a mess? Considering the results over the last several years, I find it hard to believe that anybody can agree with the moves that have been made in this area. You have always taken a wait and see attitude, but this train wreck could be seen years ago.

 

[Idgit]

One question... Don't you think the way that the oline has been handled is a mess? Considering the results over the last several years, I find it hard to believe that anybody can agree with the moves that have been made in this area. You have always taken a wait and see attitude, but this train wreck could be seen years ago.

I don't always take a 'wait and see' attitude. I did this offseason, because the guys we acquired got hurt and hadn't had the opportunity to play, so waiting to see was the only logical position to take in that situation. We also had bigger fish to fry last offseason, and limited resources.

Right now, I've said in several threads, I'd cut Free, draft an OG in the first two rounds, and sign a VFA at RT.

As far as results over the last several years go, I think the team's made efforts, especially recently, to improve. I think they whiffed on Free's extension, but I don't fault them for extending him. I think the Livings signing looks decent. I think drafting Smith was the smart move. I think Mack looks like a decent backup player at two positions, but a whiff as a starter. I see that they've tried repeatedly to develop mid round picks, and I think that's a sound strategy. I also see that it hasn't worked. But I don't get mad at the team for looking at positions that can be adequately staffed by developing mid rounders and attempting to do so. In fact, my biggest drafting criticisms have to do with other areas, like RB and TE where we haven't done that, and it's hurt us a lot more than the whiffs along the OL have.

Generally, though, I think people make a much bigger deal about the OL problems than they actually deserve. I think they're an obvious area to improve the team. I think even a moderate improvement will get good results. I don't get angry, though, with what we've done, because I see that we're trying to address it, along with addressing a number of other important personnel problems at the same time, and I understand that not everything is going to get fixed all at once.

 

[Stash]

It's subjective by definition. I wasn't implying that the smarter posters are on the happy side of the fence and that the dumb ones are on the sad side. Only that smart posters are going to zoom in on bad arguments and dispute them because bad arguments invite good ones.




I've yet to see a single post blaming people for being disappointed or frustrated. I've seen many, many posts criticizing arguments that are bad because they're based on emotions and not on anything defensible.

I don't think it's asking too much to expect posters who are frustrated to still chose to believe things that can be demonstrated or proven. If they chose to complain, also, about things that can't be supported or proven, well, then they should expect to get some replies. That's not anything new around here, and it's, frankly, kind of the point of a message board.

You see what you want to see.

More power to you.

I will always respect your commitment and your intelligence.

 

[Idgit]

You see what you want to see.

More power to you.

I will always respect your commitment and your intelligence.

Everybody in this thread: group hug.

 

[SportsGuru80]

Let them compete in OTA's and training camp... I pray we get Cooper from UNC and a bigger/stronger center.