Well, there is your first problem.Did the majority of the post I saw on my Facebook feed
Yeah, talent helps.
If you just look at totals though, it doesn't take into account a lot of things. You have to dive a little deeper, which is why "per drive" comparisons are used more often, it's just a better metric. It lets you measure against every team without numbers getting flubbed by something that can differ as easily as total drives. FootballOutsiders has this kind of info btw, it's great.
In 2018 we moved up 10 spots in yards per drive, 4 spots better in points, we were bad at forcing INTs so we moved down there, but this year we were top 5 in fumbles forced per drive which is like 12-13 spots better. 10 spots better in impact plays (down series that result in first down or touchdown). We were actually slightly better at taking the ball away this year, taking it away .122 times per drive vs .104 in 2017.
Also, Dak only had 1 more turnover last year, due to fumbles this year. He was also sacked 24 more times, which is crazy. As a team, we lost twice as many fumbles than last year. Offensive turnovers was actually pretty negligible, less picks but more fumbles, and we took a lot more sacks. Offense was also worse in yards and points per drive than last year, which might be surprising. I wonder how much the late Eagles/Giants game messed with those numbers too.
The defense did an admirable job in the redzone last year which basically saved the PPG average, because they were pretty terrible across the board in just about everything. They were better in those this year, even significantly better in some things, while the offense was worse and pass protection as a whole a lot worse, even with the games Tyron missed and we got killed last year.
How much of the defense can be attributed to talent, who knows. Some/most of it maybe. That's where it gets fuzzy. Byron kinda fell off later in the year but most of the year our coverage was pretty good and we ran a lot of man, cover-1, and cover-3 which Richards did have some success in coaching. Outside of that, I don't know, too many moving parts.
The corners have covered pretty well. The Cowboys lack a true center-fielder with instincts and range who would become the ball hawk. Richard has done a good job during his short time in Dallas and I would really like to see him move into the DC role. I am not a big fan of what Marinelli prefers in the middle of the DL and the Tampa II zone is a wet dream for good QBs.Yes! This is not a new problem!
These CB's haven't been able to turn their heads and collect INT's since before that top 10 pick and Carr and whatnot.
This has gone on through several coaches.
Now, who is to blame?
Seriously!
***2017 PPG: 20.35
2018 PPG: 21.4
2017 Interceptions: 10
2018 Interceptions: 9
2017 sacks: 38
2019 sacks: 39
****In the 2017 number I subtracted 28 points that were the result of a pick 6.
Something to discuss...are we letting a young, firey coach blind us to the fact that this defense statistically isn’t much different? That playoff performance was as bad as I have seen in the Marinelli era...maybe the worse. Richard calls the plays.
Remember...he was fired from a staff that many of us envy and the Seahawks defense is no worse for it.
I get that. My point is that (while I have wailed against the previous DB coaching for years here and it's well-documented) I don't think it can be called on coaching any longer.The corners have covered pretty well. The Cowboys lack a true center-fielder with instincts and range who would become the ball hawk. Richard has done a good job during his short time in Dallas and I would really like to see him move into the DC role. I am not a big fan of what Marinelli prefers in the middle of the DL and the Tampa II zone is a wet dream for good QBs.
When I hear the hysterical cries from fans wanting to replace Garrett with Richard before we lose him, my overrated meter gets buried on the high side.
Awuzie seems most comfortable playing a trail technique. I cringe every time he thrown at waiting for a flag. Not sure how easy it is to change those techniques through coaching at this point in their careers. The thing you want first is no big plays. The Cowboys are pretty good at that. They can also play a very sticky man coverage in the redzone. The Cowboys DBs are just not ball hawking CBs. If they are successful defending the pass aside from that, I can live it.I get that. My point is that (while I have wailed against the previous DB coaching for years here and it's well-documented) I don't think it can be called on coaching any longer.
Maybe Awuzie and Lewis can still be molded, but ByJo is what he is now: He's a play-to-stop rather than go for the gamble guy.
Maybe Richard can have more time to instill elite habits.
ByJo is, I think, is what he is.
Awuzie plays more safe now than his rookie season.
Lewis... That guy might have gotten us +2-4 TO's this season... ... ...
... ... ...
Lewis is getting robbed.
Yeah... I think we are pretty much on the same level here.Awuzie seems most comfortable playing a trail technique. I cringe every time he thrown at waiting for a flag. Not sure how easy it is to change those techniques through coaching at this point in their careers. The thing you want first is no big plays. The Cowboys are pretty good at that. They can also play a very sticky man coverage in the redzone. The Cowboys DBs are just not ball hawking CBs. If they are successful defending the pass aside from that, I can live it.
I think a sign of a good coach is one who recognizes what you can improve upon with a player and not risk changing him too much to make him into a player he is not. Fundamentals and certain techniques are very important and should always be stressed. Instincts have a lot to do with player abilities and you can't really teach or learn that. You can help a player better recognize situations to speed up his reaction, but those guys with the instincts already built in will always be one step ahead.Yeah... I think we are pretty much on the same level here.
They've been through several coaches and not a one has taught them how to be ball-hawks.
Now... is that every one of those coaches, or the talent?
So... are you thinking that Richard and the last 3 coaches all couldn't coach being ball-hawks, or that the talent simply wasn't there?I think a sign of a good coach is one who recognizes what you can improve upon with a player and not risk changing him too much to make him into a player he is not. Fundamentals and certain techniques are very important and should always be stressed. Instincts have a lot to do with player abilities and you can't really teach or learn that. You can help a player better recognize situations to speed up his reaction, but those guys with the instincts already built in will always be one step ahead.
I don't think you can coach that into a player and the current players are not ball hawks. The Cowboys as a pass defense are overall pretty average, but they do keep teams out of the endzone and limit big plays. Those seems to be the style pointsSo... are you thinking that Richard and the last 3 coaches all couldn't coach being ball-hawks, or that the talent simply wasn't there?
I think Lewis is.I don't think you can coach that into a player and the current players are not ball hawks. The Cowboys as a pass defense are overall pretty average, but they do keep teams out of the endzone and limit big plays. Those seems to be the style points
Him out of all of them, yes! He does have a nose for the ball. Sux on KO returns, but I would love to know what it is in his game that loses Richard's confidence in him.I think Lewis is.
Height.Him out of all of them, yes! He does have a nose for the ball. Sux on KO returns, but I would love to know what it is in his game that loses Richard's confidence in him.