Bob Sturm Blog: Random Cowboys Thoughts
- Thread starter WoodysGirl
- Start date
Mash
Active Member
- Messages
- 4,062
- Reaction score
- 0
I dont know
Sure depth is important...Every team wishes they had unlimited resources to pay backup players and to hit on every draft pick.
I mean.....back in the 90's......if we lost E.Smith.....who did we have? If we lost Moose? who did we have?.....Novachek......Irvin.....Aikman? Haley?.....Woodson?
I thought that team had great role players that gave the starters a breather.....but...could we really expect that team to not miss a beat if those starters went down?
Yes these Cowboys are a little thin in some areas.....I would love to have a solid backup OL or two and we are a little thin at LB......but overall.....we are not as bad as some mediots think.....
The game of football is about talent.....execution.....coaching but there is some luck involved too.....injuries can ruin a season.......
Sure depth is important...Every team wishes they had unlimited resources to pay backup players and to hit on every draft pick.
I mean.....back in the 90's......if we lost E.Smith.....who did we have? If we lost Moose? who did we have?.....Novachek......Irvin.....Aikman? Haley?.....Woodson?
I thought that team had great role players that gave the starters a breather.....but...could we really expect that team to not miss a beat if those starters went down?
Yes these Cowboys are a little thin in some areas.....I would love to have a solid backup OL or two and we are a little thin at LB......but overall.....we are not as bad as some mediots think.....
The game of football is about talent.....execution.....coaching but there is some luck involved too.....injuries can ruin a season.......
Shake_Tiller
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 1,438
- Reaction score
- 1,563
Most writers, I think, regurgitate what they are 'supposed' to say about the draft. And they do not understand or properly study the history of the draft.
Staubach was a late pick. So was Rayfield Wright. Cliff Harris and Drew Pearson were free agents. Jethro Pugh was a late pick. Wright and Pugh probably would have been free agents in the modern draft. Staubach, maybe. The Cowboys have always missed on a lot of draft picks. They missed on a lot of picks in the Landry years. They missed on a lot in the Johnson years.
They missed on too many picks in the pre-Parcells years, but they also missed on some when he was on board. They have missed on some post-Parcells.
I challenge some of you to closely study every Cowboys draft and to closely study the drafting of modern, successful franchises.
The trick is to accumulate talent. You can miss on a Dennis Homan if you sign a Drew Pearson. You can miss on a Randy Hughes if you sign a Cliff Harris.
The Cowboys have a good talent base. No team has a great one. Unfortunately the most glaring mistakes have tended to be in a very important area - the offensive line.
But consider how the Cowboys acquired Tuinei and Newton. Consider where they went to replace Stepnoski.
Dallas built a great OL in the 90s by being diverse and creative as much as by drafting well. For that matter, consider how the Cowboys acquired Novacek and Washington and Everett and Haley.
To lay any depth problems on the draft is to ignore the reality of all of the avenues employed to build an NFL team.
And to suggest depth is the major factor in how a team fares is shallow indeed. Yes it is important. But it is not as important as it is to be lucky on the injury front. The Pats played very well but missed the playoffs without Brady. I suspect the Colts would do the same without Manning. San Diego saw its defense struggle without Merriman. These are maybe extreme examples, but depth has limitations. A lot has to due with whether a team is lucky in which areas injuries occur.
Staubach was a late pick. So was Rayfield Wright. Cliff Harris and Drew Pearson were free agents. Jethro Pugh was a late pick. Wright and Pugh probably would have been free agents in the modern draft. Staubach, maybe. The Cowboys have always missed on a lot of draft picks. They missed on a lot of picks in the Landry years. They missed on a lot in the Johnson years.
They missed on too many picks in the pre-Parcells years, but they also missed on some when he was on board. They have missed on some post-Parcells.
I challenge some of you to closely study every Cowboys draft and to closely study the drafting of modern, successful franchises.
The trick is to accumulate talent. You can miss on a Dennis Homan if you sign a Drew Pearson. You can miss on a Randy Hughes if you sign a Cliff Harris.
The Cowboys have a good talent base. No team has a great one. Unfortunately the most glaring mistakes have tended to be in a very important area - the offensive line.
But consider how the Cowboys acquired Tuinei and Newton. Consider where they went to replace Stepnoski.
Dallas built a great OL in the 90s by being diverse and creative as much as by drafting well. For that matter, consider how the Cowboys acquired Novacek and Washington and Everett and Haley.
To lay any depth problems on the draft is to ignore the reality of all of the avenues employed to build an NFL team.
And to suggest depth is the major factor in how a team fares is shallow indeed. Yes it is important. But it is not as important as it is to be lucky on the injury front. The Pats played very well but missed the playoffs without Brady. I suspect the Colts would do the same without Manning. San Diego saw its defense struggle without Merriman. These are maybe extreme examples, but depth has limitations. A lot has to due with whether a team is lucky in which areas injuries occur.
lspain1
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 4,372
- Reaction score
- 33
Interesting thread although the arguments are repeating themselves. Last year we lost one starter on the OL and things got ugly. We did not have to lose a lot of people before cracks began to show and last season the injuries occurred to the wrong folks. Add in our December swoon coupled with some pre-season lapses this year and the writer has some low hanging fruit to make a story.
I like our depth better in every area this year except on the offensive line. We are likely to be a much more "ball control" offense team this season and that will increase the strain on a group that does not rotate. This group must perform at a consistently high level if we are to be a winning football team. They had some good outings in the pre-season but at times also displayed the same dismaying lack of concentration that has dogged them in the past. A team playing ball control can not afford drive killing penalties.
Did we really get a feel if any of the backups are ready to perform near a starting level? I don't think we did regardless of Free's good outings against backups. Add to this my belief that the writer is exactly right when he questions the Cowboys' drafts in the OL area. I don't care how well the other teams did, we seem to have come up empty in OL candidate challenging for a starting spot.
My conclusion before we fire a shot in anger.....we are thin at OL and we'll see if it turns out to be an achilles heel. Every one of you claiming the writer is all wet will get that sinking feeling when we lose any one of our starters on OL. We'll see.
I like our depth better in every area this year except on the offensive line. We are likely to be a much more "ball control" offense team this season and that will increase the strain on a group that does not rotate. This group must perform at a consistently high level if we are to be a winning football team. They had some good outings in the pre-season but at times also displayed the same dismaying lack of concentration that has dogged them in the past. A team playing ball control can not afford drive killing penalties.
Did we really get a feel if any of the backups are ready to perform near a starting level? I don't think we did regardless of Free's good outings against backups. Add to this my belief that the writer is exactly right when he questions the Cowboys' drafts in the OL area. I don't care how well the other teams did, we seem to have come up empty in OL candidate challenging for a starting spot.
My conclusion before we fire a shot in anger.....we are thin at OL and we'll see if it turns out to be an achilles heel. Every one of you claiming the writer is all wet will get that sinking feeling when we lose any one of our starters on OL. We'll see.
AdamJT13
Salary Cap Analyst
- Messages
- 16,583
- Reaction score
- 4,529
Why would he complain about the lack of depth, then say it was because we had a draft that produced no starters? We essentially got five primary backups out of the 2006 draft. Wouldn't that help resolve exactly what he's whining about?
He should have blamed the 2005 draft for our lack of depth. All we got out of that draft was a bunch of starters and All-Pros.
He should have blamed the 2005 draft for our lack of depth. All we got out of that draft was a bunch of starters and All-Pros.
tecolote
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 2,038
- Reaction score
- 1,196
We didn't only lose Kosier last year, we also lost his primary backup in Holland, Adams was playing injured, not to mention losing Romo for a month, Barber playing hurt and then not playing at all, Felix Jones was lost for the season, as was our punter, both in the same game Romo got injured, Witten played hurt, Hurd was out for most of the year, Austin for half, Newman lost some games and was not 100% most of the year, Roy Williams 11 was injured all year and RW38 was lost for the year and his backup Davis also lost some games, so did Jenkins and Spencer, and worst of all, Proctor was perfectly healthy all year.
Did I miss anyone?
Did I miss anyone?
DBOY3141
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 7,340
- Reaction score
- 5,956
Our depth is no better or no worse than any other team in football.
Giants lose Eli - they are done
Cardinals lose Warner - they are done
Eagles lose McNabb - they are done
someone said we have weak WR's because if our #1 goes down all we have are #2 & #3's. That's all the Giants have now, what if they lose Hixon or Smith. Do they now start #3 & 4's.
Our problem is not talent or depth. IT's LEADERSHIP and HEART!!!!
Giants lose Eli - they are done
Cardinals lose Warner - they are done
Eagles lose McNabb - they are done
someone said we have weak WR's because if our #1 goes down all we have are #2 & #3's. That's all the Giants have now, what if they lose Hixon or Smith. Do they now start #3 & 4's.
Our problem is not talent or depth. IT's LEADERSHIP and HEART!!!!
- Messages
- 58,971
- Reaction score
- 60,826
By his own definition, if a draft with 3-4 starters is 'great' then of our 2005 (Ware, Spears, Barber, Ratliff), 2007 (Spencer, Folk, Anderson and possibly Free), and 2008 (Jenkins, Scandrick, and you can make a good argument for Bennett and F Jones) were all great, or borderline great.
Really, the guy's got a problem with the 2006 draft and/or his prematurely complaining about 2009 but doing it in a roundabout fashion that doesn't make any sense.
Really, the guy's got a problem with the 2006 draft and/or his prematurely complaining about 2009 but doing it in a roundabout fashion that doesn't make any sense.
Sitting Bull
Active Member
- Messages
- 1,432
- Reaction score
- 1
If Sturm is right and there are a bunch of Cowboy fans fretting that the mighty Patriots scored a coup in picking up Stanback and calling him a QB, all they need to do is look at the Patriots inconsistent draft history.
Stanback has the roster spot vacated by recently cut draft pick Kevin O'Donnell. And speaking of 2006, while we were missing on Carp, the Pats traded up to take Chad Jackson. Green Bay used one of the Patriots' picks to take...Greg Jennings. Ouch.
The draft is a crapshoot and no good team has great depth across the board. Anyway, Scandrick and Choice (two of our best "depth" players) are tied to our 2006 draft- in a "six degrees of Kevin Bacon" sort of way...
Stanback has the roster spot vacated by recently cut draft pick Kevin O'Donnell. And speaking of 2006, while we were missing on Carp, the Pats traded up to take Chad Jackson. Green Bay used one of the Patriots' picks to take...Greg Jennings. Ouch.
The draft is a crapshoot and no good team has great depth across the board. Anyway, Scandrick and Choice (two of our best "depth" players) are tied to our 2006 draft- in a "six degrees of Kevin Bacon" sort of way...
