Both Kowalski and Arkin looking good?

[RSM94]

Broaddus says Kowalski looks good, and Nate Newton says Arkin looks good:

http://espn.go.com/blog/dallas/cowb...inny-nate-newtons-take-on-the-interior-o-line

Unexpected and good news. Hmmmm.....................

 

[burmafrd]

Broaddus says Kowalski looks good, and Nate Newton says Arkin looks good:

http://espn.go.com/blog/dallas/cowb...inny-nate-newtons-take-on-the-interior-o-line

Unexpected and good news. Hmmmm.....................

we have heard this before and in the end it meant nothing. Arkin was supposedly looking good at camp last year. NADA

 

[CowboyMcCoy]

I actually think Arkin will make the squad. I see something in him that most don't. I've been saying it for a while now. Thanks for posting this RSM94!

 

[coult44]

If true, that's TWO BIG unexpected pieces of great news!!!

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Broaddus also said that Arkin looks good.

 

[CowboyMcCoy]

Broaddus also said that Arkin looks good.

He's going to eat his words. I was saying last year that Broaddus didn't know what he was talking about. He gave up on Arkin. It's actually great to see him change his tune. We're going to be OK on the oline, "folks". Everything will be OK.

 

[Ren]

Broaddus also said that Arkin looks good.

That's pretty promising since Broaddus basically wrote him off 2 years ago and again last year. If he says Arkin looks good now he must really look good

 

[Idgit]

we have heard this before and in the end it meant nothing. Arkin was supposedly looking good at camp last year. NADA

What can you possibly have against a report of two young linemen looking good early in camp? I think we can all safely say that we know there's still a long ways to go here. Our expectations can handle a positive report here and there.

And who's to say last year's report meant nothing? Perhaps it meant that a couple of young guys were developing. It's been known to happen.

 

[DogFace]

It's much easier to be a pessimist. In almost everything.

 

[Idgit]

It's much easier to be a pessimist. In almost everything.

Yea, I know. But this is really nothing more than a snapshot on how two players have performed after a couple days in camp. It's not a revised projection for there careers or anything.

I don't see the point in raining on that any more than I would want to jump off a building if a largely clueless reporter said a few players looked bad early in practices. So what?

 

[big dog cowboy]

When Irvin talks WR's I listen because he knows. Same with Nate.

 

[TheSport78]

Man if Arkin AND Kowalski panned out, I'd be really optimistic about the OL. Both seem to be better fits for the ZB scheme.

 

[burmafrd]

until this team shows it can develop O linemen that actually are consistent they get no cred at all.

 

[Irvin88_4life]

until this team shows it can develop O linemen that actually are consistent they get no cred at all.

Seeing as though Callahan has developed OL as a coach I am confident he will have these guys ready. I have been on this site for years but never posted anything and I see "Cowboy Fans" always putting the team down even when there is good news. Thats fine if thats how you feel but me personally I cheer for everybody on the team to be great, never will you hear me say oh I hope this guy gets cut, or I hope he sucks so we can get rid of him. I don't care about the players I care about the team (life long Cowboys players I do keep up with). I think Garrett has this team going in the right direction and Romo can lead us to a championship with a team not by his self. The drafts have been very good since Garrett became coach, the team is fighting to the end of the game for all 60 minutes, Garrett is building a TEAM. Its been many years I know and its hard to be patient but with some luck on our side, like every other team, we have a chance to win it all just like any other team in the league.

 

[RoyTheHammer]

I actually think Arkin will make the squad. I see something in him that most don't. I've been saying it for a while now. Thanks for posting this RSM94!

..and what do you see?

 

[Cowboys22]

What can you possibly have against a report of two young linemen looking good early in camp? I think we can all safely say that we know there's still a long ways to go here. Our expectations can handle a positive report here and there.

And who's to say last year's report meant nothing? Perhaps it meant that a couple of young guys were developing. It's been known to happen.

Because we hear this kind of stuff every year and it never translates to the field. Everyone hopes it's true but many decide to wait and see for themselves because we've been fed a load of crap too many times before.

 

[Risen Star]

What can you possibly have against a report of two young linemen looking good early in camp? I think we can all safely say that we know there's still a long ways to go here. Our expectations can handle a positive report here and there.

And who's to say last year's report meant nothing? Perhaps it meant that a couple of young guys were developing. It's been known to happen.

If you look at it honestly and put the foam finger down, you must temper any enthusiasm over positive reports from Cowboys' linemen on either side of the ball in the summer. Because this team lacks talent along the lines. Wait until they face other rosters and the competition level goes up before putting any stock in those reports.

This is a bad team in the trenches. Odds are excellent that we'll be saying the same thing in December and pointing to that as the reason why we were a pretender once again. At least the fans with a clue as to what's going on.

And, of course, then we'll enter an offseason where we fail to seriously address it again. Lather, rinse, repeat.

 

[Idgit]

If you look at it honestly and put the foam finger down, you must temper any enthusiasm over positive reports from Cowboys' linemen on either side of the ball in the summer. Because this team lacks talent along the lines. Wait until they face other rosters and the competition level goes up before putting any stock in those reports.

This is a bad team in the trenches. Odds are excellent that we'll be saying the same thing in December and pointing to that as the reason why we were a pretender once again. At least the fans with a clue as to what's going on.

And, of course, then we'll enter an offseason where we fail to seriously address it again. Lather, rinse, repeat.

Of course positive reports this time of year should be tempered. Negative, too. The point is its silly to be antagonistic about them appearing when they do for players of every team, every year, some of whom don't make the final roster. It's just a nice, positive report about two players trying to make the team. There's no harm in that for Cowboys fans.

And nice re-use of your foam-finger line, but it still doesn't make OGs any more important than they actually are. We'll end up with the same results if we end up minus 13 in turnover differential again and because our pass defense is inadequate, and not because you're unable to properly evaluate the impact of Nate Livings' mistakes on our passing game. Repetition isn't going to make you any less wrong in that regard.

 

[Idgit]

Because we hear this kind of stuff every year and it never translates to the field. Everyone hopes it's true but many decide to wait and see for themselves because we've been fed a load of crap too many times before.

That's not true. It often translates on the field. Barry Church was one example from last season. Cole Beasley another.

These Reports are snapshots. They don't have time to be trends, yet. But there's little sense being annoyed by a positive practice just because you're reluctant to get your hopes up. If it works out for these players, great. If it doesn't, it'll be because they were unable to sustain a high level of play. We can all live with that, can't we? Why does it have to be a Homer v. "Realists" thing? It's just a universal fact of NFL training camps.

 

[Risen Star]

Of course positive reports this time of year should be tempered. Negative, too. The point is its silly to be antagonistic about them appearing when they do for players of every team, every year, some of whom don't make the final roster. It's just a nice, positive report about two players trying to make the team. There's no harm in that for Cowboys fans.

And nice re-use of your foam-finger line, but it still doesn't make OGs any more important than they actually are. We'll end up with the same results if we end up minus 13 in turnover differential again and because our pass defense is inadequate, and not because you're unable to properly evaluate the impact of Nate Livings' mistakes on our passing game. Repetition isn't going to make you any less wrong in that regard.

OL are vital. Ts, Gs, C. To downplay their importance makes it hard for me to take anything you say seriously. I'd trade an entire secondary for two great Gs.

This team isn't a contender for one reason and one reason alone. They lose the line of scrimmage consistently on both sides of the ball. Until that changes, they will never win.