xwalker
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 57,168
- Reaction score
- 64,686
Preseason stats. Don't mean much.
They "mean" that the Cowboys were able to run the ball.
Preseason stats. Don't mean much.
They "mean" that the Cowboys were able to run the ball.
Sturm says:
But, the offensive line has not progressed much and the negative runs were still all around on Saturday. Geno Atkins was still destroying your guards and putting the Cowboys in spots where they were allowing negative plays to lead to punts.
I think Sturm is getting a little eeyore-ish here. I have a lot of problems with his hyper-negative take.
1. In the first half we had 18 runs for 45 yards by my count. Not all world mind you or even close, but enough to keep the defense honest. By my count, we had one negative run in the first half. We had a few carries of zero yards. We also had 137 yards on 18 attempts in the passing game and 2 TD's, so apparently there was some respect of the run.
I've been critical of our offensive line, too, even suggesting at one point that our line was being overrun so badly we needed to call in artillery on our own position. But, we have improved year over year, and I think our running game will be pretty good when we get Leary back.
It's looking ugly for sure. The offense is really going to have to game plan around no running game,,,,,,again. More pressure on Romo,,,,,again. More mistakes by everyone,,,,,again. We need a miracle Jerry, a miracle I tell ya. Help us!
If that's enough to keep the defense honest, how bad does it have to be before they are no longer honest?
I didn't count the negative runs but there was more than one occasion where the RB broke a tackle in the backfield. That's ever bit as negative as him getting tackled in the backfield from an OL perspective.
When Leary gets back I could run thru the gaping holes in our left side. Tyron, Leary, Fred nice
Those of us who were "chicken little" about the o-line the past two preseasons were 100% spot-on accurate. And those of you with rose colored glasses were 100% wrong.
It's funny how you boys never learn.
Get ready for year 3.
Those of us who were "chicken little" about the o-line the past two preseasons were 100% spot-on accurate. And those of you with rose colored glasses were 100% wrong.
It's funny how you boys never learn.
Get ready for year 3.
Forgive me for revisiting something I have been saying lately, but this team does not need Tony Romo to throw for 5000 yards a season. Not that Romo cannot do that, but the residual issues associated with him tossing so many passes means the team is not balanced. This was a central theme of my posts last week before the Bengal game.
Then after the game I see threads about the team keeping the secret offense undercover for the regular season and I had to wonder what offense that was.
I'm always amused by giddiness with pre-season success.
The truth is here in this article. as much as people are tired of the comment, the interior line is not improved and this spoils the running game. The domino affect then takes over because if they cannot run, Romo has to carry the team. More passes, more risks, less clock control, tighter games, and your defense is exposed toward the end because of fatigue.
And defensive scheme will not change tired players who have been chasing the RG III's and crafty WR's of this league when the game is on the line in the last 7 minutes of quarter number four.
And while there are some who vehemently argue that this period - last 7 minutes - is no different than any other period in any game, they would be wrong.
The fatigue factor of the defense married with the lack of running game, which causes the team to either score quickly, or move quickly down the field to find the red zone is again a mystery for the Dallas offense, means games are in the balance late because of no clock control.
Drafting Escobar was not the problem.
The problem is this team willfully ignoring the interior offensive line, and perhaps right tackle to the point they cannot run the ball.
And while this is a passing game now, there still is a hallmark for the running game and working the last quarter where you have the ball more and are keeping a lead.
That aspect goes down hard for a lot of people here. Me included.
But there is a serious rhyme and reason to building a winner, and the bromide of winning the battle in the trenches is meaningful, even today when passing is paramount.
This is the hand they chose to play because they either don't get the value of a strong offensive line and running game, or someone pulling the strings is naive.
I'd love an 11-5 season, but no running game could end up 8-8 again and the same no play-offs we have seen for two years.
Balance is not just a DVD by Van Halen. It is how this team will win another championship.
That balance is questionable at this juncture unless Dez finds a Superman suit in his locker and can transform the offense to the point they find success.
I believe in Dez, but not an offense without the semblance of a running game. Not so much.
Well written, well thought out. But, I believe that using a first rounder on a LT two years ago, and a first round pick on a center this year shows that they do value the OL. I do think they should have drafted another OL with the second pick instead of a TE, but you can't have high draft picks at every position, and the draft is not just for the immediate future it has to be a long-term plan. I believe that Smith, Frederick and Free are solid. If Leary can be the player he looked like this preseason, they will have 4/5 of a good OL. Barring injury, the OLine will be better than it has been in several years, the defense will be better, which should result in better than 8-8. I agree that games are won in the trenches, but with these skill players a tie in the trenches is a win.
Why is that? Sturm said so??
We'll have to wait and see, but I have no idea why he's drawing conclusions about Escobar when they're clearly not running the entire playbook and the oline when Leary is missing, Free played his first game at a new position and Parnell just returned. Oh and they played a top five defense and shredded them in the second quarter.
I don't get this take from Sturm. That was about as stout a front as we're going to play all year, and the OL was not a significant problem. We put up 24 points, after all.
And the criticism re: our OGs is only fair if you're counting the fact that they've both been injured both preseasons. If they weren't both out right now, we wouldn't be talking about the relative lack of interior line depth. It's fine to criticize both players for being unable to stay on the field, but, given that they weren't obvious injury risks before we signed them, it's hardly the team neglecting the position.
But, more importantly, they cannot get the same 2 guards around Travis Frederick for more than a few moments.
Honestly, how did anyone think that a guy who has strength issues against 260 lb defensive ends think that he would be an option against 300 lb defensive tackles? I understand having a plan for emergencies, but Free makes almost no sense at guard for precisely the reasons that he struggles at tackle. It isn't the feet as much as it is the strength. And guards have to play low and be strong. Free is not very good at either.
Sad but true.Those of us who were "chicken little" about the o-line the past two preseasons were 100% spot-on accurate. And those of you with rose colored glasses were 100% wrong.
It's funny how you boys never learn.
Get ready for year 3.
This is the crux of his argument:
Everyone said that Livings and Berny could be serviceable if they spent some time playing together. What he said is true. They are putting a guy who took a pay cut at one position in a position he has never played before, next to a center who has never played in the NFL before.
I mean, are you really OK with a Free running out there at guard after playing part of 1 preseason game there?