Crayton is a # 2 ??!!

[BrAinPaiNt]

I think Stephen King, up their in Maine, is working on a new novel and doing some research.

The new novel is about a sports fan who goes on a message board and vents.

Heard it is quite scary.

 

[1fisher]

You know your team sucks when you lose to Vinny Testerverde

.........and I was there to witness it. Man, how I'll miss Texas Stadium....

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

My point is that we are a bunch of whiners. As fans, the FO isn't doing their jobs unless we have superstars at every position and superstars as backups at every position. In this era, these expectations are unreasonable.

I don't disagree. Having said that, our fans are no different then anybody elses. All fans, I suspect, are like this.

I don't really think we need a superstar. I just think we need guys who can step in and fill a role. It would be great to have another top 5 WR but I would settle for a good WR opposite TO, which is why I am an advocate of finding somebody with speed. I seriously believe that if you can match Crayton up with somebody who allows him to work with single coverage, he can be effective. As a possesion WR, I do believe that Crayton can be effective. I actually think he will improve as time goes on in this area. However, if you take away the ability to throw deep or double cover him, he will not be effective IMO. We need somebody who can catch the long ball and make certain that the safeties play for that eventuallity. Does not have to be Roy Williams or TO. However, I do think it is important that it's somebody who can run and who can catch the ball. JMO of course.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I think Stephen King, up their in Maine, is working on a new novel and doing some research.

The new novel is about a sports fan who goes on a message board and vents.

Heard it is quite scary.

The name of the book is ABQ'd. I have an advanced copy.

 

[1fisher]

actually sonny. If I were you I would be worried about your secondary. I think you have a pretty good group in that front 7. Your secondary I think is pretty weak. especially with rogers coming off an injury.

You can dog hurd if you want, but if you go back and watch that final game of the season where the Commanders beat dallas, smoot was abused all day and so were your safeties by Hurd and austin. Fred Smoot in particular, he was roasted repeatedly. Luckily for hm austin dropped a ball that would have been a 60+ yard touchdown. Hurd is a smart player with very good hands. He doesnt run exceptionally well but when you are smart you become faster.

For instance. Hurd put a wicked double move on Smoot.
http://www.4shared.com/file/57128361/8b8e33fc/hurdaustinwmv_full.html?dirPwdVerified=a4754a2

DANG!! I had forgotten how bad that really was! SMOOT SUX.....

 

[the kid 05]

The point of this thread was what again?

that Thomas can play iron man football and play wide receiver if Terrell goes down???

 

[WoodysGirl]

What's weak about it. It's the truth.

I don't really have a problem with your original response with concerns regarding the WR position. But your response to Cobra's equating all of it to the lack of playoff success is weak to me. Two very different reasons were why the team hasn't won in the past two years and very little of it has to do with the receiving corp. 2006 the team lost because of bobbled snap. 2007 wasn't solely because of the receiver's ability to catch.

Read my original post. I fail to see where any of it suggested anything other then the truth of the matter. Last year, we failed because our WRs were not good enough. There is no other reason then that.

I disagree. There was quite a few reasons why the team lost and suggesting that it was all on the receivers is failing to look at the whole picture. Did they come up small at critical times? Yes. Were they the ONLY factor? No.

You can say it was the fault of a nickCB but it was not.

Not suggesting he was solely to blame. I provided an example. But his defense just before the half was definitely a contributing factor.

We had plenty of chances to over come those plays and we didn't.
The running game produced more then enough to win and we lost.

I agree the offense had its chances, but is it solely on the WR corps? Nope. The running game produced in the first half and went bye bye in the 2nd half. Not putting that all on Barber, but Garrett's lack of committment to the run was huge to me.

Romo did not have a bad game. He threw a lot of passes, under pressure, that should have been caught. You win as a team and you lose as a team. Thats fine and thats how it should be but as I look at last years efforts, I can definatly say that we lost because our WRs did not make plays.

They and OTHERS didn't make plays and that's where you and I disagree.

13-3 is great but the only record that count's is the one in the post season. If you can't win in the post season, then why are we playing the game? If regular season is the measuring stick, then why play a post season?

The point I'm making is that the receiving corps was just fine in the regular season, breaking all kinds of Cowboys passing records. How does a few drops by normally reliable receivers suggest that they weren't good enough?

In short, I dont' agree. WR may well be the reason we fall short again. It is, IMO, the weakest position on the team. That's how I see it.

I can agree that WR position has the most questions, but I don't agree that WR will be the reason this team fails in the postseason.

 

[Tovya]

The point I'm making is that the receiving corps was just fine in the regular season, breaking all kinds of Cowboys passing records. How does a few drops by normally reliable receivers suggest that they weren't good enough?

I can agree that WR position has the most questions, but I don't agree that WR will be the reason this team fails in the postseason.

I agree with you.

On top of that, I'd go as far as to say that Patrick Crayton really got a lot more blame than he deserved and people are really too quick in writing him off as the #2 behind T.O./Witten.

I really think that this is going to be his breakout year where he shuts up the naysayers.

As for failure in the post season, with or without T.O. this team has to do more at every position, and I certainly agree that it's gonna take more than a great season with the receiver corp to take this team to the next level.

 

[dbair1967]

(that might be more a statement than a question but....)

so Jerry is going to go the whole year with the same situation we had in the Giant's game last year; If TO is out or not 100 %, the opposition triple teams Witten and Romo is left with Crayton or rookies ? with Crayton having to be the #1 or #2 go-to guy ?

I sure hope Zach Thomas can play WR if TO goes down or we're in a whole lotta trouble.

P.S. Interesting tidbit - was just at the dealership waiting room and they had an old Sporting News from the week before the Giant game - their prediction was if TO healthy we win, if TO's ankle still bothering him, Gints win.

wow who'd have thunk it? another sky is falling we're doomed #2 WR thread

0-16...we have no shot at all



David

 

[dallasfaniac]

I don't have a problem with Patrick Crayton; I just think his role is best served as a #3. That said, there really isn't/wasn't anyone out there to fill #2 worth the price.

 

[Velvet Jones]

I know you are kidding around, but I bet you jerry could outplay every receiver on our roster not named TO.

Why?? He couldn't in Seattle. He was the best in the game but the game stays young. No shame in getting old.

 

[Tovya]

I don't have a problem with Patrick Crayton; I just think his role is best served as a #3. That said, there really isn't/wasn't anyone out there to fill #2 worth the price.

He is the #3... that's the issue. Witten is our #2 (really, he's just the second #1 with T.O. if the truth be known) and Crayton fills that #3 spot nicely.

 

[cowboys2233]

(that might be more a statement than a question but....)

so Jerry is going to go the whole year with the same situation we had in the Giant's game last year; If TO is out or not 100 %, the opposition triple teams Witten and Romo is left with Crayton or rookies ? with Crayton having to be the #1 or #2 go-to guy ?

Owens and Moss are the top-two receivers in the league, but I can almost guarantee that if Moss suffered the types of injuries Owens did, the first one prior to the SB when Roy horse-collared him and then last year with the high ankle sprain, you would NOT have seen Moss out on the field as soon.

Because of his toughness, he is a far better bet to make it through the season than Moss. And what exactly to the Pats have without Moss? Quite frankly, *** have they had at the WR position for their 3 SB victories?

Before you panic, you might want to think. After all, we have Felix Jones, and he is like Reggie Bush, Brian Westbrook and Thurman Thomas all rolled into one...times two. Oh, and Roy is skinny, so there are no worries.

 

[dallasfaniac]

He is the #3... that's the issue. Witten is our #2 (really, he's just the second #1 with T.O. if the truth be known) and Crayton fills that #3 spot nicely.

I'm talking formation and order of progression. As a slot receiver he would get a better release, more field to work with and generally face lesser competition.

 

[Tovya]

I'm talking formation and order of progression. As a slot receiver he would get a better release, more field to work with and generally face lesser competition.

Don't get me wrong, if there was someone affordable cap-wise available that was SIGNIFICANTLY better than Crayton out there, I'd be all for it... but I just don't think that exists.

With that being said, I only mention the Crayton thing because of the whole 'sky-is-falling' crowd who are predicting our doom because we didn't get an upgrade over Crayton. I don't think we've seen his talent bloom yet, and I really believe this is the year we will.

On top of that, I think that Stanback and Hurd really have the physical tools to be the third receiver threat on this team this season.

 

[dargonking999]

I'm talking formation and order of progression. As a slot receiver he would get a better release, more field to work with and generally face lesser competition.

Ok so if we spilt Witten and T.O wide, and put crayton in the slot, you tell me how that does not benfit us?

 

[cowboys2233]

Ok so if we spilt Witten and T.O wide, and put crayton in the slot, you tell me how that does not benfit us?

Um, because we don't have a TE to chip block if necessary? Because it broadcasts to the defense that it is going to be a passing play?

Don't cry over spilt Witten!

 

[dallasfaniac]

Ok so if we spilt Witten and T.O wide, and put crayton in the slot, you tell me how that does not benfit us?

We lose a blocker, lose speed on the outside and Crayton would still face the better CB, etc.

Having a true #2 would provide speed on the outside to draw the safeties, freeing up the middle for Witten and also allowing him to block on the line if need be. Crayton would face a lesser CB with a cushion, giving him more field to work with.

 

[Kilyin]

Not quite:

Off topic but what is your sig supposed to imply?

 

[dallasfaniac]

As I said, I am fine with Crayton as #2 only because there aren't other options but still feel Crayton is best served as a #3. I wouldn't be surprised if Austin or Hurd started seeing more time....