WoodysGirl;2166431 said:
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.
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.
Not suggesting he was solely to blame. I provided an example. But his defense just before the half was definitely a contributing factor.
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.
They and OTHERS didn't make plays and that's where you and I disagree.
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.
You are, of course, intitled to your opinion. I have to say, however, that I do not share it. The running game did not disappear in the second half. It was limited because of the defense played against it and even then, Barber averaged 3.42 yards per carry in the 3rd quarter on 7 rushes. In the 4th quarter, he only had 4 carries for 4 yards against a stacked run defense and of those 4 carries, 3 or them were on first down when the Giants were run blitzing. I don't think the running game disappeared. I think the running game did exactly what it was supposed to do, which is make the defense commit to stopping the run and giving the passing game a chance for one on one coverage. That's exactly what we had in the second half. We just couldn't make a catch.
There may have been lots of reasons for losing but that does not change the fact that one catch would have iced the game.
The reasons for losing may have been different in years past but at the end of the day, they are still first round plane tickets home. Championships are what count so what difference does it make if we are 13-3 going home in the first round or 5-11 not going to the playoffs? It's about championships. To say that we are fine because we were 13-3 is just not relative to the central issue IMO. Those who say that we don't need any WRs because we were 13-3 are not seeing the complete picture IMO. If you wish to view that as weak, that is your affair. None the less, 13-3 is not relative to the central issue of our WR depth. No amount of "Weak" is going to change that.
If we say that it was a 3rd CB that cost us the game or contributed greatly to that lose, OK, I can go ahead live with that, to an extent. I would throw in penalties as well but again, one catch and that game is over. Our defense gave up 7 points in the second half. Our offense scored only 3. Hard for me to place a lot of blame on the defense, at all, when I look at those numbers.
