DMN: Moore: The truth about Cowboys QB Brandon Weeden's ability to throw

[jobberone]

Moore: The truth about Cowboys QB Brandon Weeden's ability to throw


http://www.***BANNED-URL***/incoming/20151002-1443826574-_h3v0707.jpg.ece/BINARY/w940/1443826574-_H3V0707.JPG
Dallas Cowboys quarterback Brandon Weeden (3) looks to pass to running back Lance Dunbar (25) during the Atlanta Falcons vs. the Dallas Cowboys NFL football game at AT&T Stadium in Arlington on Sunday, September 27, 2015. (Louis DeLuca/The Dallas Morning News)

Follow @DavidMooreDMN dmoore@***BANNED-URL***
Staff Writer
Published: 02 October 2015 08:17 PM

IRVING -- At the risk of beating a dead horse -- a phrase quarterback Brandon Weeden uttered earlier this week -- let's take a look at the place the deep ball has in the Cowboys post Tony Romo offense.

Anyone who argues the loss to Atlanta proves it has no place must admit your ability to take part in this discussion has been irrationally impacted.

Did Weeden throw deep or look to his outside receivers enough against the Falcons? No. But that's no longer the question.

The question is will this continue or was it simply a byproduct of Atlanta's single-high safety defense and a coaching staff that wanted to play it safe with a backup quarterback as he gets his cleats on the ground?

"He's got a strong arm," tight end Jason Witten said of Weeden. "He has the ability to make those throws. I don't think anybody inside this locker room is worried about that.

http://www.***BANNED-URL***/sports/...boys-qb-brandon-weeden-s-ability-to-throw.ece

 

[slomoxn]

I think Weeden is serviceable, I don't watch the all-22 or film so I'll say this with what I just saw last week.. I'd rather try Cassell out now, this article told me nothing about why they didn't take shots down field when Atlanta adjusted to the underneath routes and stacked the box. Not saying they changed the defense they just changed their emphasis on what was important to them in the defense. Weeden was incapable, couldn't see it, or was told not to worry about testing their backfield. Yes our defense was putrid in the second half but the offense was unable to do anything.

 

[DandyDon1722]

We can't handle the truth!

 

[Bullflop]

He's definitely got a strong arm. Beyond that, it becomes a struggle to identify the good stuff.

 

[black label]

 

[T-RO]

Dallas News once again confirms: it's as bereft of brains as it is of human integrity.

David Moore got paid to *lead* with these two sentences? They don't even make grammatical sense! Bizarre noun and verb constructs that don't even match up. What complete nonsense.

It's just not worth people's time to read that paper. I didn't even bother reading further.

At the risk of beating a dead horse -- a phrase quarterback Brandon Weeden uttered earlier this week -- let's take a look at the place the deep ball has in the Cowboys post Tony Romo offense.

Anyone who argues the loss to Atlanta proves it has no place must admit your ability to take part in this discussion has been irrationally impacted.

 

[conner01]

There is no argument he has a strong arm
But playing QB takes more than that
Lots of qb's with lots less arm have been successful and lots with even better arms have failed
More than any other position in football, playing QB is much more mental thN physical

 

[Corso]

I think Weeden is serviceable, I don't watch the all-22 or film so I'll say this with what I just saw last week.. I'd rather try Cassell out now, this article told me nothing about why they didn't take shots down field when Atlanta adjusted to the underneath routes and stacked the box. Not saying they changed the defense they just changed their emphasis on what was important to them in the defense. Weeden was incapable, couldn't see it, or was told not to worry about testing their backfield. Yes our defense was putrid in the second half but the offense was unable to do anything.

Atlanta had 8 in the box the whole game. They did little adjusting.

 

[TheSport78]

The Cowboys made a monumental mistake not signing a backup QB that has experience with WINNING. Weeden is simply not a gamer, and I question his self-efficacy and confidence. Heck, I would've taken Vick over Weeden. Give me a guy who has led his team to the playoffs in the past that is now content with being a solid backup. Weeden is NOT that.

 

[JDSmith]

Weeden scares me because he's just goofy looking. That face in the initial post simply doesn't inspire confidence. That said, if our defense wasn't so depleted we could have won the game.

Even with our Howdy Doody QB.

 

[slomoxn]

Atlanta had 8 in the box the whole game. They did little adjusting.

There is a line in my statement stating the defense may not have adjusted what they were playing as much as what they emphasized. Not a coach but first half they seemed to be on their heels waiting for passes down field. Second half they didn't so much, I equate linebackers bring in the middle of the field instead of playing back allowing dumps in the middle and good gains on the ground. Second half they played downhill attacking instead of waiting.

 

[dallasdave]

 

[Nav22]

It's amazing to me how everyone on this board seems to have magically forgotten how well Weeden played for much of the Falcons game.

A checkdown for a solid gain is a GOOD play. When he stepped up in the pocket and delivered a strike to Witten down to the 1 yard line, that was a GREAT play.

Weeden didn't let us down; the defense did.

This whole hatred of checking the ball down - even when it results in a solid gain - especially needs to stop. Tom Brady has made a Hall of Fame career out of check downs and taking what the D gives him.

 

[Dodger12]

It's amazing to me how everyone on this board seems to have magically forgotten how well Weeden played for much of the Falcons game.

A checkdown for a solid gain is a GOOD play. When he stepped up in the pocket and delivered a strike to Witten down to the 1 yard line, that was a GREAT play.

Weeden didn't let us down; the defense did.

This whole hatred of checking the ball down - even when it results in a solid gain - especially needs to stop. Tom Brady has made a Hall of Fame career out of check downs and taking what the D gives him.

You must have just gotten back from a watering hole and posted this. Sober up, re-hydrate, have a cup of coffee and reassess.

 

[SuspectCorner]

It's amazing to me how everyone on this board seems to have magically forgotten how well Weeden played for much of the Falcons game.

A checkdown for a solid gain is a GOOD play. When he stepped up in the pocket and delivered a strike to Witten down to the 1 yard line, that was a GREAT play.

Weeden didn't let us down; the defense did.

This whole hatred of checking the ball down - even when it results in a solid gain - especially needs to stop. Tom Brady has made a Hall of Fame career out of check downs and taking what the D gives him.

I agree with much of your post. But Weedon simply MUST take some shots downfield if for no other reason than to keep opponents from drawing in their secondary - i.e. the safeties.

 

[Idgit]

It's amazing to me how everyone on this board seems to have magically forgotten how well Weeden played for much of the Falcons game.

A checkdown for a solid gain is a GOOD play. When he stepped up in the pocket and delivered a strike to Witten down to the 1 yard line, that was a GREAT play.

Weeden didn't let us down; the defense did.

This whole hatred of checking the ball down - even when it results in a solid gain - especially needs to stop. Tom Brady has made a Hall of Fame career out of check downs and taking what the D gives him.

Weeden's a whipping boy and there's no getting people to drop it. It's a race to come down hardest on him since he's a safe target. But you're right.

The sad fact is he's capable of playing a lot worse. We'll have a shot if he plays as well as he did in ATL each week, minus the big stupid turnover. But if he gets the awful defensive support he had last week, we're in for a long ride.

 

[Nav22]

I agree with much of your post. But Weedon simply MUST take some shots downfield if for no other reason than to keep opponents from drawing in their secondary - i.e. the safeties.

Hypothetical: what if the Saints do a good job of stopping the run with 7 in the box, and they DON'T bring in the safeties? Then what?

You still want Weeden forcing the ball into coverage? Or would you be be happy with the checkdowns and underneath throws? It's just an arbitrary complaint that I've heard all week that doesn't hold a ton of weight. He was 22-26 last week and the checkdowns weren't "nothing plays" resulting in 2-yard gains.

Romo threw exactly 0 deep balls in Week 1 and I didn't hear any complaints. He threw 2 deep balls in Week 2 and those were to Dunbar being covered by a LB. You know why nobody complained? Because our D was lights out and we WON those games.

Taking what the D gives you is the best strategy. If the Saints play deep and Witten/Beasley/Dunbar combine for 20 catches tonight, I'll take it.

That's why I really didn't like Stephen Jones publicly calling Weeden out the way he did. Now maybe the Saints are thinking "let's play deep and wait for the eventual throws into coverage" because Weeden may be thinking that he MUST take some deep shots tonight.

 

[PA Cowboy Fan]

Weeden's a whipping boy and there's no getting people to drop it. It's a race to come down hardest on him since he's a safe target. But you're right.

The sad fact is he's capable of playing a lot worse. We'll have a shot if he plays as well as he did in ATL each week, minus the big stupid turnover. But if he gets the awful defensive support he had last week, we're in for a long ride.

I agree. It was the defense that lost that game. Some may be sorry what they wish for. I rather checkdowns all day rather then turnovers. Weeden is capable of a lot worse. And then you can always say next man up but there is no guarantee Cassel would be better. While I think he's better than Weeden, he's not on a team for a reason.

 

[big dog cowboy]

Heck, I would've taken Vick over Weeden.

When will this end?

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

Atlanta had 8 in the box the whole game. They did little adjusting.

More truth there than this article.