DNA of our SB Teams

[jjktkk]

Ouch. Stats and facts.

Yet none of those Super Bowl winning teams used the 4th overall pick on a rb.

 

[jjktkk]

There's nothing wrong with the coaching. Except that they haven't fixed defense yet.

The jury is still out on Marinelli and his defense. Need to really see improvement across the board with this defense, namely in the form of sacks and turnovers, regardless of the talent level.

 

[KJJ]

No, it did not. Quarterbacks get sacked. Some of them cause injuries. Saying that the running game contributed to Romo's injury is completely nonsensical. Did Romo never have to pass in 2014? Did Romo never get sacked in 2014? Did Romo never get injured in 2014?

It most certainly contributed to him being injured. Entering the 2014 season Romo was coming off back surgery and wasn't moving well the first 2-3 weeks of the season had he not had a great running game to lean on and was having to attempt 40 passes a game he wouldn't have lasted that season. His 435 passing attempts was a career low in a season in which he played at least 15 games. He only had one game in which he attempted 40 passes. He was on pace for back to back 40 attempt games when he was injured in Philly last season. Our running game wasn't getting it done our backs didn't put fear in anyone. Romo was facing a number of long down situations early last year that he wasn't facing in 2014. He was facing a long down situation on both his injuries where the defense could just pin their ears back and come after him.

No, it was not. Every single game we played that season was won by the team that passed better (as are the vast majority of games in the NFL). It didn't matter if we ran the ball well or ran it poorly -- if we passed better than the opponent, we won. If the opponent passed better, we lost. The same thing has been true in 37 of our past 38 games.

The running game is what made our passing game so efficient. We were a run first team in 2014. Murray started the season with an NFL record 8 straight 100 yard games. We fed off the running game and it opened up our passing game. Romo had a career year all due to the running game.

There is no logic in that statement. That's like saying, "If junk food isn't healthy, then millions of people wouldn't be eating it every day." And you're confusing a player or even a position with a type of offensive play.

There's no logic to my statement but there's logic to your statement that the running game has little effect on winning??? LOL Tell that to the Vikings, Adrain Peterson carried that team to the playoffs before. They had no passing game a few years ago when he rushed for over 2000 yards and he was the reason they won games and made the playoffs.

So you're saying he was elite because he helped us get to the Super Bowl? I rest my case.

He was elite because of his production that led to TD's which resulted in the Cowboys two SB teams. In 325 career carries for the Cowboys he put up 16 TDs which was 3 more than Murray had in 2014 despite having 67 more carries. Thomas was so good NFL films dedicated an entire segment on his 2 year career with the Cowboys. There were interviews with Tom Landry and opposing players who said how good he was. The Cowboys fed off him in 70 and 71.

 

[CowboyRoy]

I'd say the Cowboy Way is great QB play. If we've got that, with this OL, we've got a running game. Let's fix the defense and add a mid-round RB and get back to where we're supposed to be that way.

I dont care what round or where we get him, but we need a stud back there. 2014 and that running game should have opened every ones eyes to what type of football we need to be playing on offense. Agreed completely on the defense.

 

[CowboyRoy]

Times have changed. What stud running back did the Patriots, Bronco's or Panthers have last year?

If either the patriots or Panthers had a stud RB they might have won the championship. Although that Broncos D likely would have shut that down as well.

 

[CowboyRoy]

The jury is still out on Marinelli and his defense. Need to really see improvement across the board with this defense, namely in the form of sacks and turnovers, regardless of the talent level.

Talk all you want about scheme and coaching. If he doesnt have the players to execute it, it is useless. What they had on defense in Tampa compared to what we have here is laughable. I dont think there is a player on our defense that would start on that Tampa team. MAYBE Sean Lee on a healthy day? Maybe?

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

If either the patriots or Panthers had a stud RB they might have won the championship. Although that Broncos D likely would have shut that down as well.

Broncos had no stud back either though.

 

[CowboyRoy]

Broncos had no stud back either though.

Im not sure they needed much offense at all. That D was one of the best I have ever seen.

 

[AdamJT13]

It most certainly contributed to him being injured.

No, it did not.

Romo was facing a number of long down situations early last year that he wasn't facing in 2014. He was facing a long down situation on both his injuries where the defense could just pin their ears back and come after him.

Romo faced far more long-down situations in 2014 than he did in 2015. He got hurt on his THIRD sack of 2015. He could have been injured on his third sack of 2014, too. Instead, it happened later in the year. Nothing contributed to his injury coming on the third sack of the year except bad luck. It's not like he suffered many more sacks last season, which might have increased his odds of getting hurt at some point. But that's NOT what happened. He got sacked six times all season and happened to get hurt on two of them. Blaming the running game is completely bogus.

The running game is what made our passing game so efficient.

No, it's not. Romo was extremely efficient in 2014 when the running game was not a factor at all -- he was extremely efficient in long-yardage situations (no threat of a run), in the two-minute offense (virtually no threat of a run), with an empty backfield (no threat of a run) and when Murray wasn't even on the field. The running game has very little effect on whether the passing game is efficient.

There's no logic to my statement but there's logic to your statement that the running game has little effect on winning?

Absolutely. It has been proved over and over.

Tell that to the Vikings, Adrain Peterson carried that team to the playoffs before. They had no passing game a few years ago when he rushed for over 2000 yards and he was the reason they won games and made the playoffs.

Just like every other team, the Vikings usually win when they pass better than their opponent and usually lose when they don't -- regardless of how well Peterson runs. When Peterson rushed for 2,000 yards, they ran better than their opponent almost every game and still lost seven times -- almost always because the opponent passed better than they did.

No matter the team, and no matter how often or how well they run the ball, winning or losing is usually decided by which team passes the ball better (not necessarily more, but better). That's just a fact.

He was elite because of his production that led to TD's which resulted in the Cowboys two SB teams. In 325 career carries for the Cowboys he put up 16 TDs which was 3 more than Murray had in 2014 despite having 67 more carries. Thomas was so good NFL films dedicated an entire segment on his 2 year career with the Cowboys. There were interviews with Tom Landry and opposing players who said how good he was. The Cowboys fed off him in 70 and 71.

Again, I rest my case. Thank you for proving my point.

 

[KJJ]

Again, I rest my case. Thank you for proving my point.

You have no case everything got thrown out of court when you said the running game has little effect on winning. lol

 

[Clove]

Our DNA for Super Bowls was great coaching. We don't have that now, so we must win in spite of it.

 

[AdamJT13]

You have no case everything got thrown out of court when you said the running game has little effect on winning. lol

The facts say I'm correct. Let's look at the facts from around the league in 2015 --

Teams that passed better went 202-54, a winning percentage of .789.
Teams that rushed better went 134-122, a winning percentage of .523.

Teams that passed better AND rushed better went 107-27, a winning percentage of .799.
Teams that passed better and rushed WORSE went 95-27, a winning percentage of .779.

Teams that rushed better and passed WORSE went 27-95, a winning percentage of .221.
Teams that rushed worse AND passed worse went 27-107, a winning percentage of .201.


So, teams that passed better than their opponent won almost 80 percent of the time, and it made almost no difference whether they also ran better (.799) or ran worse (.779) than their opponent.

Teams that passed worse than their opponent won only about 20 percent of the time, and it made almost no difference whether they ran the ball better (.221) or ran the ball worse (.201) than their opponent.

Teams that ran better than their opponent won about 52 percent of the time overall (slightly better than a coin flip) -- with a HUGE SWING coming whether they passed the ball better (.799) or passed the ball worse (.221) than their opponent.


Those percentages are nearly the same every year. Passing better than your opponent is how you almost always win in the NFL. And let's not forget, in our past 38 games, the team that has passed better is 37-1 (with the only loss coming on a last-minute TD). The team that has rushed better is 19-19.

You lose.

 

[KJJ]

The facts say I'm correct. Let's look at the facts from around the league in 2015 --

Teams that passed better went 202-54, a winning percentage of .789.
Teams that rushed better went 134-122, a winning percentage of .523.

Teams that passed better AND rushed better went 107-27, a winning percentage of .799.
Teams that passed better and rushed WORSE went 95-27, a winning percentage of .779.

Teams that rushed better and passed WORSE went 27-95, a winning percentage of .221.
Teams that rushed worse AND passed worse went 27-107, a winning percentage of .201.


So, teams that passed better than their opponent won almost 80 percent of the time, and it made almost no difference whether they also run better (.799) or run worse (.779) than their opponent.

Teams that passed worse than their opponent won only about 20 percent of the time, and it made almost no difference whether they run the ball better (.221) or run the ball worse (.201) than their opponent.

Teams that ran better than their opponent won about 52 percent of the time overall (slightly better than a coin flip) -- with a HUGE SWING coming whether they passed the ball better (.799) or passed the ball worse (.221) than their opponent.


Those percentages are nearly the same every year. Passing better than your opponent is how you almost always win in the NFL. And let's not forget, in our past 38 games, the team that has passed better is 37-1 (with the only loss coming on a last-minute TD). The team that has rushed better is 19-19.

You lose.

Didn't even bother reading any of that you're just wasting your time. I have you running around chasing your tail. lol Keep going I'm on to the draft.

 

[AdamJT13]

Didn't even bother reading any of that you're just wasting your time.... I'm on to the draft.t

Wise move, considering that you have no argument when faced with the facts. Sad for you, but true.

 

[KJJ]

Wise move, considering that you have no argument when faced with the facts. Sad for you, but true.

My argument shot every one of yours down and you've done nothing but cry over it. Dry your eyes and get over it.

 

[AdamJT13]

My argument shot every one of yours down and you've done nothing but cry over it. Dry your eyes and get over it.

If you want to ignore the facts and pretend you won the argument, that's your prerogative. But everyone can see the truth, which is that there's not a single fact to support anything you said. I gave you the facts, and you chose to ignore them.

 

[KJJ]

If you want to ignore the facts and pretend you won the argument, that's your prerogative. But everyone can see the truth, which is that there's not a single fact to support anything you said. I gave you the facts, and you chose to ignore them.

I deal with facts now go back into hiding and allow those wounds to heal. You may have time to waste I don't.

 

[AdamJT13]

I deal with facts

Fact: In our past 38 games, the team that has passed better is 37-1.

Fact: In our past 38 games, the team that has rushed better is 19-19.

Fact: Last season, teams that passed better than their opponent won almost 80 percent of the time, and it made almost no difference whether they also ran better (.799) or ran worse (.779) than their opponent.

Fact: Last season, teams that passed worse than their opponent won about 20 percent of the time, and it made almost no difference whether they ran the ball better (.221) or ran the ball worse (.201) than their opponent.

So, tell us again how running better than your opponent wins games.

now go back into hiding and allow those wounds to heal.

Are you in sixth grade? You lose an argument and have to resort to "go back in hiding"?

 

[KJJ]

Fact: In our past 38 games, the team that has passed better is 37-1.

Fact: In our past 38 games, the team that has rushed better is 19-19.

Fact: Last season, teams that passed better than their opponent won almost 80 percent of the time, and it made almost no difference whether they also ran better (.799) or ran worse (.779) than their opponent.

Fact: Last season, teams that passed worse than their opponent won about 20 percent of the time, and it made almost no difference whether they ran the ball better (.221) or ran the ball worse (.201) than their opponent.

So, tell us again how running better than your opponent wins games.




Are you in sixth grade? You lose an argument and have to resort to "go back in hiding"?

Wish I had as much time to waste as you. It's obvious who lost this argument and you're still crying trying to plead your case. lol

 

[KJJ]

So, tell us again how running better than your opponent wins games.

Provide a post where I said that.