ESPN: Nate Livings leaves early with knee injury

[CowboyDan]

God forbid people try to use facts in a discussion, you're right. Let's all just stick to the "I sees what i sees" debates, because those are far more substantial and enlightening.

Seriously though, if your lineman is being knocked back into your QB's face, that is "pressure" on the QB.

..and you keep harping on how he got knocked backwards so often in the running game, yet our running game overall averaged 3.6 ypc, but when we ran behind Livings, it jumped to 3.92 ypc. Your eyeballs don't seem to be matching up with the facts, sir.

If you read the article, the author does not agree with you.

 

[RoyTheHammer]

If you read the article, the author does not agree with you.

I don't see the part of the article you're referring to.. maybe you could quote it.

 

[CF74]

"Livings was hardly sensational in 2012, but he was a whole lot better than most people think. Again, sacks stick out in your mind; you likely watched a handful of plays this year and noted how poorly Livings blocked, but you probably didn’t see a big play downfield and think, “Wow, Nate Livings really blocked well on that play.”

If the Cowboys are going to upgrade one of interior line positions (which they should), it needs to be right guard. With Tyron Smith and Livings on the left side, Phil Costa back in action at center, and a revamped right side, the Cowboys’ offensive line should be much-improved in 2013.

Grade: C+"

Translation: Serviceable but not All Pro...

 

[CowboyDan]

Probably cause you didn't read it! Ah, that was great!

Alright, here you go............

"The left guard allowed pressure on Tony Romo on just 1.9 percent of his snaps in pass protection, yet Romo went down 26.3 percent of the time Livings allowed his man to get through."

(see, "allowed his man to get through", not "gets pushed back")


and here's one for you about the running game...........

"Here’s the most interesting stat of all: Livings was at the point on just 86 runs in 2012, compared to 151 for Bernadeau, showing just how “right-handed” the Cowboys’ running game is when working the ball inside."

(if Livings is sooooooooooo good at the point of attack, why do you think we choose to run twice as much behind Bernadeau? You don't think that skews these "facts" at all do you? You don't think that Ol' Nate's numbers might not be so juicy if he had 151 attempts do you?)

 

[RoyTheHammer]

How about this argument? 31st in rushing offense.

Also a bad argument.

We averaged 3.6 ypc.. which i agree, is pitiful.

However, our average jumped to 3.92 ypc when we ran behind Livings so it really doesn't show that he struggled as much as a couple of you want to say he did. What it shows is that we need to run more to the left side behind Smith and Livings and upgrade the right side of the line.

 

[TheSport78]

Probably cause you didn't read it! Ah, that was great!

Alright, here you go............

"The left guard allowed pressure on Tony Romo on just 1.9 percent of his snaps in pass protection, yet Romo went down 26.3 percent of the time Livings allowed his man to get through."

(see, "allowed his man to get through", not "gets pushed back")


and here's one for you about the running game...........

"Here’s the most interesting stat of all: Livings was at the point on just 86 runs in 2012, compared to 151 for Bernadeau, showing just how “right-handed” the Cowboys’ running game is when working the ball inside."

(if Livings is sooooooooooo good at the point of attack, why do you think we choose to run twice as much behind Bernadeau? You don't think that skews these "facts" at all do you? You don't think that Ol' Nate's numbers might not be so juicy if he had 151 attempts do you?)

Checkmate.

Jumped to 3.92? As the stat provides above, the Cowboys only ran behind Livings 86 times, compared to 151 times with Bernadeau. Hmm, I wonder why...

 

[RoyTheHammer]

"The left guard allowed pressure on Tony Romo on just 1.9 percent of his snaps in pass protection, yet Romo went down 26.3 percent of the time Livings allowed his man to get through."

(see, "allowed his man to get through", not "gets pushed back")


and here's one for you about the running game...........

"Here’s the most interesting stat of all: Livings was at the point on just 86 runs in 2012, compared to 151 for Bernadeau, showing just how “right-handed” the Cowboys’ running game is when working the ball inside."

(if Livings is sooooooooooo good at the point of attack, why do you think we choose to run twice as much behind Bernadeau? You don't think that skews these "facts" at all do you? You don't think that Ol' Nate's numbers might not be so juicy if he had 151 attempts do you?)

What i think, is that you used alot of words in this post to try and use a bunch of your assumptions as actual evidence.

Congrats..

What i do think the numbers show.. is that we will choose to run alot more behind the left side of our line during the coming season. Because whether we chose to run 151 times or 3000 times behind Berny last year, it was obviously a stupid idea. Your statement brings up more of a coaching issue, than a player issue, though. If you're running the ball behind the right side of the line and averaging less than 3.5 ypc, and on the other hand you are having much better success running behind the left side.. why the heck would you continue running right so often?

I agree.. doesn't make much sense, does it?

Now here's my question for you.. why do YOU think we chose to run twice as much behind Berny? You think it was because he was a better run blocker?

 

[RoyTheHammer]

Checkmate.

Jumped to 3.92? As the stat provides above, the Cowboys only ran behind Livings 86 times, compared to 151 times with Bernadeau. Hmm, I wonder why...

Must be because Berny was a much better run blocker.

Oh, wait..




BTW.. it'd be hilarious to play a game of chess with you sometime. lol

 

[CowboyDan]

You sir, are incorrigible. Enjoy the Kool Aid.

 

[TheSport78]

Must be because Berny was a much better run blocker.

Oh, wait..




BTW.. it'd be hilarious to play a game of chess with you sometime. lol

So wait, your reasoning for the Cowboys running much more often behind Bernadeau over Livings is because it was a "stupid idea" and it was solely a coaching issue? Come on, man.

So now the Cowboys were just dumb, because Livings is OBVIOUSLY a much better option. Anything to fit your argument, I guess...

Going to bed now.

 

[RoyTheHammer]

So wait, your reasoning for the Cowboys running much more often behind Bernadeau over Livings is because it was a "stupid idea" and it was solely a coaching issue? Come on, man.

So now the Cowboys were just dumb, because Livings is OBVIOUSLY a much better option. Anything to fit your argument, I guess...

Going to bed now.

I was asking what you or dan though the reasoning was.. and suprisingly rolleyes: ) i didn't receive any sort of reasoning for it.

Certainly, you don't believe that its because Berny is a good run blocker or we gained alot of yards running behind him, i hope.

 

[Idgit]

So wait, your reasoning for the Cowboys running much more often behind Bernadeau over Livings is because it was a "stupid idea" and it was solely a coaching issue? Come on, man...

I'm not sure how much it matters, if they were more effective running behind Livings.

In Bernadeau's defense, he got off to a very slow start this season, and played better as the year went on. He was playing at a benchable level early on, though, after the surgery and with the shortened training camp.

 

[RoyTheHammer]

You sir, are incorrigible. Enjoy the Kool Aid.

I like the red, if you're buying.

 

[jobberone]

I just don't understand how anyone could've watched him play last season and thought he was above average, or even adequate. I mean, maybe you just looked at his stats and said, "gee, he hardly had any penalties and only gave up 5 sacks, he must've been pretty good, right?"

And if that's what you did, I can understand why you have the point of view you do..............but if you actually watched him play, you'd know that he spent half of the game looking back into the backfield, watching his man chase Tony around. He had very little penalties because he was so slow off the ball they couldn't possibly call him for jumping offsides, and he barely made contact with his man half the time, so it wasn't like he was going to get called for holding. I wish I was exaggerating, but it really was this bad all year long.

Good points. Cook and Livings have 'good' stats at PFF. I don't subscribe to they are horrible but the interior was less than average more often than I'd like. Livings had a shoulder issue which was operated on post-season. Not a big fan of Bernie but he flashes well at times. I mean really well. He just has more oh oh's than attaboys.

I hope we aren't laying too much at Fred's feet so quickly. He is still a rookie.

 

[Ren]

Why? He was our best offensive lineman last year.

That's like being the tallest midget on a team that plays against normal sized people

 

[TheSport78]

I was asking what you or dan though the reasoning was.. and suprisingly rolleyes: ) i didn't receive any sort of reasoning for it.

Certainly, you don't believe that its because Berny is a good run blocker or we gained alot of yards running behind him, i hope.

How the heck would we know WHY the Cowboys ran almost 2x more behind Bernadeau? You're asking a ridiculous question that you know cannot be answered.

I'm going by the statistics, and the numbers don't lie.

 

[RoyTheHammer]

How the heck would we know WHY the Cowboys ran almost 2x more behind Bernadeau? You're asking a ridiculous question that you know cannot be answered.

I'm going by the statistics, and the numbers don't lie.

:laugh2:

You have an opinion about everything else, i was simply asking why you thought we ran twice as much behind Berny? In earlier posts, you seemed to insinuate that it was because the coaching staff must have thought he was a better run blocker since we ran behind him more often.

You're right though.. the stats don't lie. Berny was a terrible run blocker for us last season, and when we ran behind Livings, we averaged substaintially more yardage than our overall average, and much more than when we ran behind Bern.

 

[TheSport78]

:laugh2:

You have an opinion about everything else, i was simply asking why you thought we ran twice as much behind Berny? In earlier posts, you seemed to insinuate that it was because the coaching staff must have thought he was a better run blocker since we ran behind him more often.

You're right though.. the stats don't lie. Berny was a terrible run blocker for us last season, and when we ran behind Livings, we averaged substaintially more yardage than our overall average, and much more than when we ran behind Bern.

You do realize that there's an almost twice as large sample size with Bernadeau, right? That's like saying, oh look, we ran behind Parnell 7 times and we averaged 5.2 YPC. Well, he must be a great run blocker, right?

Do you believe running behind Livings 150+ times would have generated the same or better YPC? Doubt it.

I don't know why they ran more behind Bernadeau, but THEY obviously thought Bernadeau was better than Livings at RB.

 

[RoyTheHammer]

You do realize that there's an almost twice as large sample size with Bernadeau, right? That's like saying, oh look, we ran behind Parnell 7 times and we averaged 5.2 YPC. Well, he must be a great run blocker, right?

Do you believe running behind Livings 150+ times would have generated the same or better YPC? Doubt it.

I don't know why they ran more behind Bernadeau, but THEY obviously thought Bernadeau was better than Livings at RB.

Except that it's NOT like that at all. 7 times isn't nearly the same as 86 times, no matter what kind of flawed logic you try to use. 86 times is certainly a big enough sample for me to say that it was no fluke that Livings was clearly the better guy to run behind. They may have thought last year that Bern was the better guy to run behind.. but obviously, since we barely scratched 3 ypc when doing so, they were wrong. Expect to see alot more runs to the left side of the line this year.

 

[TheSport78]

Except that it's NOT like that at all. 7 times isn't nearly the same as 86 times, no matter what kind of flawed logic you try to use. 86 times is certainly a big enough sample for me to say that it was no fluke that Livings was clearly the better guy to run behind. They may have thought last year that Bern was the better guy to run behind.. but obviously, since we barely scratched 3 ypc when doing so, they were wrong. Expect to see alot more runs to the left side of the line this year.

No, when you're comparing the player to another player who plays the same position and had nearly twice as many runs behind him, it's neither fair nor accurate. Want a fair comparison? Run behind Bernadeau and Livings more closely numerically and it'll give you more accurate numbers. How about this? They both stink lol