Flat against the Lions because. . . .

[Bcburns]

Our offense has seemed flat to me ever since Crayton went down. Although he doesn't usually make the highlight reel, I won't be surprised if the Cowboy offense suddenly comes alive when he gets back.

 

[Rick_Deckard]

Viewing life through my silver and blue colored glasses, I keep thinking that Bill played it pretty vanilla against Detroit (3 consecutive runs from the one). I think (hope) he is saving some razzle-dazzle for the tougher opponent. I look for more play action in the red zone against the Broncos.

 

[Fletch]

I can't help thinking we were offensively flat against the Lions because we didn't spend enough time time preparing for them. Bledsoe just seemed to be playing it safe and let our running game take the game over. The defense dominated a Detriot running game that is supposed to be one of the best. I can;t help but think it was because we were planning for Denver as much, or more, than the Lions.

Emphasis on stopping the run. Not seeming prepared for the Lions banged up secondary. Henry not on the field. We played a nice, safe game, and got the win.

Parcells indicated they would spend part of last week preparing for the Broncos. It was a short week on top of that. I can't help believing that we will be better prepared Thursday then we were Sunday.

Hey, 3 games in 11 days is all I have to say. And to come out on top 20-7? Again, not too shabby. Everyone is being a little over critical in my opinion. You just have to find ways to win in this day and age.

The Lions took away the deep pass all game long. And Parcells was content to run the ball. Why? Because it was working... that's why. Plus, Parcells was content to let the Lions self-destruct. Better them than us.

So just because the game was not 48-7, does not mean we have been exposed. We are what we are, and that is a first place team, sitting pretty at 7-3 with a good Denver team coming to Texas Stadium on a very short week.

 

[Tuna Helper]

I have the Lions vs. Cowboys game on Tivo and I watched it again. There was much ado made about a "snap trigger", and that maybe the Lions learned something about Al Johnson by watching film to get a jump on the ball. I don't believe it was anything pertaining to Al Johnson, and I do not believe there were any triggers. I just think the Lions were trying to get a jump on the ball by guessing at the snap count at all costs, even if this meant an offsides penalty. There were at least 5 instances where the Lions were offsides, but the refs didn't call it.

Ironically, the more offsides penalties the Lions racked up, the more rattled Drew Bledsoe looked, and partly because the refs weren't calling the penalty half the time. I watched these non calls in slow motion, and the Lions were clearly offsides on every single one of them.

I think this jumping of the snap count was just a gamble that the Lions took to get in Bledsoe's head and to keep him offtrack. It did work, but we won anyway...and 17 penalties (that counted) for the Lions is not a recipe for winning.