Gosselin: Surprisingly, help for offensive line could already be on roster

[speedkilz88]

You guys really think this is strange, or even worthy of commentary? Criticism is going to get challenged on a team's fan site. An article saying the Cowboys staff thinks we've got some young depth coming up is not. Except maybe by a few fans who have a problem with any article that contains insufficient criticism of their team. This is what normal fan board reaction looks like.

 

[xwalker]

almost as many excuses for Arkin as there is for Free on this board.

At least with Free we know he CAN play well.

NO EVIDENCE AT ALL WITH ARKIN.

There is also no evidence that Arkin can't play Guard. The 2012 preseason only proved that he was not ready to play Center, a position that he had never played before.

I don't "think" that Arkin can play, but there is really no evidence that he can't.

 

[Idgit]

There is also no evidence that Arkin can't play Guard. The 2012 preseason only proved that he was not ready to play Center, a position that he had never played before.

I don't "think" that Arkin can play, but there is really no evidence that he can't.

Last year was tough on him, but he also got a ton of snaps out of the deal. You can usually tell when a team's got expectations for a player. At least rumors bubble up from some of the position coaches or scouts or whoever it is that bubbles rumors around Valley Ranch. Leary's gotten some of that, though he's looked pretty outmatched to me when he's been in game situations. Parnell gets a fair amount of it. I haven't heard 'boo' about Arkin before this article, and even here, reading it, it sounds like pretty faint praise from Callahan to me.

Every now and then a player jumps up after a few years when you don't expect them to (Church and Harris have done it. And Bradie James made a good career doing it late in his rookie deal not too long ago). More often than not, if there hasn't been buzz about a player after two seasons--and others in his position group have seemed to pass him up in the competition for reps--he's probably not going to develop into a starter for you long-term.

Personally, I'd be really surprised to ever see Arkin starting a game in the NFL at this point.

 

[speedkilz88]

I think if Arkin got released he could go to a team like the Texans or Commanders and play pure zbs where his strength concerns wouldn't be as big a problem.

 

[Idgit]

I think if Arkin got released he could go to a team like the Texans or Commanders and play pure zbs where his strength concerns wouldn't be as big a problem.

He might. He actually is usually more or less where he's supposed to be. I gather he works hard and the coaches like his effort generally. He just doesn't seem to be able to anchor when he needs to.

He looks to me like someone they liked physically but were expecting to be able to get significantly stronger with a couple years in the Cowboys program, and his body just wasn't able to get big enough and strong enough. One more off season could help him, because his first was derailed by the lockout. But let's just say I'm skeptical that it can help enough.

 

[Nation]

It'll be nice if we can upgrade our right side of the line from F play to C+ play, but to me the most important improvement from 2012 to 2013 will be from Tyron Smith. If he can evolve from a player that is on the path to becoming a franchise left tackle to an actual franchise left tackle that will be mammoth for this offensive line.

 

[xwalker]

I think if Arkin got released he could go to a team like the Texans or Commanders and play pure zbs where his strength concerns wouldn't be as big a problem.

I'm still not sure how much Zone the Cowboys are going to use. Callahan and assistant OL coach Frank Pollack both have a history of using a lot of Zone. The reports that I saw indicated that they were implementing primarily Zone type runs in the rookie mini-camp.

On the flip side of the argument, many people believe that players that were acquired since Callahan arrived (Frederick and Livings) are more suited to man-blocking schemes.

It has definitely been reported multiple times that Callahan requires different techniques/footwork than what Houck taught.

 

[TheRomoSexual]

I'd be ecstatic with a line of Smith-Livings-Fred-Leary-Parnell. Replace Livings with a draft pick in a year or two. That's how you develop a line.

 

[Risen Star]

I'd be ecstatic with a line of Smith-Livings-Fred-Leary-Parnell. Replace Livings with a draft pick in a year or two. That's how you develop a line.

Except 3 of those players, and 4 if you count the eventual replacement for Livings, are complete unknowns at this point.

But that's how you build it.

 

[Zordon]

You guys really think this is strange, or even worthy of commentary? Criticism is going to get challenged on a team's fan site. An article saying the Cowboys staff thinks we've got some young depth coming up is not. Except maybe by a few fans who have a problem with any article that contains insufficient criticism of their team. This is what normal fan board reaction looks like.

Just be consistent. Me, I consistently defend Goose on here. Others pick and choose when he's a blathering idiot.

 

[Rack]

I'm still not sure how much Zone the Cowboys are going to use. Callahan and assistant OL coach Frank Pollack both have a history of using a lot of Zone. The reports that I saw indicated that they were implementing primarily Zone type runs in the rookie mini-camp.

On the flip side of the argument, many people believe that players that were acquired since Callahan arrived (Frederick and Livings) are more suited to man-blocking schemes.

It has definitely been reported multiple times that Callahan requires different techniques/footwork than what Houck taught.

Those would be the people that don't understand what is "required" to play in a ZBS.

 

[TheRomoSexual]

Except 3 of those players, and 4 if you count the eventual replacement for Livings, are complete unknowns at this point.

But that's how you build it.

Parnell is not unknown and Fred is a first round pick, so it's not unreasonable to consider them reliable.

And if Livings starts, that would mean he has made significant progress since joining the team.

So yes, that's how you build it. But it is hilarious how you both scream for more draft picks on the line, and yet simultaneously will diminish the impact of draft picks as "unknowns."

 

[burmafrd]

Parnell is not unknown and Fred is a first round pick, so it's not unreasonable to consider them reliable.

And if Livings starts, that would mean he has made significant progress since joining the team.

So yes, that's how you build it. But it is hilarious how you both scream for more draft picks on the line, and yet simultaneously will diminish the impact of draft picks as "unknowns."

because draft picks are unknowns. In the NFL.

 

[Risen Star]

Parnell is not unknown and Fred is a first round pick, so it's not unreasonable to consider them reliable.

And if Livings starts, that would mean he has made significant progress since joining the team.

So yes, that's how you build it. But it is hilarious how you both scream for more draft picks on the line, and yet simultaneously will diminish the impact of draft picks as "unknowns."

You know about Parnell after his brief cup of coffee last year during possibly our worst OL performance in the history of the team? Do tell.

If Livings starts it could also be because there's no talent to beat him out.

Frederick's a draft pick. Leary is an undrafted free agent. "That's how you develop a line" doesn't come into play until they actually show they can play. Because "that's how we've developed a line" for the last 15 years to poor results.

 

[Idgit]

Just be consistent. Me, I consistently defend Goose on here. Others pick and choose when he's a blathering idiot.

There are two reasons why you won't see consistency in situations like this. 1, people may read and recognize positive points that they disagree with, but a lot of posters simply don't take the time to try to explode them if they're positive. Not because they necessarily agree with them, but because for a lot of us, that's just not much fun.

The other reason is that people aren't usually blathering idiots all the time. There are plenty of 'I usually can't stand the guy, but I actually agree with JJT here' posts in these threads, because some takes are just better than others. In this case, Goose was less making an argument than he was just relaying what he believes the coaches happen to think. You're not going to say much to that other than 'I disagree with the coaches,' which is a sentiment that's pretty much expressed in every single thread at one point or another if they go on long enough.

 

[Bluestang]

There are two reasons why you won't see consistency in situations like this. 1, people may read and recognize positive points that they disagree with, but a lot of posters simply don't take the time to try to explode them if they're positive. Not because they necessarily agree with them, but because for a lot of us, that's just not much fun.

The other reason is that people aren't usually blathering idiots all the time. There are plenty of 'I usually can't stand the guy, but I actually agree with JJT here' posts in these threads, because some takes are just better than others. In this case, Goose was less making an argument than he was just relaying what he believes the coaches happen to think. You're not going to say much to that other than 'I disagree with the coaches,' which is a sentiment that's pretty much expressed in every single thread at one point or another if they go on long enough.

If you break the article down, Goose used about 3/4 of it in quoting Callahan in that piece.

It wasn't much of a story in my opinion. It's not like Goose was saying he believed that the replacement would come from within, but it was Callahan actually saying it.

Goose says some odd things from time to time, but in this particular case he just wrote a pretty cut and dry article using Callahan as the source.

 

[TheSport78]

You know about Parnell after his brief cup of coffee last year during possibly our worst OL performance in the history of the team? Do tell.

If Livings starts it could also be because there's no talent to beat him out.

Frederick's a draft pick. Leary is an undrafted free agent. "That's how you develop a line" doesn't come into play until they actually show they can play. Because "that's how we've developed a line" for the last 15 years to poor results.

It's amazing how positive and/or unrealistic spin can be put on a negative or uncertain situation, huh?

Parnell isn't unknown? Okay.

If Livings starts, it's because he's made "significant strides." I guess Alan Ball made significant strides at safety also.

 

[nathanlt]

Didn't ready the whole article did you?

No, I didn't "ready" the whole article. I did read it, though.

 

[visionary]

Parnell is not unknown and Fred is a first round pick, so it's not unreasonable to consider them reliable.

And if Livings starts, that would mean he has made significant progress since joining the team.

So yes, that's how you build it. But it is hilarious how you both scream for more draft picks on the line, and yet simultaneously will diminish the impact of draft picks as "unknowns."

Show me a team in the NFL that would count on Parnell to start for them at RT with no back up plan and I will show you a team that is likely to go 8-8

These people are unknowns at this point

 

[ScipioCowboy]

Show me a team in the NFL that would count on Parnell to start for them at RT with no back up plan and I will show you a team that is likely to go 8-8

These people are unknowns at this point

Depends.

If Federick and Leary can start and play well, the Cowboys can compensate for one leak along their offensive line. They can't, however, compensate for three leaks, like they were trying to do last season.

Those 90s lines were known as some of the greatest in the history of the league. But Derek Kennard and John Gesek were far from great players. They were marginal starters at best.