I haven't started a TO thread or really participated

[Woods]

in the discussions, but I do have a serious question concerning our WRs.

Let me first state that I am a Dallas Cowboys fan first and foremost, and whatever is decided at the end with TO doesn't impact me one way or another.

My question is simply, IF TO is cut or traded or off the team this coming season, how do we make up for his production and DCs trying to double cover him (i.e., creating opportunities for other players on the team)?

Yes, with a strong running game (or emphasis on the running game) we probably don't pass as often. Still, is the combo of our RBs, Witten, RW, and Crayton sufficient to have a strong passing game?

In 2007, without TO, our passing game and offense did sputter (end of the season).

I really don't see JJ giving up more draft picks for a guy like Boldin, for example, if TO is cut. Also, if we cut TO, I don't see we bring in a guy like C Johnson either.

We could draft another WR, which we should do anyway, but let's face it, any WR we draft will LIKELY take a couple of years to develop and isn't going to be our number 1 or number 2 this coming season.

IF we cut TO, most likely we have to hope that either Austin breaks out in a BIG way, and that between RW, Crayton, Witten, and Austin, our passing game is good enough to challenge for a Super Bowl.

Now, perhaps with an emphasis on the running game, and with a healthy RW and Witten, and with Austin as the deep threat, we can be good enough to challenge Philly and NYG for the NFC East and make it to the Super Bowl.

But honestly said, I don't yet really know what we have in Austin (hopefully he is all we think he is), and I don't see Crayton as a difference maker. As for RW, is he the guy who is going to scare DCs and draw double coverage?

Again, this is most likely the cast we will have to work with assuming TO is gone. I doubt JJ brings on another prima donna WR immediately after cutting ties with TO.

 

[viman96]

Our offense sputtered with him at the end of this season. IMO the offense will produce just fine without him. Other players will step up. RW just needs his chance to play and be featured.

In addition I would like to see us feature the RB more. Relying on a big play WR is like BB teams relying on the 3 pt shot. Come playoff time or big games, it is easier to game plan and take away.

I'd rather bring in the defenders in with a solid running game and then go over top to a WR vs. going deep with WRs and pushing defenders back to open up the running game.

 

[Vintage]

We haven't won a playoff game with Owens.

I am fully confident we can continue that streak without Owens.

 

[Woods]

We haven't won a playoff game with Owens.

I am fully confident we can continue that streak without Owens.

So, you think that without TO our offensive production will be good enough to (hopefully) challenge for a Super Bowl?

I'd still like to pick up one other WR is FA if we were to cut TO, but I doubt we could afford it if we plan on extending Ware and possibly signing a FA DL and/or ILB.

 

[Vintage]

So, you think that without TO our offensive production will be good enough to (hopefully) challenge for a Super Bowl?

I'd still like to pick up one other WR is FA if we were to cut TO, but I doubt we could afford it if we plan on extending Ware and possibly signing a FA DL and/or ILB.

What I am saying is.... we haven't won a playoff game with Owens.

I am sure we can manage to continue to not win playoff games too.... if we let him go.

 

[Woods]

Our offense sputtered with him at the end of this season. IMO the offense will produce just fine without him. Other players will step up. RW just needs his chance to play and be featured.

In addition I would like to see us feature the RB more. Relying on a big play WR is like BB teams relying on the 3 pt shot. Come playoff time or big games, it is easier to game plan and take away.

I'd rather bring in the defenders in with a solid running game and then go over top to a WR vs. going deep with WRs and pushing defenders back to open up the running game.

I would also like to see the running game featured more.

I'm not sure of RW. I guess he's at least as good a J Gage, for example, of the Titans.

The difference is that the Titans OL played much better. And their STs seemed more consistent as well.

 

[Woods]

What I am saying is.... we haven't won a playoff game with Owens.

I am sure we can manage to continue to not win playoff games too.... if we let him go.

I agree with that . . . . I'm trying to figure out how the heck we do win a playoff game. (I can't believe I just typed that as a Cowboys fan )

 

[Yoshimitsu]

I agree with that . . . . I'm trying to figure out how the heck we do win a playoff game. (I can't believe I just typed that as a Cowboys fan )

Coaching is the biggest problem.


Then its T.O.

 

[Vintage]

Coaching is the biggest problem.


Then its T.O.

Superpunk had it nailed a long time ago.

Its the players.

Two different coaching staffs; same results.

Nada.

 

[theogt]

What I am saying is.... we haven't won a playoff game with Owens.

I am sure we can manage to continue to not win playoff games too.... if we let him go.

:laugh2:

Superpunk had it nailed a long time ago.

Its the players.

Two different coaching staffs; same results.

Nada.

It's not that simple, I don't think. There are different problems under each coaching staff.

 

[Yoshimitsu]

Superpunk had it nailed a long time ago.

Its the players.

Two different coaching staffs; same results.

Nada.

That as well. But the offensive play calling was horrendous along with the execution.. When Wade took over the defense we seen how much Brian Stewart was a terrible coach. People say Wade didn't fix the defense because of the two runs in the Ravens game and the play against the eagles but that was all on the players. They totally laid an egg.

 

[DallasEast]

Once again, the impression is:

http://i356.***BLOCKED***/albums/oo4/DallasEast1701/NotFootball101.jpg

With respect, that's not necessarily true.

 

[BAT]

What I am saying is.... we haven't won a playoff game with Owens.

I am sure we can manage to continue to not win playoff games too.... if we let him go.

There is a huge difference between 5-11 (and not making the playoffs) and 13-3 (losing in playoffs).


Heck, there is a big difference between challenging for a playoff spot (9-7) and not being even close (can you imagine the record w/out Owens last season???).

 

[Woods]

To get to the next level, we do need better coaching (STs), more accountability, better execution, fewer penalties, turnovers, etc.

We also need better play at the OL and Safety position, for example.

There are quite a few things to fix.

I'm not really sure if JJ will be able to fix all these moving parts.

The coaching is virtually the same as last season . . . . maybe there will be more accountability this season, however . . . and who knows how the players will execute . . . . as for the penalties and turnovers, again, that's on the players for the most part.

 

[Nav22]

What I am saying is.... we haven't won a playoff game with Owens.

I am sure we can manage to not win playoff games too.... if we let him go.

Great logic. We should cut Romo, Witten, and Ware too.

The real question is: are our Super Bowl chances better WITH T.O. or WITHOUT him.

CONS: The cap hit is larger if we cut him. And if we want to be realistic, our offense probably dips in '09 if we cut him. Defensive coordinators we're facing next year will breathe a LOT easier if T.O. isn't a part of our offense.

PRO: Cutting him might help us chemistry-wise. That's if you believe he truly is a "cancer" and that his attitude hinders our ability to win games, which may or may not be the case.

Personally, I have a hard time believing the one "pro" outweighs the "cons".

 

[Woods]

Ideally, and again, I don't have any loyalties to TO, but IF TO was able to do what the coaches wanted of him off the field - and we gave Austin 1 more year to see what he could do . . . .

We could part ways with TO after this coming season and give Austin a nice contract next year assuming we thought enough of him.

I could see Austin potentially becoming a very good WR. We just need to see a consistent season out of him.

 

[Yoshimitsu]

Great logic. We should cut Romo, Witten, and Ware too.

The real question is: are our Super Bowl chances better WITH T.O. or WITHOUT him.

CONS: The cap hit is larger if we cut him. And if we want to be realistic, our offense probably dips in '09 if we cut him. Defensive coordinators we're facing next year will breathe a LOT easier if T.O. isn't a part of our offense.

PRO: Cutting him might help us chemistry-wise. That's if you believe he truly is a "cancer", which he may or may not be.

Personally, I have a hard time believing the one "pro" outweighs the "cons".

The cap hit being larger has been debunked many times. That is the biggest myth on these boards.

The pro outweighs the cons. How can you win with chemistry problems? Isn't the object here to win?

 

[Woods]

Are there any "cheaper" WRs that we could pick up in FA IF TO is cut?

I mean outside of Boldin, C Johnson, etc.

Preferably, we need a speedster.

 

[dallasfaniac]

Personally, I have a hard time believing the one "pro" outweighs the "cons".

Not that I care if Owens is in Dallas next year or not, but your assumption is that there is only one pro.

 

[Nav22]

The cap hit being larger has been debunked many times. That is the biggest myth on these boards.

Link, please?

I was under the impression that the hit will be around $9 mil if we keep him, and something like $9.8 mil if we release him.

The pro outweighs the cons. How can you win with chemistry problems? Isn't the object here to win?

Yes, of course the object is to win.

But you don't know that T.O. causes chemistry "problems" that actually keep us from winning football games. Neither do I.

That's the issue.

If he's hurting us more than helping us on the field, then it's a no-brainer... buh bye, T.O.

But there's no way you can unequivocally state that T.O.'s attitude has caused us to lose games.

The biggest "distraction" we faced this year was the (real or fabricated) T.O. vs. Witten/Romo feud... and we won the ensuing game.

Another "distraction" was when he said he wasn't satisfied with the # of passes thrown his way, after our loss to Washington... and we won the ensuing game.

To me, these things are only "problems" if we're losing football games. Can you say for sure that it's a "problem" when we're winning our next game each time crap supposedly hits the fan?

Maybe these "distractions" actually ARE blown out of proportion and they don't actually have a profound effect on his teammates.

It's what I've suspected all along.

Not that I care if Owens is in Dallas next year or not, but your assumption is that there is only one pro.

Feel free to add to it. I can't think of any others.