I'd treat Thursday as my dress rehearsal

[CCBoy]

What does risking injury and playing in this game do? It does absolutely nothing. Did you see who the Bronco's had out there?

Uh, didn't that team just come off a game in the Super Bowl...go figure, maybe?

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

Uh, didn't that team just come off a game in the Super Bowl...go figure, maybe?

What does that have to do with anything? Did you see the Bronco's play their #1's out there? Its a whole new season. They didn't play them last year either.

Let's just call it what it is. Preseason football means nothing. IF the NFL got rid of it, the NFL game wouldn't suffer. It gives guys chance to make a teams 53 man roster. That's what its about. Its not about "getting ready for the season". How many times have we seen teams play well in the preseason to go on and miss out on the playoffs? Or to win 1 or 2 preseason games and go on to win the Super Bowl?

A group that was much more physical and wanted it more?

It wasn't because they played their starters though.

 

[CCBoy]

What does that have to do with anything? Did you see the Bronco's play their #1's out there? Its a whole new season. They didn't play them last year either.

Let's just call it what it is. Preseason football means nothing. IF the NFL got rid of it, the NFL game wouldn't suffer. It gives guys chance to make a teams 53 man roster. That's what its about. Its not about "getting ready for the season". How many times have we seen teams play well in the preseason to go on and miss out on the playoffs? Or to win 1 or 2 preseason games and go on to win the Super Bowl?



It wasn't because they played their starters though.

The point was washed by an anger first...no, it's overall depth was improved this season. And last year's only ended up in the Super Bowl. That wasn't lost by myself...but I try to dig even when emotions are short.

 

[jterrell]

What does that have to do with anything? Did you see the Bronco's play their #1's out there? Its a whole new season. They didn't play them last year either.

Let's just call it what it is. Preseason football means nothing. IF the NFL got rid of it, the NFL game wouldn't suffer. It gives guys chance to make a teams 53 man roster. That's what its about. Its not about "getting ready for the season". How many times have we seen teams play well in the preseason to go on and miss out on the playoffs? Or to win 1 or 2 preseason games and go on to win the Super Bowl?



It wasn't because they played their starters though.

The pre-season is over and its pointless to harp on it now but be very aware that Denver and Dallas are two different teams in two different situations.
All that being said Peyton Manning attempted the most passes of any Bronco this PRE_SEASON.
Romo finished 3rd on the Cowboys.

So, yes, other teams treat game 4 like a throw away. But other teams also play their starters significant snaps in other pre-season games to get them ready.
Dallas is too scared to play theirs.
It is what it is and it is over.

I would have handled it differently.
We'll see what Garrett chooses to do in the future be it here or elsewhere.

 

[Fla Cowpoke]

The pre-season is over and its pointless to harp on it now but be very aware that Denver and Dallas are two different teams in two different situations.
All that being said Peyton Manning attempted the most passes of any Bronco this PRE_SEASON.
Romo finished 3rd on the Cowboys.

So, yes, other teams treat game 4 like a throw away. But other teams also play their starters significant snaps in other pre-season games to get them ready.
Dallas is too scared to play theirs.
It is what it is and it is over.

I would have handled it differently.
We'll see what Garrett chooses to do in the future be it here or elsewhere.

You keep bringing up Peyton Manning and using him as the yardstick for Tony Romo. The fact is they are in two different situations. Romo is coming off a surgery and Manning isn't. Manning basically only played in two preseason games a year ago...had one series in the first and didn't play in the last.

I think the last thing we need to worry about is Romo. If he is healthy, the offense will be fine. If he isn't, it really isn't going to matter much who they have to back him up.

 

[jterrell]

You keep bringing up Peyton Manning and using him as the yardstick for Tony Romo. The fact is they are in two different situations. Romo is coming off a surgery and Manning isn't. Manning basically only played in two preseason games a year ago...had one series in the first and didn't play in the last.

I think the last thing we need to worry about is Romo. If he is healthy, the offense will be fine. If he isn't, it really isn't going to matter much who they have to back him up.

huh?? I brought him up once and in relation to someone else's point.
I really could care less what other teams do beyond seperating fact from fiction.
This team isn't ready to play football IMHO.
I'd want to see them actually play well which is probably goal 2 of the pre-season if goal 1 is avoid injuries.
Outside Dez and Tyron who else do we actually trust implicitly?

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

The pre-season is over and its pointless to harp on it now but be very aware that Denver and Dallas are two different teams in two different situations.
All that being said Peyton Manning attempted the most passes of any Bronco this PRE_SEASON.
Romo finished 3rd on the Cowboys.

So, yes, other teams treat game 4 like a throw away. But other teams also play their starters significant snaps in other pre-season games to get them ready.
Dallas is too scared to play theirs.
It is what it is and it is over.

I would have handled it differently.
We'll see what Garrett chooses to do in the future be it here or elsewhere.

Well its about keeping your players healthy and for a fanbase who constantly complains about injuries....what does game 4 do? I brought up the Bronco's because before last season it did nothing for them. I just don't see a history of playing your starters in Game 4 and it equaling success. I just don't see it. What are the perks of it? Your starters gain some confidence going up against some practice squad players and backups?

I've actually seen the opposite. I've seen times where guys like Brett Favre and MIchael Strahan wouldn't play in the preseason and would go on to have success.

 

[Idgit]

http://www.yardbarker.com/nfl/artic...ll_promising_a_better_offensive_line/17078507

Seattle Seahawks head coach Pete Carroll interviewed this morning with 710 ESPN Seattle radio. Topics ranged from the NFL calling the Seahawks to admit Tharold Simon‘s illegal contact penalty should not have been called to fans worrying about Earl Thomas returning punts. “It’s another football play,” said Carroll, “You can worry all you want. I don’t live in the world of worrying what could go wrong.”

I think that's redonkulous. Does he live in a world where risk should match return? Because Earl Thomas returning punts in preseason game four is just silly. It doesn't matter that he didn't get bit. It's still dumb.

 

[Fla Cowpoke]

huh?? I brought him up once and in relation to someone else's point.
I really could care less what other teams do beyond seperating fact from fiction.
This team isn't ready to play football IMHO.
I'd want to see them actually play well which is probably goal 2 of the pre-season if goal 1 is avoid injuries.
Outside Dez and Tyron who else do we actually trust implicitly?

If they aren't ready to play football it isn't because they didn't play last night.

The defense you weren't going to see "great" play from simply because we didn't have our starters healthy. I'd rather give them every chance to get healthy for the first game then to test their health in a preseason game that means nothing.

On offense, was it really going to help us to see Romo take more shots?

I think the team will be as good as they possible can be when we line up for Game 1 against the Niners. We won't have Lawrence. We won't have Spencer. We won't have Brent or Okoye. However we likely will have everyone else. That is all we can ask for.

 

[jterrell]

If they aren't ready to play football it isn't because they didn't play last night.

The defense you weren't going to see "great" play from simply because we didn't have our starters healthy. I'd rather give them every chance to get healthy for the first game then to test their health in a preseason game that means nothing.

On offense, was it really going to help us to see Romo take more shots?

I think the team will be as good as they possible can be when we line up for Game 1 against the Niners. We won't have Lawrence. We won't have Spencer. We won't have Brent or Okoye. However we likely will have everyone else. That is all we can ask for.

this is yawn worthy at this point and we arent covering new ground.

the team has shown no signs of being ready and given that the best way to get them ready is to play them.
for guys who didn't get ready the first 3 weeks of pre-season it is hardly unheard of for them to play week 4.
you don't knock off rust or try to get going in the regular season.
most teams IL guys who haven't played by now.

basically i'd rather have guys ready to go and play hard then have a bunch of un-ready but healthy guys.

the head coach's job is to get 53 guys ready to go play. right now i don't think garrett can feel he has done that.
i am guessing after this season he will wish he had.
but it isn't my job on the line so it is his decision.

 

[TheDude]

I think that's redonkulous. Does he live in a world where risk should match return? Because Earl Thomas returning punts in preseason game four is just silly. It doesn't matter that he didn't get bit. It's still dumb.

You can argue any micro, but I think there is a chasm between the 2 philosophies and 2 orgs. I harken back to theat stupid Arizona game in 2011 and "settling for a 49 yd FG with 23 seconds left due to "risk of a negative play." The New England game and putting the onus on a defense to stop Brady versus risking anyting to just get a 1st down.

I'll grant you its perspective, but that philosophy has made some players there overperform (I think) in that they exude confidence. Here, we hold out Dunbar because he "might be " a key to the season.

 

[Idgit]

You can argue any micro, but I think there is a chasm between the 2 philosophies and 2 orgs. I harken back to theat stupid Arizona game in 2011 and "settling for a 49 yd FG with 23 seconds left due to "risk of a negative play." The New England game and putting the onus on a defense to stop Brady versus risking anyting to just get a 1st down.

I'll grant you its perspective, but that philosophy has made some players there overperform (I think) in that they exude confidence. Here, we hold out Dunbar because he "might be " a key to the season.

If we were talking regular season games, I might agree with you. But punt returns in preseason for a star player? Sorry, that's just dumb.

 

[TheDude]

If we were talking regular season games, I might agree with you. But punt returns in preseason for a star player? Sorry, that's just dumb.

I was talking about the philosophy and statement in general.

 

[Fla Cowpoke]

this is yawn worthy at this point and we arent covering new ground.

the team has shown no signs of being ready and given that the best way to get them ready is to play them.
for guys who didn't get ready the first 3 weeks of pre-season it is hardly unheard of for them to play week 4.
you don't knock off rust or try to get going in the regular season.
most teams IL guys who haven't played by now.

basically i'd rather have guys ready to go and play hard then have a bunch of un-ready but healthy guys.

the head coach's job is to get 53 guys ready to go play. right now i don't think garrett can feel he has done that.
i am guessing after this season he will wish he had.
but it isn't my job on the line so it is his decision.

His job is to get the best 53 ready to play. When McClain and Melton and Claiborne and a couple others are able to go for Game One....he will have done that.

 

[CCBoy]

His job is to get the best 53 ready to play. When McClain and Melton and Claiborne and a couple others are able to go for Game One....he will have done that.

Myself, I'm going to root for who show's up and on the field once the season starts. I'm a football fan, and can identify good play and most bad play during games. But I'm still going to root for who is there.

The front desk at a bus terminal could keep track of who is boarding a bus...but that's not my point.

This off season, and there is no coulda, woulda, shoulda's about not having a team ready to play intensely for each and every Exhibition Game, as JT is saying...and not performing at a generally respected level of play. No matter the accumulated excuses, just as the past two seasons have shown...you either do it or you don't.

Having a first offensive unit that puts up 13 points for the summer and a defense that has yet to leave an opponent's jersey somewhat dirty...just do not bode well.

I'm not about to expect our Cowboys to take the rail from the opening gate...but I'll be watching.