If you had to point to 1 Reason!

Typhus

Captain Catfish
Messages
21,217
Reaction score
24,065
If I have to point to the most crucial area,,, I would say that lossing Henry for that duration cost this team dearly.
The problems along the offesnive line with the loss of Flo and the rookie play of Pettiti can be addressed with help in the blocking schemes, but loosing Henry, arguably our best player on defense, put this defense into a tailspin.
Glenn stepped up to the plate admireably, with the resond that only a savy vet of his ilk can provide,, but Glenn is no Henry,,,, by any s-t-r-e-t-c-h, (sorry),,of the imagination.
 

joseephuss

Well-Known Member
Messages
28,041
Reaction score
6,920
Typhus said:
If I have to point to the most crucial area,,, I would say that lossing Henry for that duration cost this team dearly.
The problems along the offesnive line with the loss of Flo and the rookie play of Pettiti can be addressed with help in the blocking schemes, but loosing Henry, arguably our best player on defense, put this defense into a tailspin.
Glenn stepped up to the plate admireably, with the resond that only a savy vet of his ilk can provide,, but Glenn is no Henry,,,, by any s-t-r-e-t-c-h, (sorry),,of the imagination.

I don't think Henry would have played better against the Giants than Glenn did. The defense gave up 10 points that game. Henry has played very well for Dallas, but defense wasn't the problem that game.

I am not sure where there was a defensive tailspin. The defense has played well all year with or without Henry. The KC game was the first where I considered that the defense struggled the whole game.
 

AmericasTeam31

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,253
Reaction score
32
I blame the max protect. When we don't run it we give up some sacks, but the offense is much more potent. As we saw on Sunday...
 

Juke99

...Abbey someone
Messages
22,279
Reaction score
126
...because we wasted the entire 2004 season on the "Old Bill's Barnstorming Geriatric Football Roster" rather than signing and developing young players.
 

Eskimo

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,821
Reaction score
496
The most basic reason is that close games over the long haul are won about 50% of the time by your team. We have been in 10 close games and come out 5-5. Over the short-term there will be significant variation (look at Jags this year) but this is what one would expect overall.

Our record is fairly indicative of our overall level of play. Our record will improve when our team improves (OL, kicker, LB, FS).
 

conner01

Well-Known Member
Messages
28,960
Reaction score
26,604
i did'nt mean it as the tackles being the p[roblem. rivera has'nt been exacuting,tucker,rob,either center but it's all about exacution. the reason i mentioned the tackles is they may very well just not be able too.for the most part the rest of the team are capable just not always doing it.
 

superpunk

Well-Known Member
Messages
26,330
Reaction score
75
Juke99 said:
...because we wasted the entire 2004 season on the "Old Bill's Barnstorming Geriatric Football Roster" rather than signing and developing young players.

I'll second that, although our stupid 10 win season in 2003 is partially to blame for that experiment.
 
Top