Is It a better strategy to finish the Offense or build the defense

[Clove]

I know we have a great offense, but we need, at the very least, a good pass rush and leave everything else the same. We can have everything bad on the defense, but we MUST have a pass rush. All and I mean ALL of my resources will go into pass rushers. On offense, you will have a 2nd year Dak Prescott, a second year Zeke Elliott. You'll have possibly a new receiver, and all offseason to get the timing down between receivers and QB. This offense is destined to be better, but we just need a great pass rush.

 

[DandyDon52]

However, the real discussion here should be, would we have called that particular defense if we had a player who could beat the OL off the snap?

I think they still call same thing, they wanted to play it safe and play coverage.
Many teams do same thing, some go all out to pressure and less on coverage.
Marinelli likes to play it safe dont allow big plays, so he focuses more on coverage than pressure.
Hence the name bend dont break.

And I am with you on if we had a top level rusher or 2 they would get more pressure, and it would change some things.
But getting a good pass rusher is not easy, and cowboys want a cheap one, thru the draft, we got lawrence and gregory,
and not much value there.
Then hardy started ok, but the losing and media issues, made him give up, he then just coasted.
He had the ability but needed a strong HC, and JG isnt that.
We got thornton, but he wound up a bkup.
Since ratlif and ware dallas hasnt been able to find or get any good pass rushers.

Maybe they luck out in the draft, but I read they are happy with the guys they have lol.
Jerry wants a wardaddy lol but he isnt calling the shots.

Bottom line is they cant and wont build a strong defense this offseason, unless they get lucky in the draft.
So they are going to have to rely on the offense to help defense and win games.

Basically I expect the same players, the same coaches and the same play books, and play calling in 2017.
It will be a repeat, and maybe with a few new players.

So I doubt they throw to elliot any more than they did in 2016.

 

[big dog cowboy]

Bottom line is they cant and wont build a strong defense this offseason, unless they get lucky in the draft.

Why not? Smith and Tapper, probably 4 or 5 draft picks and FA's all being added. I can see a big improvement being very posible.

 

[DandyDon52]

Why not? Smith and Tapper, probably 4 or 5 draft picks and FA's all being added. I can see a big improvement being very posible.

Well big dog,it is possible , but I said strong not just better.
What did they add last year to defense? they drafted higher then, and only got a couple guys who could play, and then jaylon.
They got thornton who wound up a bkup.
So sure they can be a little better, but I am talking strong with a difference maker on DL and in secondary.
It is unlikely for them to make any big improvements.

 

[GhostOfPelluer]

He was also the only guy who could get pressure but that's here nor there isn't it? Lets assume you are right and the real reason they let him go was that he was a cancer. Doesn't that prove that the team used half measures to begin with, on the signing? It's not as if his behavior was a revelation. The Cowboys knew who he was and what he was when they signed him.

No, it doesn't prove your thesis at all. He was the best available pass rusher that offseason and they paid him a 1-year prove-it deal above what was his market at the time in hopes that he would pan out and they could go long term. That's trying to fix a weakness and going all out to do so.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

No, it doesn't prove your thesis at all. He was the best available pass rusher that offseason and they paid him a 1-year prove-it deal above what was his market at the time in hopes that he would pan out and they could go long term. That's trying to fix a weakness and going all out to do so.

And that's what I'm talking about. You take the one guy, nobody else wants to sign and when it doesn't work out, you say "Hey, we took a chance on this guy but it didn't work out, is all." Then you have fans justify, just like this.

That's not addressing the problem and it's not the best effort. In the real business world, an Exec would be looking for a job if they dealt with a problem in this manner.

We don't agree.

 

[Doomsday101]

My hope would be that Dallas can hit on some defensive players but come draft day getting quality players offense or defense is still the mission. Don't reach for players over getting a quality player

 

[GhostOfPelluer]

And that's what I'm talking about. You take the one guy, nobody else wants to sign and when it doesn't work out, you say "Hey, we took a chance on this guy but it didn't work out, is all." Then you have fans justify, just like this.

That's not addressing the problem and it's not the best effort. In the real business world, an Exec would be looking for a job if they dealt with a problem in this manner.

We don't agree.

I guess you have unreal expectations as to what is going all out. You can't go all out to fix all your problems at once. The salary cap and draft system don't allow any team to do so. I already pointed out the draft picks they've used on defense the past five years. They haven't ignored the pass rush, they've simply been inept at finding and developing quality talent there. Crawford, Lawrence, Gregory, Hardy, Collins and Tapper, all the secondary moves (which plays a part in pass rush), that's not a pittance in resources spent, just a pittance in return on investment.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I guess you have unreal expectations as to what is going all out. You can't go all out to fix all your problems at once. The salary cap and draft system don't allow any team to do so. I already pointed out the draft picks they've used on defense the past five years. They haven't ignored the pass rush, they've simply been inept at finding and developing quality talent there. Crawford, Lawrence, Gregory, Hardy, Collins and Tapper, all the secondary moves (which plays a part in pass rush), that's not a pittance in resources spent, just a pittance in return on investment.

Humm.... Unreal. In 11 years, we haven't drafted one good pass rusher, since Ware really...., nor have we signed an FA who could be a difference maker in this area. Yeah, that's probably it.

For the record, you pointed out, to me, defensive players taken in a much larger time frame. I pointed out that 10 years is the better indicator, or do you disagree? What possible barring could players taken while Jimmy Johnson was coach have on this team? 3 players in the last 10 years on defense. One DL, that was actually an OLB in a 34. That picture doesn't need window dressing. It shows exactly what this team thinks and how it views the importance of that situation IMO.

We don't agree.

 

[GhostOfPelluer]

Humm.... Unreal. In 11 years, we haven't drafted one good pass rusher, since Ware really...., nor have we signed an FA who could be a difference maker in this area. Yeah, that's probably it.

For the record, you pointed out, to me, defensive players taken in a much larger time frame. I pointed out that 10 years is the better indicator, or do you disagree? What possible barring could players taken while Jimmy Johnson was coach have on this team? 3 players in the last 10 years on defense. One DL, that was actually an OLB in a 34. That picture doesn't need window dressing. It shows exactly what this team thinks and how it views the importance of that situation IMO.

We don't agree.

If you're going back 10 years, why would Dallas waste resources on the pass rush when they led the league in sacks in 2008? They were seventh in 2009. They were third in 2007. It wasn't until 2010 when the pass rush started looking like it could be a weakness. That's six years ago.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

If you're going back 10 years, why would Dallas waste resources on the pass rush when they led the league in sacks in 2008? They were seventh in 2009. They were third in 2007. It wasn't until 2010 when the pass rush started looking like it could be a weakness. That's six years ago.

Because if you are smart, you understand that you don't want to be in the position you are today, which is, a team good enough to win a Championship in almost all other areas except the very critical area where we have lost to GB twice in the Playoffs. You don't want to be in a position where you don't have a pass rusher that can bring pressure in big games. Honestly, I'm surprised you would ask this question and that you would need it explained to you.

We don't agree. Going back and forth will do nothing other then bore the hell out of everybody. You don't see this approach as a problem. I do. It's as simple as that.

We do not agree.

 

[Ranched]

LOL. Agree. Quick example & I'm done with this topic. Look at this past SB. My gosh, the Falcons' D was spectacular the entire season. So, in return they made it to the big dance, only to fall apart by getting tired which gave Brady the D shredder mode lol. At the end, the best D didn't win, but instead, the best O did.

That's an interesting point but the same, I think, could be said for the idea that says, "What's the point of winning a first round game if you can't win in the second round or even in the Super Bowl?"

I think you need both. I think teams have won with superior talent on one side of the ball but I don't think that's the norm. I think that's the exception but that is just my own opinion.

 

[negativecreep]

I hate posting in threads I haven't read all the replies to, haven't been sleeping good and I'm lazy, but defense all the way.

 

[Ranched]

I married one. And HE's a very happy "housewife"! My gosh, "housewife" really? What decade are you from?! My husband' a stay at home father. But if you insist, he's a stay at home....um, "housewife".

It's like dating a stripper and expecting her to be a happy housewife.

 

[T-RO]

Why not? Smith and Tapper, probably 4 or 5 draft picks and FA's all being added. I can see a big improvement being very posible.

It's possible we could see a big impactful draft for the defense.

The draft is rich in cornerbacks, safety...and there are purportedly a lot of good (but not great) pass rushers as well.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

LOL. Agree. Quick example & I'm done with this topic. Look at this past SB. My gosh, the Falcons' D was spectacular the entire season. So, in return they made it to the big dance, only to fall apart by getting tired which gave Brady the D shredder mode lol. At the end, the best D didn't win, but instead, the best O did.

Not sure about this. Atlanta was not all that great of a Defense last year. I think they were like 25th. On the other hand, New England was. They were top 10. I think it was just the opposite. The better D did win. The better O lost.

 

[jterrell]

Don't think you strategize with either specific goal in mind.
Took Zeke not to complete offense but because he was the best player last year.
Think you do same this year.

FA for us is generally just filling holes we have from departures.
And then you get best guy you can actually afford.
They'll have salary slots on the spreadsheet.

Team focuses very heavily on the draft and will draft best talent under McClay/Stephen.

 

[jterrell]

Not sure about this. Atlanta was not all that great of a Defense last year. I think they were like 25th. On the other hand, New England was. They were top 10. I think it was just the opposite. The better D did win. The better O lost.

Think you are both wrong
Think the more experienced team/coach won.
ATL was 2 TDs better but put it on cruise control and let Brady have whatever he wanted til he got insanely hot.

 

[Killerinstinct]

i don't see why we can't do both.

WR, RT, SS, CB and speed rushing DE is all we need.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Think you are both wrong
Think the more experienced team/coach won.
ATL was 2 TDs better but put it on cruise control and let Brady have whatever he wanted til he got insanely hot.

How could what I posted be wrong? Atlanta, I believe, was 25th defensively. NE was top 10, I believe 8th? Atlanta was the better Offense, I believe 2nd in the league. NE, I think maybe 5?

The better Defense won. The better offense lost. There is no wrong there, those are the facts I believe.

However, I do agree that the more experienced, better coach won but that's not the statement that was made previously.