Is This Still True?

[Yakuza Rich]

It's not solely won in the trenches. And as historical data has shown, great pocket passing QB's are adept at avoiding sacks. The Colts and Bill Polian supposedly 'owned the draft' for years and had 'all day for Peyton to throw.' Once Peyton was gone, the team went 2-14 and the O-Line has not look nearly as good. The same will go down with the Pats O-Line when Brady leaves.

In the case of the Colts; they won because they had a superior offense that didn't rely on a great O-Line to move the ball and score. They geared the defense to be a pass defense oriented team. Sometimes that worked, sometimes it didn't. But, their offense almost always worked and so when their defense stunk, they could still outscore the opponent.

Then we have the Browns who for years had their fans screaming for a good O-Line. Now they have one and they still stink. No talent at the skill positions.

It really revolves around passing the ball more effectively than the opponent. You have primary positions involved with that like the QB, WR, corners and pass rushers. And you have supplementary positions that can help those primary positions like the O-Line, linebackers, running backs, etc.






YR

 

[Nightman]

It really revolves around passing the ball more effectively than the opponent. You have primary positions involved with that like the QB, WR, corners and pass rushers. And you have supplementary positions that can help those primary positions like the O-Line, linebackers, running backs, etc.

Adam proved this during the offseason. Passing efficiency and defending the pass is what wins in the NFL.

 

[TwoDeep3]

Adam proved this during the offseason. Passing efficiency and defending the pass is what wins in the NFL.

Stats can be misleading. When someone pulls them out, and they aren't the stats of wins and losses, I tune out.

 

[speedkilz88]

Not within 10 yards or moving side to side he won't.

Evaluating OG based on 40 times......

5 stars has a take on this.

Even if you went by 40 times it's not true. Warford had the same time as Frederick and those two aren't the only guys that have run poor 40s. Clabo, everyone's favorite free agent RT ran just as poorly.

 

[Verdict]

If Frederick can do what he was drafted to do, which is snap the ball well, hold the point of attack, take on the nose guard one on one, block well in the running game, make all the line calls and keep the defense from collapsing the pocket (and in turn also replace the weakest point in the offensive line---when Cook is in anyway) then this OL just got a whole hell of a lot better.

I will also say this ....... if we weren't drafting another starter on the OL, then there was literally no point in drafting one. We have plenty of backups already. That is one of the reasons it is hard to fault the Cowboys for not being willing to move back again and hope Frederick would still be there if he truly was the Last of the Mohicans.

 

[Risen Star]

These are pretty good players we drafted. But it doesn't matter until we fix our line of scrimmage issue. Randle can be a good back, Williams can be a starter quality WR. Escobar can be the TE of the future. Webb and Wilcox can be fixtures in our secondary. Holloman can be a late round gem. That can all happen and it still won't change the fortunes of the team.

We get beat at the line of scrimmage on both sides of the football. Can't win that way. No matter what laundry they're wearing.

 

[Verdict]

These are pretty good players we drafted. But it doesn't matter until we fix our line of scrimmage issue. Randle can be a good back, Williams can be a starter quality WR. Escobar can be the TE of the future. Webb and Wilcox can be fixtures in our secondary. Holloman can be a late round gem. That can all happen and it still won't change the fortunes of the team.

We get beat at the line of scrimmage on both sides of the football. Can't win that way. No matter what laundry they're wearing.

That is possible. But if Frederick is what he is supposed to be, then you are replacing the weakest link with what might turn out to be the best player on the line, or the second best behind Tyron. If everyone else is healthy it is entirely possible that this line MAY turn out to be SUBSTANTIALLY better than last year.

Then again, even if its not, what good would it have been to draft a guy in the 2nd or 3rd that may not be able to beat out what we have? It might make us feel better but would the result have been different THIS year?

 

[Zordon]

That was awesome.

Maybe the best answer I have ever seen on a message board to a question.

Great job.

Plankton is easily the most underrated poster on this site. Long, informative posts without the ego.

 

[Rack]

Football games are won in the trenches.

If this is true, that protection of the quarterback and creating holes for the running game, or breaking down protection for the opposing quarterback and breaking down running lanes for the opposing offense is what wins games?

If so, where does this team stand?

Not the coach speak, or company line from new coaches and old GMs.

But truthfully if you were looking at this team as an opponent, what is your assessment of the starting fronts on both sides of the ball?

If it is not true, then wherein lies victory, and how does Dallas stack up in that realm?

I am not casting blame for the draft - it is yet to be determines how well this team drafted two years from now - nor using past results to project tomorrow's outcome.

I'd like to see a discussion on this team from a neutral point-of-view about players, their strengths and weaknesses, and the likely outcome due to their meshing as cohesive units.

Vegas is giving odds this cannot be done on this site.

I have hope it can.

What say you about the team?

I don't see us any better than last year, not enough to make a difference.

Now, if we sign Winston that changes considerably.

But our weakest point last year (other than Free) was at RG. And that dude is still there unless Fred is going to play there and have Berny and Costa battle it out for the C job.

 

[5Stars]

These are pretty good players we drafted. But it doesn't matter until we fix our line of scrimmage issue. Randle can be a good back, Williams can be a starter quality WR. Escobar can be the TE of the future. Webb and Wilcox can be fixtures in our secondary. Holloman can be a late round gem. That can all happen and it still won't change the fortunes of the team.

We get beat at the line of scrimmage on both sides of the football. Can't win that way. No matter what laundry they're wearing.

:laugh2: :laugh2:

No way, dude! You know DB's are irrelevant, right?

 

[Rack]

We're going to have to sign a Right Tackle and get lucky in the interior in order to have a quality O-Line this year.

I think for our OL to get where we need it to be for our offense to become "Elite" we REALLY REALLY need 1 or 2 of those guys we got 2 years ago to BLOSSOM into a GOOD player this year (Killer, Arkin, Leary)

That was awesome.

Maybe the best answer I have ever seen on a message board to a question.

Great job.

Well dang... it got the TwoDeep seal of approval so now I have to scroll up and read it.

 

[jterrell]

No, it isn't true.

Not in the sense it was uttered originally where teams ran the ball for half of their yardage gained in a season.

The trenches will always be important but as salary shows it is the passing combinations and the defenders who disrupt the pass who get paid.

Pass rushers and QB are essentially in the trenches but they aren't really those 'trench' guys.

Dallas had one truly dominate OL game all year... against BMore and we lost!
BMore escalated themselves when they strengthened the WR corps with Torrey smith and Anquan Bolden to go with a franchise QB.

SF spent a lot of picks on the OL. All while losing a lot of games. But they are winning now. And they have a young stud QB throwing to a couple top 10 overall picks.

All that said this is the NFL. If you are woefully weak anywhere teams will exploit it. See Dallas torch the Giants DBs week 1 2012.

 

[Rack]

No, it isn't true.

lol

Dallas had one truly dominate OL game all year... against BMore and we lost!

Against the eventual World Champions. ANd we didn't lose because of our OL play. In fact, if our OL play had been the norm for what they were all season, we would have been BLOWN OUT.


Yes, trenches are still VITAL to success to winning football games.

 

[TheSkaven]

Good post. In my opinion, this is one lesson that Jerry never seems to have learned. That era of the 90's with Aikman, Smith and Irvin made him enamored with skill players, though we know those lines were every bit as important, if not more.

Drafts and free agency since then, regardless of coach, focused on skill players. Look at the top three picks of the last 10 drafts, 21 skill positions (including 8 linebackers and 3 tight ends) and 9 non-skill positions. Free agency and trades followed the same model, from Joey Galloway, to Terrell Owens, to Roy Williams.

Teams still win or lose with the offensive and defensive lines.

 

[TheSkaven]

By the way, I looked at the drafts between '89 and '92, 11 skill positions, 14 non-skill positions. Has anyone looked at those drafts by the way? They are sick. We hit on just about every pick in the top 3 rounds.

It's worth a look if for nothing else then nostalgia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dallas_Cowboys_draft_history

 

[percyhoward]

Passing efficiency and defending the pass is what wins in the NFL.

Only in a very general sense. It doesn't make the running game meaningless.

We were 9th in passing efficiency, so why were we 20th in red zone efficiency?

Stats can be misleading. When someone pulls them out, and they aren't the stats of wins and losses, I tune out.

The above stat says we don't pass nearly as well in the red zone as we do outside it. Much of that has to do with the fact that defenses don't have to worry about defending the run when we're in the red zone.