Jags vs. Titans Game Thread

[jazzcat22]

Well, I'm wondering what's the point of bringing up a run that never happened?

One of the points was he got some tough dirty yards to get us away from the goal line when every one in the universe knew the ball was going to Zeke....and he still nearly broke it.....but yet those yards were very important as it turned out.

 

[dallasdave]

Wow, just found out the Commanders-Bengals game is at 0830 on Sunday. (Go Bengals!) Twelve hours later we have the Cowboys-Beagles at 8:30 pm. In between locally are the Seahawks-Saints at 1200 and the Packers-Falcons at 3:25. This will probably be the first time I've ever had breakfast at halftime.

Go Cinci

 

[CalPolyTechnique]

Bortles padding the stats.

 

[CalPolyTechnique]

One of the points was he got some tough dirty yards to get us away from the goal line when every one in the universe knew the ball was going to Zeke....and he still nearly broke it.....but yet those yards were very important as it turned out.

That was impressive running and an overlooked aspect of that late first half drive.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

Its funny you call Zeke bling, when his value is not the jukes or home runs, but the dirty yards, 1st down runs, 1st down %, blocking, pass catching and high football IQ. You're points are the opposite of what they should be to make your point. Probably because your point doesnt exist in real reality.

Drafting a rb in the top 5 is the very definition of a flashy move.

 

[jazzcat22]

Bortles padding the stats.

Jaguars fans can now say...well you only won by 14....

 

[Toruk_Makto]

Also what is the definition of a broken tackle....in the grasp and breaks free...runnnng over a defender.....I used to see defenders try to reach in and grab Emmitt, get a tug on a jersey, Emmitt runs on through it, and the announcers would say he broke a tackle.....but really did he?
Where did this 11 seat number come from.....and is it a real number?

Pff . A site great for stats but horrible for their interpretation of said stats.

 

[Tabascocat]

17 pages for a Jags game??????

 

[Toruk_Makto]

Bortles padding the stats.

@Alexander looks at the stats after the game and is like. . . That Bortles kid showing real potential.

 

[windjc]

Drafting a rb in the top 5 is the very definition of a flashy move.

This is some myth you have created or at least helped propagate. There is no rule that says this. It is a myth.

 

[CalPolyTechnique]

This is some myth you have created or at least helped propagate. There is no rule that says this. It is a myth.

Of course there's no rule. It's conventional wisdom employed by real NFL franchises as demonstrated for the most part the past 20-25 years. The proven and demonstrated track record at the position is that you can find quality productive backs later in the 1st round, other rounds and even outside w/undrafted rookies.

RBs are dispensable; it's the nature of the position.

 

[drawandstrike]

This is some myth you have created or at least helped propagate. There is no rule that says this. It is a myth.

Dallas might very well 'flash' it's way to a deep playoff run because of that pick.

 

[windjc]

Of course there's no rule. It's conventional wisdom employed by real NFL franchises as demonstrated for the most part the past 20-25 years. The proven and demonstrated track record at the position is that you can find quality productive backs later in the 1st round, other rounds and even outside w/undrafted rookies.

RBs are dispensable; it's the nature of the position.

RBs seem to dispensable because 2014 and 2016 Dallas teams are the ONLY ones that proved you could win with running first style. Things EVOLVE. If you have a running first style then you invest in the BEST RB possible.

Saying its conventional wisdom is apples to oranges. I can give you plenty of things the Patriots have done that are not conventional.

This is the small minded thinking that has led to 20 years of mediocrity.

We are seeing teams start to copy Dallas' style. In 10 years EVERY team might be investing top 5 pics into RBs for all we know. The league is ALWAYS EVOLVING.

 

[CalPolyTechnique]

RBs seem to dispensable because 2014 and 2016 Dallas teams are the ONLY ones that proved you could win with running first style. Things EVOLVE. If you have a running first style then you invest in the BEST RB possible.

Saying its conventional wisdom is apples to oranges. I can give you plenty of things the Patriots have done that are not conventional.

This is the small minded thinking that has led to 20 years of mediocrity.

We are seeing teams start to copy Dallas' style. In 10 years EVERY team might be investing top 5 pics into RBs for all we know. The league is ALWAYS EVOLVING.

Lol, you clearly forgotten about the Seattle Seahawks.

"RBs seem to dispensable because 2014 and 2016..." RBs have be dispensable longer than that. I get it though. Some Cowboy fans aren't fans of watching football other than Dallas and don't know what's going on in the league. Not investing premium resources, whether it be FA contracts or top draft picks at the RB position is simply good, sound practice. The nature of the position lends itself to running backs getting injured, with short careers and not allowing them to get value from exorbitant contracts.

 

[kevm3]

I think it's easy to get caught up in cliches like 'you don't take a runningback high.' You don't take a runningback high if you're a dumpster team with a bad o-line, which a lot of bad teams who are picking high have. Bad line + bad qb play = a very difficult time for a runningback. With the O-line we have and the QB play, taking what we believed to be the best runningback in the draft was a great move. Most teams that have a terrible season have no real offensive identity and they don't have the surrounding elements that can aid in creating a dominant run game. We did. It's a bad idea to take an RB high if you're expecting your RB to BE your offense, or in other words, to be so dominant, that they alone will win the majority of games for you. However, it's not a bad idea if you have an outstanding RB sitting there and you have an offensive structure in place to let that RB be a significant part of your offense.

 

[windjc]

Lol, you clearly forgotten about the Seattle Seahawks.

"RBs seem to dispensable because 2014 and 2016..." RBs have be dispensable longer than that. I get it though. Some Cowboy fans aren't fans of watching football other than Dallas and don't know what's going on in the league. Not investing premium resources, whether it be FA contracts or top draft picks at the RB position is simply good, sound practice. The nature of the position lends itself to running backs getting injured, with short careers and not allowing them to get value from exorbitant contracts.

No one was drafting a line full of 1st round draft picks until we did. Now everyone is envious of us. But carry on with your small minded thinking.

 

[CalPolyTechnique]

I think it's easy to get caught up in cliches like 'you don't take a runningback high.' You don't take a runningback high if you're a dumpster team with a bad o-line, which a lot of bad teams who are picking high have. Bad line + bad qb play = a very difficult time for a runningback. With the O-line we have and the QB play, taking what we believed to be the best runningback in the draft was a great move. Most teams that have a terrible season have no real offensive identity and they don't have the surrounding elements that can aid in creating a dominant run game. We did. It's a bad idea to take an RB high if you're expecting your RB to BE your offense, or in other words, to be so dominant, that they alone will win the majority of games for you. However, it's not a bad idea if you have an outstanding RB sitting there and you have an offensive structure in place to let that RB be a significant part of your offense.

Nice post.

 

[windjc]

Nice post.

Jesus, you've been arguing the opposite over and over and now you concede the validity of these arguments. Well, better late than never.

 

[CalPolyTechnique]

No one was drafting a line full of 1st round draft picks until we did. Now everyone is envious of us. But carry on with your small minded thinking.

Moving the goalposts now....smh

Lol, you asked me earlier to point out something you said that was ignorant. Whenever you argue a point by making up a consensus "now everyone is envious of us...everyone will be doing it" that's plainly ignorant and a cheap and unconvincing argumentative tactic.

 

[CalPolyTechnique]

Jesus, you've been arguing the opposite over and over and now you concede the validity of these arguments. Well, better late than never.

I'm willing to listen and appreciate sound arguments even if it isn't my perspective entirely. I understand the argument for taking Elliott where we did, see the valid points but don't whole heartedly agree with it.

Your takes have been unsubstantiated blather and juvenile argumentation. Vastly different.