Twitter: Martin on whether he's playing T this week: "no, I'm playing guard"

[blueblood70]

per jane slater -steele reportedly had stomach bug, possible food poisoning,..given IV .but .just couldn't continue...

i still think hes out if TS is back Knight's kicked out to RT..best 5

 

[LACowboysFan1]

Wish we'd give Connor some reps at right tackle. For all we know, he's good at it. It got him drafted anyways.

He was a left tackle for the most part in college, would seem he's best suited for tackle, did he get moved to guard because he couldn't play tackle in the NFL, or because there was no spot for him with Smith and Collins entrenched at the tackles when he was drafted? Personally I'd rather put Biadasz at center, McGovern and Martin at guard and Williams and Knight at right tackle, for now.

Problem is a really good offensive line usually doesn't become that until they get to play together as a group for a year or so, with all the injuries Cowboys can't set a consistent lineup. Maybe if Collins and Smith can both get back, and Martin stays where he's good at RG, maybe the other two spots can be settled, and let them "take their lumps" and get some continuity...

 

[LACowboysFan1]

Forget the last post, clicked on wrong columns in the stats, sry...

 

[BigStar]

Badass should start immediately. When he stoned the DT sunday bending his head backwards and he waved to the ref with his free hand saying "hey look at this." I was sold. The first thing that came to mind was this guy is badass.

That's the opposite of Biadasz...
I get your point though, good awareness on his part.

 

[AbeBeta]

Is McGovern healthy?

People shouldn't worry about McGovern. We see why he's not playing. Biadasz looks really good and seems to have excellent chemistry with Williams. They were in a groove against Seattle.

 

[LACowboysFan1]

People shouldn't worry about McGovern. We see why he's not playing. Biadasz looks really good and seems to have excellent chemistry with Williams. They were in a groove against Seattle.

At the end of the game, when Dak was sacked, the Seahawks only rushed 3. Yet Williams, et al couldn't even hold them off for a few seconds to allow Dak time to throw and for the receiver to get open.

If that's "in a groove" I don't want to see any more of it...

 

[AbeBeta]

At the end of the game, when Dak was sacked, the Seahawks only rushed 3. Yet Williams, et al couldn't even hold them off for a few seconds to allow Dak time to throw and for the receiver to get open.

If that's "in a groove" I don't want to see any more of it...

Yes. Let's focus on a single play. Not the way the O was humming in the 2nd.

 

[xwalker]

I love how people keep saying crap confidently while being clueless

 

[xwalker]

At the end of the game, when Dak was sacked, the Seahawks only rushed 3. Yet Williams, et al couldn't even hold them off for a few seconds to allow Dak time to throw and for the receiver to get open.

If that's "in a groove" I don't want to see any more of it...

That pass rusher that almost sacked Dak on the final play was a fail by Looney/Martin...

LT Knight got beat a play or two before that.

It was the responsibility of Connor Williams to block either of those pass rushers...

 

[AbeBeta]

That pass rusher that almost sacked Dak on the final play was a fail by Looney/Martin...

LT Knight got beat a play or two before that.

It was the responsibility of Connor Williams to block either of those pass rushers...

Why bother. Truth don't matter to these folks.

That last play was the only negative I saw from Martin. He was out of position which likely suggests a communication breakdown between him and Looney on the stunt.

 

[glimmerman]

Browns ain’t a lesser team they are better than us right now.

So air it out again. Lol. If Dak wins does he get credit for beating a team with a winning record or is it “oh well he beat the browns.” Lol.

 

[OmerV]

Browns ain’t a lesser team they are better than us right now.

Based on what? They got blown out by 32 against the Ravens, and only had 300 yards of offense against the Skins but got 24 points off Washington turnovers.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

Based on what? They got blown out by 32 against the Ravens, and only had 300 yards of offense against the Skins but got 24 points off Washington turnovers.

And what has Dallas done lol?

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

So air it out again. Lol. If Dak wins does he get credit for beating a team with a winning record or is it “oh well he beat the browns.” Lol.

A W is a W to me but in regards to some of the idiots on this site? They are going to say he's suppose to beat the Browns. And the won't acknowledge they are 2-1.

 

[OmerV]

And what has Dallas done lol?

First, I didn't claim Dallas was better, and you are turning this on me rather than answer the question that was asked. You punted.

In any case, Dallas has been competitive in every game, which the Browns have not, and the Cowboys didn't need 5 turnovers to win the game they did the way the Browns did against a very weak Washington team.

You may not think that makes Dallas better, but it's certainly enough to call into question a definitive statement that the Browns are better.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

First, I didn't claim Dallas was better, and you are turning this on me rather than answer the question that was asked. You punted.

In any case, Dallas has been competitive in every game, which the Browns have not, and the Cowboys didn't need 5 turnovers to win the game they did the way the Browns did against a very weak Washington team.

You may not think that makes Dallas better, but it's certainly enough to call into question a definitive statement that the Browns are better.

They are 2-1. Cowboys are 1-2. I don't know what you want me to say?

They have better running back then us.
Better tight ends.
Better defense. Better offensive line. Better record.

If you want to give Cowboys credit for playing games close that's fine but as of now the Browns are 2-1 and he Cowboys are 1-2 so therefore then are better. If the Cowboys beat them on Sunday then I will concede that thought.

 

[OmerV]

They are 2-1. Cowboys are 1-2. I don't know what you want me to say?

They have better running back then us.
Better tight ends.
Better defense. Better offensive line. Better record.

If you want to give Cowboys credit for playing games close that's fine but as of now the Browns are 2-1 and he Cowboys are 1-2 so therefore then are better. If the Cowboys beat them on Sunday then I will concede that thought.

So, it wouldn't matter if one team is 1-2 while playing the top teams in the NFL in very close games, and another is 2-1 while playing the bottom teams in the NFL, the team with the better record is always unquestionably the better team?

Better TE's? Is 134 yards and 2 TD's really notably better than 193 yards and 1 TD?

Better defense? The Cowboys have given up 87 points, and Cleveland 88 points, even though the Cowboys have played 3 strong offensive teams and Cleveland has only played 1 strong offensive team.

And what about QB? Dak sas more than double the yardage and a much better completion %, plus better

What I will give Cleveland credit for is a better running game than Dallas so far this year, while Dallas has the better passing game.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

So, it wouldn't matter if one team is 1-2 while playing the top teams in the NFL in very close games, and another is 2-1 while playing the bottom teams in the NFL, the team with the better record is always unquestionably the better team?

Better TE's? Is 134 yards and 2 TD's really notably better than 193 yards and 1 TD?

Better defense? The Cowboys have given up 87 points, and Cleveland 88 points, even though the Cowboys have played 3 strong offensive teams and Cleveland has only played 1 strong offensive team.

And what about QB? Dak sas more than double the yardage and a much better completion %, plus better

What I will give Cleveland credit for is a better running game than Dallas so far this year, while Dallas has the better passing game.

I'm speaking strictly on personnel and I'd rather have Austin Hooper over Dalton Schultz.
Defensively they got destroyed by the Ravens. No doubt.
QB I'd give Cowboys the edge.

You are what your record says you are and I wouldn't really consider the Rams or Falcons to be juggernauts. When you are constantly down by 16-20 points I can't sit here and talk about they are better than a 2-1 team.

 

[OmerV]

I'm speaking strictly on personnel and I'd rather have Austin Hooper over Dalton Schultz.
Defensively they got destroyed by the Ravens. No doubt.
QB I'd give Cowboys the edge.

You are what your record says you are and I wouldn't really consider the Rams or Falcons to be juggernauts. When you are constantly down by 16-20 points I can't sit here and talk about they are better than a 2-1 team.

I agree the Falcons and Rams aren't juggernauts, but they are definitely better than Washington and Cincy. My only point is I can't see any way to definitively say one team is better, especially just 3 games into the season. Right now there are plusses and minuses with both, and time will tell how that shakes out, but 3 games into the season the record is not a good way to judge.

If records are important, the Browns have played teams with a combined record of 3-5-1, with only one of the teams having a winning record, while the Cowboys have played teams with a combined record of 5-4, with 2 of the 3 teams having a winning record.

 

[Jfconrow]

He doesn’t want to change position, no one does. It can take 5 10 years to get good at 1 position