My notes following the game

[VACowboy]

Without Romo I don't know if we can win a game.

The coaching just offers nothing and we aren't going to line up and just beat teams without our best players.

I'd add that I think the coaching chooses to stay conservative on offense and refuses to change the lineup for fear of making mistakes. I submit that we're losing without a lot of glaring miscues anyway, so what do we have to lose?

 

[dallasdave]

We know how you love DBs. To the Cowboys credit they have built the trenches on both sides of the ball so you should be happy about that.

The Cowboys have improved the OL and DL. The DL is going to have to take over games after the break !!

 

[JoeKing]

Brady made our secondary look bad... worse than it really is. That said, secondary should be a point of focus in the draft but so should RB and QB. Romo will not be easy to replace so the sooner you get started on that endeavor, the better. I've given up on this team ever drafting a quality RB because they don't want to pay them.

 

[dallasdave]

I thought the defense played very inspired football yesterday. They ultimately gave up 30 points on two turnovers to one of the best oil machines in the NFL. They largely shutdown Rob Gronkowski with our rookie CB/S Byron Jones. I can't go any further without saying what a beast Hardy is. He is the best player on our defense right now and that includes Sean Lee. Can't imagine what this defensive line will be able to do with Gregory back in the lineup. It's going to be exactly what we thought it would be.

I think our linebacker corps will be a real strength, but not until the offense can allow it to be. I think our defense is going to be stout, but we do need to address the safeties. They're terrible. Carr is also terrible, and Claiborne... only average.

The Giants beating the 49ers should hopefully light a fire under Jason and Jerry's collective butts. We're being put in a position where even with the return of Bryant and Romo it will be too late to do anything. I don't get what Garret and Linehan are thinking. We lost exactly the way I imagined. The defense does a great job, but the offense gets them gassed. How are you going to put an quarterback in the NFL and let him be check down charlie. This guy doesn't want to throw to WRs at all. Stunned that we didn't run the ball more, especially when we were having success. The last three games have seen the most uninspired play calling I've ever seen. I think with better coaching we're probably 4-1 if not 5-0. I really wanted us to bring in Colt McCoy in the offseason, especially after he roasted us last year. When we didn't bring in another QB and they said that Weeden was the most improved player, I took it as the gospel.

Weeden has a completion percentage of 72.4, in reality it should probably be closer to 55-60 percent for a guy like this. 72.4 percent reveals what we already know, he can only throw the checkdown. He has 0 pocket awareness. I don't think he does anything well.

I'd love to see Matt Cassel out there, but I don't know if that is really going to help anything. The one thing I know is that he isn't a checkdown charlie. I have no idea why they didn't play him, or why they didn't play Collins or Michael. They never want to try players who are clearly better. How many years did I say they should play Dunbar in a Sproles role, only to be laughed at. Then they give him a chance, and he is the best player on the offense with Dez and Romo out.

It sucks that so much is going to be said about drafting a qb next year now, when we should really be focused on fixing our secondary.

I bet you could have filled up the whole notebook yesterday !!!

 

[hornitosmonster]

Romo is the real OC. This board likes to complain about how close to the clock he runs the play but the truth is that he is setting up the correct play. We sure do miss that, don't we?

 

[TheDude]

Romo is the real OC. This board likes to complain about how close to the clock he runs the play but the truth is that he is setting up the correct play. We sure do miss that, don't we?

I beg to differ that that really is a benefit. The best the offense has looked this year was the 1:30 drive to win the NYG game (and the previous TD drive where they pressed and no huddle). Other than that, we never quick snap and catch anyone offsides or in confusion. You never get the the "free plays" a Rogers, Brees, Brady, etc. get

 

[Galian Beast]

I agree. When I look at this team its clear to me we just don't have enough players in the secondary. Hopefully we can add enough in the offseason to only be one or two more offseasons away of adding more to be a real contender.

Think secondary. It's where games are won or lost.

I have no idea why they kept Carr instead of getting Cromartie. Cromartie and Scandrick would have made a nice combo, with Tillman as an insurance policy.

 

[Galian Beast]

I agree with most of what you said, but Dunbar was a one trick pony that the NFL wasn't ready for. The Saints figured him out pretty quickly. He only ran 1 route. He wasn't going to save this thing, long term. The defense played as good as you can expect.

The saints "figured" him out because the offense wasn't doing anything else.

You have Bryant, Williams, Witten, Dunbar, and Beasley all out there and there is no feasible way to stop them all.

 

[31smackdown]

I beg to differ that that really is a benefit. The best the offense has looked this year was the 1:30 drive to win the NYG game (and the previous TD drive where they pressed and no huddle). Other than that, we never quick snap and catch anyone offsides or in confusion. You never get the the "free plays" a Rogers, Brees, Brady, etc. get

It's sad that we are judging QB's by their ability to manipulate the rules and take advantage of various circumstances created during a game. A hard count is one thing, but all of these "cheap" advantages make it feel like teams are just gaming the system when they are done intentionally. I guess if you are not cheating, you are not trying right? The rules put the defense in some bad situations that are giving too much advantage to the offense. I'm glad we don't play like the Patriots. Win by any means necessary, especially if it's within the rules right? Football should not be about who runs the best pick plays, confuses the defense with odd alignments, quicksnaps based on previous play design, etc.. Sure it's all "legal" but now you are just playing a game of unfair advantages and creating those situations by design, then X's and O's no longer matter. It becomes about the system, not the players and matchups. Winning by playing honest is not the worst thing in the world.

 

[TheDude]

It's sad that we are judging QB's by their ability to manipulate the rules and take advantage of various circumstances created during a game. A hard count is one thing, but all of these "cheap" advantages make it feel like teams are just gaming the system when they are done intentionally. I guess if you are not cheating, you are not trying right? The rules put the defense in some bad situations that are giving too much advantage to the offense. I'm glad we don't play like the Patriots. Win by any means necessary, especially if it's within the rules right? Football should not be about who runs the best pick plays, confuses the defense with odd alignments, quicksnaps based on previous play design, etc.. Sure it's all "legal" but now you are just playing a game of unfair advantages and creating those situations by design, then X's and O's no longer matter. It becomes about the system, not the players and matchups. Winning by playing honest is not the worst thing in the world.

There is nothing cheating about about a quick snap. If you are at the line and set and the defense isnt, that is their problem not yours. THe reason it seems like "cheating" is because you will never see Dallas do it. If a guy is running off the field and a QB snaps it to get 12 men, that is smart playing.

pick plays are illegal - nowhere near the same

 

[31smackdown]

There is nothing cheating about about a quick snap. If you are at the line and set and the defense isnt, that is their problem not yours. THe reason it seems like "cheating" is because you will never see Dallas do it. If a guy is running off the field and a QB snaps it to get 12 men, that is smart playing.

pick plays are illegal - nowhere near the same

I know what you are saying. I would still think it was cheap, not cheating, if Dallas did it. Basically the game has become more complex with defenses and alignments that you are forcing them to react to the unknown in a matter of seconds. The offense already knows what they are doing, the defense should be given some amount of time to set before the ball can be snapped to react to the offense. it doesn't have to be a lot of time, 5-10 seconds from the spot of the ball. For offsides, do you want coaches telling their players to take a free shot at the QB if they go early? Players used to try to jump back onside, but now either they snap the ball or the o-linemen move when the player moves. If defenders need to assume one of those things will happen then you should coach them to never try to get back onside and just go hit the QB... hey.. it's a free play for everyone now.. good strategy.. just like hitting the QB on every handoff because you can.. it should not be about who can outsmart the system is my general point. For me it's an unfortunate part of the game that I am glad we don't emphasize.

 

[pancakeman]

Romo is the real OC. This board likes to complain about how close to the clock he runs the play but the truth is that he is setting up the correct play. We sure do miss that, don't we?

I say put some headphones on him and have him call plays while he's sidelined!

 

[TheDude]

I know what you are saying. I would still think it was cheap, not cheating, if Dallas did it. Basically the game has become more complex with defenses and alignments that you are forcing them to react to the unknown in a matter of seconds. The offense already knows what they are doing, the defense should be given some amount of time to set before the ball can be snapped to react to the offense. it doesn't have to be a lot of time, 5-10 seconds from the spot of the ball. For offsides, do you want coaches telling their players to take a free shot at the QB if they go early? Players used to try to jump back onside, but now either they snap the ball or the o-linemen move when the player moves. If defenders need to assume one of those things will happen then you should coach them to never try to get back onside and just go hit the QB... hey.. it's a free play for everyone now.. good strategy.. just like hitting the QB on every handoff because you can.. it should not be about who can outsmart the system is my general point. For me it's an unfortunate part of the game that I am glad we don't emphasize.

The refs hold the ball if the offense subs. And for offsides, the refs blow it dead if it is unimpeded to the QB so that isnt an issue either. And if the QB is running a read option he should be drilled. Defenses basically ended that with the RGIII fiasco. THe read option was a "new" wrinkle that worked and then was ended.


The NFL is complete parity now, if you dont try to at least be marginally innovative or outsmart, you are relying on luck. We got lucky with turnovers last year and probably gave us a few games we didnt deserve. THis year, no turnovers and no ROmo to bail it out.

Championing being "not innovative" or "smart" must make you look back with disdain on the 60-70s Landry teams

 

[dallasdave]

The refs hold the ball if the offense subs. And for offsides, the refs blow it dead if it is unimpeded to the QB so that isnt an issue either. And if the QB is running a read option he should be drilled. Defenses basically ended that with the RGIII fiasco. THe read option was a "new" wrinkle that worked and then was ended.


The NFL is complete parity now, if you dont try to at least be marginally innovative or outsmart, you are relying on luck. We got lucky with turnovers last year and probably gave us a few games we didnt deserve. THis year, no turnovers and no ROmo to bail it out.

Championing being "not innovative" or "smart" must make you look back with disdain on the 60-70s Landry teams

 

[tyke1doe]

The commitment to rebuilding the trenches is why I think this team still has a shot, with or without Romo.

I wouldn't say without Romo. We lost two games we easily should have won.
However if we can keep the losses to six in time for Romo to get back, I think we can run the table - provided no more injuries, of course.

 

[dallasdave]

My notes following the game-------------Why did Matt Cassel not play ?

 

[RedLine]

Leary was not playing well at all. I would like to see Collins start, or at least have them rotate each series.

 

[jday]

I agree. When I look at this team its clear to me we just don't have enough players in the secondary. Hopefully we can add enough in the offseason to only be one or two more offseasons away of adding more to be a real contender.

Think secondary. It's where games are won or lost.