How can you possibly disagree with what I said, then two things that prove you agree with me? You're actually disagreeing with yourself. Was it Cover 2? No, it was a combination coverage -- a Cover 2look to our left and a man-to-man to our right. Was Newman in Cover 2 position from the start? No, he was playing off, then moved up right before the snap.
You said they were " disguising ". They weren't. There's a difference between disguising and pre-snap look. Every single defense in the league on every play changes from a set position to a pre-snap position. Most of the times is to adjust to the formation that the offense is showing, such as the LB following the TE when he goes in motion ( for example ). That's not disguising.
Disguising is when they line up in a particular defensive look, man to man, for example, and then when the ball is snap, they change to another one, let's say zone. That's NOT what the Cowboys did on that play.
Sensabaugh's mistake was turning inside when Rivers still had the ball. He's supposed to hold his position and be able to break on both receivers. Once he turned toward the inside, it was an easy read for Rivers. And that would have been true whether Newman jammed Jackson or not.
Yes AND No.. Look at the film again.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gcO7srR3pS0
Yes, he's supposed to be able to break on the BALL ( not both receivers, since Naanee ran a post while Jackson ran a go pattern, and about the only one who could be able to do that is a fictional character named Superman ) but only IF Newman jams Jackson at the line of scrimage. If Newman had done so, Rivers would probably not gone to him ( and if he had, it would have probably been an incomplete, perhaps an int ) because he wouldn't have been at the spot he was when he caught the ball. By jamming him, Newman would have slow down Jackson's progress, disrupting his timing.
Both Newman and Sensabaugh were at fault on the play.
Senasabaugh did nothing wrong on that play.