Our oline is better than we think.

[JerryFan]

LOL......aw, whats the matter cant take it eh?

Mr Moderator, Mr Moderator, he called me dumb!!!!! :laugh2:


This thread is pretty much 3 guys claiming the Oline did good and the other 10 people laughing. The rest of the media is laughing also in case you dont up on other opinions.

But I dont need to resort to name calling to make my point.

Well like I was always told man. If the shoe fits wear it.

 

[Keystone_Heavy]

interesting prospective that those saying that the O line was not doing well (something virtually every commentator on that game said as well) are supposedly the ones that have to show evidence.

While the used car salesmen (like Kevin Bacon in Animal House) are claiming ALL IS WELL

It doesn't matter what the commentators say. That is an appeal to authority. If IR proves them wrong with actual evidence to the contrary (which he is doing a pretty fair job of, tbh) then they are proven wrong. Their positions do not make them infallible. Suggested reading: http://www.firejoemorgan.com/

And you are being disingenuous by saying that the "bad O-line" people are the only ones that need to show evidence. I'm not going after IR because he IS showing evidence. The "bad O-line" people need to step up with the evidence as well.

 

[InmanRoshi]

You claim to have watched the game multiple times play by play. Are you turnoing off the sound? The theme of the announcers all night was how Romo was playing the role of a magician and using his mobility to escape out of harms way and extend the play. Did they EVER utter one time that the Cowboys Oline was playing well?

You live in a bubble obviously. "the Oline did a great job of keeping romo upright". LOL :laugh2:

One of several laughable quotes by you on this thread.

Some of us don't need to Al Michaels or the consensus opinion of idiots (see my Signature) to tell us what to believe. Turn off the ESPN, the talk radio and watch the games for yourself and form your own opinions.

I could really give a crap about the manufactured media narratives driven by empty talking heads who don't analyze the games and just regurgitate the same narratives over and over until they get treated as fact through the power of repetition. See "Romo isn't clutch and always melts down in the 4th Quarter" as a perfect example (102.8 QBR in Late & Close situations in his career splits). I'm supposed to take the opinion of Ross Tucker seriously about he said hours after the game? Ross Tucker didn't watch a single second of film on the game when he made his opinions, he's just going off of sketchy memory, emotional response the confirmation/selective bias that he had coming into the game.

 

[JohnsKey19]

One difference i did notice is our new OGs have much more power in the run game. They need to improve on consistency but you can see they have the ability to just maul the DL in the run game unlike years past.

 

[InmanRoshi]

I'm much more disappointed in the # of penalties than I am the # of pressures given up.

Yeah, particularly when one of the two sacks came of Witten blocking JPP one on one. I'm hoping the act of using a tight end to single block one of the Top 3 pass rushers in the NFL is an anamoly that we don't see re-occur often through the season.

IMHO, Tyson's problems with the false starts mainly come down to confidence. He's trying to cheat the snap because he's guarding an All Pro defensive end in a noisy environment and he's not comfortable in his footwork on the left side. Once he gets some confidence through proven performance, and the technique becomes instinctual/2nd nature, I don't think he'll have continued problems with false starts. He showed no signs last year that he was Flozell Adams Pt 2 last year.

 

[CowboyRoy]

Ok thats better, I agree on Tyron, and don't make excuses for him. I don't care how great JPP is, I also expect greatness from Tyron as well and didn't get it so we agree there.

Free wasn't good either, really gotta start wondering if he will improve at this point or if its a lost cause. Other than the beginning for the interior with Mack letting that guy go, I saw the interior as pretty solid most of the game under the circumstances.

The tackles have to improve, no question. Now it would be nice to have the interior be able to help them, but they had enough on their hands with Costa going out (who I'm not a fan of either).

Saying all of this though, says that they could be better as the season goes along. Certainly Tyron will play better, and hopefully the rest can gel together as the season goes along.

Im expecting them to improve for sure. I'm also crossing my fingers that Costa rides the pine long enough for the line to gel and for cook to solidify the center position.

 

[Mansta54]

I thought Washington's OL looked better than ours.

Their oline wasn't playing the Giants Dline.

 

[JerryFan]

Some of us don't need to Al Michaels or the consensus opinion of idiots (see my Signature) to tell us what to believe. Turn off the ESPN, the talk radio and watch the games for yourself and form your own opinions.

I could really give a crap about the manufactured media narratives driven by empty talking heads who don't analyze the games and just regurgitate the same narratives over and over until they get treated as fact through the power of repetition. See "Romo isn't clutch and always melts down in the 4th Quarter" as a perfect example (102.8 QBR in Late & Close situations in his career splits). I'm supposed to take the opinion of Ross Tucker seriously about he said hours after the game? Ross Tucker didn't watch a single second of film on the game when he made his opinions, he's just going off of sketchy memory, emotional response the confirmation/selective bias that he had coming into the game.

I heard Darren Sharper admit that he didnt even consider the ugrades we made on D in the offseason When he made his.analysis for the game.

 

[Keystone_Heavy]

Some of us don't need to Al Michaels or the consensus opinion of idiots (see my Signature) to tell us what to believe. Turn off the ESPN, the talk radio and watch the games for yourself and form your own opinions.

I could really give a crap about the manufactured media narratives driven by empty talking heads who don't analyze the games and just regurgitate the same narratives over and over until they get treated as fact through the power of repetition. See "Romo isn't clutch and always melts down in the 4th Quarter" is a perfect example.

Bold = so true! My favorite example is quarterbacks+leadership.

According to the media, you need a leader at quarterback to win games/championship. Thats an okay hypothesis, if you can identify the leaders and see if they do, in fact, win games/championshps.

The problem is, they determine who the leader is by who wins the games/championships! They essentially construct a giant impenetrable circle of illogic, that, in their minds, proves itself correct every time. Everything in regards to the subject, to them, must be discussed within the confines of the circle. Here is an example of how it works:

Skeptical Fan: Why do the Patriots win alot of games?

Skip Bayless: Because Tom Brady is a great leader!

Skeptical Fan: But what makes Tom Brady such a great leader?

Skip Bayless: He wins alot of games!

Its a similar story with "chemistry" too.

 

[CowboyRoy]

Some of us don't need to Al Michaels or the consensus opinion of idiots (see my Signature) to tell us what to believe. Turn off the ESPN, the talk radio and watch the games for yourself and form your own opinions.

I could really give a crap about the manufactured media narratives driven by empty talking heads who don't analyze the games and just regurgitate the same narratives over and over until they get treated as fact through the power of repetition. See "Romo isn't clutch and always melts down in the 4th Quarter" as a perfect example (102.8 QBR in Late & Close situations in his career splits). I'm supposed to take the opinion of Ross Tucker seriously about he said hours after the game? Ross Tucker didn't watch a single second of film on the game when he made his opinions, he's just going off of sketchy memory, emotional response the confirmation/selective bias that he had coming into the game.

LOL.........right, I didt watch the game. More drivel.

Obviously you do need announcers, beat writer, and guys like me knocking some sense into the homer side of your brain.

Screw it, who needs sound. Hell, who needs video. The Oline are all pro bowlers and were going to the superbowl. LOL

Does that about sum it up for you? Sorry to pop your bubble.

Clearly you picked the wrong game to prop up the Oline.

Double digit penalties on the Oline? Yah, they played outstanding!!!!:laugh2:

 

[CowboyRoy]

Bold = so true! My favorite example is quarterbacks+leadership.

According to the media, you need a leader at quarterback to win games/championship. Thats an okay hypothesis, if you can identify the leaders and see if they do, in fact, win games/championshps.

The problem is, they determine who the leader is by who wins the games/championships! They essentially construct a giant impenetrable circle of illogic, that, in their minds, proves itself correct every time. Everything in regards to the subject, to them, must be discussed within the confines of the circle. Here is an example of how it works:

Skeptical Fan: Why do the Patriots win alot of games?

Skip Bayless: Because Tom Brady is a great leader!

Skeptical Fan: But what makes Tom Brady such a great leader?

Skip Bayless: He wins alot of games!

Its a similar story with "chemistry" too.

Do you ever hear the media say that an Oline with double digit penalties had a great game?

Do you ever hear the media say that teams need an adequate Oline to win it?

 

[MichaelWinicki]

Boy if I took everything John Gruden said as "Gospel" I would come off thinking that every player in the NFL was a HOFer.

 

[CowboyRoy]

Bold = so true! My favorite example is quarterbacks+leadership.

According to the media, you need a leader at quarterback to win games/championship. Thats an okay hypothesis, if you can identify the leaders and see if they do, in fact, win games/championshps.

The problem is, they determine who the leader is by who wins the games/championships! They essentially construct a giant impenetrable circle of illogic, that, in their minds, proves itself correct every time. Everything in regards to the subject, to them, must be discussed within the confines of the circle. Here is an example of how it works:

Skeptical Fan: Why do the Patriots win alot of games?

Skip Bayless: Because Tom Brady is a great leader!

Skeptical Fan: But what makes Tom Brady such a great leader?

Skip Bayless: He wins alot of games!

Its a similar story with "chemistry" too.

Media opinion only matters when they agree with your opinion right?

Im sure you were pumping up Jimmy Johnson when he was talking about how he love Romo.

 

[InmanRoshi]

Screw it, who needs sound. Hell, who needs video. The Oline are all pro bowlers and were going to the superbowl. LOL

And there's the strawman and hyperbole to completely run the gambit of logical fallacy. Congrats, it's rare someone manages to fit them all into one thread.

 

[CowboyRoy]

Boy if I took everything John Gruden said as "Gospel" I would come off thinking that every player in the NFL was a HOFer.

Im glad you are watching the game. Check out the Ravens. Thats what a real Oline looks like. Notice the big push with the center of the line on the run plays. Look at the clean pocket for passing that Sacco has when he typically drops back to pass.

 

[Red Dragon]

And there's the strawman and hyperbole to completely run the gambit of logical fallacy. Congrats, it's rare someone manages to fit them all into one thread.

Straw men are irresistible for some people.

 

[jchap]

Want to feel better?

 

[JerryFan]

LOL.........right, I didt watch the game. More drivel.

Obviously you do need announcers, beat writer, and guys like me knocking some sense into the homer side of your brain.

Screw it, who needs sound. Hell, who needs video. The Oline are all pro bowlers and were going to the superbowl. LOL

Does that about sum it up for you? Sorry to pop your bubble.

Clearly you picked the wrong game to prop up the Oline.

Double digit penalties on the Oline? Yah, they played outstanding!!!!:laugh2:

LOL. Says the guy who got shown evidence from film of otherwise but why go with facts at this point. I dont think anybody is saying they were dominating all game long. He just proved to you with visual evidence of the contrary and all you say is listen to the media. You almost made a point of debate.

 

[Keystone_Heavy]

Do you ever hear the media say that an Oline with double digit penalties had a great game?

Do you ever hear the media say that teams need an adequate Oline to win it?

1. I never said I did. I didn't even say I agree with IR. All I said is that you shouldn't just run to the media for support of your position, and ignore all evidence that they/you are wrong. Read: http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-authority.html

2. The 0-line did not have 10+ penalties. That is a lie. Officially, they had 6. 4 on Smith, 2 on Free. And then 2 more depend on whether or not you want to blame Romo or Cook for the delay of games, but officially those go to the QB.

 

[InmanRoshi]

I heard Darren Sharper admit that he didnt even consider the ugrades we made on D in the offseason When he made his.analysis for the game.

From my observations, most ex-meatheads don't really take their jobs very seriously. It's just a way to collect a paycheck for minimal work after they've retired to enjoy the good life of hanging with their boys, golfing and being with their family. However, most of them just like dressing up in tailored suits and smiling for the camera, and put very minimal work into their jobs away from the camera. There's a few I respect like Dilfer, because I've seen him break down film to support his opinions.