Post Holiday Observations

TwoDeep3

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,506
Reaction score
17,339
CowboysZone LOYAL Fan
I'm not certain I see a great deal of difference between the wide open league of yesterday and the salary cap/parity league of today. Seems you have the upper echelon teams, basically built on top flight quarterbacks, a second tier built around the close to the same, and then the huddled masses below. New rules for protection and rules to equal the playing field haven't exactly done that. One can make the argument teams can go from goat to champion in a short period of time, and I suppose if you like that sort of inconsistency, then this league is for you.

I much preferred limiting movement and teams being built over time for the long haul. The reason will become clear later in this potpourri.

** During the last two games Dallas has reminded me a great deal of the 1970's Staubach teams. They have periods in the game where they are unfocused and the results are teams that should see nothing but the Dallas tail lights are hanging around and making the game tighter than it should be.

I see a similarity in Staubach and Romo finally getting their fill of a team that should not be able to force a tight game doing so, and both of those players take charge.

One has to wonder why it is the team has to rely on one guy to kick them in the pants to get started.

I suspect it has to do with self discipline and the culture this team lives under.

** McGloin has a very decent arm and he throws are very accurate pass. One has to wonder if the Raider brain trust really thought out the idea of throwing against Carr with any other player but Holmes and how the height advantage is why they were looking like the Broncos instead of the QB's accuracy.

Moving the RB over to challenge Carr was a really dumb idea. Carr was unable to compete with Holmes, so lets run a smaller guy out there.

I think Carr is overpaid, but he does have skills and for the most part he can play against anyone. But this league is built on size, and then he is giving up 3 or more inches and leaping ability, seems to me you milk that cow until the bucket is full if you are the Raiders.

** The Murray/Dunbar tandem seems to work well. But then when the line actually blocks and opens holes it makes a huge difference. But balance makes a huge difference with this team. Something I spoke about in training camp.

** So much is made about half time adjustments. Mostly fans screaming about this team not making them. But the defensive coordinator who is as familiar with the cover 2 as with the taste of Geritol again took a squad that is limited talent-wise and changed the outcome of the game in the second half.

One has to wonder what this team would look like if they had a front four as daunting as the Lions front four yesterday. Health and pressure is what this team lacks.

The salary cap will guarantee smoke and mirrors for another year. I look so forward to almost getting there for another season.

** I literally laughed out loud when Sims made the comment about elimination games. Not so much that he said it, but knowing there will now be people who feel validated.

It is a press generated stat that applies to Romo. Sims said as much, and then went on to defend Tony. Not certain Romo needs defense - and it appears Jerry agrees since he can't seem to put one on the field.

But so many FANS on this board go out and search stats to support theories about everything from yardage to completion to anything related to this sport. Then they post them here as if they are validated because numbers say so.

Then when the press creates a stat to keep track of games where Dallas is on the cusp of losing any shot at the play-offs - being eliminated from contention - suddenly the hue and cry is deafening.

No kidding Phil, it is a stat about Romo. It contains all the components of all stats researched that ultimately use said stats to come to a conclusion. This game is built on categories researched, and as the game evolves new categories come into play.

This game is built around the quarterback. If Romo was a safety, then that category would never have been thought up. But he is and it was and it bears fruit if he is playing in games that remove Dallas from contention if they lose. Keeping track of those stats is the same as any of the fans here that do so to support this player as they make up just as meaningless categories to suggest he is what they think.

If you don't like the fish bowl then get out.

** But having stirred the pot, I must say I find it sad this team cannot be as competitive as they could be due to poor decisions by management. How long will Romo hoist this team on his shoulders, or have the ability to do so. Until they find a pass rush, the defense will continue to be a swinging gate for the opponent.

There are going to be many years after Romo has retired that the what if game will be played. But I have to wonder what if Jerry grew a brain and actually fielded an offensive and defensive line that was top five in each category?

The questions that irritate so many on this board about Romo would have been moot because he would have won something by now.

** Miles Austin makes two catches then stands on the sidelines. I was waiting for the injury update about his hammy at one point.

He has become an after thought now.

** Both the Giants and the Raiders are cellar dwellers. Taking that into consideration, it adds significance of both games being tied late when Dallas should have handled both of them with equal ease.

** I know I stay on Romo, and that comes from expecting more from him. If this were baseball he would be a five tool player.

But it is my unbending belief that everything this team is doing now is based strictly on Romo and his skill set, and has little to do with Head Coach Ginger.

I see Romo stay on the players now to get them to focus and not the red-headed hand clapper. Even in the post game interview in the locker room Dez made a comment about not focusing early.

Shouldn't the head coach get the minds of the players right and keep them focused?

Oh wait....

The head coach wears the number 9 in my opinion.

** I watch NFLN and ESPN and come away with ex-players that sound like they quit high school. They are not smooth and professional and while having first hand knowledge, they are so rough around the edges it makes it difficult to listen sometimes.

Knowing the competitive nature of Romo, I have to wonder if he will segue into coaching when his days of playing are through. The reason I question this is both of those channels could use his wit and smarts as an analyst.

So, make a mil a year and talk about the game part time. Or maybe three or four times that and give up your life year around to stay in competition as a coach, and maybe head coach.

It ain't like he hasn't apprenticed here in Dallas as a head coach.

** Speaking of ESPN. I read here all the people who claim they do not watch that channel.

Maybe you should rethink that.

Romo is getting much respect and love from them now. But then I believe it was....wait, it was me....that said play near flawless football and all the "hate" will go away.

Bet that goes unnoticed.
 

visionary

Well-Known Member
Messages
28,448
Reaction score
33,407
great post 2 deep
agree with you on romo and (unfortunately) on ginger as well
 

JBS

Well-Known Member
Messages
22,385
Reaction score
23,824
Calling Jacoby Ford a running back is an error and a half
 

Trendnet

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,388
Reaction score
923
** But having stirred the pot, I must say I find it sad this team cannot be as competitive as they could be due to poor decisions by management.

** Both the Giants and the Raiders are cellar dwellers. Taking that into consideration, it adds significance of both games being tied late when Dallas should have handled both of them with equal ease.

One wonders how you can argue both points in the same post.
 

jterrell

Penguinite
Messages
33,874
Reaction score
15,971
appreciate the long thoughtful post.
but disagree with most of it.

if you don't see the difference in today's game with the previous eras i'd argue you aren't paying attention.

but it is easy to see where your perception is faulty as you describe teams.
truth is elite qbs don't guarantee much now.
teams are so shallow around them.

the last 5 SBs have been won by:
Ben R. arguably elite but also a likely playoff non-qualifier again.
Brees. definitely elite but the team also won only 7 games just last season.
Rodgers. Top of the heap QB. He has pretty much kept that team afloat by himself.
Eli. Not close to elite.
Flacco. Not close to elite either.

Truth is Brady and Peyton are absent those SB winners lists for a 5+ years.
Elite QBs don't mean elite teams.
Those QBs lift teams from bad to average or average to good or good to great but the salary cap is very effective at limiting any consistent excellence.

From the 1960s to mid 90s the very same teams were good every year for 5-7 years at a clip.
That no longer happens. There is no Buffalo losing a bunch of SBs because no one goes to a bunch.
You've got as good a chance of going to a SB as a non-playoff team as you as a defending champion.
Teams are losing 1/3 of the roster every year.
Dallas knew it would face GB, San Fran and Buffalo to win a title in the early 90s.
There was little unknown about it.
Now every year is a different set of playoff teams as things shuffle mightily.

Last year the Texans, Vikings, Falcons, Commanders ALL made the playoffs. None are even close to .500 now.
You can add the Packers as under .500 though more explainable with Rodgers hurt.

If the season ended today the previous SB contestants would both be 6 seeds. And only 1 of the previous 5 SB winning QBs would be above a 6 seed.
 

jterrell

Penguinite
Messages
33,874
Reaction score
15,971
comments part 2.

If this were baseball tony romo would be mike trout... a guy playing very well that cant carry a team by himself... though it's close.

OL/DL. Again this is perhaps the biggest dumb idea fans have... and it is constant and pathetic.
Having bad performances on the OL/DL is not always a management issue.
Jerry owned having a bad year there 2 years ago. He deserved to own a couple seasons but NOT this season.
THIS OL has been pretty darn good and was better than that with Brian Waters in place.
A guy the Cowboys wooed for a few months to get him in.

Dallas had a tremendous DL coming into this season. Losing Spencer was quite painful as it is for any team to lose a guy they franchised.
Adding losing Crawford as a young ascending high draft was another blow.
Losing Ratliff to insanity hurt quite a lot. Add Ben Bass who was expected to surprise in this 4-3.
But the DL wasn't ignored, or lacking talent in this off-season.
And Dallas has the most highly thought of DL coach in all of the game.

The LT and OC look like long-time Pro Bowl candidates. The RT looks like a solid vet option for a few more years.
The OG spots have gotten better and if Waters comes back he could be another Pro Bowl quality OL.

Ironically Dallas has much larger issues in the coming off-season than OL, and DL is only an issue if they do let Spencer walk.
 

TwoDeep3

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,506
Reaction score
17,339
CowboysZone LOYAL Fan
One wonders how you can argue both points in the same post.

Because I do not find Romo to be absolved of his screw-ups. I removed the glasses long ago. It's called bein g a balanced fan and looking at reality.
 

TwoDeep3

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,506
Reaction score
17,339
CowboysZone LOYAL Fan
comments part 2.

If this were baseball tony romo would be mike trout... a guy playing very well that cant carry a team by himself... though it's close.

OL/DL. Again this is perhaps the biggest dumb idea fans have... and it is constant and pathetic.
Having bad performances on the OL/DL is not always a management issue.
Jerry owned having a bad year there 2 years ago. He deserved to own a couple seasons but NOT this season.
THIS OL has been pretty darn good and was better than that with Brian Waters in place.
A guy the Cowboys wooed for a few months to get him in.

Dallas had a tremendous DL coming into this season. Losing Spencer was quite painful as it is for any team to lose a guy they franchised.
Adding losing Crawford as a young ascending high draft was another blow.
Losing Ratliff to insanity hurt quite a lot. Add Ben Bass who was expected to surprise in this 4-3.
But the DL wasn't ignored, or lacking talent in this off-season.
And Dallas has the most highly thought of DL coach in all of the game.

The LT and OC look like long-time Pro Bowl candidates. The RT looks like a solid vet option for a few more years.
The OG spots have gotten better and if Waters comes back he could be another Pro Bowl quality OL.

Ironically Dallas has much larger issues in the coming off-season than OL, and DL is only an issue if they do let Spencer walk.

I would list every spot where i think you are wrong, but please allow me to use Cliff Notes.

I disagree with everything you said.
 

mahoneybill

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,912
Reaction score
4,528
appreciate the long thoughtful post.
but disagree with most of it.

if you don't see the difference in today's game with the previous eras i'd argue you aren't paying attention.

but it is easy to see where your perception is faulty as you describe teams.
truth is elite qbs don't guarantee much now.
teams are so shallow around them.

the last 5 SBs have been won by:
Ben R. arguably elite but also a likely playoff non-qualifier again.
Brees. definitely elite but the team also won only 7 games just last season.
Rodgers. Top of the heap QB. He has pretty much kept that team afloat by himself.
Eli. Not close to elite.
Flacco. Not close to elite either.

Truth is Brady and Peyton are absent those SB winners lists for a 5+ years.
Elite QBs don't mean elite teams.
Those QBs lift teams from bad to average or average to good or good to great but the salary cap is very effective at limiting any consistent excellence.

From the 1960s to mid 90s the very same teams were good every year for 5-7 years at a clip.
That no longer happens. There is no Buffalo losing a bunch of SBs because no one goes to a bunch.
You've got as good a chance of going to a SB as a non-playoff team as you as a defending champion.
Teams are losing 1/3 of the roster every year.
Dallas knew it would face GB, San Fran and Buffalo to win a title in the early 90s.
There was little unknown about it.
Now every year is a different set of playoff teams as things shuffle mightily.

Last year the Texans, Vikings, Falcons, Commanders ALL made the playoffs. None are even close to .500 now.
You can add the Packers as under .500 though more explainable with Rodgers hurt.

If the season ended today the previous SB contestants would both be 6 seeds. And only 1 of the previous 5 SB winning QBs would be above a 6 seed.

Many are forgetting that last observation.... Well done
 

WPBCowboysFan

Well-Known Member
Messages
10,265
Reaction score
6,532
Comparing this team and Romo to the 70's teams of Staubach? You lost me there so I skipped the rest.
 

Ky31

Well-Known Member
Messages
525
Reaction score
1,037
Nice try...absolutely disagree with everything!!!
 

Everson24

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,990
Reaction score
1,331
Comparing this team and Romo to the 70's teams of Staubach? You lost me there so I skipped the rest.

He's right in the fact that Roger Staubach often had to bring an underachieving team back from the brink of a loss. I watched most of Staubach's games and felt then much like I do now. "We should be blowing these bums out!". Roger had a much better defense, but I do get the comparison.
 

Fredd

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,995
Reaction score
2,238
Fredd's post holiday observation:

eating thanksgiving at family houses results in no left-overs at Fredd's house :(
 

VACowboy

Well-Known Member
Messages
7,006
Reaction score
3,896
I love reading game analysis, whether I agree or not, so keep it up, TwoDeep.

** I literally laughed out loud when Sims made the comment about elimination games. Not so much that he said it, but knowing there will now be people who feel validated.

There's a big difference between "inventing a stat" for analyzing a sport and "inventing a stat" for criticizing a player. Simms' point is that the media goes out of its way to find stuff for blasting Tony Romo, and he's right. Romo is constantly under a microscope to which no other QB in the league is subjected. If Romo were Matt Ryan, Eli Manning, Robert Griffin III, Ben Rothlissburger or Joe Flacco, the media would be ripping him to shreds on a consistent and unprecedented scale. I don't understand why it's an issue when the media (Simms) turns an objective eye on Tony Romo for a change. Sports Illustrated is doing so in its December 2nd cover story as well.

http://insidesportsillustrated.com/...g-boy-on-this-weeks-sports-illustrated-cover/

No kidding Phil, it is a stat about Romo. It contains all the components of all stats researched that ultimately use said stats to come to a conclusion. This game is built on categories researched, and as the game evolves new categories come into play.

This game is built around the quarterback. If Romo was a safety, then that category would never have been thought up. But he is and it was and it bears fruit if he is playing in games that remove Dallas from contention if they lose. Keeping track of those stats is the same as any of the fans here that do so to support this player as they make up just as meaningless categories to suggest he is what they think.

Again, the issue is not people using a stat to support their criticism of Romo. The issue is people using a stat specifically for criticizing Romo. Everyone has been all over Matty Ice since he entered the league, consistently ranking him as a top-10 QB--based on what? His 1-4 playoff record? To me, though, there is no better illustration of the ridiculous standard the world uses to judge Tony Romo than NFLN's "Top 100 of 2013." The players named Matty Ice the #17 player in the league. Tony Romo? Not among the top 100. If you want to get a real look at the hypocrisy that exists when it comes to judging #9, check out this discussion of Matt Ryan, the regular season, the playoffs, and a bunch of other gems:

http://www.nfl.com/videos/atlanta-falcons/0ap2000000213775/Top-100-Players-of-2013-Matt-Ryan

This is the most hilarious bunch of rhetoric I've ever heard. "Matt does spectacular things in the regular season. He's destined for greatness."

Pittsburgh safety Ryan Clark said this of Ryan:

You can see him winning a Super Bowl eventually. If you look at his regular season numbers, he has been phenomenal.

Interesting how these statistical arguments get turned the other way when we're talking about Tony Romo.

If you don't like the fish bowl then get out.

If you don't like the fish bowl, drown the hypocrites.

** Both the Giants and the Raiders are cellar dwellers. Taking that into consideration, it adds significance of both games being tied late when Dallas should have handled both of them with equal ease.

Do we tag the same significance to the Denver and KC losses?

I see Romo stay on the players now to get them to focus and not the red-headed hand clapper. Even in the post game interview in the locker room Dez made a comment about not focusing early.

Shouldn't the head coach get the minds of the players right and keep them focused?

Interesting perspective. To me, though, after all the "THERE'S NO LEADERSHIP IN DALLAS!" crap, I love seeing Romo making this his team.
 

SportsGuru80

CowboysYanksLakers
Messages
8,723
Reaction score
4,566
Carr isn't overpaid... He got what the market dictated. My cousin makes plays bottom line.
 
Top