RKG Definition

[cowboy_ron]

I know more about talent than the GM and VP of Personnel on this team.

Of course you do....you just prefer to flip burgers at 5 guys instead of being burdened with a NFL position, we understand.

 

[jday]

A big part of being a fan is being willfully ignorant?

Maybe that's the problem. I think you can loyally align yourself with a team while not giving up your ability to use your brain.

Lemme splain. It's not that I don't use my brain. My eye's are wide open. I know going into this season the Cowboys chances are slim...I've said as much in this thread as well as others. But if I allowed that side of my brain to rule my decisions, I probably wouldn't bother watching. So, it's not so much being "willfully ignorant" as it is choosing to ignore certain aspects of this team that are beyond my power to change. I could go on and on an on ad nauseum about my issues with this organization from top to bottom, but what good does that do? It certainly doesn't make me feel better. Besides, this blog already has a Risen Star...not sure if there is room for another.

 

[Risen Star]

Lemme splain. It's not that I don't use my brain. My eye's are wide open. I know going into this season the Cowboys chances are slim...I've said as much in this thread as well as others. But if I allowed that side of my brain to rule my decisions, I probably wouldn't bother watching. So, it's not so much being "willfully ignorant" as it is choosing to ignore certain aspects of this team that are beyond my power to change. I could go on and on an on ad nauseum about my issues with this organization from top to bottom, but what good does that do? It certainly doesn't make me feel better. Besides, this blog already as a Risen Star...not sure if there is room for another.

Well I guess that's where we're different. I don't have to convince myself my team has a chance in order to follow and support it. I don't have to ignore anything. I can look at it logically. That's why I'm far more right every year than most around here.

Frankly, I find this whole debate about positive and negative fans to be pathetic anyway and a ploy to distract from the fact that the Dallas Cowboys are dead. We now all root for Jerry's Cowboys. They look the same taking the field but everything that went into the Cowboys being a marquee storied franchise, one that commanded respect, has long been gone.

We're now all hat and no cattle.

Go Cowboys.

 

[jday]

Well I guess that's where we're different. I don't have to convince myself my team has a chance in order to follow and support it. I don't have to ignore anything. I can look at it logically. That's why I'm far more right every year than most around here.

Frankly, I find this whole debate about positive and negative fans to be pathetic anyway and a ploy to distract from the fact that the Dallas Cowboys are dead. We now all root for Jerry's Cowboys. They look the same taking the field but everything that went into the Cowboys being a marquee storied franchise, one that commanded respect, has long been gone.

We're now all hat and no cattle.

Go Cowboys.

I honestly don't believe my contributions are without logic, either. I don't see myself as an optimist or a pessimist; I'm a realist. Granted, with that distinction, dependent on my mood, my contributions can go either way; but I try really hard to see things for what they are. It's quite the balancing act not allowing myself to get too high on some things and too low in response to others, but I think I do a pretty good job of it for the most part.

The offense looks poised for greatness, the defense not so much. A repitition of last years injury situation could very well make this team look even worse than last year. Jason has breathed new life into the culture of this orginzation, but in terms of in-game management, he has been horrible; futhermore, he sounds like a robot and looks like a member of the chucky cheese band at his pressers. Tony gives the Cowboys the best chance to win, even though sometimes his decision making reminds you of a rookie. In past offseasons, Jerry Jones gave aging veterans stupid contracts for things they had done as opposed to what they were going to do I suspect because it's easier to sell the common fan players they already know and this organization always has to win now. The cap is a mess, but over the next few years when dead money falls off and they don't hand out any more stupid contracts, that could clear up.

But as far as this next seasons is concerned, it could truly go either way. That's why we all continue to watch...any given Sunday, right?

Now, I bid you all a happy July 4th, I'm off to do the family thing and fire up the grill!

 

[BigStar]

I am glad that the old dline is now gone. Spears always seemed envious concerned with what the other guy got or was doing; he always struck me as one who would point the finger in the locker room at anyone but himself. Hatcher did as well and was markedly selfish. We know what happened with Ratliff and his betrayal.

Player attitudes aside; JG re-signed these "RKGs" after their initial contracts expired? The second time around they weren't RKGs?

 

[cowboy_ron]

Well I guess that's where we're different. I don't have to convince myself my team has a chance in order to follow and support it. I don't have to ignore anything. I can look at it logically. That's why I'm far more right every year than most around here.

Frankly, I find this whole debate about positive and negative fans to be pathetic anyway and a ploy to distract from the fact that the Dallas Cowboys are dead. We now all root for Jerry's Cowboys. They look the same taking the field but everything that went into the Cowboys being a marquee storied franchise, one that commanded respect, has long been gone.

We're now all hat and no cattle.

Go Cowboys.

 

[Alexander]

Not sure how anyone can look at this team....how it competes...then remember the Wade Era and think that there isn't a pattern in what this front office has focused on.

If you look at this team and think the fact they "fight" and "compete" as something different really means you have a very selective memory. There was less delusion the last time culture really did change from the Campo to the Parcells era.

It is amazing how one season collapse defines the Phillips era, yet continued mediocrity under Garrett that is a notch below what the Phillips teams achieved is somehow sold as definite progress.

So the idea is the lazy entitled players are all gone. Funny, I have seen players like Ratliff continue to be relied upon and even steal their salary laughing as they do it. Orton is basically flipping off management as we speak. I still see overpaid players like Brandon Carr underachieving on this roster with nary a harsh criticism from the leadership. But oh yes, all the lazy malingerers are gone, right?

Why does that perception exist? Because the propaganda machine is a lot stronger now.

The head coach is not a nervous defensive chuckling self-deprecating old man who plays with his chin fat and tugs nervously on his arm hairs during a press conference.

The team was forced by circumstance as much as philosophy to jettison older aging players, but if you tell yourself enough that it was Garrett taking out the trash, it makes it easier to digest for some..

Simple plain fact--Phillips' results were superior to Jason Garrett's have been to date. But everyone feels better because of empty coach speak and their own delusions of "what is being built here". The team is not coached better, it is marketed better.

Make no mistake, I loathed how Phillips ran a football team. In the same respect, there could very easily be the same undercurrent in the locker room towards Garrett. And no, do not bore me with quotes from the anointed leaders on this team like Romo and Witten. They are part of the upper crust haves on this team. I would rather hear how the 53rd man on this roster thinks Garrett is the next Landry.

 

[Plankton]

RKG - sounds great on paper. Makes it seem like you have a commitment to doing things "the right way." However, it's pure pablum, nothing more.

There isn't a team in the league that doesn't believe that they are signing "RKGs". There isn't a team out there that has as their mission statement, hey, we're going to sign as many deadbeat, character deficient players as possible, though Cincinnati does seen to find more than most. All teams say that they take character seriously, and want hard working teams. What matters is what is seen on the field.

My biggest issues with Jason Garrett have to do with two things. One, I don't think he earned the job, as he was a big part of the 1-7 debacle that got Wade Phillips fired (the offense was the sloppiest unit on the team). The second is, IMO, that he doesn't have an authentic coaching bone in his body. I don't see anything that I can point to that is his. RKG? Brian Kelly has used that phrase at Notre Dame since 2009. Process? Nick Saban. To his credit, he has sought out input from other leaders. He just can't use that to build a truly unique philosophy - it's all a copy of someone else.

 

[Risen Star]

I honestly don't believe my contributions are without logic, either. I don't see myself as an optimist or a pessimist; I'm a realist. Granted, with that distinction, dependent on my mood, my contributions can go either way; but I try really hard to see things for what they are. It's quite the balancing act not allowing myself to get too high on some things and too low in response to others, but I think I do a pretty good job of it for the most part.

I don't think the goal is to not get too high or too low. It should be to face reality. I wasn't too high in the early 90's. I wasn't trying to temper my enthusiasm for a clearly great team. I didn't have to maintain any balance. Sometimes a team is good. Sometimes they're bad. This balance thing is nonsense homer fans say to hope to limit your stinging justified criticisms on the flawed product we see today.

If you've been half and half on this team over the last 20 years, congratulations...you've been only half wrong.

You said you choose to ignore certain aspects of the team because you're a fan and might not even watch if you didn't. That's creating a happy place for yourself not evaluating the team for what it really is.

The offense looks poised for greatness, the defense not so much.

I'd say that's a little extreme. The offense is good but it is also completely reliant on a 34 year old QB coming off of two back surgeries in a little more than a calendar year. I don't see greatness in the other talent on offense, but I do see good talent. Good gets transformed to great on here.

A repitition of last years injury situation could very well make this team look even worse than last year. Jason has breathed new life into the culture of this orginzation, but in terms of in-game management, he has been horrible; futhermore, he sounds like a robot and looks like a member of the chucky cheese band at his pressers. Tony gives the Cowboys the best chance to win, even though sometimes his decision making reminds you of a rookie. In past offseasons, Jerry Jones gave aging veterans stupid contracts for things they had done as opposed to what they were going to do I suspect because it's easier to sell the common fan players they already know and this organization always has to win now. The cap is a mess, but over the next few years when dead money falls off and they don't hand out any more stupid contracts, that could clear up.

The Cowboys failed last year for the same reason they've failed for the last 20. They lack talent on a team that lacks the proper environment for coaches to do their job. We have emasculated coaches with subpar players. Injuries had nothing do with the failure. We weren't winning anything regardless.

But as far as this next seasons is concerned, it could truly go either way. That's why we all continue to watch...any given Sunday, right?

No. That's not why I watch. I don't believe that because I root for team X that that team has a chance to win every year. I'm a Sixers fan. They suck. Large. They have no chance to win anything next year. Just like they've had no chance to win anything for most of my lifetime, but I'll still watch and follow the team next season. I understand the situation, or the reality, of that team and it's completely irrelevant to my rooting interests.

I don't believe it's a coin flip as to whether the Cowboys win a title in 2014. Unless the success of the team falls on the coin landing on it's side.

 

[big dog cowboy]

Injuries had nothing do with the failure.

I agree. Going through 20 DL's is a sure fire reciepe to winning football games.

 

[Risen Star]

I agree. Going through 20 DL's is a sure fire reciepe to winning football games.

It's irrelevant when the team wasn't good enough to begin with.

It won't matter how healthy the Jets are this year. They have no chance to win with or without all their players.

 

[BigStar]

I agree. Going through 20 DL's is a sure fire reciepe to winning football games.

Spencer, Rat, Crawford, and Brent. Who are the other 16 DL that the team lost? I've seen this 20 DL statistic brought up a lot to justify the terrible pass rush. Rat shouldn't have been on the team, and Crawford/Brent were expected to fill in as starting 1tech/role players. A healthy Spencer off the edge would've definitely helped with the pass rush but Selvie stepped in to do a great job of setting the edge as the SE. His pass rush definitely wouldn't match Spencer but his Run D wasn't terrible either. Hatcher produced 11 sacks as the starting 3 tech. That gives you a superior interior pass rusher, a future HOFer off the RE, and a good run defender starting @ LE who also contributed 7 sacks. Spencer went on IR. That is only major injury to the DL but was replaced with 7 sacks and good run D presence in the way of Selvie. This argument sounds like the only piece missing is a Pro Bowl 1 tech?

 

[Toruk_Makto]

If you look at this team and think the fact they "fight" and "compete" as something different really means you have a very selective memory. There was less delusion the last time culture really did change from the Campo to the Parcells era.

It is amazing how one season collapse defines the Phillips era, yet continued mediocrity under Garrett that is a notch below what the Phillips teams achieved is somehow sold as definite progress.

So the idea is the lazy entitled players are all gone. Funny, I have seen players like Ratliff continue to be relied upon and even steal their salary laughing as they do it. Orton is basically flipping off management as we speak. I still see overpaid players like Brandon Carr underachieving on this roster with nary a harsh criticism from the leadership. But oh yes, all the lazy malingerers are gone, right?

Why does that perception exist? Because the propaganda machine is a lot stronger now.

The head coach is not a nervous defensive chuckling self-deprecating old man who plays with his chin fat and tugs nervously on his arm hairs during a press conference.

The team was forced by circumstance as much as philosophy to jettison older aging players, but if you tell yourself enough that it was Garrett taking out the trash, it makes it easier to digest for some..

Simple plain fact--Phillips' results were superior to Jason Garrett's have been to date. But everyone feels better because of empty coach speak and their own delusions of "what is being built here". The team is not coached better, it is marketed better.

Make no mistake, I loathed how Phillips ran a football team. In the same respect, there could very easily be the same undercurrent in the locker room towards Garrett. And no, do not bore me with quotes from the anointed leaders on this team like Romo and Witten. They are part of the upper crust haves on this team. I would rather hear how the 53rd man on this roster thinks Garrett is the next Landry.

This team probably doesn't have the talent to win it all. They haven't the last few years. Despite this i've appreciated how hard the team plays. Sue me.

 

[Clove]

Who cares? Can he play football or not? I'm not asking for a role model for my children or a leader for my church youth group. We want football players. If they can help the team I'm all for them. This RKG stuff is stupid.

Exactly. And it's funny how the definition the OP gives from Garrett has changed over the years after losing so much. It used to be by character, now he's saying it's good players. Seems like he's back tracking on his original definition.

You guys remember when he came on board full time, he wanted guys wearing suits on the plane? Stupid. These guys are football players not executives of a corporation. Instead of worrying about what they're wearing, you should be worrying about if they can rush the passer or not. And that's the same thing I said back then when guys were blasting me for it. I mean, get real. If you had to choose 1, would you want your guy to kill the other team, or be in Church every Sunday?

 

[Clove]

Wow, I don't see any suits on this Championship plane ride.

 

[Hostile]

Spencer, Rat, Crawford, and Brent. Who are the other 16 DL that the team lost? I've seen this 20 DL statistic brought up a lot to justify the terrible pass rush. Rat shouldn't have been on the team, and Crawford/Brent were expected to fill in as starting 1tech/role players. A healthy Spencer off the edge would've definitely helped with the pass rush but Selvie stepped in to do a great job of setting the edge as the SE. His pass rush definitely wouldn't match Spencer but his Run D wasn't terrible either. Hatcher produced 11 sacks as the starting 3 tech. That gives you a superior interior pass rusher, a future HOFer off the RE, and a good run defender starting @ LE who also contributed 7 sacks. Spencer went on IR. That is only major injury to the DL but was replaced with 7 sacks and good run D presence in the way of Selvie. This argument sounds like the only piece missing is a Pro Bowl 1 tech?

It isn't about who they lost, but rather who they had to trot out there to play and sometimes start. However we can still add to that list of players lost to injury.

Ben Bass
Marvin Austin

We lost Ware for some games and when he came back he was a shell of what we needed.

Nick Hayden started for us. He may not even make this team. He still could, but I have my doubts he will.

The next closest any team was to DL rotation was at 11 I believe. We were almost double the next team. No team, and I mean not a single one in the league, could win consistently with that many DL injuries, and losing Sean Lee only compounded things.

 

[ConstantReboot]

It was reported when McClay got the promotion that he would be more tolerant of borderline character players but would be less tolerant of injury risk players.

Also, now that Garrett has had years to purge the non-RKGs and build a roster full of RKGs, it's much easier to add an occasional character risk player.

When Garrett inherited a roster with a horrible locker-room mentality, he had to over-focus on adding RKGs and purging the over-entitled, under-disciplined over paid underachievers that were the definition of the Wade Phillips era.

Wait wasn't Garrett here also during that same Wade Phillips era? What did he do to help rectify that situation?

 

[BigStar]

It isn't about who they lost, but rather who they had to trot out there to play and sometimes start. However we can still add to that list of players lost to injury.

Ben Bass
Marvin Austin

We lost Ware for some games and when he came back he was a shell of what we needed.

Nick Hayden started for us. He may not even make this team. He still could, but I have my doubts he will.

The next closest any team was to DL rotation was at 11 I believe. We were almost double the next team. No team, and I mean not a single one in the league, could win consistently with that many DL injuries, and losing Sean Lee only compounded things.

I hear you on the Ware aspect, but he did start while dinged with nagging injuries outside of the (2 games? not sure tbh) where he actually had to sit. That is a lot of injuries to deal with in terms of the starting 1 tech and the depth of the D but not necessarily the starters @ play, outside of the starting 1 tech and the Spencer IR misfortune who was replaced with an average starter. I'm not going to claim the team couldn't have been luckier in injury regard (mainly Spencer IR and Ware remaining 100%) but the 20 DL statistic is a stretch in terms of the impact it really had on the starting DL.

It was shockingly unfortunate in terms of replacing the starting 1 tech, but it really is more accurately applied to depth of the DL considering Hayden continued to start regardless of who they brought in. We lost a lot of prospective depth that could have replaced Hayden/rotate with Selvie. That is where the injury pile up statistic results from. They surely weren't brought in to replace Hatcher/Ware, and even Selvie towards mid-late season.

It's off season

 

[Alexander]

Wait wasn't Garrett here also during that same Wade Phillips era? What did he do to help rectify that situation?

He was drowned out by the infamous dominating personality of Wade Phillips. Poor Jason never had a chance.

 

[xwalker]

Wait wasn't Garrett here also during that same Wade Phillips era? What did he do to help rectify that situation?

What do you thing the TO attempted mutiny was all about? It was Garrett standing up to TO and his followers like Patrick Crayton.

TO was gone before Garrett became HC because Garrett insisted on it. Wade was not involved in the removal of TO.