Should the Cowboys think about a new deal for LVE?

CowboysExchange

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,349
Reaction score
557
Again, I don't and never saw it as a "battle of the TE's", but clearly Kittle was more of a difference maker even though he didn't score a TE and Schultz did. Realistically Kittle vs. Lamb were the only effective weapons on the two teams, and they kind of offset each other, so I would say it came down to Purdy making fewer mistakes than Dak.
Schultz ended up with 10 targets 5 receptions and 27 yards

It was Schultz'kowskis "DESTINY" to get 10 targets Rogers. Right??

Didn't we assign 10 targets last week based upon trends, history, stats???

And instead of Schultz Morphing into a Gronk or Kittle he turned back into Jason Witten 2.0
Lol

Our 11 million dollar non game changer getting 10 targets.

And you can't see that our strategy and gameplan had a Dak "locked in" 10 te targets going to Schultzkowski??? Lol

I tried to tell ya it was the Battle of the TE's and it was.

Their te was basking in glory and the spotlight while ours was over on the same bench as our KICKER!!!

LOL
 

infamousstyles

Well-Known Member
Messages
839
Reaction score
865
He was good this year but he feels alot like Tyron Smith. At any moment, he can be out for a period of time due to neck injury. So it's a gamble and feels like it's been a gamble for alot of his cowboys tenure.
 

glimmerman

Well-Known Member
Messages
30,561
Reaction score
30,276
We have some good young talent but everyone was talking about Cox, well he never made the field for a reason. If we had better DTs your LBs look better. We will continue to draft.

But it’s really how LVE feels. He was on a one year prove it deal this past year. He will get good offers. People poo pooing his play had to see the problem when he wasn’t in the game. He has healed from that surgery and can contribute for a few more years. A good 2 year deal would be ok. Rotate him and Parsons. But he may get a better offer from another team.
 

OmerV

Well-Known Member
Messages
26,122
Reaction score
22,616
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
When your strategy is to target a player 10 times like Schultz he has to make some plays.

I told ya Schultz would get his 10 targets so yes it was a battle of tes this week. Because that's where the biggest mismatch was.

The game ended with Schultz and Zeke being too overinvolved. Just like it always does.
I said Schultz didn't make a difference in this game, so why are you trying to argue as if I said he did?

In any case, I'm not sure that was their strategy. I think several of those targets were dump offs because Dak felt pressure. Regardless, Schultz doesn't call plays, so even if the team's strategy was to get short 5 yards gains as an alternative to the run, Schultz can't control that.

By the way, I find it funny that when Schultz has games where he gains a lot but doesn't get in the end zone you always argue the yardage doesn't matter, only the scoring. In this game your argument is that Kittle's yardage does matter even though he didn't score. A bit of a double standard.

The reality is both matter, and in this game Kittle's yardage was more of a factor than Schultz's score.
 

OmerV

Well-Known Member
Messages
26,122
Reaction score
22,616
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
It doesn't matter who coaches this take what the defense gives ya te Checkdown scheme we've been running since 2010-11

The NFL is predicated on making big chunk plays not a bunch of duck duck goose safety valve throws for 5-6 yards.

The NFL is predicated on doing whatever works, not just one style.

Regardless, I agree with you that the team's play calling sucked in this one. Even if you hope to establish some kind of ball control offense you still have to have some semblance of a vertical passing game, and the Cowboys mostly avoided that throughout the game. Even when the running game failed, and Pollard went down, they still didn't attack with vertical passes.
 

CowboysExchange

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,349
Reaction score
557
I said Schultz didn't make a difference in this game, so why are you trying to argue as if I said he did?

In any case, I'm not sure that was their strategy. I think several of those targets were dump offs because Dak felt pressure. Regardless, Schultz doesn't call plays, so even if the team's strategy was to get short 5 yards gains as an alternative to the run, Schultz can't control that.

By the way, I find it funny that when Schultz has games where he gains a lot but doesn't get in the end zone you always argue the yardage doesn't matter, only the scoring. In this game your argument is that Kittle's yardage does matter even though he didn't score. A bit of a double standard.

The reality is both matter, and in this game Kittle's yardage was more of a factor than Schultz's score.
There is nothing wrong with the player. Schultz is who he is. He's a take what the defense gives ya te that has major holes in his abilities. He scores every 3.5 - 4 games on avg.

He's a 4th or 5th option. His scoring streaks last 1 game and then he's ice cold

He just can't be targeted like a number 1 wr every week
(10 targets)

It's a scheme problem going back to 2010ish

That's been the whole debate for 7+ years.
Can an avg take what the defense Checkdown style of te carry this team getting 10 targets per game??? Witten couldn't either??

It was Schult's destiny to get 10 targets. It's not only the strategy it's the personnel schemes in which we operate from Rogers.

It's a flawed scheme when ya do it every week because we overvalue the involvement of the te position based upon how #82 played the game as a possession receiver. Not Gronk

Dak forcefed Schultz for 10ish targets per game for like the last 5 games and he's too inconsistent

You keep saying that SCHULTZ wasn't treated as the "MAIN TARGET" but 10 targets a game debunks that theory. JS

There's only a limited number of snaps and targets to go around.

You have to target players that have big play capabilities if ya want to make big plays regardless of the position .

We basically go where Lamb and Schultz takes us
 
Last edited:

CowboysExchange

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,349
Reaction score
557
And Pollard. But the rest of those skilled players outside of Davis are Jags. Js

You'd have to have a steak at every skilled positions to overcome Schultz getting 10 targets per game. Lol
 

CowboysExchange

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,349
Reaction score
557
The NFL is predicated on doing whatever works, not just one style.

Regardless, I agree with you that the team's play calling sucked in this one. Even if you hope to establish some kind of ball control offense you still have to have some semblance of a vertical passing game, and the Cowboys mostly avoided that throughout the game. Even when the running game failed, and Pollard went down, they still didn't attack with vertical passes.
Dak had his blinders on Lamb and Schultz all night so it's no wonder if he missed any other wrs that may have gotten open

Is that not a factual statement??

We saw that style of ball w #82 for 15+ years and where is the rings??
 
Last edited:

CowboysExchange

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,349
Reaction score
557
The NFL is predicated on doing whatever works, not just one style.

Regardless, I agree with you that the team's play calling sucked in this one. Even if you hope to establish some kind of ball control offense you still have to have some semblance of a vertical passing game, and the Cowboys mostly avoided that throughout the game. Even when the running game failed, and Pollard went down, they still didn't attack with vertical passes.
Our Style for the last 5 games was throwing 10 targets to Schultzkowski.

I rewatched every play to Schultz and the only thing that jumped off the screen was his inability to separate, not come back to the ball, and make the athletic te catches and racs that the elite tes who get 10 targets do. Js
 

CowboysExchange

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,349
Reaction score
557
3 or 4 of Schultzs passes went for like 4 yards where he was gonna get picked or clobbered for no rac's

Most all of the non checkdown passes that were contested got dropped and then he didn't get his foot down.

I'd give Schultz a top 20 te grade but don't ya think hes far from a 10 target a game player???

7+ years Rogers
Same Scheme and Strategy.

Maybe we need an athletic te to go with a duo at wr

Or a good trio of wrs around Schultzkowski because he doesn't have an elite tes skillset
 
Last edited:

CowboysExchange

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,349
Reaction score
557
The NFL is predicated on doing whatever works, not just one style.

Regardless, I agree with you that the team's play calling sucked in this one. Even if you hope to establish some kind of ball control offense you still have to have some semblance of a vertical passing game, and the Cowboys mostly avoided that throughout the game. Even when the running game failed, and Pollard went down, they still didn't attack with vertical passes.
Maybe we need an athletic te to go with a duo at wr

Or a good trio of wrs around Schultzkowski because he doesn't have an elite tes skillset.

10 targets, 5 catches, and 5 yard averages made Jerrah Cry

Surely this Fo knows now that if Dak woulda been throwing to Lamb/ Amari instead of Schultz and Zeke we would have had a better shot. Js
 
Last edited:

DanA

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,988
Reaction score
5,804
Hard pass on LVE unless it’s a team friendly 1 year deal. The neck is just too big a risk and something I’m not keen for us to chance on a long-term deal.

Hard pass on Shultz too. Ferguson showed enough to suggest he can be a no.1 and it’s another deep TE draft.
 

CowboysExchange

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,349
Reaction score
557
Hard pass on LVE unless it’s a team friendly 1 year deal. The neck is just too big a risk and something I’m not keen for us to chance on a long-term deal.

Hard pass on Shultz too. Ferguson showed enough to suggest he can be a no.1 and it’s another deep TE draft.

Jerry has the opportunity to sign the TOP te playoff scoring leader since Novachek.

First thing Jerrah is gonna ask Schultz is can you play every single snap and be the main target??

Lol.

Jerrah is gonna break the bank on Schultz because he doesn't get hurt.

If he doesn't tag him one of these other guys will get hurt playing every offensive snap esp passing. Lol.

I woulda signed Gronk off his couch for that SF game.

The Battle of the Tes???
 
Last edited:

b0xZZ

Well-Known Member
Messages
727
Reaction score
1,164
No. He's just not what we need. True, he's better than recent performance. But he's still not even close to being adequate for the position. He got "Trucked" by a wr not named Evans in the Tampa game.
My sentiments exactly the guy was flat terrible and has improved to marginal the past six games or so. We can and should do better, our run defense needs it.
 
Top