So How Does This Help The Defense?

[Alexander]

The trade you mean?

For the offense it is a positive. I do not see the defense getting more than another reason to coast. Their minds have to change. I do not care if we added ten more Roy Williamses.

 

[percyhoward]

The trouble is the word "should".

Uncertainty is a beech.

 

[Alexander]

The fact that we should now be able to create leads quicker and, theoretically larger, is also going to allow our defense to rush the passer more.

How much larger? We had seventeen on Cincinnati and we did not rush better or shut them down.

Our young DBs will be able to play safer coverages IMO.

I don't see how we could get any softer or safer.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Good analysis ABC-- as usual.

But I see two potential negatives that you didn't cover.

#1. With a Roy Williams added to the passing offense I could easily see this team continue to push the needle towards a passing offense first-- and not a rushing offense. You may not see this offense even try to bludgeon any defense with the run.

#2. Yes, the offense has the ability to strike from anywhere on the field, and yes, yes, yes points are the ultimate goal... but are 4 play, 80 yard drives or 3 play 60 yard drives going to help the defense? In other words I'm not sure that the this move helps Dallas increase its time-of-possession.

The other thing to keep in mind, and someone compiled these stats on another web site yesterday-- but when this team scores, the defense is allowing the other team to score a full 50% of the next on the other team's next possession.

The thing this will not help with are the stupid plays. Penalties, TOs and Special Teams. Look at when we are getting scored on and how it corrilates to field position and negative plays. Lots of people on this board have cursed Parcells for the way he coached but he was not wrong with his school of thought, with regards to these things. Here is what I believe Jerry saw. I believe Jerry watched Az and realized that if teams have the personnel, they could not only beat us but they could hurt Romo. I never believed those who said we were OK with the WRs we had. Now, if we take what is given to us, we can beat anybody. The special teams have to be fixed because we are losing ball games because of it. I honestly can't believe that we have allowed this to happen. However, this will tell us two things IMO. 1) is Garrett our guy? If Garrett is our guy, he will understand that in the NFL, it's about taking advantage of what the defense gives you. He will understand that at the end of the day, this league is about running the football and it has always been about being able to run the ball. 2) It's going to tell us about Romo and if he's our guy. It should be about winning. If winning mean throwing the ball less and running the ball more, then a championship QB will do that. I've made this statement a couple times in the past. Aikman was great because he put winning first. As talented as he was, he always put winning first. Bart Starr was, IMO, one of the greatest QBs to ever play the game. He put winning first. Romo must do the same thing. Running the ball is going to help us with our biggest problem. We are throwing way too many INTs and fumbling way to many balls off the passing game. Of late, too many negative plays are resulting from the fact that too much of our offense is via the pass. This may sound strange but, the addition of RWs is more about perception then it is actual production in the passing game. I do believe that our passing efficiency is going to improve dramatically with the additon of RW but, the thing it's really going to help, IMO, is the running game and the short passing game. If you study the trully great offenses of the past, you will see that the backs and/or TEs played a huge role. SF, Cooper, Ring, Rathman, Craig, Tyler and Brent Jones. SD, Muncy, Brooks, James and Winslow. Buffalo was a little bit different in that they used, primarily one back as opposed to several but Thomas and Metzelar were very effective in that offense catching the ball. The Rams greatest show on turf, Marshall Faulk was rediculous. Felix Jones has the potential to be like Marshall Faulk in our offense.

I like our defense, to honest with you. We are 7th against the run, which is pretty good. We can generate pressure with just 4 rushers and our pass defense is going to get better as our young guys get more experience. Newman will eventually be back. Jenkins and Scandrick are going to have to learn quickly. However, they should be in a position where our defense is playing with a lead, most times. That's going to help a lot. We're giving up points but it's not, IMO, because our defense is playing poorly. We are just making too many mistakes and playing the worst special teams I've ever seen this team play. This really should help us. Take preassure off Romo. He doesn't have to make every play. That's his problem right now. He needs to be throwing 25 times a game, as opposed to 35. Allow our OL to do what they should do best. They are massive. They need to be run blocking most of the game as opposed to pass blocking. Pass blocking the majority of the game plays into the hands of the defense. Run blocking allows them to use there strength to wear down the opponents. This is what we should be doing more of and the addition of RW should make this possible. It's a question of taking advantage of that opportinity IMO. If we can't, then this is on our coaching staff IMO.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

The thing this will not help with are the stupid plays. Penalties, TOs and Special Teams. Look at when we are getting scored on and how it corrilates to field position and negative plays. Lots of people on this board have cursed Parcells for the way he coached but he was not wrong with his school of thought, with regards to these things. Here is what I believe Jerry saw. I believe Jerry watched Az and realized that if teams have the personnel, they could not only beat us but they could hurt Romo. I never believed those who said we were OK with the WRs we had. Now, if we take what is given to us, we can beat anybody. The special teams have to be fixed because we are losing ball games because of it. I honestly can't believe that we have allowed this to happen. However, this will tell us two things IMO. 1) is Garrett our guy? If Garrett is our guy, he will understand that in the NFL, it's about taking advantage of what the defense gives you. He will understand that at the end of the day, this league is about running the football and it has always been about being able to run the ball. 2) It's going to tell us about Romo and if he's our guy. It should be about winning. If winning mean throwing the ball less and running the ball more, then a championship QB will do that. I've made this statement a couple times in the past. Aikman was great because he put winning first. As talented as he was, he always put winning first. Bart Starr was, IMO, one of the greatest QBs to ever play the game. He put winning first. Romo must do the same thing. Running the ball is going to help us with our biggest problem. We are throwing way too many INTs and fumbling way to many balls off the passing game. Of late, too many negative plays are resulting from the fact that too much of our offense is via the pass. This may sound strange but, the addition of RWs is more about perception then it is actual production in the passing game. I do believe that our passing efficiency is going to improve dramatically with the additon of RW but, the thing it's really going to help, IMO, is the running game and the short passing game. If you study the trully great offenses of the past, you will see that the backs and/or TEs played a huge role. SF, Cooper, Ring, Rathman, Craig, Tyler and Brent Jones. SD, Muncy, Brooks, James and Winslow. Buffalo was a little bit different in that they used, primarily one back as opposed to several but Thomas and Metzelar were very effective in that offense catching the ball. The Rams greatest show on turf, Marshall Faulk was rediculous. Felix Jones has the potential to be like Marshall Faulk in our offense.

I like our defense, to honest with you. We are 7th against the run, which is pretty good. We can generate pressure with just 4 rushers and our pass defense is going to get better as our young guys get more experience. Newman will eventually be back. Jenkins and Scandrick are going to have to learn quickly. However, they should be in a position where our defense is playing with a lead, most times. That's going to help a lot. We're giving up points but it's not, IMO, because our defense is playing poorly. We are just making too many mistakes and playing the worst special teams I've ever seen this team play. This really should help us. Take preassure off Romo. He doesn't have to make every play. That's his problem right now. He needs to be throwing 25 times a game, as opposed to 35. Allow our OL to do what they should do best. They are massive. They need to be run blocking most of the game as opposed to pass blocking. Pass blocking the majority of the game plays into the hands of the defense. Run blocking allows them to use there strength to wear down the opponents. This is what we should be doing more of and the addition of RW should make this possible. It's a question of taking advantage of that opportinity IMO. If we can't, then this is on our coaching staff IMO.

Very good analysis ABQ.

Hey, I like the players that the defense has on it too-- I just don't like the results! :laugh2:

Alexander hit the key point. This offense could add 10 "Roy Williams" but until the defense improves its performance I don't see the end of the year results being much different than if we didn't have Roy Williams in the house.

 

[WV Cowboy]

Last reply I'll make on the subject...

There was no receiver anywhere close to where O'Donnell made those throws. The only person in the area was Larry Brown, both times.

Either someone ran the wrong route both times, or O'Donnell is even dumber than I thought.

Exactly, we baited him into thinking he was seeing something that wasn't there, and in his impatience to make something happen he made a mistake.

It wasn't like the throw was a little high, or a little low, or a little behind the receiver.

Do you think he threw it to LB on purpose??

He wanted to throw it deep but we took that away from them.

It was a stupid throw to make but I think our gameplan forced him into a poor decision in the 2nd half.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Very good analysis ABQ.

Hey, I like the players that the defense has on it too-- I just don't like the results! :laugh2:

Alexander hit the key point. This offense could add 10 "Roy Williams" but until the defense improves its performance I don't see the end of the year results being much different than if we didn't have Roy Williams in the house.

It's interesting. I've watched this defense this year and I don't think they are as bad as everybody thinks. Again, Penalties, negative plays, Special Teams and TOs are the killers IMO. If you look at TDs given up, the Cowboys have only given up 12 this year, of which one was on a Kick Return.

We are about middle of the pack on TDs allowed but, we've played some pretty good offenses this year. Az, Philly, GB, are all top ten. Giants are 11th.

Between Fumbles and INTs, we are averaging 3 per game. How many penalties a game are we commiting?

I don't think it's our defense as much as it is the other things.

 

[zeromaster]

They need to run-block more effectively as well. It was disappointing how many times Barber was run up the middle against the Cards on first or second down, and it seemed the remaining yardage didn't change much a majority of the time.

Putting this offense in second and long that often isn't going to get the job done. With BJohnson, it puts more on his shoulders; with Romo, it's been a load he hasn't responded to as well as last season.

 

[chinch]

^^ bingo ABC.

which points to coaching.

our D looks WORSE than it is due to terrible special teams and turnovers. We spotted AZ 7 pts to start the game and another 6 to end it. Very, very few defenses ALWAYS make big stops. Maybe the '85 bears and the Ravens. Not often.

Even the Cowboys dynasty years required big completions to harper to seal games after the defense let it get close.

 

[percyhoward]

I don't think it's our defense as much as it is the other things.

A lot of it really is other things. We're giving up 20 points per game on defense, and that includes many situations where the offense turns the ball over and puts the defense in bad position.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

A lot of it really is other things. We're giving up 20 points per game on defense, and that includes many situations where the offense turns the ball over and puts the defense in bad position.

But you know that stuff happen to other teams too. Other defenses have to put up with the same nonsense from their offenses.

I just don't see the aggressiveness out of this defense. I dunno, it just seems timid in all aspects of its game.

Like Alexander said, the defense sorta sits around waiting for the offense to do something good, then it counteracts it by doing something bad.

 

[eastcoastfan]

it helps the D by not having 3 and outs hopefully. Sustain longer drives keep the D more fresh in the 4th Qtr

 

[percyhoward]

I just don't see the aggressiveness out of this defense. I dunno, it just seems timid in all aspects of its game.

It's not a bad defense, it's just not forcing turnovers. Last year we averaged 2 takeaways per game, this year it's 1.

This defense could allow the same yards per game as it does and if we could force one more turnover ever other game it would make a huge difference. People concentrate on yards allowed, but there are defenses that have won SB's that were barely above average in yards allowed.

The Broncos won back-to-back Super Bowls with a defense that wasn't any better than this one.

 

[BAT]

Might as well ask how Roy Williams will improve the OL, ST, penalties, etc.


Roy Williams is not a panacea for what ails the Dallas Cowboys, or even the Cowboys offense, he is simply another bullet in a very big gun. It is up to Wade and his coaches to point that gun in the right direction and squeeze. Recently, its been alot of jerking and scattershot results.


But the D problems are just as much coaching philosophy, game adjustment AND attitude (from the players to the coaches) as it is player performance. It is strange, but the D plays like Pacman, the person. The D, as a whole, has a overstated sense of itself, or perhaps it is exactly like Wade, too nice, too many excuses, too stubborn, too soft.


Hey good riddance to idiot like Pacman, BUT ... while he is a pea brained thug who may be overrated, especially at PR, he brought true attitude AND was the best CB on the team the last few weeks, in coverage & against the run.


The rainman will be missed, especially b/c Ball (who will play, especially against 4 WR sets) has nowhere near the confidence, nevermind the talent.


I see the X-factor as which LB is going to replace Burnett in the nickel packages. I just hope to GOD that it is not Carp. Even Lady James would be preferrable, just by a hair. It is time for Wade to let Zach loose. It is time to let the best players play, instead of "saving" them. Wade needs to just start playing w/an edge, press the WRs on 3rd and short, bring the house on blitzes a little more, PUT YOUR PLAYERS (ton of 1st rounders & pro bowlers) IN A POSITION TO SUCCEED THEN LET THEM PLAY.


AND speaking of attitude adjustments, babying Read is not enough. Just CUT Justin Rogers already. The guy is worthless. Someone needs to be sacrificed on ST, Carp was a first rounder , Tony Curtis is the backup FB and 3rd TE, but Rogers is a POS, as a STer AND a LB. Use the spot for ANOTHER pass rushing OLB to rest Ware and Ole Man River. Spencer is HURT .... AGAIN. For Pete's sake, sign Andy Studebaker (speed, size, coverge AND prolific pass rusher_how much better is he vs. Rogers ALREADY???), promote Tearrius George, sign an injured former 2nd rounder Dan Bazuin, HECK sign brain addled recently retired Dan Morgan (not a pass rusher, but 300% tougher than Carp/Rogers/Curtis COMBINED)!!!!