Someone told me Cowboys didnt need to play the 4-3, wrong move, now what do you say?

[TimHortons]

What does changing the scheme have to do with our players stripping the ball? It's obvious that the new coaching staff put a heavy focus on take aways, but I don't understand how the OP attributes having one more down linemen to getting more fumble recoveries. Our players simply put more effort into getting those turnovers, scheme had not much to do with it. Does playing a 34 take away your ability to strip the ball carrier?

 

[jobberone]

There is a large probability that one a message board site concerning football or any other sport or religion or politics someone will find fault in something you say.

From my point of view the team still showed a remarkable lack of skill in defending the pass. Basically because this team is built with corner backs and not pressure on the opposing quarterback.

Regardless if it is the 4-3 or the 3-4, this will continue until the defensive line is constructed to disrupt the passing game at the point of release instead of the point of catch.

I don't agree the team is built with CBs even if you're pointing to Claiborne. There are two number ones on the DL. The DL played much better than the CBs did last nite. Granted they missed some sacks and 'almost' got there too often but they created problems for the Giants. Not sure what happened to Ware either. But you're right. It's not as much whether its a 3-4 or 4-3, you're still playing with guys who have to execute. I admit there are differing personnel for the makeup of the front seven. But we don't play a straight up 4-3 all the time anyway. Last nite I don't remember seeing a lot of different fronts other than the 4-3 but that won't always be the case.

 

[Risen Star]

"Where you happen to strip the football away"? That's a pretty crucial element of our defense and the OP's argument that you can't just dismiss away.

And it has absolutely nothing to do with the scheme of your defense.

 

[jobberone]

I didn't say that I liked one better than the other, but I did make and grill some bacon wrapped jalapeno shrimp yesterday while we were tailgating, so there's that.

Love this. You have to have a video of the guy eating that hamburger. Can't do it with the sig but you can put a post up. Whatdayasay?

 

[jobberone]

And it has absolutely nothing to do with the scheme of your defense.

That's true but its not as if it just happened. The Giants didn't lie it down the Cowboys took it away. That's the point.

 

[JohnnyHopkins]

Love this. You have to have a video of the guy eating that hamburger. Can't do it with the sig but you can put a post up. Whatdayasay?

I got the sig from Hypnotoad after Dallas drafted Dez. The doctored pic is all I've got!

 

[TwoDeep3]

I don't agree the team is built with CBs even if you're pointing to Claiborne. There are two number ones on the DL. The DL played much better than the CBs did last nite. Granted they missed some sacks and 'almost' got there too often but they created problems for the Giants. Not sure what happened to Ware either. But you're right. It's not as much whether its a 3-4 or 4-3, you're still playing with guys who have to execute. I admit there are differing personnel for the makeup of the front seven. But we don't play a straight up 4-3 all the time anyway. Last nite I don't remember seeing a lot of different fronts other than the 4-3 but that won't always be the case.

Scandrick - 20 million, Carr 50 million and Clai, a move up to get him. It was a concerted effort to build at the corner back position.

Where a player is drafted is inconsequential. Selvie looked like the best player on the DL last night. And he was going to be watching football on TV this year until Dallas called.

Difference of opinion, perhaps. But this game is still trench warfare and this Dallas team has not focused on finding and implementing pressure and protection.

 

[mrmojo]

The concern I have about the 4-3 is if our corner's are physical enough to play it. I love the pressure of the D-line and the play of our LBs.

 

[jobberone]

I got the sig from Hypnotoad after Dallas drafted Dez. The doctored pic is all I've got!

Let's see. Your confession states you stole your sig from another member without due credit, doctored the pic without copyright permission, and now you say you can't pony up the video. You're going to jail!

 

[ShiningStar]

Man dude, you were so right, we won one game. No one should of ever doubted you.

im telling you, i am good, if i can base all my predictions on ONE game, than i was right about Hambrick, Quincy Carter, and many others, see, dont doubt my wisdom.

 

[jobberone]

Scandrick - 20 million, Carr 50 million and Clai, a move up to get him. It was a concerted effort to build at the corner back position.

Where a player is drafted is inconsequential. Selvie looked like the best player on the DL last night. And he was going to be watching football on TV this year until Dallas called.

Difference of opinion, perhaps. But this game is still trench warfare and this Dallas team has not focused on finding and implementing pressure and protection.

You left Ware and Spencer and Ratliff out of the equation when discussing money spent on assets. I can't say Selvie was the best but I liked his play. A lot. I have to see the coaches film. But Church played well and he's an UDFA so...

I do agree in this scheme you must get pressure and get some sacks as well as take the ball away. And there were enough busted plays last nite to make me concerned the safeties were in part guilty as well as the CBs. But this scheme has always made the slant ins, digs, and seam plays a problem esp if you pull the safeties out of the middle or just influence them enough. I don't know how Kiffin will address the DB play but he'd better come up with something quick.

 

[cowboys2233]

Oh, the Giants were in a 'giving mood'. Give us a break. The Cowboys created those turnovers. Any spin for a negative view, huh?! And while S is a problem still it was more on the CBs and the scheme we gave up most of the passing yardage. While it's still a problem you could at least point your finger in the right direction.

The Cowboys certainly did NOT create the last crucial turnover. That was blind luck. And without it, there is the very real possibility that we lose that game last night. Not that it bothers me all that much, a win is a win and that is especially true when playing division opponents. I am confident that the team will get some things corrected and will play much better in upcoming weeks. But I am also under no illusions about that sham of a game last night. That was not good football, not even close. You cannot hope for or expect to get six turnovers each game, I don't care how much they stressed that in TC. Because when it comes right down to it, a turnover is nearly always the result of a mistake, rather than solid play. So from that standpoint, yes, the Giants gave us six big gifts last night. That was a slopfest and a game in which neither team probably deserved to win. And yes, I saw much of the same last night that has doomed us in past years. Total inability to hold onto a lead, all too frequent miscommunication between QB and receivers, blown coverages, and not especially good play calling or game management. They just didn't look very prepared at all.

But again, I'll take the victory any day, especially with so much of the season left to get things right.

 

[Hoods]

And it has absolutely nothing to do with the scheme of your defense.

The scheme came with the better coaching. Even you can pick up on that. Don't play dumb.

 

[VThokie7]

Perhaps you should give it more than one game before patting yourself on the back? Lets not forget Kevin Ogletree was a hero after week one last year, how did that turn out? I'm not saying the defensive line won't play well, but lets give it some time.

Not to mention the defense was far from stellar, I'm not sure how 400+ yards to Eli and 3 TD's to Cruz can be so easily overlooked. There is room for improvement after last night, much like every other team in the NFL.

 

[jobberone]

The Cowboys certainly did NOT create the last crucial turnover. That was blind luck. And without it, there is the very real possibility that we lose that game last night. Not that it bothers me all that much, a win is a win and that is especially true when playing division opponents. I am confident that the team will get some things corrected and will play much better in upcoming weeks. But I am also under no illusions about that sham of a game last night. That was not good football, not even close. You cannot hope for or expect to get six turnovers each game, I don't care how much they stressed that in TC. Because when it comes right down to it, a turnover is nearly always the result of a mistake, rather than solid play. So from that standpoint, yes, the Giants gave us six big gifts last night. That was a slopfest and a game in which neither team probably deserved to win. And yes, I saw much of the same last night that has doomed us in past years. Total inability to hold onto a lead, all too frequent miscommunication between QB and receivers, blown coverages, and not especially good play calling or game management. They just didn't look very prepared at all.

But again, I'll take the victory any day, especially with so much of the season left to get things right.

I don't believe I argued the point we played exceptionally well in all areas. First, don't pick out one turnover to negate the point that the Cowboys took the ball away from the Giants. That's just unreasonable. Granted the last turnover was not a strip but the player was in the right area to make the play and that's part of the game. I could argue that in years past the player would have dropped the ball or fumbled it enough to not score yada yada. Saying all turnovers are from mistakes is just incorrect as well. They were looking to strip the ball all night and it paid off. To say they were gifts is just to defend an untenable position. And no, you cannot hope for six turnovers every game.

I won't tell you what you saw but I saw a lot of things that were different. The intensity was greater. Much greater. There was greater effort, gang tackling and better tackling. The OL played much better. Romo had a lot of time to throw last night. They don't show downfield so I'll have to look at the coaches film to see why they weren't open at times. The run blocking was better. We gained 87 yards at 3.8 which if a good bit better than last year. Our scoring % was 39% which is much better as well. I was disappointed with our yards per play and yards per catch but a lot of that was the way the Giants played us. We only turned the ball over once and that was on the WR. We didn't commit the amount of penalties as last year although it needs to improve. The big problem last nite was giving up all that yardage to the in slants. And we didn't improve our RZ scoring enough to please me.

I don't think many people are going to take you seriously when you call the game a sham. It played out like many NYG/Dallas games of late have. So are the Giants a sham, too?

There are areas of concern and areas that can improve. There were areas of improvement in several areas. So no, I wouldn't call it a sham.

 

[cowboys2233]

I don't think many people are going to take you seriously when you call the game a sham. It played out like many NYG/Dallas games of late have. So are the Giants a sham, too?

There are areas of concern and areas that can improve. There were areas of improvement in several areas. So no, I wouldn't call it a sham.

Why so sensitive? I made it pretty clear that I called the game a sham, not the teams. And I don't care if there are some folks out there who don't take me seriously for calling that game a sham last night, because those folks are so blinded by homerism or are just utterly clueless about what they're seeing that it doesn't matter anyway. Nor did I say that all turnovers are from mistakes, I said most. And they are. A running back that has the ball properly secured should not fumble the ball, regardless of how many players are grabbing for it. That's not even debatable. You may have the occasional interception where a defender did something spectacular to come up with the interception, but in large part, they too are due to mistakes. Either the receiver ran the wrong route, the QB threw a bad pass, etc.

And trust me, I'm not alone it calling that game a sloppy mess. We got six turnovers and Eli had the ball with 3 minutes left, only down by six points. That's the reality. And it wasn't because we were playing sound, fundamental football. It was a gross travesty of a game with breakdowns and mistakes all over the field.

 

[TwoDeep3]

You left Ware and Spencer and Ratliff out of the equation when discussing money spent on assets. I can't say Selvie was the best but I liked his play. A lot. I have to see the coaches film. But Church played well and he's an UDFA so...

I do agree in this scheme you must get pressure and get some sacks as well as take the ball away. And there were enough busted plays last nite to make me concerned the safeties were in part guilty as well as the CBs. But this scheme has always made the slant ins, digs, and seam plays a problem esp if you pull the safeties out of the middle or just influence them enough. I don't know how Kiffin will address the DB play but he'd better come up with something quick.

This is where we agree.

But a word of advice, be careful. You are sounding like me now...:C)

 

[jobberone]

Why so sensitive? I made it pretty clear that I called the game a sham, not the teams. And I don't care if there are some folks out there who don't take me seriously for calling that game a sham last night, because those folks are so blinded by homerism or are just utterly clueless about what they're seeing that it doesn't matter anyway. Nor did I say that all turnovers are from mistakes, I said most. And they are. A running back that has the ball properly secured should not fumble the ball, regardless of how many players are grabbing for it. That's not even debatable. You may have the occasional interception where a defender did something spectacular to come up with the interception, but in large part, they too are due to mistakes. Either the receiver ran the wrong route, the QB threw a bad pass, etc.

And trust me, I'm not alone it calling that game a sloppy mess. We got six turnovers and Eli had the ball with 3 minutes left, only down by six points. That's the reality. And it wasn't because we were playing sound, fundamental football. It was a gross travesty of a game with breakdowns and mistakes all over the field.

I'm not being sensitive. I didn't say you called the teams a sham either. Not going to get into a tit for tat with you. If you make profound statements don't get sensitive about someone objecting.

 

[jobberone]

This is where we agree.

But a word of advice, be careful. You are sounding like me now...:C)

I generally see both sides of an equation.

 

[TwoDeep3]

I generally see both sides of an equation.

Must keep you up at night.