jday
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 9,321
- Reaction score
- 13,284
`
Imagine…
…you have just arrived home after a long arduous day of unappreciated work. A migraine is toying with your brain and the drive home features a setting sun pouring through your windshield (as your home is situated to the West of your office) and the typical raucous noises of traffic, as everyone postures as though by right they should be allowed to proceed to their own homes unimpeded at whatever speed they deem appropriate and/or necessary…a blaring horn awaits the car whose driving habits would suggest otherwise.
You leave the clamor of the outside world behind you only to discover a much more disconcerting noise inside your safe haven as your two young boys are screaming at each other huddled around a broken vase; an antiquated vessel that has been in the family for generations (supposedly). It was lauded as real crystal, but based on the shattered mess between the two ruffians, you might guess it is glass after all; but as your wife will later point out, what it is made of doesn’t matter…what it represented does.
Based on the shouting match that is occurring following your brief surface level investigation, both parties surrounding the recently deceased vase vehemently believe in their own innocence and the guilt of the other party. Following an examination of both stories, each perfectly slanted towards revealing the guilt of their brother, you determine that both boys were engaged in a game of catch, and while one boy is certainly guilty of throwing the ball, the other boy is guilty of allowing it to bounce off his hands and hit the vase, which resulted in the crime scene on the ceramic floor.
Which boy is guilty?
Both boys, of course. They shouldn’t have been playing catch in the house in the first place. As a father of two boys (8 & 5), that’s a judgement I could make in my sleep without need for a second thought or extended deliberation. Both will be subjected to a prolonged dose of bear crawling, flutter kicks, and wall squats. As a former military man I believe punishment should be both productive and educational.
The mystery Cowboys nation faces, however, is nowhere close to being as simple to determine fault. Let’s consider the evidence in Sunday’s epically disappointing disaster:
- The Cowboys defense allowed the Packers to score 28 points. Allowing a team in the NFL any more than 17 points means you got some splainin’ to do.
- The prevent defense that prevents nothing.
- Jaylon and Heath look woefully inept in coverage and average (and usually a hair late) in run support.
- The Cowboys offense scored 31 points. Ordinarily, if you score 31 points in the NFL, you did your job and therefore are immune to further scrutiny…however…
- Terrance Williams allowed a pass to bounce off his chest into the air and into the waiting hands of a defender who then ran it in for what would turn into 7 points for the Packers.
- The infamous 2nd and 2 pass that stopped the clock with more than a minute left in regulation and saved the Packers a timeout. Anyone who witnessed last year’s improbable comeback win in the playoffs featuring Aaron Rodgers heroics knows you don’t leave him with time on the clock….he will make you pay…which he once again did.
- The Dak walk-in score and taking the lead versus sliding at the 1 to milk more time and hope to score in the closing seconds of the game.
At the end of the day, ultimately, this loss is on the defense by merit of surrendering those 28 points. If you are looking to point to one person versus blaming that entire side of the ball, look no further than their revered leader, Rod Marinelli.
But tread lightly in this blame game because second-guessing is easy to do in hindsight. The question ultimately becomes when pointing the finger at Marinelli, should you bravely elect to do so, is what would you have done differently that would absolutely be better and would have led to a Cowboys win?
Some may just make my job easy and say, “They should have blitzed more!” Blitzing is great when it actually works, when it doesn’t, great players like Aaron Rodgers simply make you look stupid. As it turns out, the Cowboys faced both a great player and coincidentally, Aaron Rodgers, at the same time on Sunday.
“Well, they should have run a different defense from prevent. Prevent only prevents you from winning!” And yet, prevent is a necessary cog in situational football. Please name the defensive coordinator that doesn’t use some form of prevent when attempting to prevent a team from getting into scoring range at the end of a half.
Any type of play, be it situational or part of the gameplan, comes down to execution and whether or not you have the right players to do so. The problem is the latter part of that equation; the Cowboys secondary, in its present form, is a combination of first and second year players, players dealing with injury or recovering from injury (Anthony Brown, Chidobe Awuzie, Jourdan Lewis, and Jaylon Smith) Byron Jones (who may be better suited as a corner) and Jeff Heath, who would likely have been a great Strong Safety in the 90’s, before Safeties were asked to cover, despite the questionable angles to the ball he has a tendency to take.
Sometimes you run prevent in situations not because it is a great option, but because it is the only smart option…especially against a great quarterback like Aaron Rodgers.
If you say, for instance, “I wouldn’t have Heath out there and I wouldn’t rely on Jaylon right now,” the question then becomes who then would you play in their stead and do you know beyond a shadow of a doubt that player (presently on the 53 man roster) is an upgrade over Heath and Jaylon?
This is where the blame game becomes all the more dicey, because most might say, “well, I wouldn’t have let Church, Carr, Claiborne, Wilcox go in the offseason in the first place.”
The issue there is we have just moved the blame from Marinelli to the front office, as he has little to do, at the end of the day, with player acquisition. So which is it, Marinelli or the front office? To which the individual will likely say, “The front office.”
Obviously the next question becomes, so we should have paid (Carr, Church, Claiborne, Wlcox) more than what they are really worth, severely jeopardizing our ability to keep the players we have deemed worthy of an extension? You want to keep the same player that you likely screamed at the television should be cut/released in 2016? We say year after year the Cowboys defense needs to generate more turnovers to help that elite offense out, and you are now suggesting we should keep trying to improve that stat with the same players? Need I remind you of Einstein’s definition of insanity?
To which this fictional person may respond, “They didn’t have to let all of them walk; they should have at least kept one of the big three (Carr, Claiborne, Church).
Of course, my next question would be who should we have overpaid?
- Carr, who was largely a disappointment in his tenure here, was typically good for a busted coverage in every game he played, had no speed to keep up with the faster receivers, was lost in zone coverage and matched up against #1 receivers was bound to get abused and embarrassed.
- Claiborne, who beyond his inconsistent flashes of brilliance was an injury waiting to happen. After all, availability will always be a player’s best ability and he was hurt more than he was healthy over the course of his NFL career. Do you really want to throw more money at someone who based on previous experience likely will not be available to you for the entire season?
- Church, who was a great team leader, but quite simply did not have the athleticism to cover today’s NFL Tight Ends which is now a prerequisite of Safeties in today’s pass-happy NFL.
Remember, keeping any of the above means over-paying, which also means keeping players deserving of a higher salary (such as Zack Martin) may become impossible as a result of the salary cap and would also mean sending a young player currently on the 53 home (if either corner is kept, we likely don’t draft Jourdan Lewis / if Church is kept, we likely don’t draft Woods). I care not to guess what you or anyone would say after that, because anything other than backing off of the front office would make you or anyone else look like an idiot…to me, at least.
In the early going of the decisions to allow so much of the secondary to seek greener pastures in this past offseason, I’m guessing they knew there would be struggles early in the 2017 season as the young players learned their craft, but with their high-powered offense they could weather the growing pains. They were 11 points shy of being right; the Cowboys lost by 5 points to the Rams and 4 points to the Packers; had the Cowboys scored 6 more two weeks ago and 5 more this past Sunday, the Cowboys would be sitting at 4 and 1, instead of 2 and 3.
While on the topic of revisionist history that some of you are already planning on attacking me on for the above sentiment, allow me also to briefly point out that going into this offseason, the front office did not know about Doug Free retiring. In fact, per my quick Google search, Free did not make an announcement that he was considering said retirement until March of this year, right before the draft.
So, for those who have criticized their contingency plan to make the Cowboys running game great again, please keep in mind their first choice would have had Leary replaced by La’el Collins and Green would have continued to be the Swing Tackle.
You might then counter that the Cowboys should have drafted a viable replacement, to which I would have to ask, “Who should they have drafted?” The Giants, whose offensive line woes are notorious, drafted a TE in the first round. That should give you an idea of what they thought of the offensive line options available this year. And the Cowboys draft board, by that point, was already built around the idea that beyond Leary, they would return all of their 2016 offensive line starters. Free’s late retirement threw a huge wrench in their plans. But like all front offices must do from time to time, they rolled with the punches and decided to place faith in the ingredients they already had in the cupboard. Whether said faith was misplaced is a bit premature to say, however, having scored at minimum 30 points in their last two engagements suggest they chose wisely.
The next step for an individual making this argument is likely to back track and resume the tact that Marinelli is in fact at fault. But with the return, we must once again ask the question, “Who should he have played in Heath’s / Jaylon’s stead? Behind Heath is a combination of first and second year players. Are you all that certain Woods, Awuzie, or Frazier would have fared better in Heath’s place against one of the best quarterbacks to ever strap on a helmet in the NFL? Behind Jaylon is Wilson, the aging Justin Durant and a collection of no-names, so once again you are likely to move back to blaming the front office for not addressing either position in the offseason. After all, we are well past the front office setting the table; at this point Marinelli has to prepare this meal with the ingredients he has.
The above point is not intended to excuse the current state of the Cowboys; I’m not saying the Cowboys will be fine and will overcome their current position in the standings. They may do so, they may not…that’s besides my point. My point is the Cowboys are close. They do not suck, as some would have us believe. They are just not quite good enough yet….and there is plenty of time to right this ship, getting a healthy Sean Lee back in the lineup likely being the critical component to greatness going forward.
Now to address those whose pitchforks are aimed at the Cowboys offense:
Regardless of how much time the Cowboys left Aaron Rodgers to work with in the closing minutes of yesterday’s contest, the Cowboys offense did their job. Had the Cowboys had a lead, Dak sliding at the 1 to milk more clock would have made a lot of sense. However, considering how hard fought every inch had been up to that point, him taking the lead when the lead was there for the taking was absolutely understandable and justifiable. A score from one yard out simply is not a given so when you need better than a field goal to take the lead you take the points however you can get them whenever you can get them. Taking the lead, trumps managing the clock in that situation.
The pass on second and two was a little less understandable, however, taking another loss on a run play the Packers were absolutely expecting could have been damning; a field goal in that situation would have meant the Cowboys are still down by 1 point. With less than two minutes left they had to have a touchdown and went for it there. All context considered, while maybe not the best play, by far not the worst which would have been taking a loss in yardage or, of course, throwing an interception, which would have effectively ended the game there.
To be honest, I’m a bit flummoxed by the narratives presently attacking the Cowboys offense. They have clearly struggled at times, however, at other times they have absolutely imposed their will; something that is not easily accomplished against any NFL team, given the parity in this league. And for those who recall 2016 clearly, you will remember this offense really did not start clicking on all cylinders until the Bengals game, which was 5 games in. This past Sunday was their fifth game and the offense did absolutely look the best it has all season; the final score, unfortunately, disguises that otherwise positive gleaned from the game.
If you have already given up on the season, your outcry to fire the coaches are somewhat understandable, but I believe also misguided. The Cowboys have been close in every loss for the exception of the loss to the Broncos (and the Broncos are notoriously difficult to play against at Mile High….just ask Tom Brady). If the Cowboys were 0 & 5 and losing by double-digits in every contest, this “Fire the Coaches” banner many are now wearing would be defensible.
I, for one, am nowhere close to giving up because I have seen enough football in my lifetime to understand that what a team looks like 5 games in to the season does not define who they are and how they will finish. If you have been watching other teams throughout the league, your concern, however, is certainly warranted. Right now the Cowboys look like the third best team in the NFCE, behind the Commanders and the Eagles. And that is likely not going to change until the Cowboys are given the opportunity to play both teams. But this is not college football; public and so-called expert opinions mean absolutely nothing in the now.
Throughout the history of football there have been several instances where teams started out slow and finished strong. And those teams that finished strong had a tendency to carry that over into the playoffs all the way to the Super Bowl. We should all know this because as Cowboys fans we have seen our team be the stepping stone to those teams that got hot at the right time. Be it as the first seed or as a Wild Card that barely slips its way in, the Cowboys still have a shot. And personally, I kinda hope the Cowboys last game is a win-and-in scenario for the last Wild Card spot. At least then we won’t have to worry about this team taking their pedal off the gas to preserve their starters when they should be putting the pedal on the floor.
Thoughts?
Imagine…
…you have just arrived home after a long arduous day of unappreciated work. A migraine is toying with your brain and the drive home features a setting sun pouring through your windshield (as your home is situated to the West of your office) and the typical raucous noises of traffic, as everyone postures as though by right they should be allowed to proceed to their own homes unimpeded at whatever speed they deem appropriate and/or necessary…a blaring horn awaits the car whose driving habits would suggest otherwise.
You leave the clamor of the outside world behind you only to discover a much more disconcerting noise inside your safe haven as your two young boys are screaming at each other huddled around a broken vase; an antiquated vessel that has been in the family for generations (supposedly). It was lauded as real crystal, but based on the shattered mess between the two ruffians, you might guess it is glass after all; but as your wife will later point out, what it is made of doesn’t matter…what it represented does.
Based on the shouting match that is occurring following your brief surface level investigation, both parties surrounding the recently deceased vase vehemently believe in their own innocence and the guilt of the other party. Following an examination of both stories, each perfectly slanted towards revealing the guilt of their brother, you determine that both boys were engaged in a game of catch, and while one boy is certainly guilty of throwing the ball, the other boy is guilty of allowing it to bounce off his hands and hit the vase, which resulted in the crime scene on the ceramic floor.
Which boy is guilty?
Both boys, of course. They shouldn’t have been playing catch in the house in the first place. As a father of two boys (8 & 5), that’s a judgement I could make in my sleep without need for a second thought or extended deliberation. Both will be subjected to a prolonged dose of bear crawling, flutter kicks, and wall squats. As a former military man I believe punishment should be both productive and educational.
The mystery Cowboys nation faces, however, is nowhere close to being as simple to determine fault. Let’s consider the evidence in Sunday’s epically disappointing disaster:
- The Cowboys defense allowed the Packers to score 28 points. Allowing a team in the NFL any more than 17 points means you got some splainin’ to do.
- The prevent defense that prevents nothing.
- Jaylon and Heath look woefully inept in coverage and average (and usually a hair late) in run support.
- The Cowboys offense scored 31 points. Ordinarily, if you score 31 points in the NFL, you did your job and therefore are immune to further scrutiny…however…
- Terrance Williams allowed a pass to bounce off his chest into the air and into the waiting hands of a defender who then ran it in for what would turn into 7 points for the Packers.
- The infamous 2nd and 2 pass that stopped the clock with more than a minute left in regulation and saved the Packers a timeout. Anyone who witnessed last year’s improbable comeback win in the playoffs featuring Aaron Rodgers heroics knows you don’t leave him with time on the clock….he will make you pay…which he once again did.
- The Dak walk-in score and taking the lead versus sliding at the 1 to milk more time and hope to score in the closing seconds of the game.
At the end of the day, ultimately, this loss is on the defense by merit of surrendering those 28 points. If you are looking to point to one person versus blaming that entire side of the ball, look no further than their revered leader, Rod Marinelli.
But tread lightly in this blame game because second-guessing is easy to do in hindsight. The question ultimately becomes when pointing the finger at Marinelli, should you bravely elect to do so, is what would you have done differently that would absolutely be better and would have led to a Cowboys win?
Some may just make my job easy and say, “They should have blitzed more!” Blitzing is great when it actually works, when it doesn’t, great players like Aaron Rodgers simply make you look stupid. As it turns out, the Cowboys faced both a great player and coincidentally, Aaron Rodgers, at the same time on Sunday.
“Well, they should have run a different defense from prevent. Prevent only prevents you from winning!” And yet, prevent is a necessary cog in situational football. Please name the defensive coordinator that doesn’t use some form of prevent when attempting to prevent a team from getting into scoring range at the end of a half.
Any type of play, be it situational or part of the gameplan, comes down to execution and whether or not you have the right players to do so. The problem is the latter part of that equation; the Cowboys secondary, in its present form, is a combination of first and second year players, players dealing with injury or recovering from injury (Anthony Brown, Chidobe Awuzie, Jourdan Lewis, and Jaylon Smith) Byron Jones (who may be better suited as a corner) and Jeff Heath, who would likely have been a great Strong Safety in the 90’s, before Safeties were asked to cover, despite the questionable angles to the ball he has a tendency to take.
Sometimes you run prevent in situations not because it is a great option, but because it is the only smart option…especially against a great quarterback like Aaron Rodgers.
If you say, for instance, “I wouldn’t have Heath out there and I wouldn’t rely on Jaylon right now,” the question then becomes who then would you play in their stead and do you know beyond a shadow of a doubt that player (presently on the 53 man roster) is an upgrade over Heath and Jaylon?
This is where the blame game becomes all the more dicey, because most might say, “well, I wouldn’t have let Church, Carr, Claiborne, Wilcox go in the offseason in the first place.”
The issue there is we have just moved the blame from Marinelli to the front office, as he has little to do, at the end of the day, with player acquisition. So which is it, Marinelli or the front office? To which the individual will likely say, “The front office.”
Obviously the next question becomes, so we should have paid (Carr, Church, Claiborne, Wlcox) more than what they are really worth, severely jeopardizing our ability to keep the players we have deemed worthy of an extension? You want to keep the same player that you likely screamed at the television should be cut/released in 2016? We say year after year the Cowboys defense needs to generate more turnovers to help that elite offense out, and you are now suggesting we should keep trying to improve that stat with the same players? Need I remind you of Einstein’s definition of insanity?
To which this fictional person may respond, “They didn’t have to let all of them walk; they should have at least kept one of the big three (Carr, Claiborne, Church).
Of course, my next question would be who should we have overpaid?
- Carr, who was largely a disappointment in his tenure here, was typically good for a busted coverage in every game he played, had no speed to keep up with the faster receivers, was lost in zone coverage and matched up against #1 receivers was bound to get abused and embarrassed.
- Claiborne, who beyond his inconsistent flashes of brilliance was an injury waiting to happen. After all, availability will always be a player’s best ability and he was hurt more than he was healthy over the course of his NFL career. Do you really want to throw more money at someone who based on previous experience likely will not be available to you for the entire season?
- Church, who was a great team leader, but quite simply did not have the athleticism to cover today’s NFL Tight Ends which is now a prerequisite of Safeties in today’s pass-happy NFL.
Remember, keeping any of the above means over-paying, which also means keeping players deserving of a higher salary (such as Zack Martin) may become impossible as a result of the salary cap and would also mean sending a young player currently on the 53 home (if either corner is kept, we likely don’t draft Jourdan Lewis / if Church is kept, we likely don’t draft Woods). I care not to guess what you or anyone would say after that, because anything other than backing off of the front office would make you or anyone else look like an idiot…to me, at least.
In the early going of the decisions to allow so much of the secondary to seek greener pastures in this past offseason, I’m guessing they knew there would be struggles early in the 2017 season as the young players learned their craft, but with their high-powered offense they could weather the growing pains. They were 11 points shy of being right; the Cowboys lost by 5 points to the Rams and 4 points to the Packers; had the Cowboys scored 6 more two weeks ago and 5 more this past Sunday, the Cowboys would be sitting at 4 and 1, instead of 2 and 3.
While on the topic of revisionist history that some of you are already planning on attacking me on for the above sentiment, allow me also to briefly point out that going into this offseason, the front office did not know about Doug Free retiring. In fact, per my quick Google search, Free did not make an announcement that he was considering said retirement until March of this year, right before the draft.
So, for those who have criticized their contingency plan to make the Cowboys running game great again, please keep in mind their first choice would have had Leary replaced by La’el Collins and Green would have continued to be the Swing Tackle.
You might then counter that the Cowboys should have drafted a viable replacement, to which I would have to ask, “Who should they have drafted?” The Giants, whose offensive line woes are notorious, drafted a TE in the first round. That should give you an idea of what they thought of the offensive line options available this year. And the Cowboys draft board, by that point, was already built around the idea that beyond Leary, they would return all of their 2016 offensive line starters. Free’s late retirement threw a huge wrench in their plans. But like all front offices must do from time to time, they rolled with the punches and decided to place faith in the ingredients they already had in the cupboard. Whether said faith was misplaced is a bit premature to say, however, having scored at minimum 30 points in their last two engagements suggest they chose wisely.
The next step for an individual making this argument is likely to back track and resume the tact that Marinelli is in fact at fault. But with the return, we must once again ask the question, “Who should he have played in Heath’s / Jaylon’s stead? Behind Heath is a combination of first and second year players. Are you all that certain Woods, Awuzie, or Frazier would have fared better in Heath’s place against one of the best quarterbacks to ever strap on a helmet in the NFL? Behind Jaylon is Wilson, the aging Justin Durant and a collection of no-names, so once again you are likely to move back to blaming the front office for not addressing either position in the offseason. After all, we are well past the front office setting the table; at this point Marinelli has to prepare this meal with the ingredients he has.
The above point is not intended to excuse the current state of the Cowboys; I’m not saying the Cowboys will be fine and will overcome their current position in the standings. They may do so, they may not…that’s besides my point. My point is the Cowboys are close. They do not suck, as some would have us believe. They are just not quite good enough yet….and there is plenty of time to right this ship, getting a healthy Sean Lee back in the lineup likely being the critical component to greatness going forward.
Now to address those whose pitchforks are aimed at the Cowboys offense:
Regardless of how much time the Cowboys left Aaron Rodgers to work with in the closing minutes of yesterday’s contest, the Cowboys offense did their job. Had the Cowboys had a lead, Dak sliding at the 1 to milk more clock would have made a lot of sense. However, considering how hard fought every inch had been up to that point, him taking the lead when the lead was there for the taking was absolutely understandable and justifiable. A score from one yard out simply is not a given so when you need better than a field goal to take the lead you take the points however you can get them whenever you can get them. Taking the lead, trumps managing the clock in that situation.
The pass on second and two was a little less understandable, however, taking another loss on a run play the Packers were absolutely expecting could have been damning; a field goal in that situation would have meant the Cowboys are still down by 1 point. With less than two minutes left they had to have a touchdown and went for it there. All context considered, while maybe not the best play, by far not the worst which would have been taking a loss in yardage or, of course, throwing an interception, which would have effectively ended the game there.
To be honest, I’m a bit flummoxed by the narratives presently attacking the Cowboys offense. They have clearly struggled at times, however, at other times they have absolutely imposed their will; something that is not easily accomplished against any NFL team, given the parity in this league. And for those who recall 2016 clearly, you will remember this offense really did not start clicking on all cylinders until the Bengals game, which was 5 games in. This past Sunday was their fifth game and the offense did absolutely look the best it has all season; the final score, unfortunately, disguises that otherwise positive gleaned from the game.
If you have already given up on the season, your outcry to fire the coaches are somewhat understandable, but I believe also misguided. The Cowboys have been close in every loss for the exception of the loss to the Broncos (and the Broncos are notoriously difficult to play against at Mile High….just ask Tom Brady). If the Cowboys were 0 & 5 and losing by double-digits in every contest, this “Fire the Coaches” banner many are now wearing would be defensible.
I, for one, am nowhere close to giving up because I have seen enough football in my lifetime to understand that what a team looks like 5 games in to the season does not define who they are and how they will finish. If you have been watching other teams throughout the league, your concern, however, is certainly warranted. Right now the Cowboys look like the third best team in the NFCE, behind the Commanders and the Eagles. And that is likely not going to change until the Cowboys are given the opportunity to play both teams. But this is not college football; public and so-called expert opinions mean absolutely nothing in the now.
Throughout the history of football there have been several instances where teams started out slow and finished strong. And those teams that finished strong had a tendency to carry that over into the playoffs all the way to the Super Bowl. We should all know this because as Cowboys fans we have seen our team be the stepping stone to those teams that got hot at the right time. Be it as the first seed or as a Wild Card that barely slips its way in, the Cowboys still have a shot. And personally, I kinda hope the Cowboys last game is a win-and-in scenario for the last Wild Card spot. At least then we won’t have to worry about this team taking their pedal off the gas to preserve their starters when they should be putting the pedal on the floor.
Thoughts?
