Staubach and the Doomsday D

[gimmesix]

First, let me say that I have much respect for Roger Staubach. However, I was watching the 1977 NFC Championship Game and thought after he overthrew a short TD pass to Drew Pearson about how much his career might be different if Dallas didn't have the Doomsday Defense.

The Cowboys beat the Minnesota Vikings 23-6 to reach the Super Bowl, but turnovers and the defense were the main reason for the victory. Staubach had a few nice passes, and Dorsett and Newhouse had a few nice runs, but the defense hardly gave up anything and more than made up for it with the turnovers it forced (although the back-breaker came on special teams).

I know there are many who judge quarterbacks on winning and Super Bowls, but games like this just show how much of a team game football is. One missed TD throw might end up costing a team with a poor defense, but it didn't mar Staubach's career because the defense never really let the Vikings into the game.

Just thought I'd share that example. I'm not trying to diminish Staubach's accomplishments (you can find missed TD throws by other great QBs that didn't affect the result). I just think of other QBs who never got the benefit of having one big mistake be inconsequential.

 

[BourbonBalz]

It was a totally different game then. The rules at that time greatly benefitted defenses, while they’ve been changed over the last two decades or so to give offenses a huge edge.

 

[Techsass]

I seem to remember quite a few 10-7 games

 

[Ranching]

First, let me say that I have much respect for Roger Staubach. However, I was watching the 1977 NFC Championship Game and thought after he overthrew a short TD pass to Drew Pearson about how much his career might be different if Dallas didn't have the Doomsday Defense.

The Cowboys beat the Minnesota Vikings 23-6 to reach the Super Bowl, but turnovers and the defense were the main reason for the victory. Staubach had a few nice passes, and Dorsett and Newhouse had a few nice runs, but the defense hardly gave up anything and more than made up for it with the turnovers it forced (although the back-breaker came on special teams).

I know there are many who judge quarterbacks on winning and Super Bowls, but games like this just show how much of a team game football is. One missed TD throw might end up costing a team with a poor defense, but it didn't mar Staubach's career because the defense never really let the Vikings into the game.

Just thought I'd share that example. I'm not trying to diminish Staubach's accomplishments (you can find missed TD throws by other great QBs that didn't affect the result). I just think of other QBs who never got the benefit of having one big mistake be inconsequential.

GARRETT was a better QB than Roger!!!!!

 

[cowboyblue22]

DOOMSDAY WAS GOOD BUT SO WAS ROGER WHEN A PLAY NEEDED TO BE MADE HE WOULD COME THROUGH

 

[Tangle_Foot]

Team sport. Th-Th-Th- That's All Folks

 

[gimmesix]

It was a totally different game then. The rules at that time greatly benefitted defenses, while they’ve been changed over the last two decades or so to give offenses a huge edge.

I don't disagree with this. I think Roger threw 23 passes. The other QB (name escapes) threw around 29. Lots of runs on first and second down, few downfield throws. QBs certainly weren't asked to do as much.

However, whether it's the 1970s Cowboys or the 1990s Cowboys, having defenses like we had makes it easier to overcome mistakes by the QB or even carry them when they have a bad game. Staubach and Aikman both were beneficiaries of great running games and great defenses. That doesn't mean that they didn't contribute or step up when they needed to, just that not every play by the QB was as critical as it was during Romo's time here and now Dak's as well.

I'm hoping we're getting to the point where our defense can keep that from always being the case. We had top-ranked defenses during those Super Bowl years. You can win without having them, but it certainly makes it easier on your QB when you do.

 

[gimmesix]

DOOMSDAY WAS GOOD BUT SO WAS ROGER WHEN A PLAY NEEDED TO BE MADE HE WOULD COME THROUGH

And maybe he would have if the defense hadn't been good enough to hold the Vikings to six points, but the point is, he didn't have to. Staubach could be human and the defense would bail him out.

I don't know how either he or Aikman would have done on these 2000s teams, but it would have been much more challenging for them.

 

[gimmesix]

GARRETT was a better QB than Roger!!!!!

Nah. But Quincy Carter would have been if you surrounded him with a defense that never gave up a point and an offensive line and running backs who couldn't be stopped. Oh yeah, and a genius head coach, too, like Dave Campo.

 

[Jake]

First, let me say that I have much respect for Roger Staubach. However, I was watching the 1977 NFC Championship Game and thought after he overthrew a short TD pass to Drew Pearson about how much his career might be different if Dallas didn't have the Doomsday Defense.

The Cowboys beat the Minnesota Vikings 23-6 to reach the Super Bowl, but turnovers and the defense were the main reason for the victory. Staubach had a few nice passes, and Dorsett and Newhouse had a few nice runs, but the defense hardly gave up anything and more than made up for it with the turnovers it forced (although the back-breaker came on special teams).

I know there are many who judge quarterbacks on winning and Super Bowls, but games like this just show how much of a team game football is. One missed TD throw might end up costing a team with a poor defense, but it didn't mar Staubach's career because the defense never really let the Vikings into the game.

Just thought I'd share that example. I'm not trying to diminish Staubach's accomplishments (you can find missed TD throws by other great QBs that didn't affect the result). I just think of other QBs who never got the benefit of having one big mistake be inconsequential.

Staubach, like every other QB in Cowboys history, never won a playoff game where the opponent scored 30 or more points. He's still the greatest.

Why? Because it's ridiculous for "fans" to expect the offense to score however many it takes even when the defense is getting run over. It's a team game.

 

[gimmesix]

Staubach, like every other QB in Cowboys history, never won a playoff game where the opponent scored 30 or more points. He's still the greatest.

Why? Because it's ridiculous for "fans" to expect the offense to score however many it takes even when the defense is getting run over. It's a team game.

It's why I think winning/record is an unfair way to judge quarterbacks.

Staubach can just be OK against Minnesota and it's no big deal, Dallas makes the Super Bowl anyway, Stauback gets the win on his record and he gets a Super Bowl appearance (and, ultimately, win) to his credit. QBs with bad defenses can be great for most of a game, but make one overthrow or underthrow and they weren't good enough because the team loses, which means they get a loss on their record.

I like watching historic games because I think we sometimes tend to put players like Staubach up on a pedestal, remembering them as perfect or infallible when that definitely wasn't the case. He was a great player in the right place at the right time.

 

[big dog cowboy]

The Cowboys beat the Minnesota Vikings 23-6 to reach the Super Bowl, but turnovers and the defense were the main reason for the victory. Staubach had a few nice passes, and Dorsett and Newhouse had a few nice runs, but the defense hardly gave up anything and more than made up for it with the turnovers it forced (although the back-breaker came on special teams)

Putting up 23 points on the Purple People Eaters despite the turnovers wasn't easy to do in those days.

 

[Jake]

It's why I think winning/record is an unfair way to judge quarterbacks.

Staubach can just be OK against Minnesota and it's no big deal, Dallas makes the Super Bowl anyway, Stauback gets the win on his record and he gets a Super Bowl appearance (and, ultimately, win) to his credit. QBs with bad defenses can be great for most of a game, but make one overthrow or underthrow and they weren't good enough because the team loses, which means they get a loss on their record.

I like watching historic games because I think we sometimes tend to put players like Staubach up on a pedestal, remembering them as perfect or infallible when that definitely wasn't the case. He was a great player in the right place at the right time.

These days the defense can give up 30 - or 40 - points and "fans" run to the internet to blame the QB for not putting 41 on the board. Defenses get a pass too often.

 

[Jake]

Putting up 23 points on the Purple People Eaters despite the turnovers wasn't easy to do in those days.

The Rams could only manage 7 against those same Vikings a week earlier, and it took them 59 minutes to get on the board at all.

 

[doomsday9084]

As everyone has said, its a team game. While Aikman, Emmitt and Michael get most of the love for the JJ superbowls, the team had a devastating offensive line and a top ranked defense. As people are getting to in this thread, the same was true in the 70's. What wins games in the NFL is a well rounded team. You can't just have a superstar QB and a bunch of poor players and expect anything. That's why the top 6 paid QB's in the NFL missed the playoffs last year.

Giving QB credit for the wins and all the blame for losses is asinine. It used to kill me when the Cowboys would lose 40-35 or something with Romo as QB and the media would circle one mistake by him as the reason for the loss while ignoring the fact that virtually everyone else on the team crapped the bed.

 

[joseephuss]

The Rams could only manage 7 against those same Vikings a week earlier, and it took them 59 minutes to get on the board at all.

I think the Rams not having a great QB really is what prevented them from getting a championship in the 70s.

A team then and now could appear in or even win a Superbowl with an average QB if they were strong in other areas. Everything has to fall just right for a season, but it is much more difficult to have yearly playoff success. A team with an average QB may make a deep run one year and then may not even make the playoffs the following season. Having a great QB on a strong team gives that team a better than decent chance every year. That doesn't mean they win a SB every season, but they will make a good run every year. That is what Dallas did with Staubach. If the Cowboys didn't have Staubach in the 70s, I don't think they have the same consistent playoff success. He needed a good defense and the defense needed a great QB.

 

[Cowboysfan917]

I wish I would’ve gotten to watch Roger play but I was born in 1990. I try to find any game I can and watch old games just to catch a glimpse.

Here is a little perspective: I was born in 1990 and I knew who Staubach was LONG before I knew who Danny White was. My point? Staubach had the rings which brought the legacy. White had the stats but no rings and history did not remember that as much.

 

[Number1]

in both Staubach's SB wins his defense was way better than the O, the '71 and '77 Cowboys D's were awesome

the team you mention I believe went on to hold Denver and Morton to 5/15 in a SB. but it was Renfro's last game and Doomsday was never quite as overwhelming again.

I think of Staubach as a good athlete, great leader, and a natural playmaker ... just plain thought like a hero.

But he missed some key passes in SBs, to be fair there were the 7 sacks allowed in SB X
and our WRs disappeared in both Staubach SB losses to the Steelers,
hate to say it but Pearson, Richards, Johnson, and Hill were all manhandled by the Steelers DBs in SB X and XIII

 

[gimmesix]

Putting up 23 points on the Purple People Eaters despite the turnovers wasn't easy to do in those days.

I don't disagree with that. It was just more difficult for the Vikings to get anything going against us. That kind of defense affords you the luxury of not hitting on every opportunity against a tough defense.

 

[pitt33]

Good points all...

I still think the old adage still rings true even in today’s NFL in that defense wins championships.

Last years SB is just another great example.