Sturm on the OG situation

[DOUBLE WING]

I'm not downplaying it. It was a factor. I'm right-playing it. As to 'why,' it's what I keep saying: because there are other problems that were more important. When you've got an effective passing offense and an ineffective passing defense, it makes sense to address the defensive problems first.

I also see how much we've done to address the OL under Garrett, and support it. I don't understand why there's the impression out there that we're just ignoring things. When you replace every starter, bring in new coaches, spend multiple high picks, bring in multiple starters via FA and develop a starter and swing OT from college FA or off of other teams' practice squads, I think you deserve some credit for taking the problem seriously. The reality is, the team has taken it seriously, they're just doing it in the context of the other problem areas of the team that are simply more important.

I don't think, given the investment in Romo and how the entire success of the passing game revolves around keeping him upright, there is any position more important on our team right now than the offensive line.

 

[burmafrd]

I don't think, given the investment in Romo and how the entire success of the passing game revolves around keeping him upright, there is any position more important on our team right now than the offensive line.

how anyone can think otherwise to me is a mystery. You keep your franchise QB healthy and upright or your season is OVER.

you can bring in other players or change schemes to help out elsewhere but if Romo goes down it is OVER.

 

[Idgit]

I don't think, given the investment in Romo and how the entire success of the passing game revolves around keeping him upright, there is any position more important on our team right now than the offensive line.

When the passing offense is relatively strong, and the passing defense is relatively not....how can you not emphasize the area that's easier to fix and more in need of repair?

 

[Corso]

how anyone can think otherwise to me is a mystery. You keep your franchise QB healthy and upright or your season is OVER.

you can bring in other players or change schemes to help out elsewhere but if Romo goes down it is OVER.

What you say is true, but I wonder if the coaching staff thinks on another level than that.
Like one of Romo's major injuries- if I remember correctly was from a hit where the responsibility wasn't even from the OL, but a tight end or a fullback.
The one where he broke his, what- collarbone?

Romo can get an injury from many different places and for many different reasons.

But I do agree it is a risk lessened with a reliable OL.

 

[Idgit]

how anyone can think otherwise to me is a mystery. You keep your franchise QB healthy and upright or your season is OVER.

you can bring in other players or change schemes to help out elsewhere but if Romo goes down it is OVER.

Again, though, we've added two new starters to the line in the offseason. And having your QB upright and your passing defense in shambles isn't going to get you to the postseason anyway. You have a QB who can make one man off the edge miss every time, and move laterally in the pocket to make plays downfield. And he doesn't miss many games. You help him where he needs help the most, and right now-especially after drafting Frederick--he needs help in the form of an improved pass defense a lot more than he needs a different starting RG.

I don't understand how you guys can watch this team as carefully as you do, and care so much about us getting better, and not be on board with improving the pass defense that's killing us against every good offensive team we face.

 

[TwoDeep3]

Here's the issue for me.

I believe Romo is misused in this offense. What makes him such an alluring player for some is also his biggest downfall.

Romo should be a bus driver for this offense. Which means the team should be assembled to run the ball and control the clock.

Scoring quickly - and for the last few years there were many more field goals rather than touchdowns - ends up putting the onus on the defense to stop the other team. That is part of the game, but if you recall back in the glory days of Aikman, Irvin, and Smith, they played to get a lead and then controlled the clock to keep it.

This is still the same game, but Opie is very Andy Reid-like and passes the ball a great deal. He has since he was a coordinator.

Romo can be brilliant, but when too much is on his plate he can make mistakes - like they all do. Dallas football games come down to two distinct footprints in most cases.

1. It's like a tennis match with serve and volley. Who scores consistently in most cases wins.
2. Dallas is mismatched and gets manhandled because they are not as physical a team as others.

Turnovers and three-and-outs kill this team like they do other teams.

Romo has the ability to move the team quickly down the field. But field goals instead of touchdowns erode the chance to win, and we've seen a great deal of that in the last few years. This board complains about the red zone all year long.

So how do you change that?

Become a more physical team and run the ball to protect the defense since someone overpays for guys like Scandrick and others.

And in that little acorn is where the troubles arise for Dallas. I don't know this for a fact, but I suggest they normally do not win the time of possession.

Thus Romo should be more like a bus driver instead of the hub to this offensive wheel. His stats are awe inspiring for those who think this game is about individual achievement.

But he is a two-edged sword in his ability to move the offense quickly between the twenties and then they get bogged down. The bogging down is not his fault. But it lends itself to the troubles the team faces when handing the ball over to the other team without scoring seven points.

So I don't put a great deal of stock in passer ratings and such, because in reality, that probably hurts Dallas more than it helps. Because the underlying aspect to stats ignore field goals for touchdowns, three and outs, and turnovers that cripple this team.

It's about execution when it counts and not between the twenties for me.

This is my opinion. It could be right or wrong. But this team does an awful lot of losing and missing the play-offs for such gaudy stats that Romo puts up.

I'd prefer less passing yards, more rushing yards, and more touchdowns and protecting the defense than what is being offered now.

Thus stats to me are worthless because they are usually the loser trying to justify why his team should have won or his pet cat is elite.

 

[burmafrd]

Again, though, we've added two new starters to the line in the offseason. And having your QB upright and your passing defense in shambles isn't going to get you to the postseason anyway. You have a QB who can make one man off the edge miss every time, and move laterally in the pocket to make plays downfield. And he doesn't miss many games. You help him where he needs help the most, and right now-especially after drafting Frederick--he needs help in the form of an improved pass defense a lot more than he needs a different starting RG.

I don't understand how you guys can watch this team as carefully as you do, and care so much about us getting better, and not be on board with improving the pass defense that's killing us against every good offensive team we face.

because you are wrong

 

[Idgit]

because you are wrong

Perhaps. Then again, if I'm right, it explains the disconnect between what you think the team should do and what the team actually does, which is clearly very frustrating for you.

 

[Idgit]

Here's the issue for me.

I believe Romo is misused in this offense. What makes him such an alluring player for some is also his biggest downfall.

Romo should be a bus driver for this offense. Which means the team should be assembled to run the ball and control the clock.

Scoring quickly - and for the last few years there were many more field goals rather than touchdowns - ends up putting the onus on the defense to stop the other team. That is part of the game, but if you recall back in the glory days of Aikman, Irvin, and Smith, they played to get a lead and then controlled the clock to keep it.

This is still the same game, but Opie is very Andy Reid-like and passes the ball a great deal. He has since he was a coordinator.

Romo can be brilliant, but when too much is on his plate he can make mistakes - like they all do. Dallas football games come down to two distinct footprints in most cases.

1. It's like a tennis match with serve and volley. Who scores consistently in most cases wins.
2. Dallas is mismatched and gets manhandled because they are not as physical a team as others.

Turnovers and three-and-outs kill this team like they do other teams.

Romo has the ability to move the team quickly down the field. But field goals instead of touchdowns erode the chance to win, and we've seen a great deal of that in the last few years. This board complains about the red zone all year long.

So how do you change that?

Become a more physical team and run the ball to protect the defense since someone overpays for guys like Scandrick and others.

And in that little acorn is where the troubles arise for Dallas. I don't know this for a fact, but I suggest they normally do not win the time of possession.

Thus Romo should be more like a bus driver instead of the hub to this offensive wheel. His stats are awe inspiring for those who think this game is about individual achievement.

But he is a two-edged sword in his ability to move the offense quickly between the twenties and then they get bogged down. The bogging down is not his fault. But it lends itself to the troubles the team faces when handing the ball over to the other team without scoring seven points.

So I don't put a great deal of stock in passer ratings and such, because in reality, that probably hurts Dallas more than it helps. Because the underlying aspect to stats ignore field goals for touchdowns, three and outs, and turnovers that cripple this team.

It's about execution when it counts and not between the twenties for me.

This is my opinion. It could be right or wrong. But this team does an awful lot of losing and missing the play-offs for such gaudy stats that Romo puts up.

I'd prefer less passing yards, more rushing yards, and more touchdowns and protecting the defense than what is being offered now.

Thus stats to me are worthless because they are usually the loser trying to justify why his team should have won or his pet cat is elite.

Ack. I'm out of time to tackle this one like it deserves, but it's a really nicely written post, TwoDeep. There's a lot of good stuff here.

 

[DOUBLE WING]

When the passing offense is relatively strong, and the passing defense is relatively not....how can you not emphasize the area that's easier to fix and more in need of repair?

I don't know why we're relegating it to just passing offense though. The offensive line affects the entire offense. Two years ago the line couldn't keep Romo healthy and last year they killed us in the red zone and short yardage situations. Keeping Romo upright is just one part of it.

A successful running game, picking up first downs in short yardage and cashing in from the goal line would all help the pass defense as well.

 

[percyhoward]

So I don't put a great deal of stock in passer ratings and such, because in reality, that probably hurts Dallas more than it helps. Because the underlying aspect to stats ignore field goals for touchdowns, three and outs, and turnovers that cripple this team.

Wow. No. That's totally and completely wrong. Higher passer ratings are a sign that your offense is performing well, and higher passer ratings for your opponents are a sign that your defense is playing poorly. We were 20th in red zone TD percentage, but still managed to make the top 10 in points per drive. That doesn't make passer rating a bad stat, it just highlights (1) how good we were at scoring from beyond the 20, (2) where we must improve in order to become an elite offense. You're right that an improved running game will help in that area, but you're wrong in thinking that this will somehow lower Romo's passer rating. If anything, it will help passer rating because we'll have more possessions inside the 10 (more passing TD) and defenses worried about the run won't be able to concentrate as much on stopping the pass anyway.

This is my opinion. It could be right or wrong. But this team does an awful lot of losing and missing the play-offs for such gaudy stats that Romo puts up.

It's wrong and here's why. Romo's high passer ratings are offset by the equally high passer ratings of our opponents because we have historically had bad defenses, especially the last two seasons, and teams with poor defenses miss the postseason on a regular basis. This doesn't make Romo's stats meaningless, it shows how our opponents' QB's stats are equally as meaningful. Is this making sense?

I'd prefer less passing yards, more rushing yards, and more touchdowns and protecting the defense than what is being offered now.

Thus stats to me are worthless because they are usually the loser trying to justify why his team should have won or his pet cat is elite.

You can use stats to test your theory. The Chiefs and BIlls were 5th and 6th in rushing yards. Dallas was 31st. Still, the Cowboys ranked ahead of both of those teams in time of possession. Five of the top 10 teams in TOP (Ind, Det, Pit, SD, Atl) ranked 22nd, 23rd, 26th, 27th, and 29th in rushing yards.

The defense doesn't need "protecting," it needs to get off the field. They were 23rd in 3rd down conversions allowed and 25th in yards per play allowed last year. And yet, Dallas still ranked in the top half of the league in time of possession.

If all you're saying is, "We need to run the ball better," I agree with you. If you think running the ball better will lower passer rating, I hate to disappoint you.

 

[TwoDeep3]

Wow. No. That's totally and completely wrong. Higher passer ratings are a sign that your offense is performing well, and higher passer ratings for your opponents are a sign that your defense is playing poorly. We were 20th in red zone TD percentage, but still managed to make the top 10 in points per drive. That doesn't make passer rating a bad stat, it just highlights (1) how good we were at scoring from beyond the 20, (2) where we must improve in order to become an elite offense. You're right that an improved running game will help in that area, but you're wrong in thinking that this will somehow lower Romo's passer rating. If anything, it will help passer rating because we'll have more possessions inside the 10 (more passing TD) and defenses worried about the run won't be able to concentrate as much on stopping the pass anyway.


It's wrong and here's why. Romo's high passer ratings are offset by the equally high passer ratings of our opponents because we have historically had bad defenses, especially the last two seasons, and teams with poor defenses miss the postseason on a regular basis. This doesn't make Romo's stats meaningless, it shows how our opponents' QB's stats are equally as meaningful. Is this making sense?


You can use stats to test your theory. The Chiefs and BIlls were 5th and 6th in rushing yards. Dallas was 31st. Still, the Cowboys ranked ahead of both of those teams in time of possession. Five of the top 10 teams in TOP (Ind, Det, Pit, SD, Atl) ranked 22nd, 23rd, 26th, 27th, and 29th in rushing yards.

The defense doesn't need "protecting," it needs to get off the field. They were 23rd in 3rd down conversions allowed and 25th in yards per play allowed last year. And yet, Dallas still ranked in the top half of the league in time of possession.

If all you're saying is, "We need to run the ball better," I agree with you. If you think running the ball better will lower passer rating, I hate to disappoint you.

Percy - does this team win or not?

The gaudy statistics of 4900 yards is in direct relationship to the number opf passes Romo throws versus the effectiveness of the running game.

It is simple as that.

Less passes,ore ball control, keep the defense off the field.

The rest of the stats are rearranging chair on the deck of the Titanic.

 

[big dog cowboy]

8-8 year before

Sorry I don't play that game. You said last year and I answered.

 

[ShiningStar]

I don't seem to want to ignore anything but useless stats that cannot argue this.

Rogers, SB MVP
Romo, not.

When you can come up with a stat that trumps that stat, let me know.

every qb thats every won a SB, Marino. Oh boy.

 

[TwoDeep3]

every qb thats every won a SB, Marino. Oh boy.

Stats are meaningless in any capacity but winning for football.

Baseball, we can talk.

Football, it is such a team sport that using stats to herald one player ignores the team concept.

Sorry if that doesn't fit your mold.

 

[Oh_Canada]

Amazing that Sturm is already writing off the guard play before a single REGULAR season snap has been taken.

So how great are the Tampa Bay Bucs anyhow? I understand they paid a ton for there guards??

 

[Sasquatch]

how anyone can think otherwise to me is a mystery. You keep your franchise QB healthy and upright or your season is OVER.

you can bring in other players or change schemes to help out elsewhere but if Romo goes down it is OVER.

In a nutshell.

 

[percyhoward]

Percy - does this team win or not?

The gaudy statistics of 4900 yards is in direct relationship to the number opf passes Romo throws versus the effectiveness of the running game.

It is simple as that.

Less passes,ore ball control, keep the defense off the field.

The rest of the stats are rearranging chair on the deck of the Titanic.

Passer rating and total yards are two completely distinct concepts.

Passer rating measures efficiency, doesn't increase with more attempts, and is highly correlated with winning.

Total yards (passing, rushing, or both) do increase with more attempts, and have nothing to do with winning.

This team has been .500 the last two years despite Romo's high ratings because there's another QB on the opposite sideline who's effectively erasing everything Romo does, because he has as much success against our defense as Romo has against his.

Simple as that.

A defense that ranks in the mid-20's or lower in...

• 3rd-down conversions allowed
• yards per play
• defensive passer rating
• interceptions
• passing yards per attempt
• rushing TD
• takeaways
• rushing yards per attempt
• yards per drive
• points per drive
• touchdowns per drive

is a bad defense, and although no team should rank in the top half of the NFL in time of possession with that kind of defense, the Cowboys did. We were 13th in TOP last year, even with all the turnovers. 8th in TOP the year before with fewer turnovers, and an equally bad defense. You think this describes a team whose offense struggles to control time of possession?

 

[Corso]

Stats are meaningless in any capacity but winning for football.

Baseball, we can talk.

Football, it is such a team sport that using stats to herald one player ignores the team concept.

Sorry if that doesn't fit your mold.

At the end of the day, or shall I say the beginning of the season:

If you can't be with the one you love, honey-
Love the one you're with.
Love the one you're with.

 

[Idgit]

In a nutshell.

Good luck beating those teams with franchise QBs *and* a pass defense, then.