The defense will be better with Zeke

[KJJ]

The stats do tell the story.

If the premise is that the reason the defense was poorer in 2015 compared to 2014 because they were on the field too long in 2015, that position is not born out by actual data. You can spin it anyway you want but the defense spent roughly same amount of time on the field in 2014 as they did in 2015.

So there were other reasons for why the defense wasn't good in 2015 - they lacked talent, they just didn't play well, whatever. But being on the field too long isn't one of those reasons.

The defense being on the field too long was only "part" of the problem not the entire problem....get real! Everyone knows the #1 problem is the lack of talent primarily upfront and in the secondary. We have issues rushing the passer and we can't cover.

 

[The Quest for Six]

Garrett is one of the main ones that wanted Zeke.

And as far as the 6 top 10 backs drafted with 1 pro bowl, what does that have to do with Zeke?

Zeke wasnt one of those backs, so that stat is irrelevant

what would have helped the cowboys record last year, Zeke, or a legitimate backup Quarterback?

 

[BrassCowboy]

Again................. why do people confuse the argument? Yes, if the defense doesn't spend a lot of time on the field they will be fresher. No one denies that.

The debate here is over saying that the reason the 2015 defense was worse than the 2014 defense was largely because they were on the field too long. They weren't compared to 2014.

The defense failed for reasons higher on the list than "being on the field" too long.

ok, I can respect that. We do need to improve in multiple areas on defense. My opinion is that they tried to balance the draft to a point where they can get "that" guy in Zeke while still getting help for the defense. Grabbing Smith in the 2nd threw me at first, but I realized why later. It was because they looked ahead to future by taking that risk and I am not used to seeing that. He will pay off and we must be patient. 4 of the next 5 picks were good picks and should make this defense better. We will see.

 

[jnday]

Apparently the team sees it differently than you and a lot of this board.

They inquired about trading for Murray, drafted a RB at 4, and drafted a RB in the 6th.

To me, this doesnt sound like a team that is convinced its the Oline.

It sure sounds like a team that realized the error they had committed by the RBBC BS.

 

[Dorsett33]

In theory, yes, if the offense is out on the field more the defense doesn't play as much and therefore should be fresher.

But that's not the problem with this analysis. People are floating the notion that the defense in 2015 suffered not necessarily from a lack of talent but rather that they were tired and worn out compared to 2014 because we didn't control TOP with McFadden than we did with Murray.

Unfortunately, the problem with that analysis is that TOP stats and analysis doesn't back up that claim.

I agree to some degree, but it's more than TOP. If you don't score, TOP means nothing. We all know our defense isn't going to shut anyone down. But, if we control the clock and now have a RB that can punch it in or get that yard or two to keep the ball, that's the other part of this.

 

[CowboyRoy]

Go check the halftime scores, buddy, and get back to me.

Ok, and you check back with me when we have a championship. The reason the cowboys have sucked the last 20 years is because people running the show think just like you do. Short term, mindless nonsense. Yep Zeke will improve the team short term, but you could have done that with any number of backs. Didnt have to use the 4th pick in the draft. Henry in the 2nd round, Miller in FA, resigning Murray.

But I have no doubt that you would have championed anything the Cowboys would have done as the best move possible. So tell me, is there ANYTHING in the draft and in FA that you didnt like that the Cowboys did this year? Anything?

This should be entertaining.

 

[WillieBeamen]

what would have helped the cowboys record last year, Zeke, or a legitimate backup Quarterback?

Both

Obviously we wouldve benefited more from better QB play, but to sit here and say that this team with Mcfadden at RB would be > or = to this team with Zeke at RB, is ridiculous to me.

Even when Romo was healthy, this offense still didnt look right.

 

[AdamJT13]

I do believe a good balance is ideal for a powerhouse team, not that a team "couldn't" be a superbowl team if they were only great at one or the other, but I believe your chances are better the better you are at both.

If you can run and stop the run but can't pass or stop the pass, you have no chance.

If you can pass and stop the pass but can't run or stop the run, you have a very good chance.

If you can do both, your chances are marginally better -- they're better, but not by a whole lot.

So yes, being great at everything is ideal. But the most important thing is to be able to pass better than your opponent.

 

[bsheeern]

We were actually a better rushing team in the red zone last season than we were in 2014. We just didn't get into the red zone as often.

Being able to run the ball in the red zone isn't as important as being able to pass it in the red zone -- and running it well in the red zone doesn't correlate to passing it well in the red zone. The two best red-zone rushing teams last season were Kansas City and St. Louis. They finished 13th and 24th, respectively, in red zone points per possession.

We were actually a better rushing team in the red zone last season than we were in 2014. We just didn't get into the red zone as often.

Being able to run the ball in the red zone isn't as important as being able to pass it in the red zone -- and running it well in the red zone doesn't correlate to passing it well in the red zone. The two best red-zone rushing teams last season were Kansas City and St. Louis. They finished 13th and 24th, respectively, in red zone points per possession.

I Get the Stats portion of it. What I'm asking is how does it affect the Play calling of the opposing Defense? What does that opposing D Coordinator Have to game plan for during the week? What does that LB have in the back of his mind based on what he saw in film all week?

Does Zeke being in the Backfield on lets say 3rd and Goal from the 3 give Dez, Witten and Beasley less attention form the D that let's say McFadden would.

 

[Sydla]

The defense being on the field too long was only "part" of the problem not the entire problem....get real! Everyone knows the #1 problem is the lack of talent primarily upfront and in the secondary. We have issues rushing the passer and we can't cover.

But it really wasn't part of the problem. They weren't on the field that much more than in 2014.

What is so hard to grasp here?

 

[CowboyRoy]

It's not about drafting JUST an offensive player. You have an offensive player that will help control the clock. A player that if you focus on, Dez is one on one with a CB and I think we all like his chances. The more the offense is on the field, the more rest and less time the defense is on the field. I don't think anyone is disputing that a stud DL or CB (which if you have a stud CB and no pass rush, you can easily ruin his career because you kill his confidence), it will improve the defense. But, there are more ways to improve the defense. You keep them fresh and not worn down. That's the logic of drafting an offensive player that can do that....not just any offensive player. This team has weapons all over the field and it will force teams to pick their poison.

Ok, and when the defense gets on the field, how are they better with Zeke sitting on the bench?

 

[erod]

Ok, and you check back with me when we have a championship. The reason the cowboys have sucked the last 20 years is because people running the show think just like you do. Short term, mindless nonsense. Yep Zeke will improve the team short term, but you could have done that with any number of backs. Didnt have to use the 4th pick in the draft. Henry in the 2nd round, Miller in FA, resigning Murray.

But I have no doubt that you would have championed anything the Cowboys would have done as the best move possible. So tell me, is there ANYTHING in the draft and in FA that you didnt like that the Cowboys did this year? Anything?

This should be entertaining.

Loved the Elliott pick
Like the Jaylon Smith pick, but they'd better be right. If he comes nowhere near healthy enough to play again, this was a big miscalculation.
I'd be lying if I said I knew anything about Collins, but he's a defensive linemen, which is good.
I like the Tapper pick because I've seen every game he's played. He's good and has a great motor.
I don't think Dak Prescott will amount to anything.
Don't know the Purdue kid.
Don't know why we drafted a running back unless he's a kick returner.
The basketball player pick was dumb. Could have gotten him as a free agent.

And I'm really glad they didn't get Paxton Lynch like Jerry wanted. He'll likely be nothing but a guy.

 

[Sydla]

I agree to some degree, but it's more than TOP. If you don't score, TOP means nothing. We all know our defense isn't going to shut anyone down. But, if we control the clock and now have a RB that can punch it in or get that yard or two to keep the ball, that's the other part of this.

I get that.

But then if one is building the case for Elliott, don't keep saying he'll keep the defense fresher because they won't be on the field as long and that's why we stunk on defense in 2015.

There are a lot of reasons to like Elliott. But to keep trotting out TOP as a big reason and using the poo defense ni 2015 versus 2014 when we had Murray isn't one of them.

 

[erod]

But it really wasn't part of the problem. They weren't on the field that much more than in 2014.

What is so hard to grasp here?

Dallas led or was tied in 10 games last year at halftime. The defense held firm in the first half.

But the defense wilted in the second half because the offense rarely scored more than 17 points.

Then, when the game was in hand, and Dallas was forced to go for it on 4th down the entire fourth quarter, it added a lot of TOP to Dallas.

What is so hard to grasp here?

 

[Sydla]

Both

Obviously we wouldve benefited more from better QB play, but to sit here and say that this team with Mcfadden at RB would be > or = to this team with Zeke at RB, is ridiculous to me.

Even when Romo was healthy, this offense still didnt look right.

Well true if you are looking at it in a vacuum.

But let's look at the whole picture. Which is the better "team"?

Romo + McFadden + Ramsey playing S

Romo + Elliott + Wilcox/Church playing S

The argument then isn't so clear cut.

 

[Sydla]

Dallas led or was tied in 10 games last year at halftime. The defense held firm in the first half.

But the defense wilted in the second half because the offense rarely scored more than 17 points.

Then, when the game was in hand, and Dallas was forced to go for it on 4th down the entire fourth quarter, it added a lot of TOP to Dallas.

What is so hard to grasp here?

LOL. I do appreciate the lengths you will go to spin something your way.

 

[AdamJT13]

None of those backs you mentioned had the opportunity to run behind the OL Zeke will be running behind. The Cowboys did what any smart team would do and that's pair a great back with a great OL. If Zeke stays healthy our running game will become more efficient/consistent and we'll score more rushing TD's which will take a lot of pressure off Romo. We improved the team with that pick and you're just too absorbed in stats that don't tell the whole story to see it.

Of course Elliott improved the team. Anyone we picked at No. 4 (out of the realistic options) would have improved the team except a quarterback. Everyone else would be better than whoever he replaced in the starting lineup.

But again, no matter how well Elliott rushes this season, the vast majority of our games will be decided by whether we pass better than our opponent. That's how it is every season for every team, no matter how well they run the ball.

 

[erod]

It's amazing. All the actual evidence keeps flying in the face of the "keep the defense fresh" people.

And they just stick their heads in the sand.

I wonder if they think the Earth is flat.

That "evidence" has been refuted and demolished 100 times over, and you just refuse to admit it.

 

[erod]

LOL. I do appreciate the lengths you will go to spin something your way.

I watch the actual games. But you keep reading the box scores if you like.

 

[bsheeern]

The stats do tell the story.

If the premise is that the reason the defense was poorer in 2015 compared to 2014 because they were on the field too long in 2015, that position is not born out by actual data. You can spin it anyway you want but the defense spent roughly same amount of time on the field in 2014 as they did in 2015.

So there were other reasons for why the defense wasn't good in 2015 - they lacked talent, they just didn't play well, whatever. But being on the field too long isn't one of those reasons.[/quote

Again................. why do people confuse the argument? Yes, if the defense doesn't spend a lot of time on the field they will be fresher. No one denies that.

The debate here is over saying that the reason the 2015 defense was worse than the 2014 defense was largely because they were on the field too long. They weren't compared to 2014.

The defense failed for reasons higher on the list than "being on the field" too long.

How about CONFIDENCE?
Confidence in Knowing your offense has your back even if you have a bad drive.