The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

[Cap12]

Quit while you're behind. The farce is exposed.

And you don't speak for "most fans".

Again, give me his stats for Sunday? That should shut you up pretty quick.

I gave him a "pass" because of limited snaps and that he was coming back from injury.

 

[Stash]

I gave him a "pass" because of limited snaps and that he was coming back from injury.

It's good that you admit to "giving him a pass".

I don't.

 

[Cap12]

It's good that you admit to "giving him a pass".

I don't.

You make it sound like we lost 35 to 17. I'm just saying that there were players who were equaly (un)productive who played a bunch more snaps than Crawford. He didn't play much in training camp, so based upon past performance, I'm willing to cut him some slack for limited snaps, rust and and the injury. The rest of the DT's have no such excuse.

 

[tyke1doe]

The Good - The Boyz offense is clicking on all cylinders, Dak looks great, the receivers are all over the place, and the run game should be full speed in a week or two.

The Bad - The defense did not stuff the run up the middle, looks like the same issue as the Rams game last year. Giants gained 470 total offense, Barkley running up the gut consistently. Watch how our D-Line lines up. With out a nose guard, the linebackers need to help plug that hole.

The Ugly - Yes, they were up by 18 points with under 7 minutes left in the game, but the Boyz took the peddle off the gas. When you have your foot on the opponents neck, keep it there until they blackout. The Cowboys tend to let up when they should obliterate the other team.

I don't consider this an ugly. The Cowboys were moving up and down the field at will. Then, the Giants really couldn't muster any offense. So the Cowboys were more concerned about burning time off the clock both with long drives as well as making the Giants drive the length of the field.

I know this sounds like an excuse, but football is mentally draining. A team simply can't keep up a pedal-to-the-metal pace for 16 games, then 19 if you're playing in the Super Bowl. So you take your rest where you can. It may not seem like it, but getting up early and "cruising" is considered a "mental break" to football players. And you're going to need those somewhere during the season.

Besides, I doubt we do that against the Saints or the Eagles or the Pats should we be ahead by that much.

 

[Stash]

You make it sound like we lost 35 to 17.

No I don't. Don't try to divert the conversation. It started with you trying to absolve Crawford of rightful blame in a terrible performance. Which you finally admitted was nothing more than you trying to "give him a free pass."

I'm just saying that there were players who were equaly (un)productive who played a bunch more snaps than Crawford. He didn't play much in training camp, so based upon past performance, I'm willing to cut him some slack for rust and and the injury. The rest of the DT's have no such excuse.

Neither does the "$10 million man". In fact, he should be held to a far higher standard, and not given a "free pass".

You screwed up in your original, off-base and unsupportable statement trying to leave Crawford out of the blame when he rightfully stands front and center. And you ultimately admitted that you were trying to give the guy a free pass.

 

[Cap12]

Never gave him a "free pass" (that suggests that he bears NO responsibility). What I meant is that he bears LESS responsibility than well-practiced players like Collins, who did nothing and engaged in a stupid penalty that actaully puts him on the negative side of the ledger, besides his total lack of productivity. I just don't think that Crawford deserves the same level of scruitiny as players like Collins who played most of training camp and was relatively healthy this season.

Either way, my point about the DT's being a major part of our unproductive run D against the Giants is spot on.

 

[Stash]

Never gave him a "free pass" (that suggests that he bears NO responsibility).

Then you had better get your account checked, because it was hacked:

I gave him a "pass" because of limited snaps and that he was coming back from injury.

What I meant is that he bears LESS responsibility than well-practiced players like Collins, who did nothing and engaged in a stupid penalty that actaully puts him on the negative side of the ledger, besides his total lack of productivity. I just don't think that Crawford deserves the same level of scruitiny as players like Collins who played most of training camp and was relatively healthy this season.

I have less of an issue with a penalty vs a 60-yard run on the Giants second play of the game.

Either way, my point about the DT's being a major part of our unproductive run D against the Giants is spot on.

Nothing you've tried to say has been "spot on", absolutely nothing. You should stop typing in this thread because it's been a mistake from the first word. Heck you can't even 'Reply' to my post properly.

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

W/o disruptive DT's, your DE's can be rendered ineffective. That's why the Dolts couldn't beat NE all those years, even w/ one of the best DE combo's of all time in Mathis/Feeney. And w/o good S's, your CB's matter a ton less.

so I am ok with DT, DE, LB, CB, Saftey…good CBs can shut down the opposing WRs. Ala Revis, Deion....and even our own Byron jones last year. not in their class obviously but he was pretty good.

now, this doesn't mean I don't value a good safety. it depends on the talent. I take a Reed any day of the week, but if I had to choose between Reed and Revis….that's a hard choice. I can do so much scheme wise with Revis. Reed would be icing on the cake....

and I disagree that a good Saftey would diminish the need for a good CB.....

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

As unproductuve as Heath was, you have to blame the interior linemen (except Crawford, who played well in limited snaps) for our poor performance against the run. You can also toss some shade at LVE for freelancing too much and getting caught out of position. Hopefully having Crawford back there more frequently will help, but a bunch of guys you are counting on to provide minutes and depth, did not play well. The Giants have an improved OLine (and maybe this performance won't look so bad as the season goes on), but there is no excuse for the way a number of DT's got blown off the ball.

good point. if your safties and CBs are tackling the RBs deep in the defensive zone. there is something wrong up front.

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

Start by pulling up the biggest Barkley run of the game. Trying to find Crawford is like playing "where's Waldo".

Now I'll challenge you to show me where Crawfor made any plays whatsoever?

Secondly, what was his stat line for playing "40% of the game"? He was a disgrace!



Crawford first and foremost. And your talk of trying to make excuses for him is a sham. He was an embarrassment out there, at that joke of a right defensive end position worst of all.

that run was because LVE missed an assignment and hit the wrong hole and left it open for Barkley.....

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

A lot of fans don't like Crawford because of the big deal he signed several years ago, but he has been one of most talented, versatile and productive players on the DL since he came here. Is he a great pass rusher? No, buit the guy has been a steady, productive player for us. Most fans understand this.

bingo....he got paid, so they expect pro-bowl level else he sucks. there is no inbetween. contract value once done has nothing to do with performance level.

 

[Stash]

that run was because LVE missed an assignment and hit the wrong hole and left it open for Barkley.....

Actually, it's been reported to have been "miscommunication", but some people want to assume that the blame rested solely with Vander Esch, which is inaccurate.

 

[Cap12]

Then you had better get your account checked, because it was hacked:





I have less of an issue with a penalty vs a 60-yard run on the Giants second play of the game.



Nothing you've tried to say has been "spot on", absolutely nothing. You should stop typing in this thread because it's been a mistake from the first word. Heck you can't even 'Reply' to my post properly.

You can play semantic games all you like between a "pass" (cutting slack) and "free pass" (completely absolving). The bottom line of my original posts was that our DTs were a big part of our overall failures against stopping the run. You can blame Crawford as much or as little as you want. Either way, Marrinelli needs to address this.

 

[Stash]

bingo....he got paid, so they expect pro-bowl level else he sucks. there is no inbetween. contract value once done has nothing to do with performance level.

I'm glad that you were happy with his performance on Sunday.

Thank goodness for low standards.

 

[Stash]

You can play semantic games all you like between a "pass" (cutting slack) and "free pass" (completely absolving).

I'm not "playing" at all, that would be you. You've tried to dance around this subject since your first ill-advised comments.

The bottom line of my original posts was that our DTs were a big part of our overall failures against stopping the run. You can blame Crawford as much or as little as you want. Either way, Marrinelli needs to address this.

I agree that Marinelli needs to address it, if he can. It has been an issue for some time now and not just this one game this season. But it's the entire defensive line (and some part the linebackers) and not just the DT's.

 

[Cap12]

bingo....he got paid, so they expect pro-bowl level else he sucks. there is no inbetween. contract value once done has nothing to do with performance level.

What he makes is not out of line for a slightly better than average veteran starting DE makes in the the league. Veteran Pro-Bowlers make a hell of a lot more than 9 Mil. What are you? From the Hoover Administration? lol.

 

[kskboys]

so I am ok with DT, DE, LB, CB, Saftey…good CBs can shut down the opposing WRs. Ala Revis, Deion....and even our own Byron jones last year. not in their class obviously but he was pretty good.

now, this doesn't mean I don't value a good safety. it depends on the talent. I take a Reed any day of the week, but if I had to choose between Reed and Revis….that's a hard choice. I can do so much scheme wise with Revis. Reed would be icing on the cake....

and I disagree that a good Saftey would diminish the need for a good CB.....

Talent at any position diminishes need for talent at other positions. Nature of the game. The argument is how much.

I know, many people disagree w/ me about S over CB. However, at the end of the day, a CB covers one guy. A S is responsible for much, much more. If by "good" you mean competent, I agree w/ you!!!!!!!!!!

Revis covers one guy. Reed makes it extremely hard to throw deep. It's really S by a landslide.

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

Actually, it's been reported to have been "miscommunication", but some people want to assume that the blame rested solely with Vander Esch, which is inaccurate.

perhaps. won't argue, but it was a defensive miscommunication ended up with someone in the wrong place. initial analysis was LVE, but coaches know better.

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

I'm glad that you were happy with his performance on Sunday.

Thank goodness for low standards.

I didn't say I am happy. I said, people either want pro-bowl level based on his pay if he is not performing at that level. he sucks. there is no in between in the evaluation.

is he playing up to his contract? I don't think so. does he suck? I don't think so. he is somewhere in between.

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

What he makes is not out of line for a slightly better than average veteran starting DE makes in the the league. Veteran Pro-Bowlers make a hell of a lot more than 9 Mil. What are you? From the Hoover Administration? lol.

Hoover?, is he from the future LOL