TwoDeep3
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 14,506
- Reaction score
- 17,339
One of the many complaints I see is the fact that Dallas has seemed to ignore the offensive line in this draft.
Of course we do not know what tomorrow - or later today actually - will bring. So the offensive line could be addressed in the second day.
Yet several comments made by people I respect have indicated to me this staff has a plan.
The first was Jerry Jones explanation that Dallas will utilize a two tight end set this year more often than in the past.
The objective is two fold.
1. To block for a run or passing play with your tight ends. Adding support to your tackles and lessening the protection burden of all the linemen.
2. To disguise your tight end as a hot receiver by showing a consistent formation that has been the staple for the rushing attack.
To break this down, we have two WR's and a back go into routes and seven blockers.
But what if they put eight in the box?
Wasn't the acquisition of T.O. to counter this fornation?
If a team decides to rush 8, then someone is manned up. And while there is a contengency which thinks Bledsoe isn't a quality QB. If you revisit the stats from last season, you will note he truly is much better than we have had since Aikman. He can find a receiver.
And behind a porous offensive line he still posted the second best passing yardage of any Cowboy QB but Danny White.
The second aspect to this is the chess match which is invaribly what coaches do.
Now you have two tight ends who catch well. You have a player in MBIII who blocks well along with catching and running well.
So who stays in to block and who slips out into a route?
This formation offers max protect and the element of surprise in the passing game.
The other person who commented today was Ron Jaworski.
Now I know he is an ex-Eagle. But you watch him break down film and you see he knows what he is talking about when it comes to football.
His comment that Fasano was a "snot knocker" in the mold of Bavaro should tell you everything you need to know.
Brand names are great. Believe me when I tell you I was fascinated by Stephen Jackson as a running back for this team.
I was disappointed when we passed on him.
But football is more than a 4.4 forty or a guy I have heard of.
The team wants to protect the quarterback and use two tight ends to do so.
So how effective will the lead draw work after we have shown this formation and passed succesfully to a tight end a few times?
When Ireland stated we took the best available player, he surely meant for our intentions.
We don't see the entire plan until it plays out on the field.
For us to assume they made a mistake doesn't consider we don't know what they have in mind.
But was there really a great deal of difference between Lawson and Hatcher other than Lawson's amazing speed?
Lawson was the player du jour because of his tremendous combine.
Yet where was he last year?
Now people will bring up what ESPN thought of Hatcher as a late round consideration.
But you people need to be consistent about what you say.
If ESPN is full of shate on their opinions of players that you like.
Why aren't they full of shate about players that you never heard of?
Brand names mean nothing or Ryan Leaf would be an all-pro.
Lawson was nobody until very recently. He may be All-World.
But I was argued to death about value on this board.
If Hatcher becomes a solid contributor, then isn't that EXACTLY what you guys were after?
And we maneuvered so we got another 4th round pick.
The only three real issues that are different between Lawson and Hatcher are these.
Lawson runs faster and played for better school.
Hatcher is bigger and played for a smaller school. Sort of like DeMarcus Ware.
And Hatcher has the build to add weight if they intend to make him a DT.
Both have lots of upside.
Both were risks.
Now if both bust, which was the bigger hit?
Lawson in the first?
Or Hatcher in the third?
There is a plan.
Either we trust the plan or find another team.
The Steelers and Cards had a pretty good first day.
Should I link their message boards here so you can join them and rejoice?
Of course we do not know what tomorrow - or later today actually - will bring. So the offensive line could be addressed in the second day.
Yet several comments made by people I respect have indicated to me this staff has a plan.
The first was Jerry Jones explanation that Dallas will utilize a two tight end set this year more often than in the past.
The objective is two fold.
1. To block for a run or passing play with your tight ends. Adding support to your tackles and lessening the protection burden of all the linemen.
2. To disguise your tight end as a hot receiver by showing a consistent formation that has been the staple for the rushing attack.
To break this down, we have two WR's and a back go into routes and seven blockers.
But what if they put eight in the box?
Wasn't the acquisition of T.O. to counter this fornation?
If a team decides to rush 8, then someone is manned up. And while there is a contengency which thinks Bledsoe isn't a quality QB. If you revisit the stats from last season, you will note he truly is much better than we have had since Aikman. He can find a receiver.
And behind a porous offensive line he still posted the second best passing yardage of any Cowboy QB but Danny White.
The second aspect to this is the chess match which is invaribly what coaches do.
Now you have two tight ends who catch well. You have a player in MBIII who blocks well along with catching and running well.
So who stays in to block and who slips out into a route?
This formation offers max protect and the element of surprise in the passing game.
The other person who commented today was Ron Jaworski.
Now I know he is an ex-Eagle. But you watch him break down film and you see he knows what he is talking about when it comes to football.
His comment that Fasano was a "snot knocker" in the mold of Bavaro should tell you everything you need to know.
Brand names are great. Believe me when I tell you I was fascinated by Stephen Jackson as a running back for this team.
I was disappointed when we passed on him.
But football is more than a 4.4 forty or a guy I have heard of.
The team wants to protect the quarterback and use two tight ends to do so.
So how effective will the lead draw work after we have shown this formation and passed succesfully to a tight end a few times?
When Ireland stated we took the best available player, he surely meant for our intentions.
We don't see the entire plan until it plays out on the field.
For us to assume they made a mistake doesn't consider we don't know what they have in mind.
But was there really a great deal of difference between Lawson and Hatcher other than Lawson's amazing speed?
Lawson was the player du jour because of his tremendous combine.
Yet where was he last year?
Now people will bring up what ESPN thought of Hatcher as a late round consideration.
But you people need to be consistent about what you say.
If ESPN is full of shate on their opinions of players that you like.
Why aren't they full of shate about players that you never heard of?
Brand names mean nothing or Ryan Leaf would be an all-pro.
Lawson was nobody until very recently. He may be All-World.
But I was argued to death about value on this board.
If Hatcher becomes a solid contributor, then isn't that EXACTLY what you guys were after?
And we maneuvered so we got another 4th round pick.
The only three real issues that are different between Lawson and Hatcher are these.
Lawson runs faster and played for better school.
Hatcher is bigger and played for a smaller school. Sort of like DeMarcus Ware.
And Hatcher has the build to add weight if they intend to make him a DT.
Both have lots of upside.
Both were risks.
Now if both bust, which was the bigger hit?
Lawson in the first?
Or Hatcher in the third?
There is a plan.
Either we trust the plan or find another team.
The Steelers and Cards had a pretty good first day.
Should I link their message boards here so you can join them and rejoice?
