The trouble with the hole at guard

[Stash]

I really wish you would look up the word "irrelevant", because you really don't know the meaning of the word!

I guess when the Cowboys signed Deion Sanders that helped the Cowboys win a SB , instead of signing him they should have signed the best guard in the NFL and they would have still won a SB?

Didn't they already have the best guard in the game at that time?

 

[Stash]

Exactly. And you can develop a decent OG relatively affordably, and you can cover up for limitations at RG if you have to. There are a lot of competitive teams with similar holes in their rosters.

When you use the term 'you', who are you referring to?

Not the Cowboys of course as they have obviously been unable to do it for years.

 

[Idgit]

When you use the term 'you', who are you referring to?

Not the Cowboys of course as they have obviously been unable to do it for years.

It was the generic 'you.' The Cowboys, we're led to believe, can't develop anyone, using high picks or free agency. Or so I've been lead to believe. I've heard people think it's Jerry Jones' fault, if I'm remembering that correctly.

 

[CyberB0b]

Exactly. And you can develop a decent OG relatively affordably, and you can cover up for limitations at RG if you have to. There are a lot of competitive teams with similar holes in their rosters.

When have we developed a guard in the last decade? I'm 30 and the only one I can think of immediately is Larry Allen. I think I was 12 years old when he came on board.

 

[TheRomoSexual]

When have we developed a guard in the last decade? I'm 30 and the only one I can think of immediately is Larry Allen. I think I was 12 years old when he came on board.

No offense, but these posts are hilarious to me. Why do our past failures with entirely different coaching staffs have anything to do with our current coaching staff? It's like people think the "Cowboys" are an entity separate and apart from the coaches. It isn't, and what's happened in the past under different coaching regimes is completely and utterly irrelevant.

 

[Idgit]

When have we developed a guard in the last decade? I'm 30 and the only one I can think of immediately is Larry Allen. I think I was 12 years old when he came on board.

I'd say that Leary is a pretty good example of what you can do with a player you stash and develop. I know he's not done anything beyond make a push for starting snaps so far, but given that Callahan has only been here a year, that's a pretty good indicator.

Either way, the solution to not being able to develop OG talent isn't to over-invest resources in order to fill those spots. It's better to figure out what's wrong with what you've been doing and to change your process (yeah, I said it) so that you can fill positions the way other successful teams in the league fill them and reserve your picks and cap dollars for the positions where skilled players are in much, much more demand.

 

[SWG9]

No offense, but these posts are hilarious to me. Why do our past failures with entirely different coaching staffs have anything to do with our current coaching staff? It's like people think the "Cowboys" are an entity separate and apart from the coaches. It isn't, and what's happened in the past under different coaching regimes is completely and utterly irrelevant.

Our coaching staffs are turned over every three years on average, which destroys any semblance of continuity or cohesion. That absolutely is an organizational flaw that hurts player development and has to be mentioned.

 

[burmafrd]

hilarious to watch the usual suspects defending the Boys. Leary has done NOTHING in a regular season game yet Idge uses him as supposedly an example of progress.
and then another claiming that past failures have nothing to do with now- yet the team is run by the same man in both areas.

the contortions some go through rather than admit the obvious:

Jerruh thought he did not need to put high draft picks into the O line- UNLIKE EVERY OTHER TEAM IN THE NFL.
Finally he was FORCED to admit his failure and make some picks.

If he had been more reasonable we would not be in this position. His love for shiny toys hurt this franchise badly.

And I will make the case that because of his obvious disdain for using 1st or 2nd rd picks on the O line that the scouting staff and others reacted to that over the years by working on their evaluations to make up for that. Resulting in picks like Brewster and company. Reaching for guys in their evaluations. MOre so then in other areas because of Jerruh. I think Arkin is another example of someone that was a reach because they were so desperate to hit on a O line player.


How else do you explain the FACT that the Boys have not developed one single offensive guard since LA? And only Gurode on the interior since him. THough of course one is hoping that the Beard changes that.

TO be brutal and rub the noses of the Pollyanna's in it - the Dallas Cowboys developed one single draft choice into a quality starter IN TEN YEARS. Doug Free. And he is not exactly a Pro Bowler is he? Andre Gurode picked in 2002. Then Doug Free. ONLY TWO PLAYERS SINCE LA WAS DRAFTED.

 

[Stash]

It was the generic 'you.' The Cowboys, we're led to believe, can't develop anyone, using high picks or free agency. Or so I've been lead to believe. I've heard people think it's Jerry Jones' fault, if I'm remembering that correctly.

If you can illustrate where they've had success drafting and developing their own guards to refute what I have said, I would be glad to read it.

 

[Stash]

No offense, but these posts are hilarious to me. Why do our past failures with entirely different coaching staffs have anything to do with our current coaching staff? It's like people think the "Cowboys" are an entity separate and apart from the coaches. It isn't, and what's happened in the past under different coaching regimes is completely and utterly irrelevant.

Not at all. Plenty of the same people who have contributed to past failure are still here.

I would rather try to learn from past mistakes than try to sweep them under the rug like they never happened.

 

[CoCo]

hilarious to watch the usual suspects ...[/quote]

So ironic to see you using this phrase...

 

[TheRomoSexual]

hilarious to watch the usual suspects defending the Boys. Leary has done NOTHING in a regular season game yet Idge uses him as supposedly an example of progress.
and then another claiming that past failures have nothing to do with now- yet the team is run by the same man in both areas.

the contortions some go through rather than admit the obvious:

Jerruh thought he did not need to put high draft picks into the O line- UNLIKE EVERY OTHER TEAM IN THE NFL.
Finally he was FORCED to admit his failure and make some picks.

If he had been more reasonable we would not be in this position. His love for shiny toys hurt this franchise badly.

And I will make the case that because of his obvious disdain for using 1st or 2nd rd picks on the O line that the scouting staff and others reacted to that over the years by working on their evaluations to make up for that. Resulting in picks like Brewster and company. Reaching for guys in their evaluations. MOre so then in other areas because of Jerruh. I think Arkin is another example of someone that was a reach because they were so desperate to hit on a O line player.


How else do you explain the FACT that the Boys have not developed one single offensive guard since LA? And only Gurode on the interior since him. THough of course one is hoping that the Beard changes that.

TO be brutal and rub the noses of the Pollyanna's in it - the Dallas Cowboys developed one single draft choice into a quality starter IN TEN YEARS. Doug Free. And he is not exactly a Pro Bowler is he? Andre Gurode picked in 2002. Then Doug Free. ONLY TWO PLAYERS SINCE LA WAS DRAFTED.

Again, the past failings have little to nothing to do with the current development of players given the new coaching regime, and any irrational venting about the past is...well, just that.

 

[burmafrd]

Again, the past failings have little to nothing to do with the current development of players given the new coaching regime, and any irrational venting about the past is...well, just that.

with the same guy in overall charge, you really believe that? And to call it irrational is to ignore reality.

 

[TheRomoSexual]

with the same guy in overall charge, you really believe that? And to call it irrational is to ignore reality.

I call it irrational to ignore current events (two first round picks in three years, the current develop of a left guard, and the efforts to sign a vet RG) due to past events. Under JG, this team has placed a greater emphasis on the OLine, so I don't really care what happened before him.

 

[CyberB0b]

No offense, but these posts are hilarious to me. Why do our past failures with entirely different coaching staffs have anything to do with our current coaching staff? It's like people think the "Cowboys" are an entity separate and apart from the coaches. It isn't, and what's happened in the past under different coaching regimes is completely and utterly irrelevant.

Maybe because the guy in my avatar has been the Owner, GM, and President of the Cowboys for most of my life? You don't think having the same guy in charge of personnel has a bearing on how we acquire and develop talent? Really?

I'd say that Leary is a pretty good example of what you can do with a player you stash and develop. I know he's not done anything beyond make a push for starting snaps so far, but given that Callahan has only been here a year, that's a pretty good indicator.

Either way, the solution to not being able to develop OG talent isn't to over-invest resources in order to fill those spots. It's better to figure out what's wrong with what you've been doing and to change your process (yeah, I said it) so that you can fill positions the way other successful teams in the league fill them and reserve your picks and cap dollars for the positions where skilled players are in much, much more demand.

I agree with the bolded and underlined part, but as you said, Leary is the only example of a guy we have developed who has even pushed for a starting role in over a decade (that we could both think of off the top of our head).

 

[jobberone]

This is what I hear from some of you. I wanted to put "Back to the Future" up as well but figured its all a waste of time.

Smith and Fred have been drafted recently. Leary appears to have the makings of a good guard. Free and Parnell played well the last third of the year. I see improvement in overall depth and in the starters. I'll give you guys the fact some have done nothing yet. You give others credit for saying there is more than one question mark along the OL. I'll give some credit for the fact the Cowboys have been poor at developing OL for some time. You give the Cowboys credit for trying to invest resources into fixing the OL esp the number ones.

The past is a door you shut and look into when you must. Otherwise you keep looking into unopened doors.

People who fail are extremely common. They get up and never give up. They often eventually succeed. Almost all winners were initially losers.

Finally I'm not defending anyone. There isn't many on here that were as anti-Jerry as I was at one time. I've had to change my judgment as time went on. Each year here is different and each should be judged according to its merits.

What I take away from the enlarged scene is Jerry needs to develop some team stability from the top down and I see him doing that. That is the key for long term success in this league IMO. That and talent acquisition. Later.

 

[xwalker]

Our coaching staffs are turned over every three years on average, which destroys any semblance of continuity or cohesion. That absolutely is an organizational flaw that hurts player development and has to be mentioned.

OLine Coaches:
Tony Wise 1989-1992
Hudson Houck 1993-2002
Tony Sparano 2003-2006
Hudson Houck 2007-2011
Bill Callahan 2012
Bill Callahan / Frank Pollack 2013

The years are approximate.

 

[mmillman]

Right now one might arguably conclude that there is a reasonable expectation that we can get adequate play at four of the five offensive line spots. I think that is a fair assumption (regardless if it turns out to be accurate or not).

There seems to be a vast difference in opinion about how good we are at the 5th spot which at this point is the guard opposite of Leary. Many posters seem satisfied with Arkin. I'm not really sold on him, but more importantly, the Cowboys don't seem satisfied with him either (and the rest of the guards) since they seem to be in the market for a starter.

The problem with just sending a live warm body out to play in the other guard spot (who does little other than suck good oxygen out of the air and say Ole' as he watches his QB get pummelled) is that teams "game plan" to exploit weaknesses like that. You can game plan to protect one of your minor weaknesses, but a major weakness will get exploited most of the time (and it limits what you can do because someone else is helping that weak link out).

The good news in all this is that if the Cowboys are willing to go out and spend decent money to plug the last perceived hole on the line that probably means that they are pretty satisfied at the other four postions ..... because plugging one hole in the bottom a bucket is meaningless if the bucket has more than one hole in it.

I still have visions of Free as a turnstile at RT so I hope 4 of 5 is correct. I have been disappointed in Smith as I really thought he would be dominant by now. Particularly since we passed on Watt to draft him.

 

[mmillman]

As it turned out we could have traded back and still got DeCastro. But as they say ...." if a worm had a machine gun the birds wouldn't eat him".

I wanted Nicks last year, not two scrub guards that still leave holes up the middle.

 

[Idgit]

...I agree with the bolded and underlined part, but as you said, Leary is the only example of a guy we have developed who has even pushed for a starting role in over a decade (that we could both think of off the top of our head).

It's been a really, really long time since we've developed a really good OL from scratch, and longer if you don't count the no-brainer top-10 pick variety of player. And I understand the frustration with it, because I share it myself. The fact that guys like Kowalski (injury) and Arkin (questionable strength) have been on the roster as long as they have been and aren't seen as potential up-and-coming starters for us down the road drives me up the wall, too.
I do think that very recent history looks more promising. Leary, as I've said. I think Costa and Parnell are success stories of the sort you have to have to have good OL depth. Frederick and Smith were expensive resources, but I don't think we missed on either of them. And I think OGs are important, too, just not as important as the other holes we've been concentrating on fixing recently.

I'd like to see us address the OG position the way we did the S position last year. Basically, we develop one starter from deep in our bench (like we did with Church) and then bring in an experienced vet (Will Allen) to hold down the fort. And then use mid round picks to add high-potential players you think can develop into eventual starters for you (Wilcox and Johnson). Throw a couple college FAs you like into the mix to push the middle-rounders.

The thing is, we need our premium picks to replace the DT/DEs we're going to lose this offseason. We need a QB to start developing. And it's insane to think that picks and cap dollars are wasted when they're spent at the CB position. I'd *love* to be able to add a premium player to the interior OL, but if we do that, it's going to be at the cost of a player at a position of greater need or at a salary cap expense that makes a second contract for a player we really really like difficult.

Personnel in the NFL in a salary cap era is a zero-sum game. I'd rather skimp at the positions where you've got the best chance of filling the roster with a value signing or a value pick. That doesn't make me a 'pollyanna.' It doesn't mean I'm not in favor of upgrading our interior OL where we can, or that I mistakenly think Mack and/or Livings are better than they actually are. And it doesn't mean that I don't agree that we've got a recent track record of not developing quality OL starters from the bench.

Looking at how the organization under Garrett churns the roster at position groups until they get options they can work with, and given that we've just brought Callahan in recently and that other positions along the OL are gradually improving, I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt that they'd eventually find options for us that will work. Especially because I don't really see where we've got any other good options available to us.