jday
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 9,321
- Reaction score
- 13,284
The following is a collection of random thoughts on the Seattle loss and them some.
It is games like that that solidify my opinion that this Cowboys team is still a few pieces away from being a legitimate contender. I still say they are a 10 and 6 team, but if they do make the play offs, I don't see them getting very far, but I hope I am wrong.
Rob Ryan has dialed back blitzing? Why? I thought the point of improving the secondary was so Rob Ryan could blitz. A 3 man rush 8 times in the game against Seattle? What scenario called for that? If we were winning and they were playing catch up, I can see it, but I think it was pretty obvious that for the most part Seattle was trying to kill clock. And against a rookie QB…I really would love to know the thought process there. I am not a coach, scout, or otherwise informed individual, so I can’t just outright say his lack of blitzes called was a mistake. The only thing that comes to mind is that he was more afraid of Josh Wilson’s leg’s than his arm. For me, though, that really doesn’t make sense either. I would much rather a QB get it in his head that he has to win on his own legs than have all day in the pocket to pick us apart.
Defense. I'm actually okay with the defensive overall performance. There were far too many 3 and outs from the Cowboys offense for their defense to maintain the intensity they started with. That paired with the injuries suffered, would be a recipe for disaster for any team. Keep in mind, the first 10 points of the game was not the defenses fault. The only thing I question is the think twice aspect of a defenses game. Think twice is a very important psychological part of football. You want receivers to think twice before they take their routes over the middle and catch a ball. You want QB's to think twice before they throw. You want RB's to think twice before they make that next cut, and you absolutely positively want the opposing team to think twice before they celebrate a hit or try to punk one of your own teammates...especially your defensive leader.
I get Jason's take on it. You don't want the retaliation to hurt the situation on the field or give the opposing offense free yards or worse lead to an ejection. I understand that completely. But there are ways to retaliate without actually hurting the team. And you don't necessarily have to get the perpetrator back; anyone on the opposing team will do. It simply needs to be made clear that the Cowboys are not to be punked and if they are, there will be dire consequences. At least, that is my take on it.
I like Jason Garrett the Head Coach. I like Jason Garrett the talent evaluator...for the most part. But I absolutely hate Jason Garrett the play caller. For his defenders, I only ask you to explain 1 thing: Why do you think we have to see the Romo twist during just about every series of offense? And, no, it's not just because of our make shift OL, though, it clearly plays a part. It's because far too many of Jason's play's break down. Rather it is poor teaching or poor play schematics and route combinations, it still falls under Garrett's responsibility. Example, you ask? The easy answer is simply shotgun draw on the goal line. My wife, who hates football, even knew what Garrett was calling in that situation last year. Too easy? Okay. The strong side run this year. It's a great run play, but only if it is used right. Just as you use the run to set up the play action, in a zone blocking scheme, which is what they are trying to incorporate, you use the strong side run to set up the weak side cut back/counter. I have seen that play once and it was in preseason. I love his new commitment to the run, but running strong side straight forward all the time is not going to cut it, if you don't throw in a weak side counter every now and then to keep the defense honest. Even if it doesn't work, it will pay dividends later in the game. Questioning his route combination, admittedly, is tough, because there is no way to confirm if players are running the right route...but if they are not, that still falls under Jason Garrett's responsibility. I bring this up because it seems as though guy’s covering other players end up with the interception as opposed to the guy actually responsible for coverage of the player Romo is throwing to. Route combinations, by design, are supposed to help prevent this. I really don’t have any hard data to support this statement, but I get the feeling sometimes Garrett calls plays like he’s the smartest guy on the field. Does that make sense to anyone outside of me?
I want to be clear here, though. I like Garrett as our coach and I hope Jerry intends to keep him as coach for a long time. In life, you very rarely find coaches that are a finished product, in terms of understanding the game and how to win. And if they are available, they are either now an analyst or retired. I point to the inception of the Cowboys as the reason I want Garrett to remain our coach, regardless of what I believe to be mistakes. It took Tom Landry, I think, 6 years to get the Cowboys to be competitive.
Make no mistake, if you have to point to one aspect of the Seattle game that led to the loss ultimately, I point to the offensive line. Granted, I think improved/smarter play calling would certainly help the OL. But let's not kid ourselves, everyone from Tyrone Smith to Doug Free have shown instances of being man-handled and lack of focus. Not sure if it is their overall strength or a flaw in their technique, but it is obvious this money ball approach to fixing our OL has not worked up to this point. But, considering that the Cowboys success or lack thereof really doesn't have a tangible impact on my life, I am willing to wait and see what happens. The great offensive lines throughout the history of the NFL typically were playing together a couple of years before they started earning a reputation for dominance. On the other side of this argument you have to consider that the Cowboys are running that offensive line with 3 of the 5 being other team's castoff from a year ago.
Felix Jones. He just isn't the same guy anymore. And I think him still being on the team is actually a prime example of what has been wrong with the Cowboys since their last Super Bowl win. The Cowboys either wait too long to deal guys when they have nothing left and/or wait too long to try young guys who showed something in preseason. Tony Romo, Miles Austin, Felix Jones are all recent examples of players that showed something in preseason, but didn't get an opportunity to really start and show what they had until years later in their career. Keith Brooking, Bradie James, Terence Newman, Roy Williams (WR & SS), even maybe Jason Witten, are examples of guys that the team held on to way too long, despite being well past their prime. And for those of you who think I included Jason Witten because of the Seattle game 3 drops, please save your defense. I have been saying we need to deal Witten while he still has value for a couple of years now. It's a business where the idea is to try and stay young and talented. And I'm sorry, I don't think Witten impacts games as much as some of you believe. Just my opinion. But back to my point, Felix Jones and Brodney Poole should have been cut as soon they failed their physicals. I feel like Jason Garrett missed out on a prime opportunity to send a message there. But once again I steer from my point. Even if Felix passed the physical, there is no way he would have made my final 53. Period. He did absolutely nothing in the preseason to show that he was more deserving of a spot than any of the other 3 being showcased. Meanwhile, guys who actually did show a little something, are sitting on our practice squad.
Lawrence Vickers. Frankly, I don’t see how he is better than what we had. Don’t get me wrong, I recognize that he is one of the better FB’s in the league, but he is not living up to his hype. Just sayin. Obviously it is too soon to judge him, particularly considering he did not have too many opportunities to play against Seattle, because we were playing from behind and Jason gave up on the run. And I might add, touching on his play calling issues above again, I think Jason gave up on the run in that game too soon.
Now for what I think, I think…I think. I put it that way, because what I’m about to say flies right in the face of convention and will likely illicit a number of eye-rolls and snarky comments. Don’t care. I think the Cowboys have 6 receivers that can play in this NFL. And I think we should use all of them. And, no, not just as decoys. Utilizing route combinations, you can manufacture situations to get guys open. And I think guys like Beasley and Harris should get the ball in their hands, at least, once a game. I know…there are only so many balls. I get it. But a season is a marathon not a sprint. And I think you have to give opposing DC’s something else to think about when they are watching film. On a given play, they can only take so many weapons away. If you make sure the ball get’s spread around in a number of different ways, you don’t give OC clear things to work on as the Cowboys did in the Giants game. One of things that really concerned me in the offensive plays called against the Giants was that one slant play that the Cowboys used over and over again, Ogletree in particular being the recipient. I thought that maybe Garrett was setting up the next team for a situation where they could fake that and then go over the top, knowing the defense would be eager to stop the slant. I didn’t see that against Seattle, but it is possible I missed it. Back to my original point, I get that you should always take what the defense gives you, but I do think there are situations where you can manufacture a play specifically for one guy. Like I said earlier in this, it may not work, but that’s not really the point of doing it in the first place. As I said before, it will give the DC on the other side of the field something more to think about and it gives the guy watching film the next week something to think about. That’s, at least, what I think I think.
That’s a good portion of what has been rattling around in my head since that horrible, horrible game.
It is games like that that solidify my opinion that this Cowboys team is still a few pieces away from being a legitimate contender. I still say they are a 10 and 6 team, but if they do make the play offs, I don't see them getting very far, but I hope I am wrong.
Rob Ryan has dialed back blitzing? Why? I thought the point of improving the secondary was so Rob Ryan could blitz. A 3 man rush 8 times in the game against Seattle? What scenario called for that? If we were winning and they were playing catch up, I can see it, but I think it was pretty obvious that for the most part Seattle was trying to kill clock. And against a rookie QB…I really would love to know the thought process there. I am not a coach, scout, or otherwise informed individual, so I can’t just outright say his lack of blitzes called was a mistake. The only thing that comes to mind is that he was more afraid of Josh Wilson’s leg’s than his arm. For me, though, that really doesn’t make sense either. I would much rather a QB get it in his head that he has to win on his own legs than have all day in the pocket to pick us apart.
Defense. I'm actually okay with the defensive overall performance. There were far too many 3 and outs from the Cowboys offense for their defense to maintain the intensity they started with. That paired with the injuries suffered, would be a recipe for disaster for any team. Keep in mind, the first 10 points of the game was not the defenses fault. The only thing I question is the think twice aspect of a defenses game. Think twice is a very important psychological part of football. You want receivers to think twice before they take their routes over the middle and catch a ball. You want QB's to think twice before they throw. You want RB's to think twice before they make that next cut, and you absolutely positively want the opposing team to think twice before they celebrate a hit or try to punk one of your own teammates...especially your defensive leader.
I get Jason's take on it. You don't want the retaliation to hurt the situation on the field or give the opposing offense free yards or worse lead to an ejection. I understand that completely. But there are ways to retaliate without actually hurting the team. And you don't necessarily have to get the perpetrator back; anyone on the opposing team will do. It simply needs to be made clear that the Cowboys are not to be punked and if they are, there will be dire consequences. At least, that is my take on it.
I like Jason Garrett the Head Coach. I like Jason Garrett the talent evaluator...for the most part. But I absolutely hate Jason Garrett the play caller. For his defenders, I only ask you to explain 1 thing: Why do you think we have to see the Romo twist during just about every series of offense? And, no, it's not just because of our make shift OL, though, it clearly plays a part. It's because far too many of Jason's play's break down. Rather it is poor teaching or poor play schematics and route combinations, it still falls under Garrett's responsibility. Example, you ask? The easy answer is simply shotgun draw on the goal line. My wife, who hates football, even knew what Garrett was calling in that situation last year. Too easy? Okay. The strong side run this year. It's a great run play, but only if it is used right. Just as you use the run to set up the play action, in a zone blocking scheme, which is what they are trying to incorporate, you use the strong side run to set up the weak side cut back/counter. I have seen that play once and it was in preseason. I love his new commitment to the run, but running strong side straight forward all the time is not going to cut it, if you don't throw in a weak side counter every now and then to keep the defense honest. Even if it doesn't work, it will pay dividends later in the game. Questioning his route combination, admittedly, is tough, because there is no way to confirm if players are running the right route...but if they are not, that still falls under Jason Garrett's responsibility. I bring this up because it seems as though guy’s covering other players end up with the interception as opposed to the guy actually responsible for coverage of the player Romo is throwing to. Route combinations, by design, are supposed to help prevent this. I really don’t have any hard data to support this statement, but I get the feeling sometimes Garrett calls plays like he’s the smartest guy on the field. Does that make sense to anyone outside of me?
I want to be clear here, though. I like Garrett as our coach and I hope Jerry intends to keep him as coach for a long time. In life, you very rarely find coaches that are a finished product, in terms of understanding the game and how to win. And if they are available, they are either now an analyst or retired. I point to the inception of the Cowboys as the reason I want Garrett to remain our coach, regardless of what I believe to be mistakes. It took Tom Landry, I think, 6 years to get the Cowboys to be competitive.
Make no mistake, if you have to point to one aspect of the Seattle game that led to the loss ultimately, I point to the offensive line. Granted, I think improved/smarter play calling would certainly help the OL. But let's not kid ourselves, everyone from Tyrone Smith to Doug Free have shown instances of being man-handled and lack of focus. Not sure if it is their overall strength or a flaw in their technique, but it is obvious this money ball approach to fixing our OL has not worked up to this point. But, considering that the Cowboys success or lack thereof really doesn't have a tangible impact on my life, I am willing to wait and see what happens. The great offensive lines throughout the history of the NFL typically were playing together a couple of years before they started earning a reputation for dominance. On the other side of this argument you have to consider that the Cowboys are running that offensive line with 3 of the 5 being other team's castoff from a year ago.
Felix Jones. He just isn't the same guy anymore. And I think him still being on the team is actually a prime example of what has been wrong with the Cowboys since their last Super Bowl win. The Cowboys either wait too long to deal guys when they have nothing left and/or wait too long to try young guys who showed something in preseason. Tony Romo, Miles Austin, Felix Jones are all recent examples of players that showed something in preseason, but didn't get an opportunity to really start and show what they had until years later in their career. Keith Brooking, Bradie James, Terence Newman, Roy Williams (WR & SS), even maybe Jason Witten, are examples of guys that the team held on to way too long, despite being well past their prime. And for those of you who think I included Jason Witten because of the Seattle game 3 drops, please save your defense. I have been saying we need to deal Witten while he still has value for a couple of years now. It's a business where the idea is to try and stay young and talented. And I'm sorry, I don't think Witten impacts games as much as some of you believe. Just my opinion. But back to my point, Felix Jones and Brodney Poole should have been cut as soon they failed their physicals. I feel like Jason Garrett missed out on a prime opportunity to send a message there. But once again I steer from my point. Even if Felix passed the physical, there is no way he would have made my final 53. Period. He did absolutely nothing in the preseason to show that he was more deserving of a spot than any of the other 3 being showcased. Meanwhile, guys who actually did show a little something, are sitting on our practice squad.
Lawrence Vickers. Frankly, I don’t see how he is better than what we had. Don’t get me wrong, I recognize that he is one of the better FB’s in the league, but he is not living up to his hype. Just sayin. Obviously it is too soon to judge him, particularly considering he did not have too many opportunities to play against Seattle, because we were playing from behind and Jason gave up on the run. And I might add, touching on his play calling issues above again, I think Jason gave up on the run in that game too soon.
Now for what I think, I think…I think. I put it that way, because what I’m about to say flies right in the face of convention and will likely illicit a number of eye-rolls and snarky comments. Don’t care. I think the Cowboys have 6 receivers that can play in this NFL. And I think we should use all of them. And, no, not just as decoys. Utilizing route combinations, you can manufacture situations to get guys open. And I think guys like Beasley and Harris should get the ball in their hands, at least, once a game. I know…there are only so many balls. I get it. But a season is a marathon not a sprint. And I think you have to give opposing DC’s something else to think about when they are watching film. On a given play, they can only take so many weapons away. If you make sure the ball get’s spread around in a number of different ways, you don’t give OC clear things to work on as the Cowboys did in the Giants game. One of things that really concerned me in the offensive plays called against the Giants was that one slant play that the Cowboys used over and over again, Ogletree in particular being the recipient. I thought that maybe Garrett was setting up the next team for a situation where they could fake that and then go over the top, knowing the defense would be eager to stop the slant. I didn’t see that against Seattle, but it is possible I missed it. Back to my original point, I get that you should always take what the defense gives you, but I do think there are situations where you can manufacture a play specifically for one guy. Like I said earlier in this, it may not work, but that’s not really the point of doing it in the first place. As I said before, it will give the DC on the other side of the field something more to think about and it gives the guy watching film the next week something to think about. That’s, at least, what I think I think.
That’s a good portion of what has been rattling around in my head since that horrible, horrible game.
