Video: Dukes vs Doug Free: The Video Evidence

[Bob Sacamano]

I agree..... Seems like Free was taking too sharp an angle when dropping back in pass protection. Jared Allen was taking a route that put him close to Romo on most of the pass plays. Free was giving too much ground before engaging Allen. With that being said, Free improved as the game went on . Romo could not step up in the pocket because of the pressure coming from the middle. Free done a better job than Dukes gave him credit for, but not quite as good as DC gave him. Free will be much better after playing the position in training camp and preseason. Free should prove Dukes wrong as the season goes on and Free settles in on the left side . Just my 2 cents........

Which is where I think switching over from right to left tackle was huge for him.

 

[juck]

Dukes loved the Cowboys when his pal TO was here. On the video,Kosier sucks.

 

[casmith07]

off topic, but Jamie Dukes sure does bag on Tony Romo a whole lot for being an UDFA himself.

 

[casmith07]

Anyone who watched the game knows it was Ray Edwards on Marc Columbo that gave us fits.

:clap2:

 

[DallasDomination]

The more I watch this the more it reminds me of how bad the oline played that game. Romo had zero time to pass. It also reminds me of how dumb our coaching was by not running Felix Jones more.

Doug free played average at best in this game. I'm giving him a pass because he played well at RT when Colombo was hurt.

 

[CF74]

Flo went down, Gurode was playing with a bum knee, and Colombo was still nursing a broken leg.. We didn't have a chance and by the 4rth quarter the defense was gassed and started giving up points. Free was not even a concern in that game...

 

[SilverStarCowboy]

Flo went down, Gurode was playing with a bum knee, and Colombo was still nursing a broken leg.. We didn't have a chance and by the 4rth quarter the defense was gassed and started giving up points. Free was not even a concern in that game...

It's hard to make it though an NFL season healthy, especially when you wiegh over 300 lbs.

 

[Alexander]

I don't know, but I think if producers and editors held these guys a bit more accountable they would have better papers, magazines and TV shows and more people would read, buy and watch their stuff.

I disagree. Any producer and editor wants the material to be consumed by the masses, not some small segment of connoisseurs. And what sells better? Things that are bright and rosy written for the Cowboy fan in mind? I guarantee you if Dukes said he had the utmost confidence in Doug Free, it would not sell.

 

[VACowboy]

I disagree. Any producer and editor wants the material to be consumed by the masses, not some small segment of connoisseurs. And what sells better? Things that are bright and rosy written for the Cowboy fan in mind? I guarantee you if Dukes said he had the utmost confidence in Doug Free, it would not sell.

I guess "selling" is the name of the media game, but doesn't accuracy have to come into play at some point? My personal opinion, Free was neither as bad as Dukes has portrayed him, nor as great as DC made him out to be in the video. What I saw was Free getting pushed around a good bit but holding up fairly well, considering the circumstances.

What did anyone expect from a guy forced into mid-game duty in a conference championship game, in one of the most hostile environments in the league, against one of the best players in football, at a position he hadn't prepared for and had never played before in his professional career? In my opinion, Free did as well as could have been expected. I have complete confidence that, going through TC at LT and preparing to play the position, week in and week out, Free will be fine.

I don't care if Dukes hates the Cowboys. I couldn't care less if his opinions are biased. What irks me is when he uses blatant inaccuracies in his arguments, like calling Free "heavy-legged." He obviously knows zero about the player.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

I disagree. Any producer and editor wants the material to be consumed by the masses, not some small segment of connoisseurs. And what sells better? Things that are bright and rosy written for the Cowboy fan in mind? I guarantee you if Dukes said he had the utmost confidence in Doug Free, it would not sell.

I disagree with you on this. I think there’s a niche being developed here because of more or less incompetence from sports writers and TV analysts. I have no problem with Dukes saying that he doesn’t like Doug Free, but show us why instead of just telling us that he sucks and leave it at that. Hell, if a producer really had some guts they’d call out idiot reporters and idiot analysts who clearly just make blanket statements, much like a ‘taste test comparison’ type of marketing.

It has nothing to do with being a ‘connoisseur’, but it has to do with good, sound reporting/analysis and I think the masses want that…or at least wouldn’t mind seeing that. The problem with these shows and sports sections in the newspapers is that all of them try to be the same and quite frankly, ESPN owns the market on that. So think outside of the box for a bit, differentiate yourself from the competition and market yourself as being different from the competition and you can actually generate the ratings, revenue, Web site clicks, etc.

There’s not a lot of reasons for an NFL fan to go and pay extra to get the NFL Network when they can get ESPN with their regular cable package if the NFLN is essentially the same format with the same type of hosts making the same type of blanket statements and lazy analysis and reports.




YR

 

[VACowboy]

I disagree with you on this. I think there’s a niche being developed here because of more or less incompetence from sports writers and TV analysts. I have no problem with Dukes saying that he doesn’t like Doug Free, but show us why instead of just telling us that he sucks and leave it at that. Hell, if a producer really had some guts they’d call out idiot reporters and idiot analysts who clearly just make blanket statements, much like a ‘taste test comparison’ type of marketing.

It has nothing to do with being a ‘connoisseur’, but it has to do with good, sound reporting/analysis and I think the masses want that…or at least wouldn’t mind seeing that. The problem with these shows and sports sections in the newspapers is that all of them try to be the same and quite frankly, ESPN owns the market on that. So think outside of the box for a bit, differentiate yourself from the competition and market yourself as being different from the competition and you can actually generate the ratings, revenue, Web site clicks, etc.

There’s not a lot of reasons for an NFL fan to go and pay extra to get the NFL Network when they can get ESPN with their regular cable package if the NFLN is essentially the same format with the same type of hosts making the same type of blanket statements and lazy analysis and reports.




YR

EXACTLY.

I have no prob with Dukes criticizing Free, but he needs to at least look at some film. Free is exactly opposite the slow non-athlete Dukes makes him out to be.

 

[Alexander]

I disagree with you on this. I think there’s a niche being developed here because of more or less incompetence from sports writers and TV analysts. I have no problem with Dukes saying that he doesn’t like Doug Free, but show us why instead of just telling us that he sucks and leave it at that. Hell, if a producer really had some guts they’d call out idiot reporters and idiot analysts who clearly just make blanket statements, much like a ‘taste test comparison’ type of marketing.

It has nothing to do with being a ‘connoisseur’, but it has to do with good, sound reporting/analysis and I think the masses want that…or at least wouldn’t mind seeing that. The problem with these shows and sports sections in the newspapers is that all of them try to be the same and quite frankly, ESPN owns the market on that. So think outside of the box for a bit, differentiate yourself from the competition and market yourself as being different from the competition and you can actually generate the ratings, revenue, Web site clicks, etc.

There’s not a lot of reasons for an NFL fan to go and pay extra to get the NFL Network when they can get ESPN with their regular cable package if the NFLN is essentially the same format with the same type of hosts making the same type of blanket statements and lazy analysis and reports.




YR

It has everything to do with being a connoisseur. If you think bits like what is put out by the mass media is concerned with accuracy and a lack of bias, then you are most certainly not the target audience. I don't think the masses want the kind of reporting you are referring to, because honestly it would be over their heads. I am not excusing it but I understand why things are done the way they are.

 

[HoleInTheRoof]

It has everything to do with being a connoisseur. If you think bits like what is put out by the mass media is concerned with accuracy and a lack of bias, then you are most certainly not the target audience. I don't think the masses want the kind of reporting you are referring to, because honestly it would be over their heads. I am not excusing it but I understand why things are done the way they are.

I agree.

Hard core fans want what YR is referring to. And most of us are hard core fans.

But Joe Fans want simplicity that doesn't require thinking on their part.

 

[Alexander]

EXACTLY.

I have no prob with Dukes criticizing Free, but he needs to at least look at some film.

I can count on one hand the number of analysts that actually do this. Sadly, most are just like Dukes, uninformed and more than a little bit lazy. Again, these types of junkies (ala Ron Jaworski) are few and far between. Even those bring their baggage to the table. Jaworski is as technical as can be, but he will absolutely inject bias.

 

[Alexander]

I agree.

Hard core fans want what YR is referring to. And most of us are hard core fans.

But Joe Fans want simplicity that doesn't require thinking on their part.

Quick, easy and not mentally taxing is the name of the game. Intellectual analysis (or hardcore as you put it) is not something that sells or is that cost efficient considering the target audience.

Like it or not, football coverage is rarely slanted this way. Watch practically any pregame show there is. No film study, just quick and digestible bites that casual fans can digest and ruminate over. The more sensational or sentimental the better. It is emotionally driven, not analytical.

 

[Chief]

I can count on one hand the number of analysts that actually do this. Sadly, most are just like Dukes, uninformed and more than a little bit lazy. Again, these types of junkies (ala Ron Jaworski) are few and far between. Even those bring their baggage to the table. Jaworski is as technical as can be, but he will absolutely inject bias.

So true.

 

[VACowboy]

It has everything to do with being a connoisseur. If you think bits like what is put out by the mass media is concerned with accuracy and a lack of bias, then you are most certainly not the target audience. I don't think the masses want the kind of reporting you are referring to, because honestly it would be over their heads. I am not excusing it but I understand why things are done the way they are.

I guess I'm naive, then. I don't know how anyone can "want" inaccurate reporting. To me, there's a huge difference between commenting with inaccuracy and commenting with bias.

 

[Alexander]

So true.

It is what happens when a sport gets this popular. It has to be marketed for the masses as opposed to a smaller cross-section who knew what they were looking at.

Years ago, sportswriters wrote their pieces in press boxes and they read like prose (or they wrote them after the fact over a bottle of rye, chomping on a cigar and it read like an epic).

Look at the announcers even. When people as ridiculous and mentally stunted like Joe Buck and Chris Berman rise to the top of the heap, you have to be able to understand what the heap is made of. It is just the way things are now.

 

[HoleInTheRoof]

I guess I'm naive, then. I don't know how anyone can "want" inaccurate reporting. To me, there's a huge difference between commenting with inaccuracy and commenting with bias.

You just have to understand that most fans are ignorant. They don't study the game. They're just casual fans. They want microwavable sound bites and mindless entertainment.

 

[VACowboy]

I can count on one hand the number of analysts that actually do this. Sadly, most are just like Dukes, uninformed and more than a little bit lazy. Again, these types of junkies (ala Ron Jaworski) are few and far between. Even those bring their baggage to the table. Jaworski is as technical as can be, but he will absolutely inject bias.

This. Yep.

Oh well.

Edited to add: I guess I don't see where it takes hours of technical film study to see that Doug Free is an athletic guy. Dukes just makes crap up.