Wade, Another one who should just shut up.

[CNY Cowboy]

I just heard that W.P. stated that his plan was to take away The Pats run game and have Brady beat em.

Even if that dumb coaching move was true ,I wouldn't admit to it now.:bang2:

 

[5Stars]

I just heard that W.P. stated that his plan was to take away The Pats run game and have Brady beat em.

Even if that dumb coaching move was true ,I wouldn't admit to it now.:bang2:

The game with the Pats is over, sweetheart!

FYI.

Carry on...

 

[dbair1967]

I just heard that W.P. stated that his plan was to take away The Pats run game and have Brady beat em.

Even if that dumb coaching move was true ,I wouldn't admit to it now.:bang2:

wow...really quality post, I can hardly wait for the next one

not

David

 

[Nors]

I think Wade is tripping up what he meant to say.

I think he means to say you have to stop running game to win in NFL. I think he also went on to say Pats did what they expected, throw the ball alot. And then went to the then we try and pressure and make plays.

I think he'd have been better served on adjustments you can make. But he got stubborn and made that silly comment, though I do believe it's being twisted a little.

The other reality is an offense can also dictate what formations and schemes are in play. Especially ahead and always with the ball.

We imploded late in game.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

Let me guess... You heard that on 103.3 from Hansen, didn't you?

See, this is one reason idiot articles suck. Hansen got this from Cowlishaw's article, where he insists that Wade said that. I think there is NO WAY he said that. He was talking in general terms, saying that if you make an offense one-dimensional, you have a better chance to beat them. That's it. He NEVER said Sammy Morris was better than Tom Brady, or more important to stop, or anything of the sort. Do you really think he doesn't know which one is a better player?

Cowlishaw is just stupid, disingenuous, or both.

 

[smarta5150]

I don't understand why everyone is getting on Wade for coming out and admitting we wanted Brady to beat us.

Isnt that what every defense tries to do? Stop the run 1st? Which is exactly what we did.

We shut down their run game and they beat us by throwing 40+ times.

Were we suppose to let them run for 5 yards a pop and that would some how let us win the game?

Embrace the hate i guess.

 

[AsthmaField]

I just heard that W.P. stated that his plan was to take away The Pats run game and have Brady beat em.

Even if that dumb coaching move was true ,I wouldn't admit to it now.:bang2:

Yeah, I would have definately dropped about 8 or 9 back in coverage and made them run the ball all day. Their drives would have all been long and time consuming, eventually tiring out Brady's arm from turning to hand off the ball.

Then, since they had around 500 yards rushing, Tom would have no reason to throw... thus... wait for it... thus, stopping their potent passing attack!

Not to mention the benefits our offense would have from only playing about 10:00 min the entire game. They would all be fresh as Daiseys at the end of the game.

It would almost be like a bye for our offense and they'd really be ready for Minnesota!

Yeah, that would have been much better. Stupid Wade!

 

[5Stars]

I don't understand why everyone is getting on Wade for coming out and admitting we wanted Brady to beat us.

Isnt that what every defense tries to do? Stop the run 1st? Which is exactly what we did.

We shut down their run game and they beat us by throwing 40+ times.

Were we suppose to let them run for 5 yards a pop and that would some how let us win the game?

Embrace the hate i guess.

Sweet...!

The Cowboys did good...

 

[Chuck 54]

I just heard that W.P. stated that his plan was to take away The Pats run game and have Brady beat em.

Even if that dumb coaching move was true ,I wouldn't admit to it now.:bang2:

I think maybe you are in the same boat the ESPN newsmen are...maybe you just don't understand the NFL.

I can guarantee you there's not a team in the NFL that doesn't try to attack the Patriots the same exact way. Are you going to play nickel against two TE's and let them run the ball on you at will? Every team has to stop the running game of the other team...the only exception is that you take a calculated risk on giving up a play when you blitz the QB.

Look at our team especially...how would any sane person attack the Pats? The same way...stop the run totally with your front 7, which we did, and make the Pats one dimensional. When a QB has to throw the ball 50 times, even a good QB, you assume you'll get a sack here and there, a holding penalty here or there, a dropped pass here and there, a tipped ball, or maybe a bad pass now and then. You're looking for stops, not total control. The Pats played a great game with Brady being very sharp all game, the receivers catching everything, DB's close to receivers but never getting their hands on perfectly thrown balls, and an OL that adjusted and protected him well in the 4th quarter and didn't commit penalties. And when we did get stops on 3rd down, we were offsides or roughed the passer to give them first downs anyway.

Can you imagine what Brady would do to you if you didn't force him to be one dimensional? What if you let him have a good running game and he could play action you at will?

And can you imagine the Cowboys trying to shut down the passing game and let the running game take over? How exactly do you do that? Put in more DB's? We were already playing Jones, who should never be playing in a game like that...Jones, a guy we cut and not a single team in the NFL claimed on waivers!!! Should we put in more safeties like Elam, Davis?

What Wade said sounds funny because it sounds like he wasn't afraid of Brady, which couldn't be further from the truth...there's so much respect for Brady that you don't want to let him only pass when he wants to or when he has you set up...you want to know he is passing every down so you can try to pressure him and have the right guys in for coverage, guys you don't want to see flying up to stop the run. And you just don't have any decent guys in the secondary to put into the game either.

The ESPN announcers making fun of Wade just don't get it. When Indy plays NE, you can bet they will stop the run and try to get Brady to pass it 50+ times as well. Who wants to see a RB getting 100+ yards and Brady killing you only when he sees something he likes?

 

[Chuck 54]

Yeah, I would have definately dropped about 8 or 9 back in coverage and made them run the ball all day. Their drives would have all been long and time consuming, eventually tiring out Brady's arm from turning to hand off the ball.

Then, since they had around 500 yards rushing, Tom would have no reason to throw... thus... wait for it... thus, stopping their potent passing attack!

Not to mention the benefits our offense would have from only playing about 10:00 min the entire game. They would all be fresh as Daiseys at the end of the game.

It would almost be like a bye for our offense and they'd really be ready for Minnesota!

Yeah, that would have been much better. Stupid Wade!

The five guys we had in coverage already included Jones who was cut and had every single team in the NFL let him pass back to us without claiming him on waivers!!!! Who would you have put back there for Dallas that would have helped us stop Brady and Company? Who do we even have after Jones? More crappy safeties who stink?

<just adding to your sarcasm>

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

I just heard that W.P. stated that his plan was to take away The Pats run game and have Brady beat em.

Even if that dumb coaching move was true ,I wouldn't admit to it now.:bang2:

If we could have kept the Pats off the field.... it still could have worked.... The Pats would have got theirs and we could have expanded on our lead after halftime..

They loaded up on points on our tired defense in the end

 

[Nors]

If we could have kept the Pats off the field.... it still could have worked.... The Pats would have got theirs and we could have expanded on our lead after halftime..

They loaded up on points on our tired defense in the end

Yes, we did Sack Brady 3 times and force a fumble/TD. Our offense let our defense down with too many 3 and outs and poor 3rd down conversions. We tired and were run over late in a game we were leading in 3rd.

 

[Clove]

Yes, we did Sack Brady 3 times and force a fumble/TD. Our offense let our defense down with too many 3 and outs and poor 3rd down conversions. We tired and were run over late in a game we were leading in 3rd.

I think it's the other way around. Our defense did nothing in this game but consistantly gave up the quick outs/hitches since we play way off the WRs, this put them in 2nd or 3rd and short.

From there, they would send Welker in motion to determine if Nate was playing him 1 on 1, and when Nate would follow, they would simple burn him.

Our offense is not as smooth as NEs, we have weaknesses at WR (speed) and a couple of weaknesses in the OLine, Romo is basically doing most of this himself.

 

[CrazyCowboy]

Actually, I don't see nothing wrong with saying that after the fact.

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

Yes, we did Sack Brady 3 times and force a fumble/TD. Our offense let our defense down with too many 3 and outs and poor 3rd down conversions. We tired and were run over late in a game we were leading in 3rd.

I think it's the other way around. Our defense did nothing in this game but consistantly gave up the quick outs/hitches since we play way off the WRs, this put them in 2nd or 3rd and short.

From there, they would send Welker in motion to determine if Nate was playing him 1 on 1, and when Nate would follow, they would simple burn him.

Our offense is not as smooth as NEs, we have weaknesses at WR (speed) and a couple of weaknesses in the OLine, Romo is basically doing most of this himself.

You both make good points. But the defense gets a little bit of a pass.... how many times are you going to ask them to stop that kind of offensive attack.... then add in exhaustion from being on field too long.

 

[Freyguy]

Not to trash talk here but the best part about the top post was the avatar.

 

[RomoFan4ever]

I just heard that W.P. stated that his plan was to take away The Pats run game and have Brady beat em.

Even if that dumb coaching move was true ,I wouldn't admit to it now.:bang2:

Who said this? Hanson?

Let it go-we lost, but there's STILL TEN more games to go.

Heck-we could have Mike Holmgren as our coach-he's having his WORST coaching year, by far, IMHO. You saw how he went for it on 4th down(instead of kicking the FG to make it a one score game and then going for the onsides).

It's not like Wade has been bone-stupid like this.

 

[Vertigo_17]

I don't understand why everyone is getting on Wade for coming out and admitting we wanted Brady to beat us.

Isnt that what every defense tries to do? Stop the run 1st? Which is exactly what we did.

We shut down their run game and they beat us by throwing 40+ times.

Were we suppose to let them run for 5 yards a pop and that would some how let us win the game?

Embrace the hate i guess.

Agreed. Even if we wanted to, there is no way we could have shut down Brady with our CB's and Safeties. Might as well at least try and stop the run, otherwise the final score is even worse.

 

[TheSkaven]

You guys crack me up. In fact, it was a successful strategy. What killed this team was the inability to stop Brady on 3rd downs. We're not talking about 3rd and 3's here either, but 3rd and long (8 or more yards). In that situation, the team knew the pass was coming, it did, and Wes Walker torched Nate Jones.

I'm just not sure this team had the personnel on the field to match up in that situation. We'll see when we play them in the SB and Henry is healthy.

 

[ddh33]

I saw and heard the same thing multiple times today on ESPN. This isn't just bad reporting either. This is blatant misrepresentation. Others have already mentioned what Wade said, what he meant, and how it was taken out of context. Pretty pathetic if you ask me.