AdamJT13;2134532 said:
The passing game is what almost always determines whether you win or lose, not the running game. The passing game is usually the deciding factor, while the running game is merely a contributing factor.
If Romo had completed his final pass, you'd need a new theory.
Somehow, the discussion has focused on just the playoff game of last season- but that's not exactly what I'm talking about.
I'm referring to the last few games of 2007. In the first of last year, the Cowboys played with determination and discipline- no doubt with some remaining influence of Parcell's disciplinarian ways.
This is not about Parcells- let me make that clear. I thought it was time for him to go. However, he did help mold this team.
But, as their success grew, and the media hype surrounding them reached new levels- and other teams studied their new offense- cracks in the armor began to appear.
Buffalo nearly beat us early, as the Cowboys were not expecting their defense-which seemed to know where Romo's recievers would be. Winning that game was a tribute to the desire of the Cowboys to win, and the ability of Jason Garrett to adapt and change his game plan in the middle of a game to succeed.
And, then, they rolled on along- and even though we lost to New England, the Cowboys could have just as easily won that game.
But, after dominating early against Green Bay-really putting the game away after the first quarter and a half-the Cowboys seemed to lose their discipline; and they never seemed to have the intensity and coordination to the offense for the rest of the season that they did beforehand.
In the last few games of last year, a change appeared in the Cowboys offense. It showed against Washington in the first game- as their intensity just didn't seem to be their, and they appeared to approach it with a "ho hum" attitude. Remember the snap from center that hit Romo, and Julius Jones caught it? That was the carelessness that began to show in their offense- stupid plays that just kept popping up- not the mark of a professional team. The Cowboys won, but it was a fight to the end against a team that wasn't near as good.
The run out of the endzone by Marion Barber that garnered so much national attention actually symbolized the undisciplined offense that followed. He got very lucky- because what he should have done was go down at the two, instead of retreating all the way to the back of the end zone. If Bill Parcells had still been the coach, he would have no doubt had a stroke on the sidelines during that play, and would have probably left teeth in Barber's backside from the chewing he gave him afterwards. That was a stupid play, and he got really lucky that it wasn't a safety, or worse. It may have looked good on the highlight reels, but it was actually a definite 'no-no' for professional football.
And that's where I see a problem- it was as if our offense began to lose it's discipline, and began to play sandlot football. The coordination and the discipline was no longer there, and they seemed to have a sandlot mentality- rather than a professionally coordinated offense that methodically moves down the field to score; along the way setting the tone for the game , and developing a rhythm for the offense as the game wore on.
That's the part I'm talking about. If the Cowboys do not regain the rhythm, coordination, and discipline in their offensive game planning that they showed early last year, and "wing it" like they did at the end of last season, they could be in for troubles.
For all of my worries about Wade, the defense of the Cowboys played fantastic all year last year.
It was the offense that struggled. Stats don't matter; putting the ball in the end zone when it counts matters.
