FEATURED What IS working

[kramskoi]

It all depends on the type of person you are.

After a decade or so of posting on Cowboys message boards, I'm convinced that there is a good portion of the fan base (population) that is just miserable unless we are winning nearly every game.

I tried talking sense to them by pointing out the positives (much like this thread is), to no avail.

I finally just realized that there is a large segment of people that i wouldn't want to be in a foxhole with, no way, no how.

So now, I pretty much just leave 'em alone and let them lament the losses and the thin margin victories.

I'm not going to change their mind. I just let them talk amongst themselves and I now pretty much see it as white noise.

But what have they actually won in the past decade? That really is the only relevant question...at least for a fanbase and an organization that aspires to its rich history of championship caliber performance. Dallas is approaching nearly TWO decades with not even a deep playoff run to their credit.

 

[rwalters31]

It is almost painful to listen to so many "fans" whine. Whine after losses, whine after wins, whine in the Bye week. Whine all off-season. Its to the point there should be 1 sticked thread for Jerry hate. Another for Garrett hate. No one with any defense for them allowed at all. Just allow the hate and whine to flow there unfettered.

It's never friggin ending.

Dallas has become the anti-bandwagon team. The team for people who love to complain.
So... to balance the scales how about let's look at what is going right.

As I look at the standings Dallas is 5-4 and in 1st place in the NFCE by a game and a half.
That's good.

They've scored the 2nd most points in the NFL. Yes, SECOND.

They've allowed 209 points which is the lowest total in the NFCE and amongst the lowest in the NFL of teams who've played 9 games.

They are 3-1 at home and have been handling home field.
They are undefeated in divisional play.
More impressively they are 5-1 in the conference.
So the first two tie-breakers look awfully good.

They've beaten the divisional foes by an average of 11 points.
They have 4 losses but 2 of those are by 1 point.
They went toe to toe with Denver who is widely expected to be the AFC top overall seed and SB representative.

The special teams has been excellent and rates as the league's top unit according to Football Outsiders.

The injury list is long but we've also found 5 or 6 CHEAP players we expected next to nothing of this year.
George Selvie, Nick Hayden, Heath, Beasley, Wilcox and a few more.
These guys bring down the cost of running the team versus the salary cap for the future.

The front office has become quite adept at adding players from other practice squads or off the street.
The rookie class has been a sensational value already.

Tony Romo is throwing for 283 yards a game and has 20 TDs with only 6 INTs. His rating is the 2nd highest of his career and he is on pace for right at his career high in TD passes while producing amongst the lowest INT and turnover rates of his career. In short he has been massively effective.

Dez Bryant is without a doubt a top 5 WR in this league and ascending.

Sean Lee was just locked up to a long-term deal then immediately followed with outstanding play and a defensive player of the week honor.

DeMarcus Ware returns this week and goes against a Saints team where he made his biggest mark in a game he basically took from Drew Brees.
Maybe even better new is Ware is only 3rd on the team in sacks this year. As good a pressure guy as he is he returns to merely add to Hatcher and Selvie not have to carry the load by himself.

And the schedule looks pretty darn rosy. Only one team would be favored over Dallas if the game were played today. New Orleans. Chicago and GB are down to back up QBs and the rest of the teams are simply abysmal. You get the 3 division games which again we own round 1 by an average 11 points then Oakland and GB at home.

The hardest game left on the schedule is this week. But win or lose Dallas comes out of this in good position to make the playoffs and host a game for only the third time in a decade plus.

Brother, I like your optimism, but at the moment we are still a 8-8 team. We are replacing players at an alarming rate. The last games are against Divisional teams that have a tendency of getting better at the end of the season. So, with this being said I look at the end of the season like this: 1. The Cowboys will be 8-8 after the last game; 2. The Cowboys will have a better Divisional record; 3. The Cowboys will be without key players after the last game and comb the streets for warm bodies; 4. The Cowboys will s _ _ k at the end but the rest of the NFCE will s _ _ K worse and the Cowboys will win the Division. The first playoff game will be be played at the AT&& Stadium with the Cowboys fielding a team with half the players picked off the Street the previous week. The final score is 45 to 9 ( not Cowboys) and the kicker is the most valuable player.

 

[kramskoi]

You spend your time labeling what others do. You see yourself above the fray by your comments of what others do in YOUR mind. You suggest the people who weigh the plus and minus of this team are miserable. You have no perspective of how they see the team on game day.

Everyone of the people who attempt to discuss the reality of this team on this board hurt a little when the team loses. They don't walk away celebrating a moral victory of losing a close one.

But morose, despondent, miserable, those are labels you offer from a vantage point of someone who doesn't know.

There is a bigger calling here than just moral victories. But you, as others do, look away and find solace in baby steps to nowhere. Your words that push away any discussion on injuries, weaknesses, or failings of coaching style indicate you want your eggs sunny side up and nothing else.

Correct me if I'm wrong.

Yet the one thing you and so many others do is label the fan who wants more than empty promises made by this team year in and year out - this becomes a name calling, labeling exercise. You label those fans as whiners and cry babies and haters. Because if I label you, your words can't get past my rosey demeanor.

For the most part I ignore the fan that sees glory in losing a game. A fan who wants to ignore the shortcomings.

Until I read a post like your anchor post in this thread and your rebuttal at the top of this post. Then I speak because so few here do speak for fans that are just as loyal, have as much history with this team, and perhaps more, and are as big a fan as you and anyone else here.

So a question...

Just how little thought did you put into that decision to start name calling? Self flagellation, wallowing in misery - your labels come freely about other fans because they not only want to talk about what is, but also how to perhaps fix it.

The Broncos game was an indication this team can play with the best - but also lose.

But this is not the same team that played them to a dead heat in the final stanza of that game before giving it away with an interception.

This team lost a significant piece on the offensive line. In happy-land that means nothing because this team is 5-4. But in the rejoicing of that current standing, it ignores Dallas has been owned by over .500 teams while making hay on losers.

So when you look ahead and make glorious predictions of winning the East, it ignores facts. One defensive lineman now plays for another team, one out for the year, the best of them all out for several games, and the glue that kept the line marginally together has a shoulder issue that goes beyond the norm of a stinger.

And both the Eagles and Commanders are getting better each game, whereas Dallas seems to be struggling more and more to eek out wins or lose close ones.

The defense is headed into another stadium with a passing attack that is one of the best, Dallas' offense is struggling in the running game and finding balance, and meeting another over .500 team where this team struggles.

Those are just facts. But facts you wish to ignore as you find comfort in going down to the wire with a 1-6 team until it was pulled from the fire while making Ponder look like a stud.

Your woman comes home late one night with her panty hose over her shoulder, lipstick smeared across her face, smelling of liquor and a man's cologne that you don't own.

Some men become suspicious.

In the case of Dallas, others plan their coming wedding anniversary and ask no question.

Mediocrity in this league is just good enough to tease, but not good enough to draft at the right spot to fill your roster with blue chippers.

Lose, win, do something other than 8-n-8, because this team is filled with old guys now.

The thing is, I look at the offensive line...it could be argued that it has been retooled, notwithstanding the addition of Waters. They still need a guard through the draft. That said, that line needs to start performing at a higher level in both running and passing. For Garrett and the rest of the coaches to simply give up on cultivating a running game is almost profane. Garrett, Callahan and Romo checking out of run plays is too much power marginalizing the rushing attack. I always wondered why Callahan, with his predilection for passing, was chosen as a play-caller. The running game is not cultivated and the rushing totals per season continue to fall. In four weeks the offensive line has gone from the penthouse to the outhouse...even before the injury to Waters the shine was coming off. It was hailed as a much improved unit, as the defense was earlier in the year. At the half-way mark, the results are much more sobering.

When you look at the Dallas - New Orleans matchup, we as fans must really ask ourselves if the team is better or worse than the the '09 team that dominated the Saints through three quarters, on route to handing them their first defeat of the season. Is this team better than New Orleans after four years of retooling?

I watched the 09' contest last night and Barber's violence looked remarkable compared to where the team is now. He destroyed Jonathan Vilma on more than a few plays (sending him to the sidelines for a few). At 12:05 of the third quarter, they had 106 yds rushing and almost perfect balance. Straight out of the locker room...second half...13 play 7 min drive, 31 yds rushing, 43 yds passing...24 - 3. Everything flowed in that game, even when Free was getting abused at right tackle. Romo was fearless and commanding...the guy did not flinch in the face of a fierce fourth quarter rally by the Saints. Spencer put on clinic and Ware mopped up the mess. It was a signature win down the stretch and easily one of the best performances under Romo as quarterback.

I really want to be wrong about Garrett and my concerns about him stem more from the fact that offensively the team has atrophied since he took over. It is a trend that he needs to correct "yesterday" or tomorrows for Dallas are likely to be more akin to the old adage, "the past is prologue".

 

[DogFace]

He and I are pals.

But more importantly is this. One side seems to get angry the other side wants to talk about the team and what is wrong. I find it extremely hypocritical of those who take this position to blame the other side about crying and whining since the management of this site doesn't create threatening posts and warnings of being banned about the happy side and their hijacking threads.

But they surely do it as much as anyone.

And they create threads specifically to complain about the other side of this argument.

He and I are pals.

But more importantly is this. One side seems to get angry the other side wants to talk about the team and what is wrong. I find it extremely hypocritical of those who take this position to blame the other side about crying and whining since the management of this site doesn't create threatening posts and warnings of being banned about the happy side and their hijacking threads.

But they surely do it as much as anyone.

And they create threads specifically to complain about the other side of this argument.

He and I are pals.

But more importantly is this. One side seems to get angry the other side wants to talk about the team and what is wrong. I find it extremely hypocritical of those who take this position to blame the other side about crying and whining since the management of this site doesn't create threatening posts and warnings of being banned about the happy side and their hijacking threads.

But they surely do it as much as anyone.

And they create threads specifically to complain about the other side of this argument.

I see your point. It seems to me though both sides do this.
As for the bias in the management of this site that is very possible. If that is true I don't agree with that at all. My opinion is this should be a place for free discussion. It's not my site though so they probably don't care much about my opinion.

 

[LeonDixson]

Mostly agree except a few things:

Dallas is not close to being amongst the lowest in points per game allowed.
The special teams ranking is almost entirely because of the return game. Coverage not so much.
Ware is 3rd on the team in sacks because he has been injured and not playing.
I think Chicago would still be favored even with the backup QB, but there is a good chance Cutler is playing in that game anyway.

This isn't a slam on you but I don't think that what came across in the bolded part is what you really meant. The OP saw it as a positive that Hatcher and Selvie are on pace for double digit sacks and now we're getting Ware back who statistically is #3. You disagreed. You don't see that as a positive?

Your point that he is only #3 because he has missed games may be correct, but it's still a positive that we get him back in 3rd place.

 

[Gaede]

Great post. We can easily get caught up in little details that we lose perspective.

I would like to see us beat a good team, however, before i start getting too optimistic

 

[TwoDeep3]

The thing is, I look at the offensive line...it could be argued that it has been retooled, notwithstanding the addition of Waters. They still need a guard through the draft. That said, that line needs to start performing at a higher level in both running and passing. For Garrett and the rest of the coaches to simply give up on cultivating a running game is almost profane. Garrett, Callahan and Romo checking out of run plays is too much power marginalizing the rushing attack. I always wondered why Callahan, with his predilection for passing, was chosen as a play-caller. The running game is not cultivated and the rushing totals per season continue to fall. In four weeks the offensive line has gone from the penthouse to the outhouse...even before the injury to Waters the shine was coming off. It was hailed as a much improved unit, as the defense was earlier in the year. At the half-way mark, the results are much more sobering.

When you look at the Dallas - New Orleans matchup, we as fans must really ask ourselves if the team is better or worse than the the '09 team that dominated the Saints through three quarters, on route to handing them their first defeat of the season. Is this team better than New Orleans after four years of retooling?

I watched the 09' contest last night and Barber's violence looked remarkable compared to where the team is now. He destroyed Jonathan Vilma on more than a few plays (sending him to the sidelines for a few). At 12:05 of the third quarter, they had 106 yds rushing and almost perfect balance. Straight out of the locker room...second half...13 play 7 min drive, 31 yds rushing, 43 yds passing...24 - 3. Everything flowed in that game, even when Free was getting abused at right tackle. Romo was fearless and commanding...the guy did not flinch in the face of a fierce fourth quarter rally by the Saints. Spencer put on clinic and Ware mopped up the mess. It was a signature win down the stretch and easily one of the best performances under Romo as quarterback.

I really want to be wrong about Garrett and my concerns about him stem more from the fact that offensively the team has atrophied since he took over. It is a trend that he needs to correct "yesterday" or tomorrows for Dallas are likely to be more akin to the old adage, "the past is prologue".

I don't feel you can compare one game to another in the same season much less two franchises playing 4 years apart.

 

[skinsscalper]

I agree. I can't stand losing but I will not cry and whine like some little 5 year old who does not get their way. Clearly there are things that this team needs to get better and areas I that have been positives for this team.

10 to 1 says that 90% of the whining doom and gloom group were "time out" kids.

 

[Alexander]

For years I have been coming to this site and watching people like you call names of those who ask questions. You toss out the words whine and cry and use a selective group of stats or current standings and make broad brush commentary about the team while denigrating fans because they don't see the team your way.

Then there are those that whine about other people whining, which is just as bad if not worse.

He planted his flag in a defensive line of 30-year olds who now are sidelined because of injury or left the team to play for another franchise because Jerry lost his temper.

I disagree. Jones allowed his own sentimentality to be played by Ratliff, who I feel is one of the lowest character players to ever play for this franchise. He lied to and quit on his teammates for his own selfish reasons. Now the other two 30 year olds, I agree with.

The head coach is in his seventh year running the offense and what should be a seemless organization between QB and Head Coach is a fire drill at a grade school without the teacher telling the kids where to go.

There is no reason why Romo should not be humming along with this offense, knowing it like the back of his hand by this stage. You see a little of that, but I still do not think after seven years together, the pair have a bond, like what you saw with Turner and Aikman. It also hurts Romo has not had a good positional coach since David Lee walked out the door.

 

[Alexander]

There is no doubt there are great coaches and poor coaches. You can't divorce talent from coaching. They will always go hand in hand.

Some here nearly deify Jimmy Johnson. Jimmy coached great teams here. Maybe the greatest I've ever seen. He left here and went to a team with a first class offense. He suddenly became fallible with his drafts and couldn't make the same magic in Miami even with a great QB and a fairly good defense which he was supposed to fix being the great defensive coach. Suddenly the great coach wasn't so great. So either he wasn't as great as some think or he was still the same guy but didn't have the same circumstances i.e. the same overall talent.

I just fail to understand why people misidentify the issues Johnson met when he went to Miami.

A "first class offense" with an ancient Dan Marino? No running game? He did not inherit a quality offense and he did fail overall as a result.

He became fallible with his drafts for several reasons. Number one being he only was able to secure the services of Ackles, not Wooten, Mansperger and others who were on the Dallas staff. Number two, he simply was a defensive coach and did not have the ability to draft the offensive talent needed. It really was not a lot different than in Dallas where he inherited Irvin, stumbled over Aikman and had to be convinced to draft Emmitt Smith by Joe Brodsky.

He did not suddenly become a bad football coach, nor did he lose his ability to select defensive talent, which is clearly evident with the excellent defensive players he was able to draft with the Dolphins.

But I see his failure in Miami being held up way too often as some sort of "proof" that Jerry Jones can actually build a champion without him.

We have already seen the results after Jones cleared out the scouting minds in Dallas that helped build a champion.

Fact is, both failed when the "perfect storm" was no longer in effect.

 

[jobberone]

I just fail to understand why people misidentify the issues Johnson met when he went to Miami.

A "first class offense" with an ancient Dan Marino? No running game? He did not inherit a quality offense and he did fail overall as a result.

He became fallible with his drafts for several reasons. Number one being he only was able to secure the services of Ackles, not Wooten, Mansperger and others who were on the Dallas staff. Number two, he simply was a defensive coach and did not have the ability to draft the offensive talent needed. It really was not a lot different than in Dallas where he inherited Irvin, stumbled over Aikman and had to be convinced to draft Emmitt Smith by Joe Brodsky.

He did not suddenly become a bad football coach, nor did he lose his ability to select defensive talent, which is clearly evident with the excellent defensive players he was able to draft with the Dolphins.

But I see his failure in Miami being held up way too often as some sort of "proof" that Jerry Jones can actually build a champion without him.

We have already seen the results after Jones cleared out the scouting minds in Dallas that helped build a champion.

Fact is, both failed when the "perfect storm" was no longer in effect.

I never tried to make that point.

As to Jones it's clear his stumbled and fumbled with talent acquisition until Parcells got him on the right path. I do see talent here as improving overall.

As to Miami, Marino put up good numbers until 99. The offense was above average in points and yardage although not top ten. And the defense was mediocre.

You are giving Jerry deserved criticism for doing poorly in talent acquisition in that period yet are making excuses for Johnson over the same time. Who cares if Jimmy couldn't keep his own guys. He left those guys to fend for themselves, was out of football awhile and then jumped back in. If you think I'm arguing about those two then no. All I've said is Jimmy didn't appear to be a great coach in Miami and he didn't exactly start from scratch there at the very least. He had three years to do something and couldn't. I love Jimmy and I think he's got a great eye for talent and coaches as well as being a fairly dinkum good defensive coach. I just don't put him up there with the greats of the game as he only had three winning seasons for the Boys and three for the Dolphins. Those latter were 9-7(2) and 10-6 winning two WC games and losing by the second largest margin of loss in playoff history in the other 62-7. He backed into the playoffs with the two 9-7 seasons.

 

[Alexander]

You are giving Jerry deserved criticism for doing poorly in talent acquisition in that period yet are making excuses for Johnson over the same time.

Not at all. I was pointing out that yes, he did have success drafting his specialty which is defensive talent. That is unquestionable, but people still want to mischaracterize his tenure in Miami as a complete failure, which is nothing but grandstanding to deflect attention from what Jones did which was bring a franchise to its knees during the same time period by horrible drafting on both sides of the football.

 

[jobberone]

Not at all. I was pointing out that yes, he did have success drafting his specialty which is defensive talent. That is unquestionable, but people still want to mischaracterize his tenure in Miami as a complete failure, which is nothing but grandstanding to deflect attention from what Jones did which was bring a franchise to its knees during the same time period by horrible drafting on both sides of the football.

I agree. It was decidedly not a complete failure and I'd say not a failure. But I'd say it was a failure to achieve the glory of the early 90s Cowboys' teams and a failure to achieve greatness as a coach compared to Landry, Lombardi, Shula and the like.

 

[Alexander]

I agree. It was decidedly not a complete failure and I'd say not a failure. But I'd say it was a failure to achieve the glory of the early 90s Cowboys' teams and a failure to achieve greatness as a coach compared to Landry, Lombardi, Shula and the like.

Landry had the benefit of beginning and ending his career in Dallas. Shula built winners in Baltimore and Miami. Lombardi failed in Washington.

I do not think most people would rank Johnson at the top legendary echelon. But in terms of Cowboys history, he is the second best and still belongs on the second tier of all-time great head coaches IMO.

 

[Plankton]

Landry had the benefit of beginning and ending his career in Dallas. Shula built winners in Baltimore and Miami. Lombardi failed in Washington.

I do not think most people would rank Johnson at the top legendary echelon. But in terms of Cowboys history, he is the second best and still belongs on the second tier of all-time great head coaches IMO.

Shula inherited a team four years removed from back to back championships in Baltimore that was .500 in 1962, and still had an in their prime Johnny Unitas, Jim Parker, Gino Marchetti, Lenny Moore and Tom Matte - there wasn't much rebuilding required at all. Lombardi didn't fail at all in Washington - he coached one season (1969), and led them to their first winning season since 1955. He died before he could do anything else.

As for Johnson, no, he was not a success in Miami. However, since he took over in Miami in 1996, Johnson has won as many playoff games as Jerry Jones' Cowboys - two.

And Johnson hasn't been active in football in 14 years.

 

[TwoDeep3]

There is no reason why Romo should not be humming along with this offense, knowing it like the back of his hand by this stage. You see a little of that, but I still do not think after seven years together, the pair have a bond, like what you saw with Turner and Aikman. It also hurts Romo has not had a good positional coach since David Lee walked out the door.

I stole that from a post you made. I had not considered that, but you, as you do so many times, made it clear that something is out of sync between two guys who have been together for seven years.

My belief the fundamental culture of this team with Jerry so close to the organization and wearing two hats causes him to throw mixed messages and could be construed as passive aggressive, which is the case with Ratliff.

Alex, I disagree with your disagreeing. Jerry called out Ratt in front of others. Ratt may have thin skin, but Jerry feels he has a familiarity with the players that puts him on their level, until he pulls out the boom stick as the GM/Head coach.

Some men are built in a way they can ignore that type of leadership - if you want to call it that. Ratt evidently wasn't and took the money and hauled the mail.

As to your first point, I get it. But I tire of this game of second class citizen because I will not eat from the bowl of ignoring the elephant in the room. Sometimes I express it.

Nice seeing you again.

 

[TwoDeep3]

Landry had the benefit of beginning and ending his career in Dallas. Shula built winners in Baltimore and Miami. Lombardi failed in Washington.

I do not think most people would rank Johnson at the top legendary echelon. But in terms of Cowboys history, he is the second best and still belongs on the second tier of all-time great head coaches IMO.

Lombardi failing in Washington does have a small caveat that he had cancer and didn't spend the time with that franchise to perhaps succeed.

 

[5Stars]

Landry had the benefit of beginning and ending his career in Dallas. Shula built winners in Baltimore and Miami. Lombardi failed in Washington.

I do not think most people would rank Johnson at the top legendary echelon. But in terms of Cowboys history, he is the second best and still belongs on the second tier of all-time great head coaches IMO.

No salary cap...

 

[Eddie]

Yes, we have LOTS to be optimistic about. 1 playoff win in 17 years just calls for eternal optimism. A lunatic control freak running this team has done a wonderful job.

A perennial .500 team with $31 million in the hole for next year. Again, wonderful job.

Jerry Jones will do anything to win ... except remove the main problem from the equation. He may WANT to win, but he obviously doesn't know how.

The team has become a laughing stock of the league. Jerry wants relevance ... he's got it.

 

[dallasdave]

There is no doubt there are great coaches and poor coaches. You can't divorce talent from coaching. They will always go hand in hand.

Some here nearly deify Jimmy Johnson. Jimmy coached great teams here. Maybe the greatest I've ever seen. He left here and went to a team with a first class offense. He suddenly became fallible with his drafts and couldn't make the same magic in Miami even with a great QB and a fairly good defense which he was supposed to fix being the great defensive coach. Suddenly the great coach wasn't so great. So either he wasn't as great as some think or he was still the same guy but didn't have the same circumstances i.e. the same overall talent.

I believe great coaches are great leaders and get the most out of a player while putting them in a position to succeed more often than fail. They can take talent and meld it together to make the whole greater than the sum of the parts. And they in turn can be made great by a great team.

The team is the coach and the players and even the organization. If you take one part away then the team struggles or fails. You can't take away Garrett''s tools and expect him to build anything. I don't have any real idea what Garrett can do but I won't judge him until he is able to put a reasonably well built team on the field. And I do have doubts. Having said that you can't wait forever. Nor can you prematurely remove the scaffolds and expect great results. The only teams that 'turn' things around in short order already have most of what they need on hand. That's not to take away from those coaches handiwork. They still have to put the rest of the puzzle together.

Starting over would be foolish right now. Point the finger at the chief architect if you must point fingers.

Don't forget Jimmy Johnson took over the worst team in the league in 1989 and turned it into a Superbowl championship team in 4 years. I won't say who's team he took over to avoid conflict on old coaches, but it's fair to say Jimmy inherited a total mess. He built the team from the ground up and that's what the Cowboys need now a coach who will build the team, to a championship team. A coach of the future not afraid to do whatever's needed to get to the Super Bowl Victory. A coach who will stop at nothing to have the # 1 team in the NFL, in other words a man like Jimmy Johnson.