Who is our weakest Link?

[joseephuss]

Kosier doesn't play RG.

I don't know why everyone is so down on him and wants him replaced. Rivera was the biggest problem on the inside. You can win with play like we received from Kosier last year. That's far from our weak link.

Right guard is still a question until it actually gets answered. Leonard Davis is likely an upgrade over Marco Rivera, but until the games are actually played we will not know.

Tight end is a weak leak. W(h)itten is a great receiver, but his blocking is not strong. There is a big drop off in Fasano and no clear #3 guy.

Fullback is a big question. That position has limited the offense the last couple of years. The offense was limited when Richie Anderson was back there. He could catch and run, but was a poor blocker. Well it has become worse. Blocking is only a little better and now there is no threat of running or catching from the position. What will happen this year?

Spears and Canty are question marks. Will they mature in their 3rd years? Will new schemes make a difference? More is needed from both of them in order for the defense to take a step up. Improved play from them will help everyone behind them.

Obviously safety is a concern. Hamlin and a more experienced Watkins may help this year.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

I think the lack of leadership came from a combination of not having those best-of-the-best players that have the credibility to lead plus Parcells squashing what leadership there was.

Irvin could talk and people would listen, because he was the best. Same with Aikman. Although he didn't talk much, when he did get in someone's face, it meant something. You average role player like Bradie James can't tell Roy Williams what to do, because he's a vastly inferior player. If you've been on a team, you know how ridiculous it is when a relative nobody player tries to tell one of the best players how to act.

And Parcells didn't mean to, I'm sure. But he was the face of the team, and he overshadowed every player we had. That plus the constant fear of players getting cocky and the "Don't put him in Canton yet" attitude that Hos mentioned kept every player in his place. How's a guy supposed to take command when his own coach keeps reminding everyone that he's really not that good? I don't think Parcells had this problem when he was younger, because this Hall of Fame reputation hadn't been established yet. By the time he got to us, his legend was bigger than life, and I think some players didn't know what to make of that.

It was interesting watching the America's Game about our '92 team the other night. All the players said that while Jimmy was tough, he wanted his players loose and confident. We had that swagger everyone talked about. That's a vast difference from the way Parcells operated.

Anyway, I think Romo can become that leader *if* he becomes a good enough player. And look for Ware to step up, too. He said in an interview a couple of months ago that he was looking to become more of a leader now that he'd made a Pro Bowl and established himself as a player in this league. Hamlin might do it for the secondary guys if he can play well, too.

 

[Alexander]

That is what this team lacks. George Teague defended the star when Owens did his thing. I think Cliff Harris would have sent Owens out prone on a stretcher in his day. Roy has that capacity to do that, but he lets stuff go. Owens stood right on the star in the endzone helmet when he was with the Eagles right next to Roy. I think once again Cliff Harris would have leveled him.

I think back to another situation: The Fun Bunch.

I cannot recall who it was, either Barnes, Ron Fellows or Downs who stepped right into their celebration and tried to stop it alone.

We have players now who either ignore it or pat them on the rear when they are finished showing us up. And what Teague did was probably out of more embarassment for being lit up all day than defending team honor.

Mike Furrey threw a football into one of the stars and broke it. No one made Mike Furrey pay. I believe someone like a Harvey Martin or Charles Haley would have knocked his head off, or since they didn't line up against WRs would have crushed his QB. No disrespect is meant to any of our players over this, but they don't enforce themselves.

I miss that. That's what I am talking about as our weakest link. Aeneas Williams trash talks Michael Irvin and all Irvin does is burn him for 200+ yards and 3 scores.

Attitude on the field is missing. I am hopeful the new Defensive scheme brings some.

I do not see how scheme can generate attitude. These players do not have the personality that Martin, Haley and others had. Hopefully Hamlin will bring some fire. He showed some in Seattle.

 

[Alexander]

And Parcells didn't mean to, I'm sure. But he was the face of the team, and he overshadowed every player we had. That plus the constant fear of players getting cocky and the "Don't put him in Canton yet" attitude that Hos mentioned kept every player in his place. How's a guy supposed to take command when his own coach keeps putting him in his place? I don't think Parcells had this problem when he was younger, because this Hall of Fame reputation hadn't been established yet. By the time he got to us, his legend was bigger than life and think some players didn't know what to make of that.

Coach Johnson had a very big ego and there was no question he was in charge. That did not stop Irvin from being a reflection of the coach. He said it often how he was an agent who used his own fear to pass along the message.

I also have a hard time believing Bill Parcells was driven by ego to keep the leaders down. He was dying for someone to take off the pressure. He waited for leaders to emerge. No one ever did. If the legend squelched leadership is was because nobody wanted it.

Put it this way, who is stepping forward to assume the mantle now that Phillips isn't the egomaniac with the legend bigger than life? Why the same people we all could have named as "leaders" last year. And they are doing the very same things again, which is talk. A lot.

 

[InmanRoshi]

I remember in the 2004 season (when the team went 6-10) Pat Summeral would say he asked Parcells what was wrong with the team and Parcells said he didn't have an answer. Parcells said addressing the locker room was like addressing a funeral, and he's never had a team with that kind of personality before. As much as Parcells reputation for being a no-nonsense dictator goes, when you listen to him talk about former players the ones that light up his eyes are guys like Bryan Cox, Keyshawn, Jim Burt. Not exactly timid guys. Guys who could take Parcells verbal abuse without batting an eye and throw some back at him. "Jersey neighborhood guys" as he would probably call them. Now, maybe the 65 year old version of Parcells was just too much of a crabby old man, and that permeated through the team. Maybe his "I'm too old to deal with thugs" philosophy prevented them from ever coming here. I don't know. I do know Parcells wanted that kind of attitude on the team, but for whatever reason couldn't bring it out of them. I'm hoping a full season of Romo and his "moxie" help alleviate some of that.

I don't know how the Phillips' scheme is going to incorporate a different attitude. On one hand, maybe a higher risk/reward scheme could lend itself to this team pulling itself out of the doldrums with a big play. On the other hand, a high risk/reward scheme could also lend itself to this team being down 14-0 early after giving up a couple of big plays, and they fold like a cheap card table.

 

[Hostile]

I think back to another situation: The Fun Bunch.

I cannot recall who it was, either Barnes, Ron Fellows or Downs who stepped right into their celebration and tried to stop it alone.

That is such a great example. It was Michael Downs I believe.

We have players now who either ignore it or pat them on the rear when they are finished showing us up. And what Teague did was probably out of more embarassment for being lit up all day than defending team honor.

Right, and I think the lack of this is our weakest link.

I do not see how scheme can generate attitude. These players do not have the personality that Martin, Haley and others had. Hopefully Hamlin will bring some fire. He showed some in Seattle.

Just being allowed to play full throttle can fire guys up. Look at how this team responded when they talked Parcells into taking the brakes off. Each time we did that the team exploded, but Parcells always went right back to the conservative approach.

Success is infectious. If they generate some pressure and it leads to success on either side of the ball guys will get fired up. Think back to the Bills comeback versus the Oilers. Once the bills started scoring their body langauge said volumes and so did the Oilers. They looked defeated while the Bills looked like they could go all day.

I don't care what fires the players up, be that a player, or the scheme, or a coach. I just want them once they are fired up to stay hot.

 

[Alexander]

W(h)itten is a great receiver, but his blocking is not strong.

Neither was Jay Novacek's. He did fairly well. Witten is adequate. I don't know what else he needs to do. He's more than good enough and is a top five-seven TE in this league, easily.

There is a big drop off in Fasano and no clear #3 guy.

Care to name the team that has three strong TEs? I can't. We are above average. Fasano could start for a few teams, even with his inexperience.

 

[Yeagermeister]

Right guard is still a question until it actually gets answered. Leonard Davis is likely an upgrade over Marco Rivera, but until the games are actually played we will not know.

Tight end is a weak leak. W(h)itten is a great receiver, but his blocking is not strong. There is a big drop off in Fasano and no clear #3 guy.

Fullback is a big question. That position has limited the offense the last couple of years. The offense was limited when Richie Anderson was back there. He could catch and run, but was a poor blocker. Well it has become worse. Blocking is only a little better and now there is no threat of running or catching from the position. What will happen this year?

Spears and Canty are question marks. Will they mature in their 3rd years? Will new schemes make a difference? More is needed from both of them in order for the defense to take a step up. Improved play from them will help everyone behind them.

Obviously safety is a concern. Hamlin and a more experienced Watkins may help this year.

Hopefully Deion "The Crazied Chicken" Anderson fixes the FB position.

 

[joseephuss]

I think back to another situation: The Fun Bunch.

I cannot recall who it was, either Barnes, Ron Fellows or Downs who stepped right into their celebration and tried to stop it alone.

We have players now who either ignore it or pat them on the rear when they are finished showing us up. And what Teague did was probably out of more embarassment for being lit up all day than defending team honor.



I do not see how scheme can generate attitude. These players do not have the personality that Martin, Haley and others had. Hopefully Hamlin will bring some fire. He showed some in Seattle.

Maybe a new scheme will allow some players to be in more of their comfort zone. That can lead to more of their personality to coming out. A big maybe. I figure leaders show up no matter what the scheme. Some guys just need to be changed to their strengths first. The bigger factor is just maturity. Three main guys on defense(Spears, Canty and Ware) will be entering their 3rd seasons. That familiarity with how the NFL works may allow them to take a more assertive stance on defense as leaders. Michael Irvin was not considered a leader his first couple of years in the league. He was at the U, but it wasn't until he had a few years under his belt did it show in Dallas.

 

[carphalen5150]

The weak link right now is the DE rotation of Canty, Spears, Hatcher, and Ratliff. The new scheme should work, but they were bad last year. Ratliff not so much...and I expect to see him inside more this year too.

 

[ThreeSportStar80]

To me our weakest link is that we do not have an emotional leader on the team that everyone rallies around. They're all quiet, even tempered, good guys and decent players, but no one is in everyone's face demanding more.

We haven't had a true team leader since Darren Woodson retired.

I think a guy like T.O. may be an emotional leader, funny as it may sound intially but he's known to get teammates jacked up...

 

[joseephuss]

Neither was Jay Novacek's. He did fairly well. Witten is adequate. I don't know what else he needs to do. He's more than good enough and is a top five-seven TE in this league, easily.



Care to name the team that has three strong TEs? I can't. We are above average. Fasano could start for a few teams, even with his inexperience.

I didn't say the #3 guy had to be strong. Dallas just doesn't even know who is #3 yet. There has been a different #3 for several years. There hasn't even been a regular #2 guy. Based on last season, Fasano could not start. Maybe he has gotten better as most rookies do, but he did not look good last year as a blocker or receiver. It was a weakness last year. Something I hope improves, but I have to see how the position has grown to see if it has improved.

Witten is a good tight end. One of the tops in the league. The offense still has to work with his limitations as a blocker. You can't be strong at everything. Same when Novacek was back there. I don't see Witten as a liability because as you say he is adequate. I just realize his limitations as a blocker and how that applies to the offense.

 

[Alexander]

Just being allowed to play full throttle can fire guys up. Look at how this team responded when they talked Parcells into taking the brakes off. Each time we did that the team exploded, but Parcells always went right back to the conservative approach.

This brings up an interesting point.

It is pretty much a widely held belief that Bill Parcells held them back. I don't buy it, but that is besides the point.

Has anyone asked why he did this? Why would he hold them back?

The answer is simple. To protect them from adversity. If you play conservative, there is less opportunity, in concept, to make an error. And even when we made mistakes, they were crippling. It is about trust. Now, perhaps he could have thrown them a little more faith, but there is probably a good reason why he did not. That is what I would like to know. If trust was a problem, why? It is entirely possible that since he saw these players every day, spoke with them and knew them, that he saw things that pushed him to minimize risk. Remember, we took a lot of risks in 2003. It did not exactly pay off in spades that year either.

We will see what "full throttle" looks like. I just question if mentally we have the ability to overcome mistakes because playing aggressive defense will cause a few.

 

[Stautner]

Right guard is still a question until it actually gets answered. Leonard Davis is likely an upgrade over Marco Rivera, but until the games are actually played we will not know.

Tight end is a weak leak. W(h)itten is a great receiver, but his blocking is not strong. There is a big drop off in Fasano and no clear #3 guy.

Fullback is a big question. That position has limited the offense the last couple of years. The offense was limited when Richie Anderson was back there. He could catch and run, but was a poor blocker. Well it has become worse. Blocking is only a little better and now there is no threat of running or catching from the position. What will happen this year?

Spears and Canty are question marks. Will they mature in their 3rd years? Will new schemes make a difference? More is needed from both of them in order for the defense to take a step up. Improved play from them will help everyone behind them.

Obviously safety is a concern. Hamlin and a more experienced Watkins may help this year.

Keep in mind that "question marks" and "weak links" are not necessarily the same thing. "Question marks" may end up proving to be weak links, but it remains to be seen.

I think the spirit of this thread was not to mention every area where there are questions - every team has any number of those areas - but in the positions you feel are almost unquestionably weak.

In that context it is hard to point to anyone or any position. We have LOTS of question marks, but I would be hard pressed to call any spot clear weak link.

While you are right about Davis being something of a question until he suits up and we see what he does - it's still wrong to call him a weak link. He's merely an unknown, and, as you said, the liklihood is that he will be an upgrade.

Calling a position (TE) manned by a frequent pro-bowler a weak link is pretty far fetched. While Witten isn't a standout blocker, he isn't as bad as you indicate, and he is one of the top receiving TE's in the game.

Fasano is a dropoff, so perhaps you can call TE DEPTH weak, but even so, he was just a rookie last year, so he isn't a lost cause. To mention the 3rd team TE is pretty silly - if you go down to 3rd team at any position with any team you are going to find weaker players.

I guess the one area I would point to is punt returns ...... at this point we don't even know who the guy will be, and there is no reason to expect anyone we've had on the roster before can get the job done (except Newman, who undoubtedly wll not be used their regularly).

 

[Stautner]

This brings up an interesting point.

It is pretty much a widely held belief that Bill Parcells held them back. I don't buy it, but that is besides the point.

Has anyone asked why he did this? Why would he hold them back?

The answer is simple. To protect them from adversity. If you play conservative, there is less opportunity, in concept, to make an error. And even when we made mistakes, they were crippling. It is about trust. Now, perhaps he could have thrown them a little more faith, but there is probably a good reason why he did not. That is what I would like to know. If trust was a problem, why? It is entirely possible that since he saw these players every day, spoke with them and knew them, that he saw things that pushed him to minimize risk. Remember, we took a lot of risks in 2003. It did not exactly pay off in spades that year either.

We will see what "full throttle" looks like. I just question if mentally we have the ability to overcome mistakes because playing aggressive defense will cause a few.

I'm glad to see someone else shares my viewpoint. I have no doubt that the more agressive defense will cause some players to look better, but it very well may expose others.

I admittedly got very frustrated with Parcells at times - there were times where I just felt we needed to take the risk of being more agressive because we had nothing to lose - what we were doing wasn't working so well.

But overall, in my mind, there are still a lot of questions surrounding several players that cannot be solely explained away by Parcells reserved style.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

Coach Johnson had a very big ego and there was no question he was in charge. That did not stop Irvin from being a reflection of the coach. He said it often how he was an agent who used his own fear to pass along the message.

I also have a hard time believing Bill Parcells was driven by ego to keep the leaders down. He was dying for someone to take off the pressure. He waited for leaders to emerge. No one ever did. If the legend squelched leadership is was because nobody wanted it.

Put it this way, who is stepping forward to assume the mantle now that Phillips isn't the egomaniac with the legend bigger than life? Why the same people we all could have named as "leaders" last year. And they are doing the very same things again, which is talk. A lot.

Well for one, I said in my post that Parcells didn't mean for it to happen. So I never said that he purposely kept leaders from emerging. I think he wanted exactly what he had in New York -- that was obvious from just about every move he made.

Also back to America's Game, Parcells was different in those Giants days. He was young enough that he was almost like one of the guys. He'd been a LB coach and he was close to Taylor and those guys, and they almost saw him as an equal more than an on-high superior once he became head coach. Yeah, he yelled at them and berated them, but they almost didn't take him too seriously. You know what I'm talking about, I'm sure.

By the time he got to us, he was a legend. Everyone was scared to death of him. That's great for discipline and eliminating slacking off, but it's not so good for some of the younger players who IMO didn't know when they were overstepping their bounds. IR talked about the old Giants players stepping up and talking back to Parcells... I don't think our younger players saw that as something Parcells would ever want.

It doesn't necessarily have to be that Parcells or the players are to blame. Sometimes these things just happen. I don't think Parcells kept players down for his own ego or that our particular players have some inherent flaw. I do think there were times when each wasn't sure what the other wanted.

And as far as leaders emerging under Wade, can we give it a few months? We haven't even gotten to our first training camp under the new coach yet!

 

[joseephuss]

Keep in mind that "question marks" and "weak links" are not necessarily the same thing. "Question marks" may end up proving to be weak links, but it remains to be seen.

I think the spirit of this thread was not to mention every area where there are questions - every team has any number of those areas - but in the positions you feel are almost unquestionably weak.

In that context it is hard to point to anyone or any position. We have LOTS of question marks, but I would be hard pressed to call any spot clear weak link.

While you are right about Davis being something of a question until he suits up and we see what he does - it's still wrong to call him a weak link. He's merely an unknown, and, as you said, the liklihood is that he will be an upgrade.

Calling a position (TE) manned by a frequent pro-bowler a weak link is pretty far fetched. While Witten isn't a standout blocker, he isn't as bad as you indicate, and he is one of the top receiving TE's in the game.

Fasano is a dropoff, so perhaps you can call TE DEPTH weak, but even so, he was just a rookie last year, so he isn't a lost cause. To mention the 3rd team TE is pretty silly - if you go down to 3rd team at any position with any team you are going to find weaker players.

I guess the one area I would point to is punt returns ...... at this point we don't even know who the guy will be, and there is no reason to expect anyone we've had on the roster before can get the job done (except Newman, who undoubtedly wll not be used their regularly).

I see your points about weak links and question marks.

Fullback is a weak link. The rest is more question marks.

No, I was just not looking at Witten. It is depth at tight end. The #3 guy can be a good tool in goal line situations. A good offense will face a lot of goal line situations and having a good group of tight ends can be a key to scoring in those situations. I did not see that as a strength last season. Hopefully it is stronger this year.

 

[carphalen5150]

We will see what "full throttle" looks like. I just question if mentally we have the ability to overcome mistakes because playing aggressive defense will cause a few.

We gave up big plays playing conservative, so not sure how we would give up more than we already did.

 

[Hostile]

I think a guy like T.O. may be an emotional leader, funny as it may sound intially but he's known to get teammates jacked up...

I've already dismissed this idea once. I simply don't see him as any kind of leader. Great player. No doubt about that.

 

[InmanRoshi]

We gave up big plays playing conservative, so not sure how we would give up more than we already did.

That's not exactly true. For most of the season, we didn't give up many. When they did happen, they came in bunches. In other words, once we started giving them up we showed absolutely no ability to shake it off and overcome. We just got that deer in the headlights look in our eyes and got steamrolled.