Cowboys vs Vikings

[Roughneck93]

Cowboys should beat the hapless Vikes...

[cougartino]

I wonder which Cowboys team will show up today.

[Roughneck93]

Nice stop by the D...

[Macarthur]

Doug free strikes again.

[Roughneck93]

Ernie Sims...:foul:

[Roughneck93]

:sleeping::sleeping:

[Roughneck93]

Finally...:clap:

[Roughneck93]

Wow!!

[Macarthur]

There we go!

[Roughneck93]

Webb is having trouble with Jennings.

[Roughneck93]

Damn...

[Macarthur]

Wow .

[Macarthur]

The only thing worse than this OL is the play calling.

[Roughneck93]

C'mon Dez...

[Farmersfan]

The only thing worse than this OL is the play calling.


Wow! Yea, the o-line is the problem today...... smh

[Macarthur]

So the OL is fine, huh, ff.

[Roughneck93]

Lol, smh...

[Eagle 1]

Again, Dallas lets a piss poor team hang around until they get the lead.

[Farmersfan]

So the OL is fine, huh, ff.


I never said the O-line is fine. I said you chose to call out the O-line on 1 play after our 19 million a year QB threw a 3 yard swing pass on 2nd and 1 into the friggin' dirt. Beasley is still running if Romo gets it up............. And the penalties (or bogus calls) are killing the Cowboys.

[Macarthur]

Romo made a bad throw there. How about the one he put right on the money to Dez.

You are the one person in America that watches this game and says, if only the cowboys had a QB...

[Macarthur]

Never mind several of the Houdini acts he's had today to keel plays alive. It must be really sad for you watching your team and having such an ingrained hatred romo. I wonder why you watch.

[Roughneck93]

:dispntd:

[Saggy Aggie]

Lol Romo with the timely INT

[Eagle 1]

There's your boy Romo.
EXCUSES IN
5
4
3
2
1.....

[Farmersfan]

Never mind several of the Houdini acts he's had today to keel plays alive. It must be really sad for you watching your team and having such an ingrained hatred romo. I wonder why you watch.


What?

[Farmersfan]

Can Romo get us a score Mac? 2.45 left in the game................

[Macarthur]

Hope so.

[Roughneck93]

Yes!!!

[Saggy Aggie]

Can Romo get us a score Mac? 2.45 left in the game................

Yep, several nice throws along the way...

[Saggy Aggie]

Now everybody has message board material. 4th qtr int, and go-ahead TD in the same game. Reluctant to say winning TD yet... LOL

[Farmersfan]

Nice drive! Great throws by Romo. Why can't these guys do this the whole game?

[Macarthur]

I never had a doubt. :)

[Macarthur]

Oh dear.

[Roughneck93]

Whew...

[Macarthur]

I think there's some real offensive issues especially regarding play calling and coordination. I don't have time to go into it.

This game should not have been this close.

Sure would like to have that #28 on the cowboys.

[Roughneck93]

Sure would like to have that #28 on the cowboys.

No kidding...

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-0VpRLM_QUEk/Una0iWsNk7I/AAAAAAAADM8/TcJ3uSoDLmQ/s1600/ad11.gif

[cougartino]

No kidding...

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-0VpRLM_QUEk/Una0iWsNk7I/AAAAAAAADM8/TcJ3uSoDLmQ/s1600/ad11.gif

Yeah. Someone with some heart!

[bobcat1]

Now that we got by the "tough" game..... we are headed to the Super Bowl! signed Jerry Jones.

[Txbroadcaster]

O-Line gave up 3 sacks to a team that is at the bottom in pass rush...and Prob should have given up 2-3 more...losing Waters is already devestating...WRs could not catch a cold today..I think it was 6 drops in the game....Murray looked gimpy even when he ran well.

[coach]

9 carries for 36 yards....

[Macarthur]

Yeah, and wasn't one one them Romo for 7 or 8 yards? Unbelievable.

[Tejastrue]

Yeah. Someone with some heart! As great a play as that was..it was another Viking (86) that kept Peterson from going down at the 3-4 yard line. He was falling over backwards and the dude stuck his hands under Paterson's armpits and lifted/pushed forward. Is that not illegal?

[Tejastrue]

Here's the video link that clearly shows it. Sorry for the commercial. http://nfl.si.com/2013/11/03/adrian-peterson-touchdown-run-dallas-cowboys/

[Farmersfan]

O-Line gave up 3 sacks to a team that is at the bottom in pass rush...and Prob should have given up 2-3 more...losing Waters is already devestating...WRs could not catch a cold today..I think it was 6 drops in the game....Murray looked gimpy even when he ran well.


There are probably a half dozen sacks potential in every single NFL game TXB. These are prevented or allowed based on how the QB recognizes and adjusts to prevent them. If you want a NFL O-line that gives the QB 5 seconds on every single dropback then go to sleep and start dreaming. Even the great O-lines in the early 90's didn't give Aikman that much time. Bottom line is that about 75% of all sacks are allowed or prevented by the play of the QB. Yesterday was no different. The Vikings brought constant pressure and very rarely were made to pay for it...... The Vikings dictated to the Cowboys offense the entire game........ The play calling was terrible! The audibles out of the play calling was terrible! And the execution once the ball was snapped was terrible. But I think someone indicated sevral weeks ago this offense was not on a good trend and you guys kept saying that any win is a good win. Was that a good win yesterday?

[Farmersfan]

Yeah, and wasn't one one them Romo for 7 or 8 yards? Unbelievable.


And one of them was a audible into a delayed draw right into the blitz for a 5 yard loss. When you only run 9 times it doesn't take a really bad or good play to effect the average a lot.................. D. Murray averaged close to 8 yards a carry but only got 5 carries. My question is why isn't someone looking for a job today after THAT game plan against THAT defense?

[coach]

There are probably a half dozen sacks potential in every single NFL game TXB. These are prevented or allowed based on how the QB recognizes and adjusts to prevent them. If you want a NFL O-line that gives the QB 5 seconds on every single dropback then go to sleep and start dreaming. Even the great O-lines in the early 90's didn't give Aikman that much time. Bottom line is that about 75% of all sacks are allowed or prevented by the play of the QB. Yesterday was no different. The Vikings brought constant pressure and very rarely were made to pay for it...... The Vikings dictated to the Cowboys offense the entire game........ The play calling was terrible! The audibles out of the play calling was terrible! And the execution once the ball was snapped was terrible. But I think someone indicated sevral weeks ago this offense was not on a good trend and you guys kept saying that any win is a good win. Was that a good win yesterday?



Its obvious you are a typical fan. There is no such thing as a bad wins. A win is a win.


Hell ppl god mad at Jerry for calling the Denver game a good loss. There are no such things as good loses. A win is a win is a win... I guess thats the coach coming out in me, but I have never seen a bad win and a good defeat. They all count the same.

[Txbroadcaster]

There are probably a half dozen sacks potential in every single NFL game TXB. These are prevented or allowed based on how the QB recognizes and adjusts to prevent them. If you want a NFL O-line that gives the QB 5 seconds on every single dropback then go to sleep and start dreaming. Even the great O-lines in the early 90's didn't give Aikman that much time. Bottom line is that about 75% of all sacks are allowed or prevented by the play of the QB. Yesterday was no different. The Vikings brought constant pressure and very rarely were made to pay for it...... The Vikings dictated to the Cowboys offense the entire game........ The play calling was terrible! The audibles out of the play calling was terrible! And the execution once the ball was snapped was terrible. But I think someone indicated sevral weeks ago this offense was not on a good trend and you guys kept saying that any win is a good win. Was that a good win yesterday?


wow dude..so 75% sack is on the QB now..Jeebuz your view of football is so warped

and yes it was a win..so that makes it good..

[D'Highlander]

it was a win..so that makes it good..

Right but this team is not getting better as the season goes on like they need to be doing. They are just average and that is all they will be...

[GrTigers6]

There are probably a half dozen sacks potential in every single NFL game TXB. These are prevented or allowed based on how the QB recognizes and adjusts to prevent them. If you want a NFL O-line that gives the QB 5 seconds on every single dropback then go to sleep and start dreaming. Even the great O-lines in the early 90's didn't give Aikman that much time. Bottom line is that about 75% of all sacks are allowed or prevented by the play of the QB. Yesterday was no different. The Vikings brought constant pressure and very rarely were made to pay for it...... The Vikings dictated to the Cowboys offense the entire game........ The play calling was terrible! The audibles out of the play calling was terrible! And the execution once the ball was snapped was terrible. But I think someone indicated sevral weeks ago this offense was not on a good trend and you guys kept saying that any win is a good win. Was that a good win yesterday? Every win is a good win. Its a win! No matter how ugly its better than the alternative. This game was poorly coached from the beginning of the game plan preparation. But execution was horrible in all aspects of offense and defense. Poor tackling poor blocking and too many key drops. Not to mention some of target throws

[Bullaholic]

I think FF just wants the Cowboys to return to their form of the glory days so badly that he is just rabid. I'm an old fan who gets that way sometimes, also, after so many years of suffering mediocrity that has gone on far too long for this franchise. Happy for any win, though.

[Macarthur]

There are probably a half dozen sacks potential in every single NFL game TXB. These are prevented or allowed based on how the QB recognizes and adjusts to prevent them. If you want a NFL O-line that gives the QB 5 seconds on every single dropback then go to sleep and start dreaming. Even the great O-lines in the early 90's didn't give Aikman that much time. Bottom line is that about 75% of all sacks are allowed or prevented by the play of the QB. Yesterday was no different. The Vikings brought constant pressure and very rarely were made to pay for it...... The Vikings dictated to the Cowboys offense the entire game........ The play calling was terrible! The audibles out of the play calling was terrible! And the execution once the ball was snapped was terrible. But I think someone indicated sevral weeks ago this offense was not on a good trend and you guys kept saying that any win is a good win. Was that a good win yesterday?

There's no question that the QB sometimes plays a role in sacks. However, I would like for you to quantify how you came up with your two figures: 6 or so sack potentials a game, and 75% of the sacks are due to the actions of the QB.

As some others have said, ff, I think many of us, myself included, long for the days when teams were good and bad. The realty of the nfl now is that no one is really good or really bad ( with minor exceptions). The league has, by design, made it so that there is a painful amount do parity in the league. If we continue to view games and the league through the filter of the good old days, we will continue to have this level of frustration.

The roster restrictions do not allow teams to build depth. Couple that with how much more physical the game has become, you have guys that years ago wouldn't have made a team thata re playing significant minutes. And on top of that, the new collective bargaining agreement has significantly reduced the amount of contact in practice.

On the whole, while we have a more 'competitive ' league, I think the entire level of play is not nearly as good in years past.

[Macarthur]

And one of them was a audible into a delayed draw right into the blitz for a 5 yard loss. When you only run 9 times it doesn't take a really bad or good play to effect the average a lot.................. D. Murray averaged close to 8 yards a carry but only got 5 carries. My question is why isn't someone looking for a job today after THAT game plan against THAT defense?

Do we know for sure that was an audible. And a run against a blitz isn't always a bad call. Had he been able to get past one guy, that could have been a big gain.

[cougartino]

Folks on cowboys.com talking as if the Cowboys lost yesterday. It was not pretty but a win is a win. Neither was Giants win over the Bills in the Super Bowl. They didn't complain.

[1971Coogs]

Folks on cowboys.com talking as if the Cowboys lost yesterday. It was not pretty but a win is a win. Neither was Giants win over the Bills in the Super Bowl. They didn't complain.sure wish we could get a running game going though. Dallas will never be a dominate team until that happens.

[Farmersfan]

Its obvious you are a typical fan. There is no such thing as a bad wins. A win is a win.


Hell ppl god mad at Jerry for calling the Denver game a good loss. There are no such things as good loses. A win is a win is a win... I guess thats the coach coming out in me, but I have never seen a bad win and a good defeat. They all count the same.


I agree there is no such thing as a "BAD" win. But there certainly are wins that can't be considered "GOOD WINS". It isn't a either/or proposition. There are whole lot of areas in between. Is a ugly win better than a loss? Of course. Any win is better than a loss. But a 1 point loss to the #1 team in the NFL on a day when the Cowboys put up 500+ yards of offense and scored almost 50 points gives normal people a reason to hope and to think maybe they are figuring things out. A escape with a win by the skin of their teeth against a 1-6 team that is in the bottom of every single NFL category doesn't give much hope for the development and future of this team. If anyone sees a brightside to that win yesterday (other than a mark in the win column) then they probably need to be examined themselves. Based on what you saw from this team yesterday do you think they stand much of a chance against the Saints?

[BILLYFRED0000]

They are average because they are playiing guys that came off the street this season. Not their starters. On both sides of the ball. The fact that they are still winning is mostly on Tony Romo. If the defense had all the starters and the oline still had brian not to mention the injuries to Miles Austin and Demarco Murray... well geez, playin third stringers and still average ain't bad.

[Txbroadcaster]

Based on what you saw from this team yesterday do you think they stand much of a chance against the Saints?

Not much...but I also watched the Saints and they looked terrible against a pretty average Jets team....Week to Week leaue..last week's results and how they look do not matter

[Macarthur]

Based on what you saw from this team yesterday do you think they stand much of a chance against the Saints?

Yep. Did you watch NO yesterday?

Btw, Seattle almost got their ass beat by TB yesterday. I'm not saying we should be doing back flips over is win, but I also think you're not being realistic if you always try to qualify things in today's nfl. It's a week to week league.

[Farmersfan]

There's no question that the QB sometimes plays a role in sacks. However, I would like for you to quantify how you came up with your two figures: 6 or so sack potentials a game, and 75% of the sacks are due to the actions of the QB.

As some others have said, ff, I think many of us, myself included, long for the days when teams were good and bad. The realty of the nfl now is that no one is really good or really bad ( with minor exceptions). The league has, by design, made it so that there is a painful amount do parity in the league. If we continue to view games and the league through the filter of the good old days, we will continue to have this level of frustration.

The roster restrictions do not allow teams to build depth. Couple that with how much more physical the game has become, you have guys that years ago wouldn't have made a team thata re playing significant minutes. And on top of that, the new collective bargaining agreement has significantly reduced the amount of contact in practice.

On the whole, while we have a more 'competitive ' league, I think the entire level of play is not nearly as good in years past.



I don't disagree with this Mac. My point is that even in this "NEW NFL" that is more competitive the Dallas Cowboys are mediocre at best and NOT more competitive. Based on what we've seen for a decade there is no reason to expect more than .500 football from this team. The game we saw yesterday gives no hopes of more than a .500 season. The games we've seen the last several weeks gives no hope for more than a .500 season.

[Deuce]

I don't disagree with this Mac. My point is that even in this "NEW NFL" that is more competitive the Dallas Cowboys are mediocre at best and NOT more competitive. Based on what we've seen for a decade there is no reason to expect more than .500 football from this team. The game we saw yesterday gives no hopes of more than a .500 season. The games we've seen the last several weeks gives no hope for more than a .500 season.

Damn, I have to agree with you!

[Farmersfan]

They are average because they are playiing guys that came off the street this season. Not their starters. On both sides of the ball. The fact that they are still winning is mostly on Tony Romo. If the defense had all the starters and the oline still had brian not to mention the injuries to Miles Austin and Demarco Murray... well geez, playin third stringers and still average ain't bad.

2008- 9-7
2009- 11-5
2010- 6-10
2011- 8-8
2012- 8-8

Starters out? Backups? Injuries to Murray? Ware?

[Macarthur]

I agree. They're a mediocre team.

[Farmersfan]

Yep. Did you watch NO yesterday?

Btw, Seattle almost got their ass beat by TB yesterday. I'm not saying we should be doing back flips over is win, but I also think you're not being realistic if you always try to qualify things in today's nfl. It's a week to week league.


The Seahawks are 18-6 the last two seasons and sitting at 8-1 right now and are probably a favorite to win it all. The Saints are 50-22 the last 5 years, with a Superbowl win and are currently sitting at 6-2. Let's not compare them to these Cowboys. Yesterday was an anomoly for those two teams you mentioned. Yesterday was NORMAL for our Cowboys. Apples and Oranges.....................

[Farmersfan]

I agree. They're a mediocre team.


So how much sense does it make for a mediocre team to muddle through and hopefully get a playoff spot to be destroyed in the first round? If you can't be a consistent winner and be in the race for a title then you might as well be rebuilding................... 8-8 seasons are franchise killers. Too many wins for the owner to clean house and not enough losses to get good draft picks.

[Macarthur]

The Seahawks are 18-6 the last two seasons and sitting at 8-1 right now and are probably a favorite to win it all. The Saints are 50-22 the last 5 years, with a Superbowl win and are currently sitting at 6-2. Let's not compare them to these Cowboys. Yesterday was an anomoly for those two teams you mentioned. Yesterday was NORMAL for our Cowboys. Apples and Oranges.....................

But you asked about them having a chance next week. Why do they not have a chance? The cowboys lost to NO by three points last year. And the cowboys lost by one point to the only undefeated left in the league.

[Macarthur]

So how much sense does it make for a mediocre team to muddle through and hopefully get a playoff spot to be destroyed in the first round? If you can't be a consistent winner and be in the race for a title then you might as well be rebuilding................... 8-8 seasons are franchise killers. Too many wins for the owner to clean house and not enough losses to get good draft picks.

The problem with this in today's nfl is that there are multiple recent examples of teams being 9-7 and winning the SB. It really is true that if you can get in, you can make a run.

[refereedoc]

So how much sense does it make for a mediocre team to muddle through and hopefully get a playoff spot to be destroyed in the first round? If you can't be a consistent winner and be in the race for a title then you might as well be rebuilding................... 8-8 seasons are franchise killers. Too many wins for the owner to clean house and not enough losses to get good draft picks.

The owner needs to fire the GM, oops can't do that.

[Farmersfan]

The problem with this in today's nfl is that there are multiple recent examples of teams being 9-7 and winning the SB. It really is true that if you can get in, you can make a run.


Sorry Mac! You are wrong. 10 Wins is the absolute minimum requirement for being in contention for a Superbowl. In the last 40 years I think the Giants are the only sub 10 win team to win it.... If you remember I researched this about a month ago. It's not out of the question for this Cowboys team to go on a little run and maybe get to that 10 win mark. Especially if they start getting some of their injuried players back. But what possible reason would a logical person have to expect a different result in the playoffs than what they have shown for more than a decade?

[cougartino]

Jets proved that on any given Sunday...

[Farmersfan]

the owner needs to fire the gm, oops can't do that.



exactly!!!!!

[Farmersfan]

But you asked about them having a chance next week. Why do they not have a chance? The cowboys lost to NO by three points last year. And the cowboys lost by one point to the only undefeated left in the league.


The difference in the Cowboys and those teams you mentioned is that the Cowboys lose very competitive and closely played games against the very best teams in the league. They then barely win competitive and closely played games against teh very worst teams in the league. About twice or three times a season they have the Romo meltdown games where the bad teams that they should beat sneaks in a beats them. But they rarely have games where they sneak up on the best teams. What was the stat they were showing on the TV? Dallas is way above .500 against teams below .500 but way below .500 against teams above .500.

[BILLYFRED0000]

2008- 9-7
2009- 11-5
2010- 6-10
2011- 8-8
2012- 8-8

Starters out? Backups? Injuries to Murray? Ware?
No they were not that good. lasst two years the Oliine just sucked. could not run or pass block.
What I said about this year is legit.

[GrTigers6]

The difference in the Cowboys and those teams you mentioned is that the Cowboys lose very competitive and closely played games against the very best teams in the league. They then barely win competitive and closely played games against teh very worst teams in the league. About twice or three times a season they have the Romo meltdown games where the bad teams that they should beat sneaks in a beats them. But they rarely have games where they sneak up on the best teams. What was the stat they were showing on the TV? Dallas is way above .500 against teams below .500 but way below .500 against teams above .500.

Why is it with you that if the cowboys lose to a team that is better than them it has to be Romo screwing up? Do you not remember when the cowboys went into NO and beat a undefeated Saints team. It wasn't even close.
This years losses could both be pinned on the defense not holding a lead In the 4th qtr. Granted the offense also had issues as well but it was just Romo.
This team over the Romo years have been very consistent with one thing. They play to the competition level of the team they are playing. If they are supposed to get beat the either win or barley lose. If they are supposed to dominate, same thing. Very seldom have they destroyed someone or been destroyed

[Macarthur]

Sorry Mac! You are wrong. 10 Wins is the absolute minimum requirement for being in contention for a Superbowl. In the last 40 years I think the Giants are the only sub 10 win team to win it.... If you remember I researched this about a month ago. It's not out of the question for this Cowboys team to go on a little run and maybe get to that 10 win mark. Especially if they start getting some of their injuried players back. But what possible reason would a logical person have to expect a different result in the playoffs than what they have shown for more than a decade?

Green Bay was 10-6 year they won it. Balt was 10-6 last year (with one of those wins coming on a cowboy missed FG as time expired). Giants were 10-6 two years ago. And 9-7 in 2007. And GB actually needed that crazy punt return by Philly at the end of the game to beat ny or GB would not have even made the playoffs that year.

And remember that all three of those teams had stretches when they struggled.

Now, where I think those teams differ from the cowboys is that they had at least one unit in the OL or DL that was exceptional. That's the cowboys fatal flaw, imo. They are weak at OL AND DL.

[Macarthur]

The difference in the Cowboys and those teams you mentioned is that the Cowboys lose very competitive and closely played games against the very best teams in the league. They then barely win competitive and closely played games against teh very worst teams in the league. About twice or three times a season they have the Romo meltdown games where the bad teams that they should beat sneaks in a beats them. But they rarely have games where they sneak up on the best teams. What was the stat they were showing on the TV? Dallas is way above .500 against teams below .500 but way below .500 against teams above .500.

I'm not sure where the disagreement here is. We both agree they are inconsistent. Can play with any team in the league and can lose to anyone. That doesn't mean that they couldn't find a hot streak to end this season and win a coupe, of playoff games.

I'm saying I think it will happen, but it is possible.

[Macarthur]

Why is it with you that if the cowboys lose to a team that is better than them it has to be Romo screwing up? Do you not remember when the cowboys went into NO and beat a undefeated Saints team. It wasn't even close.
This years losses could both be pinned on the defense not holding a lead In the 4th qtr. Granted the offense also had issues as well but it was just Romo.
This team over the Romo years have been very consistent with one thing. They play to the competition level of the team they are playing. If they are supposed to get beat the either win or barley lose. If they are supposed to dominate, same thing. Very seldom have they destroyed someone or been destroyed


http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/content/nfl-myth-busting-tony-romo-and-the-dallas-cowboys-are-americas-chokers/23434/

[Farmersfan]

No they were not that good. lasst two years the Oliine just sucked. could not run or pass block.
What I said about this year is legit.


Not legit!
2012 The Dallas running game sucked because D. Murray got hurt and only played 10 games. The Dallas passing game was #3 in the NFL. Somebody must have been blocking. Every other year the Dallas running game has been about average and the passing game has been top 10 in the NFL. BTW: The O-line has been ranked #18, #15, #11 and #15 in the NFL in sacks allowed over the last 4 seasons. Again, average!

[Farmersfan]

Why is it with you that if the cowboys lose to a team that is better than them it has to be Romo screwing up? Do you not remember when the cowboys went into NO and beat a undefeated Saints team. It wasn't even close.
This years losses could both be pinned on the defense not holding a lead In the 4th qtr. Granted the offense also had issues as well but it was just Romo.
This team over the Romo years have been very consistent with one thing. They play to the competition level of the team they are playing. If they are supposed to get beat the either win or barley lose. If they are supposed to dominate, same thing. Very seldom have they destroyed someone or been destroyed

?????? Not sure a understand where this is coming from. The only time i have ever blamed a loss 100% on Romo was when Romo had the ball in his hands in the end of a low scoring game and he either takes points away from the Cowboys or gives the other team points because of a individual mistake!

[Macarthur]

There is a diff in pass blocking and being able to open holes in the run game. The cowboys were 31st in rushing yards per game last year and are 27th right now.

[GrTigers6]

The difference in the Cowboys and those teams you mentioned is that the Cowboys lose very competitive and closely played games against the very best teams in the league. They then barely win competitive and closely played games against teh very worst teams in the league. About twice or three times a season they have the Romo meltdown games where the bad teams that they should beat sneaks in a beats them. But they rarely have games where they sneak up on the best teams. What was the stat they were showing on the TV? Dallas is way above .500 against teams below .500 but way below .500 against teams above .500.

From here

[bobcat1]

Here's the video link that clearly shows it. Sorry for the commercial. http://nfl.si.com/2013/11/03/adrian-peterson-touchdown-run-dallas-cowboys/

Kinda looks like rugby.

[Tejastrue]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tdMCAV6Yd0Y hahaha...now, now, you know that anything close to rugby would be frowned upon in the NFL.

[Txbroadcaster]

Not legit!
2012 The Dallas running game sucked because D. Murray got hurt and only played 10 games. The Dallas passing game was #3 in the NFL. Somebody must have been blocking. Every other year the Dallas running game has been about average and the passing game has been top 10 in the NFL. BTW: The O-line has been ranked #18, #15, #11 and #15 in the NFL in sacks allowed over the last 4 seasons. Again, average!


and just think how bad it would be without a QB who can escape pass rushes

[Tejastrue]

Don't you guys think this was the 'perfect storm' game for Dallas to lose. Big questions in Minnesota for a 1-6 team. QB controversy with the starter trying to prove he belongs there. A premier running back who had yet to be loosed. For Dallas, coming off an embarrassing, last second loss. Losing more key people to injury. I thought it was a gut check for the Cowboys and they withstood the challenge. Great to get the win.

[Farmersfan]

and just think how bad it would be without a QB who can escape pass rushes



I can do this too TXB! Just think how much better it would be with a QB that can get rid of the ball quick enough to not get sacked!
Stop assuming Romo is mobile. He might just be the LEAST mobile QB in the NFL right now. He's slippery and has made some amazing escapes in his career but those are coming fewer and fewer as times goes by. And he runs like a grandmother when he does escape. I've seen overwieght D-linemen run him down like he was running in mud.

[Txbroadcaster]

I can do this too TXB! Just think how much better it would be with a QB that can get rid of the ball quick enough to not get sacked!
Stop assuming Romo is mobile. He might just be the LEAST mobile QB in the NFL right now. He's slippery and has made some amazing escapes in his career but those are coming fewer and fewer as times goes by. And he runs like a grandmother when he does escape. I've seen overwieght D-linemen run him down like he was running in mud.

wow..least mobile? dude your hate just gets stranger and stranger...the game winning TD he escaped...and I do not how see how you can say fewer and fewer when they even mentioned during the game how many times he was having to escape pressure in the game Sunday

[Farmersfan]

There is a diff in pass blocking and being able to open holes in the run game. The cowboys were 31st in rushing yards per game last year and are 27th right now.


Dallas in the bottom half of rushing teams in the NFL right now. They are joined by the Saints, Chargers, Broncos and Detroit Lions to be at the bottom but still have a winning record. The following teams are in the top 10 rushing teams in the NFL. Philly, Oakland, Washington, Buffalo and Houston and none of them have a winning record. I'm not understanding the point here. If you are saying you want your team to be equally good at passing and running then again perhaps you should move back to La La land. It doesn't happen all that often. More often than not a team must WIN with what they are able to do or what they are good at whether it's running or passing. The only 2 teams that are in the top 10 in the NFL in rushing and passing are the Eagles (4-5) and Green Bay (5-3). It would be awesome if this team could run better! But it would also be awesome if they could pass better, defend better, return kicks better, coach better, game plan better, draft better and on and on and on!
But the facts are D. Murray has been hurt and still has a 4.8 per rush average this season. That would be good for a top 5 spot in the NFL if the Cowboys featured him and he had 25+ carries a game. It'll never happen because he is too fragile and will always be hurt but hell, if we are going to play the "What If" game then let's really play it.

[Farmersfan]

wow..least mobile? dude your hate just gets stranger and stranger...the game winning TD he escaped...and I do not how see how you can say fewer and fewer when they even mentioned during the game how many times he was having to escape pressure in the game Sunday


There is a difference in being slippery in the pocket and being "MOBILE" TXB. Romo runs like a wounded grandmother with a oxygen tank on his back. He escaped some pressure on sunday and actually ran for a 1st down for the first time in quite a long time. Normally he doesn't get 2 yards down field before a lineman runs him down and he dives for a place to hide. Don't confuse juking fat linemen with being able to actually run. I can pull up his rushing stats................. Aikman was better running for yardage than Romo has ever been. And nobody has ever accused Aikman of being a mobile QB. And this has nothing to do with my like or dislike of Romo. This is a fact and we all watch in every Sunday. He might dodge a pass rusher but they will run him down really, really quick if he doesn't throw the ball immediately.

[Bullaholic]

IMO, in today's NFL the rushing game is used primarily for (3) reasons:

1. Keeping defenses from playing the dime all the time.

2. Sustaining drives by making first downs, mostly in short yardage situations.

3. Short yardage power plays inside the 10

[Macarthur]

Lol. No one has ever claimed romo was Vick. Just that he is very good at avoiding pressure and buying time. Everyone associated with the league acknowledges this.

Your bias has made you incredibly jaded and blind.

[Txbroadcaster]

There is a difference in being slippery in the pocket and being "MOBILE" TXB. Romo runs like a wounded grandmother with a oxygen tank on his back. He escaped some pressure on sunday and actually ran for a 1st down for the first time in quite a long time. Normally he doesn't get 2 yards down field before a lineman runs him down and he dives for a place to hide. Don't confuse juking fat linemen with being able to actually run. I can pull up his rushing stats................. Aikman was better running for yardage than Romo has ever been. And nobody has ever accused Aikman of being a mobile QB. And this has nothing to do with my like or dislike of Romo. This is a fact and we all watch in every Sunday. He might dodge a pass rusher but they will run him down really, really quick if he doesn't throw the ball immediately.


FF..your wanting to argue so bad your getting into semantics...the first thing I said was how lucky the OL was that they had a QB that can avoid sacks..if you do not think he is one of the best at that I dont know what else to say

[Farmersfan]

wow..least mobile? dude your hate just gets stranger and stranger...the game winning TD he escaped...and I do not how see how you can say fewer and fewer when they even mentioned during the game how many times he was having to escape pressure in the game Sunday


In fact you aroused my interest so I looked up the numbers. Tony Romo is ranked #19 in the NFL this season in QB rushing yards. That's about average but it really based on the number of attempts. But he is actually ranked #34 out of all QBs that have played this season in the NFL in yards per rush with a 2.9 yard per rush average. With a wide open field and the option to run or not run Tony Romo manages to gain less than 3 yards every time he carries the rock. If you think back without your normal biased you will remember that Romo NEVER seperates from the D-line when he runs and in fact he appears to be far, far, far slower than the 300lb linemen that run him down from behind. These numbers are quite a ways behind such mobile greats as Big Ben, Drew Brees and Eli Manning........:vrycnfsd:

[full circle]

McArthur hit it dead on. Being slippery in the pocket is all Romo needs to be, he doesn't need to be able to outrun anyone, just avoid pressure and get the ball off, of which he is one of the best, a magician at times

[Macarthur]

In fact you aroused my interest so I looked up the numbers. Tony Romo is ranked #19 in the NFL this season in QB rushing yards. That's about average but it really based on the number of attempts. But he is actually ranked #34 out of all QBs that have played this season in the NFL in yards per rush with a 2.9 yard per rush average. With a wide open field and the option to run or not run Tony Romo manages to gain less than 3 yards every time he carries the rock. If you think back without your normal biased you will remember that Romo NEVER seperates from the D-line when he runs and in fact he appears to be far, far, far slower than the 300lb linemen that run him down from behind. These numbers are quite a ways behind such mobile greats as Big Ben, Drew Brees and Eli Manning........:vrycnfsd:

I could care less about my QBs rushing yards. You really are making a fool of yourself.

[Txbroadcaster]

In fact you aroused my interest so I looked up the numbers. Tony Romo is ranked #19 in the NFL this season in QB rushing yards. That's about average but it really based on the number of attempts. But he is actually ranked #34 out of all QBs that have played this season in the NFL in yards per rush with a 2.9 yard per rush average. With a wide open field and the option to run or not run Tony Romo manages to gain less than 3 yards every time he carries the rock. If you think back without your normal biased you will remember that Romo NEVER seperates from the D-line when he runs and in fact he appears to be far, far, far slower than the 300lb linemen that run him down from behind. These numbers are quite a ways behind such mobile greats as Big Ben, Drew Brees and Eli Manning........:vrycnfsd:


Your the only person that brought up rushing yards...your at the point where your arguing with yourself because no one else said anything about him running the ball

[Farmersfan]

Lol. No one has ever claimed romo was Vick. Just that he is very good at avoiding pressure and buying time. Everyone associated with the league acknowledges this.

Your bias has made incredibly jaded and blind.


I'm really tired of being accused of being biased because I don't agree with you guys. If i'm being biased then you guys are equally biased about the information available as I am. YES! Romo is good at avoiding the pass rush. Is he better than most others? I think that is completely subjective and there aren't any numbers to prove that. What would other QBs do with this O-line? What would Romo do with other O-lines? it's all subjective. The question is what do these QB's do when they do escape a pass rush? Sometimes Romo amazes us all and sometimes he frustrates the hell out of everybody. JUST LIKE EVERY OTHER QB! And NO Romo is not mobile. Would you like for me to compare Romo's "MOBILITY" numbers to Troy Aikman? Romo cannot run! Romo never has been able to run! Romo never will be able to run! Everything else is subjective crap that really means nothing. TXB wants to claim Romo is adding something to this offense because he "ESCAPES" the pass rush yet he refuses to acknowledge that any other NFL QB would also have something to add that Romo doesn't. You guys need to watch some other QBs in the NFl from time to time. They all escape pressure from time to time. Romo included! At times he is amazing with the things he does. But at other times he is pathetic. But to claim any other QB would be sacked far more is nothing but a hyperbole argument that makes no sense. I think Jon Kitna proved that Romo didn't make the O-line better than it really was. Was Kitna mobile? Did Kitna have great ability to escape pressure?

[Bullaholic]

Farmer is going to file a bullying complaint against you guys. :D

(BTW-I do not consider bullying to be amusing in any shape or form when it actually occurs and involves actual harm to other persons, especially young ones).

[Txbroadcaster]

I'm really tired of being accused of being biased because I don't agree with you guys. If i'm being biased then you guys are equally biased about the information available as I am. YES! Romo is good at avoiding the pass rush. Is he better than most others? I think that is completely subjective and there aren't any numbers to prove that. What would other QBs do with this O-line? What would Romo do with other O-lines? it's all subjective. The question is what do these QB's do when they do escape a pass rush? Sometimes Romo amazes us all and sometimes he frustrates the hell out of everybody. JUST LIKE EVERY OTHER QB! And NO Romo is not mobile. Would you like for me to compare Romo's "MOBILITY" numbers to Troy Aikman? Romo cannot run! Romo never has been able to run! Romo never will be able to run! Everything else is subjective crap that really means nothing. TXB wants to claim Romo is adding something to this offense because he "ESCAPES" the pass rush yet he refuses to acknowledge that any other NFL QB would also have something to add that Romo doesn't. You guys need to watch some other QBs in the NFl from time to time. They all escape pressure from time to time. Romo included! At times he is amazing with the things he does. But at other times he is pathetic. But to claim any other QB would be sacked far more is nothing but a hyperbole argument that makes no sense. I think Jon Kitna proved that Romo didn't make the O-line better than it really was. Was Kitna mobile? Did Kitna have great ability to escape pressure?


I do not think your biased because you do not agree with me..I think your biased because you have admitted you do not like Romo...and you definition of mobile is WAY different that mine..for me a mobile QB is someone who escapes normal sacks..and it is funny..your now saying what Romo does is just like any other QB, which most of us have said from the beginning

[Macarthur]

Funny stuff.

If you do not think Romo is one of the better escape artists in the league, you are in an overwhelming minority. Even Romo's most ardent detractors don't deny he has some magic.

[Macarthur]

Lol. Haslett even thinks he's one of the best he's ever seen.

http://www.redskins.com/media-gallery/videos/CSN_Haslett_on_Romos_Escapability/ecbcd2e8-51e6-412a-aef5-8ea3b26b5faf

This is what we mean about how your bias has clouded your judgment. You can't even agree with the entire world when it goes against your view.

[Farmersfan]

I could care less about my QBs rushing yards. You really are making a fool of yourself.


I couldn't either Mac until someone calls me out for saying he isn't mobile.

[Macarthur]

As you can tell, if you're willing to admit, there is a difference in someone being elusive and having escapability and being a good rushing QB.

Do you disagree with haslett?

[Farmersfan]

Lol. Haslett even thinks he's one of the best he's ever seen.

http://www.redskins.com/media-gallery/videos/CSN_Haslett_on_Romos_Escapability/ecbcd2e8-51e6-412a-aef5-8ea3b26b5faf

This is what we mean about how your bias has clouded your judgment. You can't even agree with the entire world when it goes against your view.


You keep saying this Mac as if it means something. I have never said Romo isn't good at escaping pressure. Please show me where I said this? I said Romo was one of the LEAST mobile QBs in the NFL. I even posted his ranking in the league at the only stats we have to measure mobility. The whole "escape artist" thing is subjective and really can't be measured. We all have seen Romo make some amazing plays after escaping pressure. I have admitted this many times. My point is that we have all also seen Romo make an escape just to be run down from behind by a 300+lb lineman. We have repeatedly seen Romo fail to get a 1st down when he does decide to tuck and run with the ball. And we have seen Romo repeatedly taking a dive when pressure gets close. So when TXB makes the claim that Romo adds something to this offense because he can escape a pass rush every once in a while I have to balance that against what I perceive to be liabilities that Romo brings at other times...... If you can't understand that then you aren't as smart as you sometimes act.

[Txbroadcaster]

You keep saying this Mac as if it means something. I have never said Romo isn't good at escaping pressure. Please show me where I said this? I said Romo was one of the LEAST mobile QBs in the NFL. I even posted his ranking in the league at the only stats we have to measure mobility. The whole "escape artist" thing is subjective and really can't be measured. We all have seen Romo make some amazing plays after escaping pressure. I have admitted this many times. My point is that we have all also seen Romo make an escape just to be run down from behind by a 300+lb lineman. We have repeatedly seen Romo fail to get a 1st down when he does decide to tuck and run with the ball. And we have seen Romo repeatedly taking a dive when pressure gets close. So when TXB makes the claim that Romo adds something to this offense because he can escape a pass rush every once in a while I have to balance that against what I perceive to be liabilities that Romo brings at other times...... If you can't understand that then you aren't as smart as you sometimes act.

again..WOW..the hate is strong with this one

[Macarthur]

You keep saying this Mac as if it means something. I have never said Romo isn't good at escaping pressure. Please show me where I said this? I said Romo was one of the LEAST mobile QBs in the NFL. I even posted his ranking in the league at the only stats we have to measure mobility. The whole "escape artist" thing is subjective and really can't be measured. We all have seen Romo make some amazing plays after escaping pressure. I have admitted this many times. My point is that we have all also seen Romo make an escape just to be run down from behind by a 300+lb lineman. We have repeatedly seen Romo fail to get a 1st down when he does decide to tuck and run with the ball. And we have seen Romo repeatedly taking a dive when pressure gets close. So when TXB makes the claim that Romo adds something to this offense because he can escape a pass rush every once in a while I have to balance that against what I perceive to be liabilities that Romo brings at other times...... If you can't understand that then you aren't as smart as you sometimes act.

Wow.

[Farmersfan]

again..WOW..the hate is strong with this one


By your defintion I can also say the "LOVE" is strong with you. Hence the creation of the word "romosexual". What you can't seem to grasp is that these things I'm saying aren't the result of my dislike for Tony Romo. My dislike for Tony Romo is the result of the things I have been saying. In the end it all boils down to whether or not Romo makes his team better. Sometimes he does without question. But at other times he does not without question. So can the Cowboys find another QB that provides as much "UPSIDE" as Tony Romo and less "Downside"? I don't know. But what I do know for certain is that they won't find that QB if they aren't looking..................... And if 8-8 is the best Romo can make this team then I would rather see rookie after rookie be run through this program with the hopes of stumbling onto the next great NFL QB.

[Emerson1]

So being mobile only means you have straight forward top end speed?

[Txbroadcaster]

By your defintion I can also say the "LOVE" is strong with you. Hence the creation of the word "romosexual". What you can't seem to grasp is that these things I'm saying aren't the result of my dislike for Tony Romo. My dislike for Tony Romo is the result of the things I have been saying. In the end it all boils down to whether or not Romo makes his team better. Sometimes he does without question. But at other times he does not without question. So can the Cowboys find another QB that provides as much "UPSIDE" as Tony Romo and less "Downside"? I don't know. But what I do know for certain is that they won't find that QB if they aren't looking..................... And if 8-8 is the best Romo can make this team then I would rather see rookie after rookie be run through this program with the hopes of stumbling onto the next great NFL QB.


I have always said( which for some reason you try to argue) that the Ron Wolf plan was best..draft QBs whenever you can.

[Farmersfan]

I have always said( which for some reason you try to argue) that the Ron Wolf plan was best..draft QBs whenever you can.


I've never argued that point TXB. I agree 100% with it. What I argued was your assertion about how successful Ron Wolf has been with it. The late round QBs that the Packers brought through their system and sold off as huge successes didn't really turn out to be that succssful. But that doesn't mean you should not be trying.

[Macarthur]

Part of the problem with the Ron Wolfe method now is the change in the collective bargaining has made it so that if you put in the time developing a QB, you then lose them after 4 years. With the rookie pay scale now so low, it's almost better now to draft a QB fairly high because it doesn't cost you as much.

[Farmersfan]

So being mobile only means you have straight forward top end speed?



I'm thinking it's probably a prerequisite Emerson1.

[Macarthur]

I'm thinking it's probably a prerequisite Emerson1.

So are you saying that a QB has to be fast to be considered elusive or having good pocket presence?

[coach]

In fact you aroused my interest so I looked up the numbers. Tony Romo is ranked #19 in the NFL this season in QB rushing yards. That's about average but it really based on the number of attempts. But he is actually ranked #34 out of all QBs that have played this season in the NFL in yards per rush with a 2.9 yard per rush average. With a wide open field and the option to run or not run Tony Romo manages to gain less than 3 yards every time he carries the rock. If you think back without your normal biased you will remember that Romo NEVER seperates from the D-line when he runs and in fact he appears to be far, far, far slower than the 300lb linemen that run him down from behind. These numbers are quite a ways behind such mobile greats as Big Ben, Drew Brees and Eli Manning........:vrycnfsd:

How many rushing yards does Peyton Manning have?

[coach]

Im still waiting the 50 bad plays romo made a few weeks ago that ff promised he would show us

[Farmersfan]

So are you saying that a QB has to be fast to be considered elusive or having good pocket presence?


Is this what you got out of my comments? Seriously?

[Farmersfan]

How many rushing yards does Peyton Manning have?



Let me know when somebody calls Peyton Manning a mobile QB and I'll look up those numbers for you Coach!!! :wave:

[Farmersfan]

Im still waiting the 50 bad plays romo made a few weeks ago that ff promised he would show us



Are you holding your breath?

[Macarthur]

Is this what you got out of my comments? Seriously?

You told Emerson that having straight line speed is a prerequisite Correct?

[coach]

Let me know when somebody calls Peyton Manning a mobile QB and I'll look up those numbers for you Coach!!! :wave:



HE does an incredible job of not getting sacked. So does tom brady and ben rothlesberger and brett favre. what are their first down numbers?

[coach]

Are you holding your breath?

Hell, you are the one that claimed he made 50 plays and said you wou;d show us.

[Farmersfan]

You told Emerson that having straight line speed is a prerequisite Correct?


Actually I said "I'm thinking its a prerequisite". And we were talking about mobility..... Not elusiveness and pocket presence which you asked about.

[Txbroadcaster]

Actually I said "I'm thinking its a prerequisite". And we were talking about mobility..... Not elusiveness and pocket presence which you asked about.

again semantics

[Farmersfan]

HE does an incredible job of not getting sacked. So does tom brady and ben rothlesberger and brett favre. what are their first down numbers?



Yes he does! One of the best to ever play the game at avoiding the rush. But is he considered a Mobile QB? Of course not. That is what we are discussing here. Do you believe Tony Romo is a mobile QB? I agree Romo is elusive and at times displays a magical ability to avoid the rush... But mobile? Not even close!

[Farmersfan]

again semantics



No it's not TXB. Semantics is saying the same thing in different ways. We were talking about Mobile QBs. Elusiveness and pocket presence is completely different. As coach pointed out, Peyton Manning and several other QBs are very elusive but nobody is silly enough to call me mobile QBs. It is my opinion that you can have elusiveness and pocket presence without having speed. But I don't think a QB who isn't fast as a runner can be a mobile QB. but even the term "Fast" is subjective.... And then there is Quickness. Where does that fall into the equation?

[Saggy Aggie]

Yes he does! One of the best to ever play the game at avoiding the rush. But is he considered a Mobile QB? Of course not. That is what we are discussing here. Do you believe Tony Romo is a mobile QB? I agree Romo is elusive and at times displays a magical ability to avoid the rush... But mobile? Not even close!

Well, he's certainly not immobile

[Macarthur]

So if you are saying a mobile QB has to be fast, I guess so. And no one is saying romo is fast. What we are saying is that he is very good at avoiding the rush and buying extra time. I think that involves some level of mobility.

We truly are arguing over semantics here. No one on here is saying romo is going to win many foot races. But that doesn't make him a statue either.

[Tejastrue]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NjplYy_zT0Y

[Macarthur]

To your point, ff. romo certainly isn't as quick as he used to be which is natural as guys get older.

In fact, I still think there's some lingering effects of this back thing that he had operated on. The thing I notice more than anything is that his accuracy has been off more this year than in years past.

[Farmersfan]

Well, he's certainly not immobile


Well compared to you or me he is probably an Olympic sprinter. But my original point is that far too many people consider Romo a mobile QB when in my opinion (and based on all his career stats) he isn't close to being a mobile QB. I don't know if you watched the game on Sunday but at one point Christian Ponder ran the ball. If you watched him run the ball it was obvious how different he was from Tony Romo in his ability to seperate himself from the defensive players to gain some yardage. Ponder had more running yardage in this single game than Romo has had the entire season. Romo does not outrun 300lb D-linemen. Mobile QBs outrun d-linemen and linebackers and most d-backs. But don't take my word for it. go back and watch some video. Romo runs like a bumblebee in molasses! :)

[Farmersfan]

To your point, ff. romo certainly isn't as quick as he used to be which is natural as guys get older.

In fact, I still think there's some lingering effects of this back thing that he had operated on. The thing I notice more than anything is that his accuracy has been off more this year than in years past.


He is still capable of doing some amazing things in the pocket. I have never denied that. But when the pocket breaks down and Romo is put on the run....... LOL, it's like watching a slug who is late for dinner. He did make a good run on Sunday and got a 1st down but normally when he first comes open everybody in the world initially thinks "Ok, Romo can get us 10 yards here". but he then gets 3 yards and piled on by defensive linemen.
Not to start another argument but watch some recent video and ask me how often Romo seems to be bailing on his throws. It seems to me he has a tendency to be moving backwards with his body as the ball is being released. don't bite my head off! Just watch some video....

[ccmom]

No it's not TXB. Semantics is saying the same thing in different ways. We were talking about Mobile QBs. Elusiveness and pocket presence is completely different. As coach pointed out, Peyton Manning and several other QBs are very elusive but nobody is silly enough to call me mobile QBs. It is my opinion that you can have elusiveness and pocket presence without having speed. But I don't think a QB who isn't fast as a runner can be a mobile QB. but even the term "Fast" is subjective.... And then there is Quickness. Where does that fall into the equation?

Plenty of people would say Romo is a mobile QB....and not just posters on this board.

http://m.washingtonpost.com/blogs/football-insider/wp/2013/10/09/redskins-defense-braces-for-romo-after-quarterbacks-500-yard-game/
Said Wilson: "It makes our job incredibly hard. Any time you play a mobile quarterback, it's difficult. You don't per se see him as a read-option quarterback. But he knows how to get away from the pressure, kind of move and buy himself time. And Dez [Bryant] and all their receivers know how to do these scramble routes and get open, as you saw last week with him and Dez on the Broncos on that deep ball. It's a simple play that went bad as the time
went on."

I found several examples like the above quote.

Mobile=able to move around.

[Macarthur]

As I said, there is some lingering effects, I think, on this back thing. He has taken some wicked shots, esp in that Detroit game. But hes still making big throws and his turnovers have been low.

Again, no one is saying Romo is fast. Sure, Ponder is much quicker. But I bet Ponder is a lot slower when he's ten years older which is the age duff in him and Romo. Its a moot point really because the best QB's in the league are guys thatccouldn't run out of sight in a week. I could care less if my QB has a good forty time. You can have vick, Ponder and I'll take Romo and rivers and Manning. :)

[Macarthur]

Interesting perspective on the running game from broaddus.

http://www.dallascowboys.com/news/article-BryanBroaddusBlog/Point-If-Final-Vikings-Drive-Is--Indication-Balance-Not-Needed/a3e1b5bc-9fe5-47e0-b619-5ee1a097e50b

[Txbroadcaster]

Interesting perspective on the running game from broaddus.

http://www.dallascowboys.com/news/article-BryanBroaddusBlog/Point-If-Final-Vikings-Drive-Is--Indication-Balance-Not-Needed/a3e1b5bc-9fe5-47e0-b619-5ee1a097e50b


I agree,,why keep trying to do something that does not work

[GrTigers6]

If my memory serves correctly didn't green bay win their last superbowl with a primarily passing team because they had no running game?

[Macarthur]

Yes. However I also saw something interesting that said Romo has like the 3rd or 4th highest QB rating on play action pass attempts. So even with a poor run game, a little threat of the run can help quite a bit.

I'm somewhere in the middle. I know you can't keep banging your head against the wall if it isn't going to work, but I think we need to have at least some threat of a run game.

[GrTigers6]

Yes. However I also saw something interesting that said Romo has like the 3rd or 4th highest QB rating on play action pass attempts. So even with a poor run game, a little threat of the run can help quite a bit.

I'm somewhere in the middle. I know you can't keep banging your head against the wall if it isn't going to work, but I think we need to have at least some threat of a run game.

Draws work real well when strategically placed in the game plan. Catch the D off guard
If your passing successfully anyway.

[GrTigers6]

Sad thing is they were doing play action passes when they only ran 9 times and it seemed to take too long to get to play

[Txbroadcaster]

Sad thing is they were doing play action passes when they only ran 9 times and it seemed to take too long to get to play


The Witten TD was off PA

[GrTigers6]

The Witten TD was off PAYes I know, But one of the sacks was as well. Im not saying that I don't like play action but don't run it on an obvious passing down is all I am saying. They have got into a bad habit of 1st down-run 2nd - run 3rd - pass/play action pass. 4th Punt. They need to mix it up and keep the D guessing

[Bullaholic]

Yes I know, But one of the sacks was as well. Im not saying that I don't like play action but don't run it on an obvious passing down is all I am saying. They have got into a bad habit of 1st down-run 2nd - run 3rd - pass/play action pass. 4th Punt. They need to mix it up and keep the D guessing

One of the complaints about the Dallas offense under Garrett is that it is predictable in a large % of situations. Ray Lewis said this when the Ravens played the Cowboys. I think there is a great deal of validity to your post, GrTiger.....

[Macarthur]

One of the complaints about the Dallas offense under Garrett is that it is predictable in a large % of situations. Ray Lewis said this when the Ravens played the Cowboys. I think there is a great deal of validity to your post, GrTiger.....

You know, I'm not so sure about this. I think the defensive coordinators in this league are so good, I think many of them know teams tendencies really well. I think the predictability thing is overblown. Dallas offense is like top 5 in the league in scoring so they seem to be doing okay from a big picture standpoint.

I think a lot of defenses can predict a high percentage of what every offense is going to do most Sundays. There really are few 'secrets'.

[GrTigers6]

You know, I'm not so sure about this. I think the defensive coordinators in this league are so good, I think many of them know teams tendencies really well. I think the predictability thing is overblown. Dallas offense is like top 5 in the league in scoring so they seem to be doing okay from a big picture standpoint.

I think a lot of defenses can predict a high percentage of what every offense is going to do most Sundays. There really are few 'secrets'.

If I have noticed it then its not hard to figure out. :D
When they start drives with a slant pass or 10 yard pass they seem to go farther then when they start with a 2 yard run followed by a 1 yard loss. They struggle on third downs in those situations because they consistently are having 3rd down and 7+ yards

[coach]

Im disapionted in the amount of draw plays this year. We could do some damage since we pass so much. We used to run 4 or 5 draws a game.

[Farmersfan]

If my memory serves correctly didn't green bay win their last superbowl with a primarily passing team because they had no running game?


Also the Saints and Drew Brees......................

[Farmersfan]

Im disapionted in the amount of draw plays this year. We could do some damage since we pass so much. We used to run 4 or 5 draws a game.


Draws and screens are great weapons against a strong pass rush. Dallas has been ok with the draw play but they have always sucked with screen plays. I can't stand the Dallas screen plays to their tight ends. Screen plays should be to small quick guys who can get down the field in a hurry. Beasley could be a huge screen weapon in my opinion. Wonder why some teams aren't good with a screen? Discipline?

[GrTigers6]

Draws and screens are great weapons against a strong pass rush. Dallas has been ok with the draw play but they have always sucked with screen plays. I can't stand the Dallas screen plays to their tight ends. Screen plays should be to small quick guys who can get down the field in a hurry. Beasley could be a huge screen weapon in my opinion. Wonder why some teams aren't good with a screen? Discipline?My guess is yes discipline plays a huge part. Lack of key blocks and execution which all falls on discipline

[coach]

Draws and screens are great weapons against a strong pass rush. Dallas has been ok with the draw play but they have always sucked with screen plays. I can't stand the Dallas screen plays to their tight ends. Screen plays should be to small quick guys who can get down the field in a hurry. Beasley could be a huge screen weapon in my opinion. Wonder why some teams aren't good with a screen? Discipline?

You have to have the right type of guys and practice ALOT. There are so much more happening on screens. Andy Reid's teams are usually good screeners.

I dont ever remember the cowboys having good screen teams. Not even in the 90's.


I think the draw would work well with this team because they are so pass heavy.

[Macarthur]

I wish they were better at screens too.

Dunbar seems like a guy that would be good in the screen game.

[Macarthur]

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1839040-dallas-cowboys-need-to-keep-throwing-to-win-nfc-east#storylink=cpy

[Farmersfan]

It seems like in the past the Cowboys would run the draw a lot on 3rd and long or 2nd and long plays and often have great success at it. We don't see it much anymore.... Like Arsenio Hall always said: "Things that make you go hmmm"

[Farmersfan]

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1839040-dallas-cowboys-need-to-keep-throwing-to-win-nfc-east#storylink=cpy


Makes a lot of sense!

[coach]

I guess Sean Payton is an idiot Romo Sexual.

http://espn.go.com/blog/dallas/cowboys/post/_/id/4718934/sean-payton-romo-having-his-best-year

[Tejastrue]

Vikings beat Skins tonight. lol

[Roughneck93]

Vikings beat Skins tonight. lol


:2thumbsup

[GrTigers6]

Vikings beat Skins tonight. lol

That kinda makes that ugly win not quite as ugly. I know that the Redskins aren't very good but I thought better than the Vikings. I think the Vikings aren't quite as bad as their record indicates

[Macarthur]

That kinda makes that ugly win not quite as ugly. I know that the Redskins aren't very good but I thought better than the Vikings. I think the Vikings aren't quite as bad as their record indicates

Peterson makes them dangerous.

[Farmersfan]

And it's truly a sad day in Cowboy land when people think we are supposed to feel better our team because of what a horrible Redskin's team did.................... the only thing last night proved to me is that the Cowboys aren't that much better than the Redskins and that sucks! :flaming:

[Tejastrue]

You are such a pessimist when talking Cowboys. :dispntd:

[GrTigers6]

And it's truly a sad day in Cowboy land when people think we are supposed to feel better our team because of what a horrible Redskin's team did.................... the only thing last night proved to me is that the Cowboys aren't that much better than the Redskins and that sucks! :flaming:

I never said it made me feel better. I just said they weren't a bad as some were speculating.
That should say that (they may not be as bad as some were speculating)

[coach]

And it's truly a sad day in Cowboy land when people think we are supposed to feel better our team because of what a horrible Redskin's team did.................... the only thing last night proved to me is that the Cowboys aren't that much better than the Redskins and that sucks! :flaming:

I wouldnt say it makes us feel better about our team, but it makes ME feel better about our chances of winning the division.

[Macarthur]

Winning in the nfl is not easy.

[Sweetwater Red]

Winning in the nfl is not easy.


And taking anything away from beating or losing to a good or bad team in the NFL is just silly.
I hate sports cliches but "any given Sunday" comes to mind.

[Farmersfan]

You are such a pessimist when talking Cowboys. :dispntd:


2000= 5-11
2001= 5-11
2002= 5-11
2003= 10-6
2004= 6-10
2005= 9-7
2006= 9-7
2007= 13-3
2008= 9-7
2009= 11-5
2010= 6-10
2011= 8-8
2012= 8-8
2013 = 5-4

That is 109-108 since 2000 for this team. Do you find optimism in another 8-8 season? Good for you if you do. Reality called and wants to speak to you........

[Farmersfan]

And taking anything away from beating or losing to a good or bad team in the NFL is just silly.
I hate sports cliches but "any given Sunday" comes to mind.


"Any given Sunday" is a cliche' that was invented to illustrate how nothing is a given or nothing is exact. But the FACTS are that "any given Sunday" is nothing more than words. The good teams win far, far more often than they lose and the bad teams lose far more often than they win. If not they wouldn't be good or bad! And there is only one true measure of a team at any level. And that is how they perform on the field from week to week. A bad performance one week is nothing more than a indication that they performed badly for that week. But multiple bad performances creates a trend and gives people an expectation. After a certain about of time we come to understand exactly what a team is or isn't based on what we see from them consistently over that time....... And what we have seen from this Cowboy team isn't a positivie thing.

[Tejastrue]

2000= 5-11
2001= 5-11
2002= 5-11
2003= 10-6
2004= 6-10
2005= 9-7
2006= 9-7
2007= 13-3
2008= 9-7
2009= 11-5
2010= 6-10
2011= 8-8
2012= 8-8
2013 = 5-4

That is 109-108 since 2000 for this team. Do you find optimism in another 8-8 season? Good for you if you do. Reality called and wants to speak to you........ I find optimism because the season is far from over. My thoughts are at some point things have got to change. Why not this year?