|
|
|
|
|
| | ***the official DALLAS COWBOYS thread***Page 98 of 127 (87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127) |
I just pointed out two TERRIBLE home losses....
not to mention losing to the titans ...AT HOME...another terrible loss....
yet you think they are better?...
It was penalties (bad Calls) that cost Dallas the Washington, Tn, and Minnesota game.
And didn't the Lions get cheated on a TD that was not called that cost them the game early in the year. | |
|
| ***the official DALLAS COWBOYS thread***
Posted: 11/28/2010 1:34:58 PM |
probably a female. cause you dont know nothing about football.
OMG, and I USED to like you HD.  
Sweet Nancy, shame on you for misconstruing my words, and thanks for correcting my misspelling.
Pete dear, like I said I didn't see the first half, but in the second half it sure did look like Saints defensive struggled against the offense Dallas. Saints are a much more of a stronger team than Dallas this season, but I think Dallas is better than their W-L record and they didn't just hand the game over, they played tough. That's all I was pointing out.
Truth be told I didn't watch the game that closely to say how the Saints fought in the trenches.
I would agree a team is as good as their fight at controlling the scrimmage or in "trenches" as some call it. I've never watched film of the plays and dissected it but my Dad always taught the lines at scrimmage count and I know he was right! LOL, I didn't even notice your miss spelling.
In fact Giants defense struggled at the line of scrimmage the whole first half in todays game, man the Titans RB's were running right by our defensive line, thru our line backers and right into our last line of our defense. CRAP when CB's and Safeties are stopping the run... that's bad! THANK GOODNESS our defensive line stepped up in the second half and Giants won! | |
|
| ***the official DALLAS COWBOYS thread***
Posted: 11/28/2010 2:19:21 PM | YOU ARE WHAT YOUR RECORD IS
I'd be willing to bet starting next Sunday week 13 that the Lions, Cowboys, Bengals, and Bills will finish the season( the last 5 games ) with a better record than the Redskins, Raiders, Titans, and Rams who have a better record right now at the time. | |
|
| |
| ***the official DALLAS COWBOYS thread***
Posted: 11/28/2010 7:30:16 PM | petebelongsI like being right
your not all right so dont get too big of a head. your like 55% right if that.
im not impressed with your bandwagon jumping to the saints, when oh golly gee wiz they made the playoffs a few of years ago.
not impressed with your football playing days. next you'll say you played for the steelers in the '70s.
not impressed with the internet name calling just shows how boyish you are.
boy you would think somebody at your age would no better. | |
|
| ***the official DALLAS COWBOYS thread***
Posted: 11/28/2010 7:44:31 PM | the Saints dominated the trenches!
Please explain how when the Cowboys offense controlled the ball for 34:41 and racked up 457 yards in offense.
not impressed with your football playing days. next you'll say you played for the steelers in the '70s.
I remember a Pete Gogolak that was a place kicker for the Giants back in the 60's and 70's and a Pete Banazack that played full back for the Raiders.
| |
|
| ***the official DALLAS COWBOYS thread***
Posted: 11/29/2010 8:34:22 AM | sumreel i dont see your picture posted on here
cause i'm not here to meet up with anyone!.......but rest assured that you look more like my pop, than my (slightly) older peer.
i dont care what you look like,
but maybe your inner feminine side does!
you dont know nothing about football.
i know about as much of it...as you know about baseball!
""It ain't braggin', if ya can back it up""
(a quote by: Jay "dizzy" Dean-------> best pitcher in baseball between 1934--37)
 | |
|
| ***the official DALLAS COWBOYS thread***
Posted: 11/30/2010 1:32:10 AM | To Pete
<div class="quote">Sean Payton and Jason Garrett are personal friends and Payton did not want to embarrass Garrett so he called off the dogs and tried to sit on the 2 TD lead, and Bush spoiled that plan by letting you back into the game! Otherwise the Cowboys would have been simply crushed. And, if you watched the game clearly, you would have noticed that the Saints controled the line of scrimage through most of the game!.
This has to be the funniest comment of the year Surely Pete you dont believe Payton choose not to run up the score and allow the Cowboys back in the game because the two coaches are friends.........surely you must be kidding LMAO.
Secondly the Saints do not own the Cowboys or did you consider last years Cowboys win a fluke ..? tell me why would Garret ruin Paytons possible unbeaten season if they are such good friends.
Your whole idea of friendship goes out the door the minute you enter the stadium or have you ever really played the game ????????
If your frienship cant handle a serious competition on the field , be it player or coach then you are'nt much of a friend.
Yes I will admit that the Cowboys are what they are and they stunk with Wade Philips as coach this year and Jason Garret may or may not be much better ... only time will tell.
But If you think the Saints own the Cowboys your head has puffed up the size of the Good Year Blimp. I will agree the Saints have a better team at the moment as we do need a few players on the O line to catch up to you but since when do you own the Cowboys the Saints lost to the Cowboys just last year !!!
How Is that Owning Us?????
Its obvious the Cowboys got off to a terrible start which even got worse after Romo was injured but by that time the season was over and everyone knew it . Wade Philips said himself that he lost the players....... and our O line was a mess earlier in the year.
Garret has cleaned up the team as far as being laxed is concerned there will be no more Camp cup cake in the future and you can tell by how the players are now playing with a bit more heart as their jobs are on the line now and there will be changes next year.
Given the right coaching The Cowboys talent is comparable to the Saints so I wouldnt exactlty say the Saints own the Cowboys. Both the Cowboys and the Saints
are talented teams however you do have way better coaching than the Cowboys had but I wouldnt go as far as saying the Saints own anyone.
So far Garret has the Boys beating the Giants and the Lions and gave your Saints a run for there money however this might not be the same team that started the season under (CUP CAKE) Wade Philips.
Pete The fact that Payton and Garret may be friends had nothing to do with the out come of the game !!!!!!!! ...........it is what it is ................
But to come up with some story that Payton didnt want to embarass his friend IS A JOKE !!!!!!
You talk as if you know them personaly 
I have played Hockey, Football, and Lacrosse and also coached both Football and Lacrosse and at any level Frienships are checked at the door just like ego's. Never in my life have I heard of saving a freinds face for the sake of a frienship IN ANY SPORT PERIOD.
You Play 100 % all the time or dont bother playing at all and that goes for playing against friends as players or as coaches. I have seen coaches pull starters and take it easy late in a game!!!!!! .....BUT NEVER IN THE FIRST HALF !!!!!!
Please Spare Us the BS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! and stick to your knowledge of the game not what you assume.
| |
|
| ***the official DALLAS COWBOYS thread***
Posted: 11/30/2010 10:46:28 AM | HD, perhaps I do owe you an apology for inferring that you are basically dumb as a stump. I don't really know you and you don't really know me. Perhaps you couldn't tell if I was trying to state a fact or an opinion. Perhaps you are used to dealing with people that have the personality disorder that makes them want to embellish and fabricate things in order to make them sound like more than what they really are in life. I don't happen to be such a person and I call it like I see it! I also take great exception to being called a liar, and since I can't ask you to step outside to discuss that liar comment in further detail, I resorted to pick on what I percieve to be your lack of intelligence. That was wrong on my part and was tatamount to making fun of the participants of a Special Olympics. I am sorry and will do my best to refrain from doing so in the future. Now, HD, I have a proposition for you, that in the future I will not comment on your postings and in return, you will not comment on my postings and we can ignore each other and get along in that fashion. Deal?
MGM, the Cowboys had the ball for 75 plays while the Saints had the ball for 62 plays. Do you need any further explaination as to why the Cowboys had a longer time of possession? In my opinion, an a$$ whippin', in a football game happens on the line of scrimage. This may not be your perception as you keep referring to the scoreboard and time of possession in regards to a whippin'. To each, his own. From what I saw, contrary to last year's game when the Cowboys line hurried and harrassed Brees all game long, it appearsed to me that Brees was mostly comfortable (he did get sacked twice) in the pocket for the entire game and had the time and ability to make several long passes downfield. Most were completed, some were dropped and some were broken up by the defense. Conversely, Kitna did not have the luxury to be able to sit in the pocket and throw long passes downfield and though the Saints only had one sack of Kitna, the Cowboys relied almost completely on short routes and passes out in the flat for their offense. There were several plays where Felix Jones and Roy Williams made nice moves to get big gains with yards after the catch. But the passes were no more than 10 yards in length. In the running game, Barber averaged less than 2 yards per carry and Felix Jones about 3.5 yards per carry while for the Saints, Ivory was over 5 yards per carry and Julius Jones averaged 4.5 yards per carry. For most of the game, the Saints controlled the line of scrimage!
And, MGM, as I've stated on here in the past, the nickname "petebelongs" refers to my strong belief that Pete Rose belongs and should have a plaque in Cooperstown as the all time hits leader.
1 and 4, shouldn't you have changed your name to "3 and 8 and out of the playoffs" by now???
In the last 7 meetings between the Saints and the Cowboys, what have been the results? In case you don't know, I'll save you the trouble of looking it up. The Saints have won 6 of those games with the only Cowboy win coming last year to give the Saints their first loss of the year! In the way back days, the Cowboys won 13 of the first 16 times they played the Saints, but the tide has turned in more recent days!
With six wins in the last seven meetings, the Saints own the Cowboys for now! Whether you care to admit it or not!
<div class="quote"> Secondly the Saints do not own the Cowboys or did you consider last years Cowboys win a fluke ..? tell me why would Garret ruin Paytons possible unbeaten season if they are such good friends.
1 and 4, what an inane statement by you! Garrett was not the Head Coach of the Cowboys last year as you well know!
My philosophy in playing sports is like yours. If you're playing, you give 100%, all of the time that you're playing. Can you honestly say that all of the teammates that you've played with or have coached have done the same?? If so, you weren't watching closely because not all that play sports believe in that line of thought. Not everyone has the same competitive edge and desire as I have and you say that you have. Now professionals are expected to give total effort all of the time since that's what they are paid for but it's not always the case. Did you see the play a few weeks ago where Haynesworth got knocked down and proceeded to lie on his stomach and watch the conclusion of the play instead of bouncing up and trying to get back into the play? Have you ever seen Terrell Owens jog out a route when he knew the ball wasn't going to be thrown his way or not bother to throw a block? Or hockey players that don't bust their butts in order to backcheck when the puck heads the other way? You know, the blue line hangers hoping for a easy breakaway after their teammates make the effort to get the puck back.
Now you believe what you care to believe, that is your perogative, and I'll believe whatever I care to believe! But when I see a Gregg Williams defense playing in a prevent fashion instead of the normal attack, attack, attack mode that runs through his blood, I firmly believe that it was not his choice to have his defense play that way. Since Williams is the defensive coordinator and there is only one person that can overrule how he wants his defense to play, it seems very logical to me that Payton told him to back off!
Payton himself is a breed unto himself! How many other head coaches do you know of that told their GM to reduce their salary and give that money in order to sign the defensive coordinator he wanted??? Name them? I know that payton wanted to win that game, but I believe that he told Williams to back off and it almost cost him the game. You might have noticed that the defense went back into attack mode after the Cowboys took the lead.
GEAUXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX SAINTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
TWO DAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! | |
|
| ***the official DALLAS COWBOYS thread***
Posted: 11/30/2010 8:22:28 PM | do you like all this attention your getting? because you must not be getting any @ home. your insinuating that i called you a lair. i said its a lie meaning wherever you heard it from.
no deal. whenever you are wrong you will be corrected.
the question of the week should garrett be promoted? | |
|
| ***the official DALLAS COWBOYS thread***
Posted: 11/30/2010 10:11:44 PM | To Pete
Believe what you want ............but it is totally ridiculous in my opinion that
Payton even came close to ease up on Garret 's team just cause he is now and probably will be the Cowboys coach of the future friends or not.
I hardly think Garret or the Cowboys saw the situation the same as you suggest.
In fact....... I would think Jason Garret would be insulted if he had any incling that Sean Payton held back his players just so Garret could look good .
One other thing 17 points is in no way running up the score and Im sure Sean Payton would have at least waited till the third or fourth quarter before replacing his starters
which would be the proper way to show that he didnt want to embarass his friend .
Garret may not of been head Coach last year when the Cowboys beat the Saints last year but he did call the offensive plays and didnt hold anyone back from acheiving the ultimate goal which was to win the game regardless if Payton had a chance to go undefeated.
If you are true friends a bad loss isnt going to change anything off the field in which I think Pete you are way out in left to even consider such a thing.
As for playing 100 % all the time you bring up a few players who have trouble staying with thier respective teams My guess would be the same as any coach or owner those players have already proved they are not worth the sweat from my left testicle. | |
|
| ***the official DALLAS COWBOYS thread***
Posted: 12/1/2010 4:26:48 AM | Pete:
Ever thought it maybe the other coaches that are slacking off when playing against the Saints since the "Aints" did nothing the first 40 years of their Franchise, and are now saying let's give the Saints their chance. | |
|
| ***the official DALLAS COWBOYS thread***
Posted: 12/1/2010 5:09:55 PM |
HD, I've been reading your posts on here for the last two seasons and accordingly have come to the conclusion that you are basically a functional illiterate
MGM, reading is fundamental while comprehension is essential!
MGM, I don't need to explain to you why a team doesn't try for as FG being down 4 points!
Phew, I'm tired after this post, but I like being right!
what?...losing to green bay 45-7 was actually a closer game than what I watched?...was it only one play that could have made the score 45-21?.....
you crack me up MGM...
OMG, and I USED to like you HD.
I will take that bet mgm...5 bucks!!! pay up!!!
your not all right so dont get too big of a head. your like 55% right if that.
not impressed with your football playing days.... next you'll say you played for the steelers in the '70s......not impressed with the internet name calling just shows how boyish you are....boy you would think somebody at your age would no (sic) better.
Your whole idea of friendship goes out the door the minute you enter the stadium or have you ever really played the game ????????
But If you think the Saints own the Cowboys your head has puffed up the size of the Good Year Blimp.
Given the right coaching The Cowboys talent is comparable to the Saints
Please Spare Us the BS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! and stick to your knowledge of the game not what you assume.
I also take great exception to being called a liar, and since I can't ask you to step outside to discuss that liar comment in further detail, I resorted to pick on what I percieve to be your lack of intelligence...... That was wrong on my part and was tatamount to making fun of the participants of a Special Olympics.
MGM, the Cowboys had the ball for 75 plays while the Saints had the ball for 62 plays. Do you need any further explaination as to why the Cowboys had a longer time of possession?
1 and 4, shouldn't you have changed your name to "3 and 8 and out of the playoffs" by now???
With six wins in the last seven meetings, the Saints own the Cowboys for now! Whether you care to admit it or not!
1 and 4, what an inane statement by you! Garrett was not the Head Coach of the Cowboys last year
Payton himself is a breed unto himself! How many other head coaches do you know of that told their GM to reduce their salary and give that money in order to sign the defensive coordinator he wanted??? Name them?
do you like all this attention your getting? because you must not be getting any @ home.
Ever thought it maybe the other coaches that are slacking off when playing against the Saints since the "Aints" did nothing the first 40 years of their Franchise, and are now saying let's give the Saints their chance .
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here you have it!!........^^ the TOP quotes of the month!.............PRICELESS!
 | |
|
| ***the official DALLAS COWBOYS thread***
Posted: 12/1/2010 5:34:22 PM |
MGM, the Cowboys had the ball for 75 plays while the Saints had the ball for 62 plays. Do you need any further explaination as to why the Cowboys had a longer time of possession?
Then how can you say the Saints dominated in the trenches? | |
|
| |
| ***the official DALLAS COWBOYS thread***
Posted: 12/2/2010 2:54:32 PM | MGM, the Cowboys had the ball for 75 plays while the Saints had the ball for 62 plays. Do you need any further explaination as to why the Cowboys had a longer time of possession? In my opinion, an a$$ whippin', in a football game happens on the line of scrimage. This may not be your perception as you keep referring to the scoreboard and time of possession in regards to a whippin'. To each, his own. From what I saw, contrary to last year's game when the Cowboys line hurried and harrassed Brees all game long, it appearsed to me that Brees was mostly comfortable (he did get sacked twice) in the pocket for the entire game and had the time and ability to make several long passes downfield. Most were completed, some were dropped and some were broken up by the defense. Conversely, Kitna did not have the luxury to be able to sit in the pocket and throw long passes downfield and though the Saints only had one sack of Kitna, the Cowboys relied almost completely on short routes and passes out in the flat for their offense. There were several plays where Felix Jones and Roy Williams made nice moves to get big gains with yards after the catch. But the passes were no more than 10 yards in length. In the running game, Barber averaged less than 2 yards per carry and Felix Jones about 3.5 yards per carry while for the Saints, Ivory was over 5 yards per carry and Julius Jones averaged 4.5 yards per carry. For most of the game, the Saints controlled the line of scrimage!
SweetNancy, you'll LOVE the Cowboys if they beat the Eagles! | |
|
| ***the official DALLAS COWBOYS thread***
Posted: 12/2/2010 3:07:39 PM |
Conversely, Kitna did not have the luxury to be able to sit in the pocket and throw long passes downfield and though the Saints only had one sack of Kitna, the Cowboys relied almost completely on short routes and passes out in the flat for their offense. There were several plays where Felix Jones and Roy Williams made nice moves to get big gains with yards after the catch. But the passes were no more than 10 yards in length.
What team dominates the trenches when Dallas has the ball on a 13 play drive that eats up 7 minites of the clock for a TD versus Drew Brees throwing the ball up for grabs on a 1 play 80 yard TD pass that takes 10 seconds off the clock? Nancy knows the answer. | |
|
| ***the official DALLAS COWBOYS thread***
Posted: 12/2/2010 4:12:07 PM |
What team dominates the trenches when Dallas has the ball on a 13 play drive that eats up 7 minites of the clock for a TD versus Drew Brees throwing the ball up for grabs on a 1 play 80 yard TD pass that takes 10 seconds off the clock? Nancy knows the answer.
ooooh, ooooh ooh,  I THINK I know the answer..... It's the team that takes off it's clothes. ... lol I couldn't resist....anyway...... on to some less serious "stuff"
OK OK as hard as it is to admit, it was Dallas. Pete dear, just because a team is throwing short passes and running the ball doesn't mean the other teams defense is controlling the line of scrimmage. for example:
1. If the defense is allowing the offense to complete first downs and allows a team 13 consecutive plays AND they score a TD on that drive.... I would say the defense is NOT controlling the line of scrimmage.
2. Some offenses play the run game with short passes as a way to play defense within their offense... like in the days of Bill Parcells with the Giants... Parcells intentionally played the running game with short passes, it allowed the offense to "chew up" the clock AND it wore down the defense of the opposing team. So if an offense can SUCCESSFULLY keep a drive going by using short passes and the run to "chew up" the clock and wear down the defense, then ... I would say the defense is NOT controlling the line of scrimmage.
LOL back in the Parcells days with the Giants I used to argue this very point with the guys I worked with.... and it took the Giants and Parcells to the SuperBowl 2x's and they even won both times on just that kind of offensive play.
SweetNancy, you'll LOVE the Cowboys if they beat the Eagles!
Hmmm lets see... Cowboys have no chance to get to the playoffs, Dallas beating the Eagles, who are up Giants azz for the divisional playoff spot, .....so Dallas beating the Eagles would enhance the Giants chances by Eagles scoring another 1 or 2 loss not only in the lose column, but also the divisional lose column.... all I have to say is.....Yeah Baby!!!! I say bring it on Dallas
So yes Pete dear I would agree I would TEMPORARILY Love Dallas if they beat the Eagles, once would be nice, twice would be GRAND. | |
|
| ***the official DALLAS COWBOYS thread***
Posted: 12/2/2010 4:13:25 PM | funny how these saint fans werent running their mouth, puttin their little foot in their big mouth like last year.oh well its because we were 3 and 7, hogwash its because you were a coward.pete the only question i had for you was "what kind of a man are'?which is apparent you are no man at all. but you have lightened up on your more recent post.
i have good intentions of traveling to trent, nj and whooping the first short, baldheaded, fat looking old male i see.
uh um your safe gaint fans, thanks but no thanks we dont need ya.maybe you can get together with ZOMBY (petes son).
sumreel im old and stop adding words to my post(sic).oh you have a "peer" whats a peer? you dont have to post a picture because you have a peer, right? sorry i dont get it.yet you go around looking on other peoples profile? you'll have some lame excuse.
i havent looked at anybodys profile in these sports forums, frankly some of these pictures scare me.. | |
|
| ***the official DALLAS COWBOYS thread***
Posted: 12/2/2010 11:26:16 PM | sumreel im old and stop adding words to my post(sic).
..Oh, is that what i did?
oh you have a "peer" whats a peer?
...man, you ain't saying much for the American education system, are you!
i have good intentions of traveling to trent(sic), nj and whooping the first short, baldheaded, fat looking old male i see.
^ this is not what the typical giant fan looks like......the person you described is more along the lines of a cowboys fan!
-----------------------------------------
I've been way kinder to you on these posts than Pete has.........so if you got some beef with him, then be "man-enuff" to handle it without dragging my name(or anyone else's) into your argument. | |
|
| ***the official DALLAS COWBOYS thread***
Posted: 12/3/2010 7:50:48 AM | Alllllllrighteeeee then! For the last time, I promise, I'll attempt to explain the whole line of scrimage thing. This is Football 101. I will attempt to state this in simple enough terms so that even HD can understand it!
Take an offensive lineman and a defensive lineman. This would be mano y mano (man to man in English)! The offensive lineman's goal on a passing play is to block the defensive lineman effectively so the defensive lineman does not sack, disrupt, hurry or otherwise interfere with the QB as to keep the pass from being completed. Every time the offensive lineman manages to do this, it's a battle won by the offensive lineman. Every time the offensive lineman doesn't reach this goal, it's a battle won by the defensive lineman. Now, consider a group of ten plays. If the offensive lineman wins the battle 5 out of 10 plays, it's been an even battle with the defensive lineman. If the offensive lineman manages to reach his goal 6 out of 10 times he'd have an edge over the defensive lineman. 7-8 times out of 10 and the offensive lineman has controlled the defensive lineman. 9-10 times out of 10 and the offensive lineman has dominated the defensive lineman. On the opposite side of the scale if the offensive lineman is winning 4 out of 10, the defensive lineman has an edge. 2-3 out of ten, the defensive lineman is controlling the line. 0-1 out of ten and the defense is dominating. Hopefully you are still with me and are getting this concept. And this is not etched in stone anywhere but hopefully you've heard commentators saying that one line or the other is controlling the other or even dominating the other, although dominating is rare in the pros. A rough guide would be a 5-5 (50-50 or 50%) split as even, 6-4 (60%) an edge, 7-8 vs. 3-2 (70-80%) controlling and 9-10 vs. 1-0 (90-100%) as dominating.
Now, let's expand this concept to the units, offensive and defensive lines. For example, if an offensive line is winning the battle (giving the QB the time without pressure to attempt to complete the pass) 7-8 times out of 10, that offensive line is controlling the defensive line. And so on with the other percentages as previously mentioned. This does not mean that the QB will always complete the passes, even if his line is controlling the play. There are always accuracy issues, coverages, drops etc. that come into play. This is just about line play.
If an offensive line is having trouble giving the QB the necessary time, a change in the play calling can help, particularly by shortening the pass routes, allowing the QB to get rid of the ball in a shorter amount of time and relieving some of the pressure being applied to the offensive line by the defense. Passes out to the flats, quick slants, quick outs, screens, etc. (This is what Dallas had to do because of their inability to complete passes downfield and they did it effectively.)
On to run blocking. A good average for a running back is 3.5 yards per carry. If the line can block so that a back can maintain 3.5 yards per carry, a team never needs to throw the ball because after every three plays, the team will have a new first down and methodically march down the field and score a TD on every possession. If an offensive line can block so the running backs can get 3.5 yards or more per carry they have won that battle and are controlling the defense. Less than that average, the defense is winning the battle, controlling the offensive and forcing the offensne to throw the ball in order to make 1st downs.
I'm going to pause here for any potential comments and/or questions that may have arisen. | |
|
| ***the official DALLAS COWBOYS thread***
Posted: 12/3/2010 3:58:25 PM |
I'm going to pause here for any potential comments and/or questions that may have arisen.
If Kitna was sacked 1 time and Brees sacked 2 times what are you going to say that Gregg Williams only rushed 3 Defensive Linemen the whole game? And if that is true then that only means the Saints had a extra defensive back in the game to help stop the Cowboys passing attack where back-up Quarterback John Kitna passed for 313 yards on the Saint defense.
On to run blocking. A good average for a running back is 3.5 yards per carry.
You also forgot to mention Miles Austin's 60 yard run and only run that resulted in a TD. | |
|
| ***the official DALLAS COWBOYS thread***
Posted: 12/3/2010 7:56:30 PM | Good answers MGM!
Pete you are as stubborn as some other people here. Including me.
Now, let's expand this concept to the units, offensive and defensive lines. For example, if an offensive line is winning the battle (giving the QB the time without pressure to attempt to complete the pass) 7-8 times out of 10, that offensive line is controlling the defensive line. And so on with the other percentages as previously mentioned. This does not mean that the QB will always complete the passes, even if his line is controlling the play. There are always accuracy issues, coverages, drops etc. that come into play. This is just about line play.
Agreed, so far...lets move on.
If an offensive line is having trouble giving the QB the necessary time, a change in the play calling can help, particularly by shortening the pass routes, allowing the QB to get rid of the ball in a shorter amount of time and relieving some of the pressure being applied to the offensive line by the defense. Passes out to the flats, quick slants, quick outs, screens, etc. (This is what Dallas had to do because of their inability to complete passes downfield and they did it effectively.)
Hmmm I agree a defense can cause an offense to HAVE to change to short pass routes, flats, quick slantz ect... rather than an offense CHOOSING (some offenses CHOOSE to play that way) then the defense has SOME WHAT controlled the line. Remember football is a game of chess, which means if one line is stronger than the other can adjust, that's what makes it so interesting, so if an offense can "successfully adjust" to this then it is now the offensive line that has control. In the case of Dallas I'm not so sure the Saints MADE them go for short passing because they are playing with a back up QB and a lot times a team will use safer short passes rather than longer risker ones, however for the benefit of doubt lets say the Saints defensive line MADE Dallas go to shorter passes lets look at some passing stats from this game:
Passing attempts: Brees 39, Kitna 42... Cowboys attempted MORE passes.
Average passing Gain: Saints 8.1 yards, Cowboys 7.3.... wow for a team that DOMINATED the line they only held the Cowboys down by 1.2 yards less on average, somehow if they dominated the differential of the 2 numbers should be a LOT larger.
Total yards passing, Saints 333, Cowboys 313... holy cow only a difference of 20, again if the D-line "dominated" the differnce would have been much bigger.
But wait it gets better!!!
On to run blocking. A good average for a running back is 3.5 yards per carry. If the line can block so that a back can maintain 3.5 yards per carry, a team never needs to throw the ball because after every three plays, the team will have a new first down and methodically march down the field and score a TD on every possession. If an offensive line can block so the running backs can get 3.5 yards or more per carry they have won that battle and are controlling the defense. Less than that average, the defense is winning the battle, controlling the offensive and forcing the offensne to throw the ball in order to make 1st downs.
I agree on only "some" of this, not all short passes are because a team can't run the ball. Some coaches (most in my opinion) design their plays to have a mix of runs and passes, in fact the better the offense the more they can "mix" it up with short, long passes, running up the middle or running to the outside. This is all part of that great chess game called "strategy" in football. Dallas usually doesn't JUST run the game, in fact why would they, they have some pretty good WR's and they use 3 TE's. However again lets just go with your theory again that Saints d-line wasn't letting Dallas successfully run the ball and look at some stats, BTW, I love these ones as compared to the passing ones:
Total rushing yards, Saints 81, Dallas 144 ...wow Dallas had 63 more rushing yards.
Even without the 60 yd run by Austin Dallas would still have more running yards.
Average Rushing yards Saints 3.9 Dallas 4.5 Hmm Dallas averaged above the 3.5 you stated, and by your own definition as stated above it can be said the Dallas controlled the line of scrimmage when running the ball.
In fact Dallas had MORE 1st downs than the Saints, Dallas had 24 and Saints had only 21 .....oh and get this: 7 of those 24 1st downs that Dallas got were by rushing as compared to the Saints who out of their 21 1st downs 5 were by rushing. So by your own numbers given you can clearly see that Dallas offense line controlled the line better when running AND Dallas d-line held Saints running game to less than Dallas's.
In the running game, Barber averaged less than 2 yards per carry and Felix Jones about 3.5 yards per carry while for the Saints, Ivory was over 5 yards per carry and Julius Jones averaged 4.5 yards per carry. For most of the game, the Saints controlled the line of scrimage!
Actually you forgot to mention that Barber ran for only 1 yard on 1 play because he got a TD... so he couldn't run anymore than 1 yard on that play.
Also if you noticed Dallas had almost double the amount of running yardage than the Saints and they averaged .6 more yards per carry than the Saints. Your stats aren't complete.
Saints had 4 players with running yards and Dallas had 7 so of course the individual runs may have been less AND 2 of those runs were for only 1 yard each because they were for TD's so again thats all they could run. In fact all 3 TD's by Dallas were the by running, lol so I don't know how you can say the Saints stopped Dallas running game and FORCED them to throw short yardage.
2 last over all stats, Total net yards: Saints 414, Dallas 457.... hmmm Dallas had more.
Brees sacked 2 x's, Kitna 1x, that means Brees was sacked twice as much as Kitna.
JMO, however I really don't know how you can say that Saints "controlled" the line of scrimmage for MOST of the game. To say that would mean that their offensive and defensive lines dominated through out the game and by the stats and the score 27-30, lol Saints won by ONLY 3 points I'm just not going to buy that. | |
|
| |
| ***the official DALLAS COWBOYS thread***
Posted: 12/3/2010 11:16:47 PM | Pete:
Get out your pencil and paper and take notes on Nancy's post, not only does she do her homework but she definately knows the game of football. | |
|
|
|
|
Page
98
of
127 (87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127)
|
|
Home
login 
