Dallas Cowboys secondary still a work in progress
by Dave Halprin on Oct 2, 2008 11:43 PM CDT
in News
47 comments
I'll get to the Cowboys secondary in a second, but let me get this out of the way first: I've been totally slack on the blog this week. So my apologies to you guys (and gals) but some weeks real life overtakes my blogging life. I promise to do better next week. I didn't get to do a Film Review this week but I do hope to do a Scouting Report and I hope to get 5 Questions in with Kirkendall over at Cincy Jungle. By the way, he has a nice little primer for the game here, and he also has some bits on whether Carson Palmer will actually play and their injury situation. Go over and check it out. There's also more on their injuries here. Marvin Lewis also discusses the additions of Cedric Benson and Chris Henry in this article.
On the Dallas side of things, let's talk secondary. Wade has basically said the Keith Davis will take over the role of Pat Watkins while they hold him out because of the shoulder injury. Kind of scary that we're down to our third string SS and we're also playing the inexperienced Courtney Brown for a lot of the snaps, too. Especially with the Bengals having a talented group of receivers. Maybe we'll catch a break by not having Carson Palmer throwing to them.
And the guys charged with stopping those receivers, the Cowboys secondary, haven't exactly been on fire so far this season. This article by Nick Eatman discusses playing man-to-man versus zones. Through no fault of Eatman, I came away even more confused about what the Cowboys philosophy is on defense in regards to the secondary. Read it for yourself and give me your take. In addition, there's this article, which notes the obvious, the Cowboys next interception will be the first of the year. Not exactly confidence-inspiring.
Even though the Benglas passing game has stunk so far this year, my biggest fear is that the Bengals receivers get the best of the Cowboys secondary on Sunday.
There's more Romo and T.O. talk, if you're interested in that kind of thing, here. Even the Bengals receivers are getting in on the act.
"Tell T.O. to tell Jason Garrett they need to throw the ball to him 24 times," Houshmandzadeh said while laughing. "Me and Chad ain't had 17 balls thrown our way in a game yet combined. Tell him they need to give it to him 24 or 25 times."
Maybe of bigger importance, Andre Gurode's status for the game is up in the air although Wade feels confident he'll play.
0 recs |
47 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Another Sunday to watch owens sulk
Another Sunday is just about upon us and one thing is for sure. Whether this one is an overtime nailbiter or a cowboys blowout, if TO doesn’t have 100+ yards receiving with a few TDs sprinkled in, he’ll be sulking on the sidelines like the last two games. Just what Tony needs to worry about during the game, force feeding Owens, in turn forcing picks.
by DieSlowKeyshawn on Oct 3, 2008 7:57 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
He doesn't sulk much
when they win and he gets involved. He hates losing and especially when he thinks he could have contributed and didn’t (in his mind) get a chance to do so. I can live with that much desire.
And none of us would even know or care about this if not for a level of attention paid to him equaled only by a Brit Spears melt-down.
Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.
by dunkman on Oct 3, 2008 5:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I personally think
the entire defense is a work in progress, not just the secondary, but that IMO is a good thing, I’d rather they improve and get better as the season rolls on and peak in January then peak right now.
In Romo we Trust
by Terry on Oct 3, 2008 8:05 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
+1
Well said my man.. Dallas added a couple of new pieces to the D this year, give it some time.. We have to make mistakes while we figure out what everyone’s strengths are..
"If you see me up in the mountains with a lion, I ain't lyin
don't help me, help the mountain lion"
by Wmillion on Oct 3, 2008 10:55 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agree completely
I am almost gratified that it turns out that T-New is still hurt because he looked awful and now we know why. Fortunately they have the talent to cover for him (to make a bad pun) and the more experience AJ, Jenks and Scanman get, the better.
Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.
by dunkman on Oct 3, 2008 5:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I feel the same way about this defense every year, on paper it is supposed to be so good, yet whenever the season begins, it’s the same old scheme for the defensive backs, play 8-10 yards off the receivers and let the opponent’s WR beat us on screens and 5 yard gains over the middle, when will the DBs actually play close to the line and press WRs? I’m sick of them playing scared to get beat in a footrace, Newman & Pacman are supposed to be twice of the quickest CBs in the game, why are they so timid?
by DieSlowKeyshawn on Oct 3, 2008 8:38 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
The didn't have this problem last year
until later in the season and a lot of it was just inferior talent in the persons of Reeves and N Jones. I think the number of new guys is slowing progress, but the talent and coaching (Campo) is definitely better. Instead of regressing, I think they’ll improve.
Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.
by dunkman on Oct 3, 2008 5:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's why we love you DieSlowKeyshawn
Always the optimist haha. I don’t think T.O. will sulk. Even he’s not (hopefully) that dumb. He knows the cameras are on his every move
by AikmanNailedMySis on Oct 3, 2008 9:37 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Maybe it's the recent defeat against the Redskins
But I’m feeling particularly bitter.
And so tired of hearing that the defense is a “work in progress” or “improving.” We’ve got EIGHT first-rounders on that side of the ball, and they’ve already had a year of experience in this new aggressive, attacking scheme (supposedly). But it’s obvious our D cannot be relied on to control/win a game for us when the O is out of whack.
So, the Cowboys:
- suck at drafting defensive players and we’re really not that talented
- cannot execute the defensive game plan and we’re not really that well-coached
- or both
This might be acceptable to some of you because, hey, we’re a team that wins with offense right? But championship teams don’t seem to be built that way.
31 teams may dream of the Superbowl but only one team, the Dallas Cowboys, expect it.
by accidental innuendo on Oct 3, 2008 10:18 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
somebody needs to take a nap cause they sure seem cranky
why would you want the defense to be playing their best now instead of January? The Giants defense last season sucked at the start of the season but progressively improved to the point where they had the best defense in the league come playoffs. Isn’t that what we should be hoping the Cowboys defense morphs into this year?
In Romo we Trust
by Terry on Oct 3, 2008 10:39 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
needs to take a nap.. LOL
Seriously we are 3-1.. Calm Down..
Didn’t we peak to early last year..
"If you see me up in the mountains with a lion, I ain't lyin
don't help me, help the mountain lion"
by Wmillion on Oct 3, 2008 10:57 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yup
“Seriously we are 3-1.. Calm Down..”
Cause 13-3 took us so far last year. Underlying problems are much easier to ignore when you’re winning, which we’re very capable of, but the small things take their toll over the season.
The Redskins made me take off the homer goggles. Sorry to burst your bubble.
31 teams may dream of the Superbowl but only one team, the Dallas Cowboys, expect it.
by accidental innuendo on Oct 3, 2008 2:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
HELP!!!
The sky is falling! The sky is falling! LOL
In Romo we Trust
by Terry on Oct 3, 2008 2:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You are being ridiculous
Keep deluding yourself that you have any sort of objectivism.
31 teams may dream of the Superbowl but only one team, the Dallas Cowboys, expect it.
by accidental innuendo on Oct 3, 2008 3:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think expecting the defense to be dominant
at this stage in the season is ridiculous. I want them to be dominant in 3 or 4 months from now, and so should you.
As long as we win enough games to make the big dance, the defense shouldn’t be a concern until that time.
If the defense looks like this in December, then your “sky is falling” attitude is justified, but right now it isn’t.
In Romo we Trust
by Terry on Oct 4, 2008 9:14 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
LOL-accidental innuendo
Every team has underlying problems.. There is no perfect team…
Not sure what point you are trying to make?? You give me a team and I will give you 3 problems.. That is beauty of football..
"If you see me up in the mountains with a lion, I ain't lyin
don't help me, help the mountain lion"
by Wmillion on Oct 3, 2008 5:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No...
The sky isn’t falling, but the promise of great defensive play that was supposed to come with the hiring of Wade (I run an aggressive 3-4 Defense!) Phillips has not been delivered on.
Dallas doesn’t scare anyone defensively. That isn’t a dire problem unless you’re a team with the high expectations and window of opportunity that this team has…right here…right now.
I have to agree with accidental here because great defense is what this team has lacked since the early 90’s. Even Madden pointed out how this defense didn’t look very good. Madden!!!
The defense is supposed to be talented, deep and well-coached. So far, its been none of those things.
"Well, we didn't block real good but we made up for it by not tackling."
- John McKay, the first coach of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers
by 5Blings on Oct 3, 2008 6:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
but the season is only a quarter old
As long as we’re winning I don’t care how the defense looks until December and January when it counts.
The defense looking great right now doesn’t mean a thing.
In Romo we Trust
by Terry on Oct 4, 2008 9:11 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I hope it does.
However, I think that this coaching staff has not given us reason to fully trust that they will improve at the end of the year. Last year, they got worse, not better. I think that’s why this loss really socked some people, because based on what happened last year, the team will get a little worse, not a lot better. Again, I hope that’s different this year, but Wade’s track record is not good.
by Baked Potato Soup on Oct 3, 2008 10:58 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
same way Giants fans felt last year...
"If you see me up in the mountains with a lion, I ain't lyin
don't help me, help the mountain lion"
by Wmillion on Oct 3, 2008 11:33 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I guess.
I’m not really one that goes for the “well, they did it, so we can do it” argument. I want the answer to be “well, we did it, so we can do it again.” Wade’s history is losing in the playoffs, not improving as the season goes along. I hope this year is finally his year, but I don’t think that the Giants doing it is an indicator of how the Cowboys will turn out. It doesn’t help that the team did the same thing under Parcells with many of the same players. I’m not being negative for the sake of it, but I want to see some actual signs of improvement before I express too much optimism.
by Baked Potato Soup on Oct 3, 2008 12:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not really...
G-Men weren’t picked by ANYONE to win it all.
"Well, we didn't block real good but we made up for it by not tackling."
- John McKay, the first coach of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers
by 5Blings on Oct 3, 2008 6:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The reason I'm cranky
Is because it seems that the Cowboys’ best on defense is not much better that what we have seen on the field so far.
The only reason we keep parroting that the D is a work in progress/improving is because we’re hoping that the defense has lots of room to grow before season’s end. Unfortunately, what I see so far is just more of the same, and I’m afraid that we might be playing close to the best we’re capable of, i.e. we’re not going to get very much better.
Best players on D so far, in order: Ratlff, Ware, Zach and Ellis. Following that is a long list of average and mediocre.
31 teams may dream of the Superbowl but only one team, the Dallas Cowboys, expect it.
by accidental innuendo on Oct 3, 2008 1:59 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No
The reason we keep saying the D is a work in progress is that we are working in new players, three of whom (Pacman, Jenkins, and Scandrick) are either rookies or extremely out of practice. Spencer has not been healthy. The coaching from last year isn’t going to fit exactly when you have 3 new players to work in and one in Spencer who didn’t play much as a rookie. I’m entirely overlooking Roy’s injury here because it doesn’t really bear on the coverage schemes that much. A lot of the mistakes that have happened so far are a result of blown coverages, and I am HOPING that those will be ironed out as the season goes on. Newman and Pac have also fallen down and given up big plays this year, and that’s not exactly something that’s likely to be a chronic issue.
Will the defense get better? I don’t know, because I don’t have a crystal ball. I have absolutely no reason to believe, however, that it’s going to get worse barring significant injuries. Stewart may not be the best coordinator in the world, but he is a professional, and so is Wade, and so is Campo. I have confidence that they can make a unit play better and smarter. I also have confidence that the pass rushers will start trying to actually tackle the QB on sack opportunities instead of trying to kill him and letting him bounce away (it’s happened in the last 3 games, sometimes multiple times). That sort of thing will make the CBs look better, too.
Seriously, you would think that we lost in the playoffs again based on the reaction last week. Did you think that the team was going to go undefeated or play flawlessly in every game? I don’t disagree with your assessment of who has played well so far, but “so far” are the key words. Newman is coming off injury and sucked a little last game. Pacman is still shaking off rust but steadily improving. We are working in rookies, and Spencer, who is both coming off injury and hasn’t seen significant time.
It will happen. If it doesn’t, then this team isn’t as good as we think. But it is WAY too early to be calling that now. Nobody knows what this defensive unit can be playing at its best, because it hasn’t happened yet.
by grapejoos on Oct 3, 2008 2:57 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Like I said before
A win masks your faults, and a loss brings them to the fore. I am just no longer in denial about our defense.
31 teams may dream of the Superbowl but only one team, the Dallas Cowboys, expect it.
by accidental innuendo on Oct 3, 2008 3:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It does bring the problems to the fore
which early in the season is a good thing. Last yesr they didn’t have any time left to unf*** themselves before being ousted. The O and D both need some tweaking and I think it’ll happen.
Joos is right, though. This defense has new players and plenty of nagging injuries – Newman, Spencer, Williams, Watkins, Tank… That’s left them with no one to give Ellis or Ware a breather for example, and Ellis is no Spring Chicken. With time and a little luck in the infirmary side, they should play better.
Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.
by dunkman on Oct 3, 2008 5:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
We aren't in denial
We all want the D to give up 10 points or less a week. We just understand for our D to click it will take a little time..
Spags was Stewart at this point in the season..
"If you see me up in the mountains with a lion, I ain't lyin
don't help me, help the mountain lion"
by Wmillion on Oct 3, 2008 5:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
patience young grasshopper, patience
Nobody is saying the defense is great or without faults, we’re saying we have 12 more games to correct them, thats all.
In Romo we Trust
by Terry on Oct 4, 2008 9:16 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
don't forget Zach..
Roy is out..
"If you see me up in the mountains with a lion, I ain't lyin
don't help me, help the mountain lion"
by Wmillion on Oct 3, 2008 5:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
-1
None of those players you mentioned are listed as starters. Players who add depth are coming and going every year. The starters are largely intact. Roy’s injury could be a blessing in terms of coverage.
I think you’re glossing over poor play and poor coaching here and looking for excuses. At some point, it will become the reason this team can’t deliver on it’s promise.
"Well, we didn't block real good but we made up for it by not tackling."
- John McKay, the first coach of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers
by 5Blings on Oct 3, 2008 6:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I certainly think the play and coaching could be better
All I am doing is trying to show people who are being unreasonably pessimistic why the defense could be and likely will be better. When long-term starters here make mistakes, you’re right, that can’t be attributed to coaching. It can, however, be attributed to nagging injuries, but let’s just assume we’re going to keep blaming the coaches for poor play caused by those (see Newman’s failures vs. WSH…if he covers well, is Stewart getting bashed this week?).
However, some of the new players are starters/have been starting (Pacman, Thomas whom I somehow omitted), and the others have been playing. And when those guys are playing, other players’ responsibilities may be affected/undermined by breakdowns by the new guys. There is an understanding and chemistry that comes from players playing together and getting used to the coach’s system, and I think it is absolutely reasonable to expect better all-around defensive performance as that improves. It’s also absolutely reasonable to expect the coaches to install more exotic packages and trust the players with greater responsibilities (like man-to-man coverage) as that familiarity increases and the rust is shaken off.
I’m not making excuses, I’m trying to show that there is a counterpoint to extreme pessimism (and that’s all I can really call it when your team is 3-1 and barely loses a game to a tough division opponent). Let’s wait for there to be a trend before freaking out, okay? Two weeks ago this team shut down GB’s passing attack on the road. While the Skins certainly earned their victory, I am giving the team a grace period to fix the problems, instead of burying them the second they make a costly mistake. Mistakes are cheap right now, make them early and often if it means they won’t happen later.
by grapejoos on Oct 3, 2008 6:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Any reason why Henry and Hamlin are not playing safeties
with Newman and Pacman at the corners?
I would rather have a secondary with Henry/Hamlin/Newman/Pacman than one with Keith Davis in it.
I realize that you cannot just move people around in the secondary without extensive training camp reps, but I would trust Henry in coverage more than Keith Davis in coverage.
It’s not like Cincy has a dominant rushing attack or a dangerous TE to cover.
With Mike Jenkins and Orlando Scandrick at the nickel and dime, isn’t that what you drafted them for?
I think Henry would have done a better job in coverage than Watkins in the Redskins game.
Maybe I just have a bad impression of Keith Davis’ coverage skills…
Henry at the safety position would probably increase the number of interceptions as well…
by DolphDallas on Oct 3, 2008 11:19 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Did you guys see Matt mosley's NFC East rankings??
Matt Mosley:
1. Giants
2. Redskins
3. Cowboys
4. Eagles
Cowboys fan since 1978.. I was 3 years old
by Mullin on Oct 3, 2008 12:16 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
im ok with that
…for this week. The number criteria you have to look at for rankings is head-to-head match-ups. Giants beat Skins. Skins beat us. We beat the Eagles. When the Eagles beat the Skins, then it’ll get interesting…
by AikmanNailedMySis on Oct 3, 2008 12:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That is the exact division rankings..
Cool with me, we don’t have to be the favorites right now..
"If you see me up in the mountains with a lion, I ain't lyin
don't help me, help the mountain lion"
by Wmillion on Oct 3, 2008 12:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's probably wrong, but I expected it
and it’ll change faster than Al Davis changes Depends.
Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.
by dunkman on Oct 3, 2008 5:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I love this team, I really do..
But I am almost certain now that opposing offenses with a 3rd and pretty much any yardage is going to be a 1st down. I call it a 3rd and 1st (feel free to use it) and unfortunately I’m right about it 75% of the time.
I don’t understand the defensive philosophy at all and what’s worse is there’s no one explaining it. Sure everyone on here tries to rationalize, but why do we have all these (allegedly) talented corners, playing 10 yards off the freaking ball all of the time? I mean really, why is that? I’m starting to think Jacque Reeves wasn’t a bad corner at all. Maybe he was just a guy caught up in a bad scheme that made him play off the line as if he were an outfielder waiting on a pop fly. This is the NFL. Quarterbacks can throw the ball 20 yards without any arch at all, and playing 8-10 yards off the ball is ideal for a quick slant or hitch.
I hope the team starts playing some solid D but I for one have dropped all expectations. It’s the expectations and the teams inability to live up to them that upsets me the most. I guess if you’re not leaning, you can’t fall.
by sublimezg on Oct 3, 2008 3:47 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
That's not a bad approach
make the team earn your expectations. And I think they will.
Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.
by dunkman on Oct 3, 2008 5:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Our oppontents' 3rd down numbers
In the ‘Boys 4 games this year, here are the opponent’s 3rd down figures for the game, with the Cowboys’ in parentheses:
CLE: 3/9 (DAL 8/11)
PHI: 5/12 (DAL 6/10)
GB: 4/14 (DAL 7/14)
WSH: 6/15 (DAL 6/12)
So, in every game this year, Dallas has converted at least 50% of its third downs, and the opponent hasn’t come close to doing that except the Philly game. Hmmmmmmmmmm.
I know the 3rd down conversions allowed are maddening, but the numbers don’t bear out the perception. Of course, some hurt more than others.
I hear you on the cushion thing, and I wish they pressed more, but I have to think it’s by design. The philosophy is that we will let you nickel and dime, but the coverage is designed to stop long pass plays. Of course, that only goes about as well as the tackling, but I think that’s the explanation.
Oh and, might want to check with the Texans fans on how good Reeves is.
Dropping all expectations might help all of our sanity, and will probably result in some pleasant surprises.
by grapejoos on Oct 3, 2008 6:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's not just the number of conversions
it’s the conversions that happen in critical situations that allow points for the other team. Don’t forget about the 3rd down penalties that make it a 1st for the other guys too.
by sublimezg on Oct 3, 2008 6:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't get that philosophy either
Talented corners need to be up at the line to throw off the offense’s timing and give our D-line an extra second to get to the QB. Very confusing. Also frustrating because how many times does it look like someone is a step away from getting a hand on the QB.
T-New, shutting down WR's for Dallas since 2003
by APerfectStar on Oct 3, 2008 11:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Getting a hand on the QB
I just wish we would take them down when we have the chance. I remember McNabb getting away several times and Rodgers and Campbell at least once where a defender had a clean shot on them and they just did not tackle well.
I don’t get the man coverage thing either. Maybe Wade has always been a zone guy. I don’t get it.
by grapejoos on Oct 4, 2008 1:30 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I hear you
I was trying to point out that we’re doing better than it seems, but allowing 3rd down conversions hurts. And if you only allow 6/15, great, but if you allow all 6 in a row, you’re probably in trouble. Imagine how our opponents must feel.
Good point about the penalties. Not sure how they account for that in conversion stats, but my guess is they probably don’t.
by grapejoos on Oct 4, 2008 1:29 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nice stats usage Grape
I’m surprised that WAS got only 6/15, it seemed much worse watching the game.
Our offense is killing in 3rd down conversions.
T-New, shutting down WR's for Dallas since 2003
by APerfectStar on Oct 3, 2008 10:59 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Blogging The Boys
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
