Film Review: Dallas Cowboys in the trenches (defense)
Yesterday, I took a look at the Dallas Cowboys offensive line and blocking schemes against the Seattle Seahawks to see how they're performing. Now, it's time to look at the defense, specifically the front seven to see how they controlled the line of scrimmage and how they were able to attack the QB. We won't take much notice of the secondary or coverages in this Film Review, it's all about the war in the trenches.
As posted on the offensive Film Review, everything comes with the caveat that while Seattle has some talent, as a team they are playing very poorly. They also had some youth in the interior line that skewed the perspective. But you play who they schedule, and so it was.
Make the jump below for the rest.

Defense
The Cowboys defense has started to make an impact in a positive way. Over the last batch of games (minus the Giants), the defense is controlling the running game, getting more pressure on the QB and creating turnovers. Is it a coincidence all this started when Wade Phillips became more involved? Is it the competition we've played recently? Or is it players returning from injury on both sides of the ball? All good questions, but for this article, we'll see what they did on Thanksgiving Day.
Dallas controlled the run by playing smart, disciplined defense. They appear to have rectified that bugaboo from earlier in the season - poor gap control. The Cowboys defensive front five (DL + Ware and Ellis/Spencer) were extremely mindful of the gaps and didn't over-pursue leaving huge cutback lanes, they didn't shoot upfield only to have the play go right under them; they played assignment football. Watching the front five on one particular play, a stretch run, was a thing of beauty. Think of the Denver Broncos zone-blocking scheme where all the linemen move in unison one way, keeping perfect spacing in between them. The Cowboys did that from the defensive side of the ball, everybody perfectly choreographed as they pursued down to the sideline, where DeMarcus Ware eventually knocked the runner out of bounds for a small loss. That's emblematic of what I saw from the Cowboys run defense in this game.
To do this effectively, the guys taking on the blocks must at least hold their position along the line. If one guy is pushed back, the gap is opened. The Cowboys took on the blocks extremely well in the game. They also were able to maintain the double-teams, not allowing one of the blockers to disengage and get to the second-level. If they can do that, Bradie James and Zach Thomas are free to pursue the ball carrier and shoot into any hole available.
If the run was between the tackles, the front three pinched down to clog the lanes and the outside contain didn't over-pursue, but pushed down the line while keeping their option to snuff out any cutback runs.
Dallas was able to hold the line, maintain gap control and occupy double-teams. They also tackled better because they were in the right position to make the play, instead of diving or arm-tackling because they got beat on their assignment. That's good run defense.
The Cowboys are also showing a little more creativity and desire when getting after the QB. One thing that stood out in the game was the amount of times we blitzed the inside linebackers. Bradie James and occasionally Kevin Burnett were used on a variety of blitzes from different angles. The Cowboys were probably mindful that the Seahawks were playing a brand-new center so using the inside backers made sense. But they didn't bring them just up the middle.
The Cowboys ran a blitz where the ILB's would rush and either DeMarcus Ware or Greg Ellis would drop back into zone coverage as the middle linebacker. Bradie James got a sack out of this formation, but he wasn't lined up in the middle. He lined up as the OLB and beat the TE's block. They ran this type of blitz while changing the ILB's angle of attack 4-5 times in the game.
The blitzes also had the effect of giving some favorable matchups in one-on-one situations. Tank Johnson got a sack when the center had to block him and was leaning one way trying to anticipate; Tank blew right by him the other way. Or they created impossible matchups, like when Ken Hamlin blitzed on DeMarcus Ware's side forcing the right tackle to choose one of them to block. He started with Ware, slid outside to Hamlin and Ware went straight to the QB for a sack. On the same play Bradie James was coming on a delayed blitz and was about to get his own taste of the QB. He also got his own sack when he came in un-touched on a delayed blitz.
The downside of blitzing the middle linebackers was that John Carlson, the TE, was able to pull off some of their biggest plays. We left the middle wide-open on one blitz, then we couldn't cover him in a zone with one inside linebacker blitzing. Matt Hasselback was able to get a couple of hot-reads and quick passes to work over the middle, but the Cowboys were willing to live with that.
Most of the line chipped in on the pass rush. DeMarcus Ware had two sacks where he just destroyed Walter Jones with his speed and agility, plus the one mentioned above. Greg Ellis had a few plays were he got pressure and he picked up a garbage-time sack. Bradie James got two sacks from the linebacker spot. And then there's Jay Ratliff, who was causing havoc in the middle although it didn't really appear in the stats sheet or on my first watch of the game. He blew up runs, he got pressure on the QB, he stood up double-teams; in short he's still the Rat.
Comments
Blitzing is the way to go.
Looking forward to the front 7 causing trouble for Big Ben. Let’s hope the secondary holds up for this to happen. I love Scandrick in the slot since Newman gets to stay on the left side. Hopefully Pac has remembered hoe to cover as well.
by goat3000 on
Dec 4, 2008 11:15 AM CST
reply
actions
0 recs
Thank you for not posting "1st", Good Write Up
I’ll be very interested to see how we handle the Pittsburg Steelers. They absolutely dismantled the Patriots. On a pure talent basis, we’re a better team, but we learned a couple of months ago that talent means nothing when you don’t execute.
by GhostofGaryHogeboom on
Dec 4, 2008 11:26 AM CST
reply
actions
0 recs
+1 not writing first, let's put a stop to the gossip blog antics.
by DieSlowKeyshawn on
Dec 4, 2008 11:29 AM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
You know what
I’d be all for just letting people do it if they want. It’s not a big deal really, and if the BSR guys want to continue the tradition I got no problem with it. We waste more time and comments (like these) discussing it than the actual ‘first" comment. Lots of blogs do it, not just gossip ones and it’s harmless really. Just pass over it. Although I agree it would be cool if a little substance was added to the “first” comment, although while writing that substance you might get beat to the “first.” It’s a vicious cycle.
Anyway, I’m all for just letting it be and get on with the Cowboys talk.
by Dave Halprin (Grizz) on
Dec 4, 2008 11:37 AM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
word grizz
the whole discussion is just silly
Don't believe everything you think.
by stoproyce on
Dec 4, 2008 11:40 AM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I disagree.
I think it’s annoying and I’m pretty sure that’s the whole reason that it’s done. I don’t think that it should be given free pass, just like any other post here should not just be given free pass. If they choose to do it, then others on the board should feel free to voice their opinion about how annoying it is. If I make a post about anything Cowboys related, no one tells other people to just pass over it. If they don’t want people to respond to it negatively, they should not do something that is clearly annoying to much of the blog.
I know it’s your playground and you make the rules, but that’s what I think. I feel like if you don’t want people to respond to it, you shouldn’t allow them to post it in the first place. If you don’t mind them posting it, you shouldn’t mind people responding to it. But, you make the rules. I love this site and I’ll still post here either way.
by Baked Potato Soup on
Dec 4, 2008 1:16 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I agree with Baked Potato Soup
As a BSR member, it annoyed me to no end. I would purposely post something in the first spot when I had a chance just so no one would put the idiocy again. It just gets more and moree annoying over time. You try to ignore it, but its a constant annoyance.
I’d be more than pleased if that “tradition” didnt follow through to here.
by Ridgelake on
Dec 4, 2008 1:21 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
OK I'm throwing in the towel
I always liked the “1st” thing, if only because it made this blog feel a little more like our old blog. I wasn’t ever purposely doing it to annoy anyone. Don’t get me wrong, I’m loving the fusion of content, and from an information standpoint this merger is terrific, but I guess one of the unexpected growing pains was merging two existing communities. This is really getting silly though, and I’d rather not do it if that’s what it’ll take for this to be one community, instead of feeling like two separate groups.
"When it's third and ten, you can take the milk drinkers and I'll take the whiskey drinkers every time." -Max McGee
by BigDinSC on
Dec 4, 2008 1:37 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
waaaaaa If Grizz is cool with it... please move on this is like...
complaining about the weather.Unless you are pro censorship get over it. We actually have things to talk about. Go Cowboys.
Don't believe everything you think.
by stoproyce on
Dec 4, 2008 1:50 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Who's crying now?
You are complaining about people complaining? How is that different? Again, if you don’t wish for people to complain about it, then don’t do it. Before people started posting “first”, no one complained about it. I think it’s pretty clear what the cause of the problem is.
I don’t think it can be stopped, as I am not pro-censorship, which is also the reason that comments complaining about it should not be stopped. If you are a supporter of “first”, then you should also support anyone that wants to make a counter post.
There’s no point complaining about the rain, but if someone throws a cup of water on you every single day, perhaps you should complain.
by Baked Potato Soup on
Dec 4, 2008 7:06 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
+1 Baked Potato Soup!
I don’t understand the argument that it is a “tradition” to say first. Is it really a “tradition” to type “first” if you’re the first person to notice a post about the Cowboys offense or defense and write the word? Grizz.. no offense, but Baked Potato Soup raises a valid point. Why shouldn’t we voice our opinion about the topic? I guarantee 90% of the people who write the word “1st” don’t even read the article you or your staff has written. Instead, they are more concerned about getting there before anyone else does, as you’ve mentioned in your response, so they rush to type it in. If it’s not Cowboys related, shouldn’t it be saved for non-cowboys related posts? We have a rule not to talk about politics in these threads, so why is it ok to compete with one another over a faux-tradition?
Tradition:
1. the handing down of statements, beliefs, legends, customs, information, etc., from generation to generation, esp. by word of mouth or by practice: a story that has come down to us by popular tradition.
What generation did “first” come from?
by DieSlowKeyshawn on
Dec 4, 2008 2:18 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
As a first poster
You can be either Ryan Leaf, yell “First,” and contribute nothing worthwhile.
Or you can be Peyton Manning, constribute something substantial making the discussion better and still be FIRST!1
In-YOUR-endo
by accidental innuendo on
Dec 4, 2008 2:08 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
The big problem is the disrespect that is behind it.
It is by now obvious that it upsets a lot of people, and yet the few that do it insist on continuing. It is similar to posting in all caps or in varying fonts, etc. It is rude, and done deliberately. Many people may not mean for it to be, but now that it is clear that others consider it so, continuing to do it makes it doubly so. If you were told that many people consider something offensive, say at work, would you continue to do it? I doubt it. Yet, those who post first continue to do so here.
Again, I realize it can’t be stopped, but I think that opens up one of 2 things, if not both: massive arguments like this one, and people who will just choose to quit posting out of irritation. I can’t make you stop posting “first”, but you force me to read it every thread. What then is the source of the problem?
by Baked Potato Soup on
Dec 4, 2008 7:22 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I agree Grizz....The problem that most have is the fact that nothing is added to "1st"..
I could care less if it continues, BUT….post if it means so much to some people to be “1st”….then COMMENT AGAIN, if needed, if your worried about being beat to the punch….Comment on the subject at hand…..Don’t just post “1st” and don’t follow it up with a comment of substance….THAT is the problem.
A true diehard Cowboys fan since 1975.
"If you don’t take him off the field as a coach, he will just about die out there," Jerry Jones said. "That impacted my decision. It’s a Michael Irvin-type work ethic. That’s what we are talking about with Felix Jones."
- Owner/G.M of the Dallas Cowboys , Jerry Jones
by BoyzRback on
Dec 4, 2008 4:02 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I can't believe I'm going to contribute to this conversation
GET OVER IT! The fact is that whoever posts “first,” – with or without football or article commentary – leaves one, maybe two, lines. You guys pissing and moaning about it leaves half a page.
I, for one, thought the tradition (yes it’s a tradition) was silly when I first joined www.theboysblog.com When I became a more regular reader and community member (no longer just looking) I joined in the action.
When we moved to BSR it kept up and therefore, so did I.
We’re here now. We’re family. Our blogs have merged. Our two families now sit at the same proverbial table for dinner. It may bug you and piss you off. The simple solution is ignore and move on in order to continue the conversation OR piss and moan and tell me that the table I’m sitting at now was yours first.
The beauty of family is that we’re inseparably linked. The nightmare of family is that we’re inseparably linked.
Sit down at the table, say grace, take a bite and continue the conversation. Who cares if the first comment is “first.?”
And to the point of the article:
I’m excited about the tape on Ratliff. I know he’s a player and that he’s got a motor that never quits. That said, it’s good to hear that when he’s not getting his name called it’s because he’s demanding more attention to be slowed and not that someone finally figured out how to neutralize him.
I commented. You're welcome.
another transplant from The Blue & Silver Report
by bulldog jeeper on
Dec 4, 2008 2:41 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Jeez! I'm glad you're open to respecting everyones opinions
surely we disagree and there seems to be quite a large disagreement about this silly competition which takes place between a slim minority of those who comment on these posts. Interesting analogy you bring up about this blog being a “proverbial table.” It is a merger of families, however you are not the one who brings home the bacon or breaks the bread at this table. If you and others continue to waste our time reminding us of where you stand in your blog post standings, we will continue to complain about it.
by DieSlowKeyshawn on
Dec 4, 2008 3:01 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
awesome its like the 6th grade all over again
Didn’t grizz already squash this? I’m pretty sure if anyone is bringing pork products to the table it would be Mr. Halprin.
Don't believe everything you think.
by stoproyce on
Dec 4, 2008 3:06 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Yep...
Its really not that serious.
by AirforceBat on
Dec 4, 2008 5:44 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Likewise.
I love how those who want to say first are saying that everyone else should get over it, as if they are the only ones entitled to post what they like. I have never complained about the first thing on this blog, because I know that is it’s intent: to irritate other members of the blog. That’s why people do it here and elsewhere, and that’s why it is an internet tradition. It’s a passive aggressive way of riling up other people.
You are now complaining about people posting against it, and I would say, “Good, now you know how it feels. Irritating, isn’t it?”
However, the power is in your hands. We can’t prevent you from posting first. Dave says he doesn’t have a problem with it. That’s fine, but if that’s the case, then I think that people who want to counter post should be granted the same rights and Dave should be equally okay with it, which was the point of my original post. If you don’t want people to respond to it, then don’t do it.
That would be like me spitting on someone, and then getting upset when they spit back. Posting first is like spitting on everyone who opens the thread, or like a dog marking it’s territory. If you want to do it, then I hope you realize that people are going to spit back at you.
There are other internet and blog traditions that are similar to first, such as racism, foul language, misogyny, homophobia, etc.
by Baked Potato Soup on
Dec 4, 2008 7:15 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I think it might be a little bit extreme to put the word “first” on the same level as racism, foul language, misogyny, and homophobia.
Also, it isn’t a matter of people who post “first” thinking that they are the only ones who can say whatever they like. I see it more this way: It was a tradition at the old blog. It never riled anyone up at the old blog, so that wasn’t its original purpose. (We had a different tradition at the old blog intended purely to irritate people. His name was Tex.) When we all came here, it was a little dumb thing we brought with us. I for one never imagined there would be this much venom spewed over it. So that we’re clear: never meant it as disrespect, and since its being taken that way, i’d rather not do it.
"When it's third and ten, you can take the milk drinkers and I'll take the whiskey drinkers every time." -Max McGee
by BigDinSC on
Dec 4, 2008 8:08 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I just can't believe
that this has been the only real active story on here today, and it’s all because of the stupid first thing. It blows my mind that people feel the need to keep talking about it. It people get their rocks off writing it, let them, and just ignore it. It’s definitely not worth diverting all of your blogging over.
by Mandmeisterx on
Dec 4, 2008 8:16 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
And Grizz,
that was meant with no disrespect to your original post on the defensive play, if that’s how it seemed.
by Mandmeisterx on
Dec 4, 2008 8:18 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Not what I meant, and thanks.
I didn’t mean it was the same as those things, just that those are also internet traditions. Just because things are done elsewhere or are traditions doesn’t mean that they have to continue. I appreciate that you understand that it bothers people and will stop doing it. For my part, I will not address the posting of “first” again, outside of this thread, as I have successfully ignored it in every other thread and every other internet site that I go to. I do feel that if people are allowed to post it, though, that others should be allowed to post complaints about it. Tit for tat, so to speak.
We’re all Cowboys brothers and sisters, so there is love and respect for all of you. Just kidding, I know that no actual females post here. But I do love you guys and am glad that all of the new people are here. More voices are always welcome in a discussion, especially intelligent ones like those that have migrated here.
by Baked Potato Soup on
Dec 4, 2008 8:28 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
And if there are any females that post on here,
send me your address, and your engagement ring will be in the mail.
by Mandmeisterx on
Dec 4, 2008 8:36 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
70th!
Lord, a food-fight at the dinner table has broken out. Any possibility this has run its course?
The merging of the blogs has been a big success in my opinion. I’m digging all the new content and getting to know the commenters from BSR, 99.9% of the merge has been executed like a nine-yard pass from Romo to Witten on third and eight. So why are we so uptight about this?
I guess if people want to write it. they can write it, if that so offends some people, I guess they can complain.
Everybody else, let’s keep chugging, we got a huge game coming up, so if you want to talk Cowboys, do it up!
by Dave Halprin (Grizz) on
Dec 4, 2008 10:44 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Will Ware or Ratliff be FIRST! to sack Big Ben?
Maybe Ellis?
:)
by DieSlowKeyshawn on
Dec 5, 2008 6:19 AM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
4th
How does the front 5, in maintaining their gaps, respond to a guard or tackle pull?
by AustonianAggie on
Dec 4, 2008 11:35 AM CST
reply
actions
0 recs
Good question
If a lineman pulls, the gap he vacates is usually occupied by someone else blocking down, so the guy on defense in the gap needs to take on that block and maintain integrity. If the vacated spot is left open because the offense doesn’t believe the guy on defense can make the play from that side, then he needs to pursue down the backside of the play making sure there is no cutback. When offenses pull linemen they hope they will get to the second-level once he reaches the point-of-attack as the guy on the d-line is already occupied and blocked. You hope the guy at that point-of-attack on defense has held his position and forces the pulling lineman to double up the block or creates traffic in the hole not allowing the back to hit it. If the pulling lineman has a lane open, then the ILB’s have to come up and blow up the hole by taking the block, allowing the other LB or a safety to make the tackle.
by Dave Halprin (Grizz) on
Dec 4, 2008 11:45 AM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Usually D-Ware takes care of that!
By chasing them down from behind!!! boy I hope his knee is ok
by Cal in DC on
Dec 4, 2008 1:03 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
1st ! oh fifth
quit crying about it or it will only get stronger. wow complain much about irrelevant crap. great write up Grizz. I too think our d-line will dominate i want to see way more of the chaos formation while locking henry up on the TE. This is going to be a defensive struggle if the weather is as bad as some are predicting. Also in yesterdays PC at the end you mantioned that wade said we may call up a rb if barber is a sketchy proposition. Who do you think that would be?
Don't believe everything you think.
by stoproyce on
Dec 4, 2008 11:39 AM CST
reply
actions
0 recs
8th, defense need another 60mins of good play this game!
I think everyone is short changing the Pittsburgh offense and the line. the amount of sac they have surrendered since playing Philly has gone down drastically, Also, Holmes and especially Ward ( in the slot) will be Scandricks biggest test. ward is very physical and there is the possibility he may school the young CB. Big Ben Is, well big and it will take full wrap ups to take him down because passing arm tackles won’t do it and that cannon arm he has is always dangerous. Then there is Willy, need to keep him caged!
by bad knees on
Dec 4, 2008 11:47 AM CST
reply
actions
0 recs
Do we know Parker’s status? Is he getting the majority of carries, versus Moore?
by Tim Wilson on
Dec 4, 2008 1:05 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Big Ben
I read yesterday that Ben left practice with a knee injury.
Apparently he injured it by slipping while dropping back in the pocket.
Does anyone now how serious this injury was?
by Prime-Time on
Dec 4, 2008 12:00 PM CST
reply
actions
0 recs
I asked for an update as well ^^^ above. The injury was never reported on here whatsoever.
Most likely because it’s deemed to be not too serious, nonetheless, it’s still newsworthy in advance of this game.
by DieSlowKeyshawn on
Dec 4, 2008 12:01 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Thanks
I was just wondering if there were an update today, if you had heard or if anyone had heard whether he did or would practice today, both the article and fan post are from yesterday, or about yesterday’s injury.
by DieSlowKeyshawn on
Dec 4, 2008 2:21 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Call me crazy but...
I would rather have Big Ben in there than Leftwich at this point. I trust the d-line will get to Ben in this one. Leftwhich can run a little bit and cause problems. Besides, they are game planning for Ben anyway.
by goat3000 on
Dec 4, 2008 12:04 PM CST
reply
actions
0 recs
since when could Leftwich run?
I remember watching a game when he was with the Jags where he said something to the effect of, “they think that because I’m black, I can run. I can’t.”
they’re big beefs with him in Jacksonville was too many injuries, too many turnovers, too big of a windup, and too slow and immobile. i’d take that playing our D any day. especially over the one guy that I’ve heard many Cowboy fans (on multiple blogs, including BSR) believe is as talented and desireable as our beloved Romo
I commented. You're welcome.
another transplant from The Blue & Silver Report
by bulldog jeeper on
Dec 4, 2008 12:33 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Ben is 100 times more mobile than Leftwich
Boy, you can tell some of you guys never watch Steelers game. Ben is almost on par with Romo with respect to mobility and escapability.
In Romo we Trust
by Terry on
Dec 4, 2008 12:37 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Way off base
Leftwich cannot run. Just because a QB is black does not mean he’s a mobile quarterback (partly kidding there, but that does seem to be the attitude that a lot of the popular sports media takes— white WRs can’t be fast, black QBs can’t be pocket guys, etc. Anyway, topic for another time…)
If you watch Leftwich play, you’ll see that he holds the ball forever, his feet look like they’re bathed in cement, and his long wind-up throwing motion adds another half second or so to his release time. So he’s less mobile than Roethlisberger— I’d imagine Roeth beats him in a footrace.
That said, I do not put Roethlisberger in Romo’s class in terms of mobility. Yes, he has the same ability to roll out and throw on the run, but he is not evasive like Tony is. Roethlisberger often holds the ball too long, and he relies on his strength (which is considerable) to prevent sacks, not his pocket elusiveness. I think the sack numbers show pretty clearly that Romo’s style of play is much better at avoiding pressure.
by Tim Wilson on
Dec 4, 2008 1:02 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I agree Ben isn't in Tony's class
But for a big man, he can really move out of the pocket and escape a pass rush. Not so much this season because he’s been hurt, but when 100%, he definitely has that skill set.
But you’re right, Ben is no Jedi knight. ;)
In Romo we Trust
by Terry on
Dec 4, 2008 1:15 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Yep, they're both good, just different
I think one of the most impressive parts of Roethlisberger’s game is his tremendous strength. He can take that extra second in the pocket, even with a defender hanging on his back, to find a receiver and wing the ball downfield just because of his overall body strength and the fact that it is so difficult to just physically bring him down. This year I think that’s gotten him into some trouble— he seems to have relied on that too much, and it’s led to him holding the ball too long and taking some bad sacks.
Romo’s game is just different. He doesn’t have that physical strength, but his elusiveness is so impressive. So it’s just two young QBs, both of whom are very talented, but with very different styles.
by Tim Wilson on
Dec 4, 2008 1:20 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
so romo is a roach
and Big Ben is what? a really big slow cockroach?
I commented. You're welcome.
another transplant from The Blue & Silver Report
by bulldog jeeper on
Dec 4, 2008 2:25 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
maybe some kind of beetle
In-YOUR-endo
by accidental innuendo on
Dec 4, 2008 2:28 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
He's a dung beetle
A true diehard Cowboys fan since 1975.
"If you don’t take him off the field as a coach, he will just about die out there," Jerry Jones said. "That impacted my decision. It’s a Michael Irvin-type work ethic. That’s what we are talking about with Felix Jones."
- Owner/G.M of the Dallas Cowboys , Jerry Jones
by BoyzRback on
Dec 4, 2008 4:14 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
So who's a flying cockroach?
Those are the bastids I really can’t stand.
by MadMick on
Dec 4, 2008 5:05 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
apparently he's a girl
http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/12/04/hasselbeck-calls-big-ben-a-girl-in-jest/
Don't believe everything you think.
by stoproyce on
Dec 4, 2008 3:00 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I laughed for like a half hour when I saw that.
Easily one of the funniest sports quotes I have ever seen.
by Mandmeisterx on
Dec 4, 2008 3:36 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Its not just the moderately better mobility..
its also the much faster release time. Leftwich winds up almost as much as a major league pitcher. His slow release was one of the big reasons Parcells passed on drafting him (and took Newman instead). Big Ben can get rid of it in a hurry.
In contrast, Romo is elite in his delivery speed. Marino level speed. Its part of why he;’s so tough to sack.
by Ridgelake on
Dec 4, 2008 1:36 PM CST
up
reply
actions
1 recs
Leftwich is forced fumble bait
With our pass rushers and his wind up, the Cowboys could generate a lot of fumbles.
Rothelessberger has a very good and accurate arm for throwing when he is running, but he’s not very fleet footed, in my opinion
by AustonianAggie on
Dec 4, 2008 4:10 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Roethlisberger's a fair scrambler given the chance.
I recall he had a pretty nifty 30-plus yard touchdown run against the Browns last season.
by MadMick on
Dec 4, 2008 5:03 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Crazy!
No freakin way.Ill take the backup any day. He may slightly more mobile but i aint worried about that.
Don't believe everything you think.
by stoproyce on
Dec 4, 2008 12:17 PM CST
reply
actions
0 recs
he isn't slightly more mobile
Actually, Leftwich isn’t mobile at all
In Romo we Trust
by Terry on
Dec 4, 2008 12:38 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Yeah— you may be thinking of Leftwich’s former backfield competitor, David Garrard. Byron ain’t mobile.
by Tim Wilson on
Dec 4, 2008 1:03 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Its put up or shut up time!
This game will be won or loss up front. I worry that we may be to much of a finesse team. A physical team in bad weather on a crappy field is just what the Dr ordered. If we get though these next 4 games and make the playoffs then we will had to win at least 3 games. If we do that then we will be ready for the playoffs. Its gonna be tough but that is a major requirement for SB champions.
by squidlo97 on
Dec 4, 2008 12:29 PM CST
reply
actions
0 recs
Cowboys are definitely a physical team
In Romo we Trust
by Terry on
Dec 4, 2008 12:39 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
We have the potential to be physical, yes
I’d agree, especially lately— Strahan stated that the ‘Boys were the most physical team the Giants played last year. So I think we have the personnel and the style to POTENTIALLY perform well in a “smashmouth” style of game, which the turf condition may necessitate this weekend. We’ll see to what extent we show up mentally. I’m optimistic.
by Tim Wilson on
Dec 4, 2008 1:04 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
D Ware practicing today says he'll be goin "Full Blast"...We'll need him
Don't believe everything you think.
by stoproyce on
Dec 4, 2008 2:01 PM CST
reply
actions
0 recs
Question
How much would a knee brace limit Ware’s mobility?
by quincyyyyy on
Dec 4, 2008 2:02 PM CST
reply
actions
0 recs
these days
Braces are so light weight and non restrictive that it shouldn’t effect his mobilty at all… he just needs to become comfortable with it
Cowboys fan since 1978.. I was 3 years old
by Mullin on
Dec 4, 2008 4:37 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I regularly compete in submission wrestling and jiujitsu tournaments and have
at time needed to wear a brace, although the sports couldn’t be more different. they(even the hinged ones) never seemed to keep me from doing anything that i tried to do. It was just more of a psychological comfort and some lateral support. I’d figure you won’t even notice it.
Don't believe everything you think.
by stoproyce on
Dec 4, 2008 3:03 PM CST
reply
actions
0 recs
LAST!!
I can’t wait to see the irritated comments on this!
"It is an odd thing, but everyone who disappears is said to be seen at San Francisco" Oscar Wilde
by Jim Vance on
Dec 4, 2008 10:22 PM CST
reply
actions
0 recs
but as soon as someone angrily comments, you are no longer last.
………..wait………..I confused myself.
"When it's third and ten, you can take the milk drinkers and I'll take the whiskey drinkers every time." -Max McGee
by BigDinSC on
Dec 4, 2008 10:30 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
3rd from last!
Now it’s up to some of you.
Baked Potato, Let me say, (“First” off, if you will), that I will always post a comment when I post first. I think it’s an easy and obvious middle ground my fellow BSR’s can follow-put “First” if you must, but let’s always then respond to the post. It IS a little silly to just put “First” and nothing else.
Second, though, it’s about having a sense of humor about what we’re doing here. As I like to point out to people who go too far, we are grown men typing to strangers about a game played by people we’ll never meet. A little obsessive, no? Healthy to have some tongue in your cheek and not take it too seriously.
Alright, gotta check my shotgun in case the Boys lose to the Steelers….
by Realist Larry on
Dec 5, 2008 12:40 AM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs












