Maybe Camp Cupcake isn't so bad afterall...
by sduncan24 on Aug 3, 2009 8:36 PM CDT
Email
PrintI just read on ESPN.com that Stewart Bradely, one of Philadelphia's starting linebackers will miss the whole season with a torn ACL. My first reaction was that this is a big blow for the Eagles and a tough break. Then I read on further to see that is appears as if he was injured in a pile up at practice.
This lead me to think about all the ridicule the Cowboys have taken over not tackling in TC because Wade wants to protect his players, and now it appears as if one of our rival's starters has been lost for the year because of training camp tackling.
I never really had that big of a problem with the no tackling, but for those of you who did, does this change your mind? Would you rather have us not tackle or risk losing Demarcus Ware for the year in a training camp pile-up?
Just some food for thought.
I just wanted to clarify that I do not buy into the "Camp Cupcake" idea, it was the best way I could think to broach the subject.
Another user-created commentary provided by a BTB reader.
104 comments
|
3 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
+1
The whole cupcake thing is a JFE, drug-induced fantasy. As if she knew more than a HC with 40 years experience.
What is disappointing is how many people bought into that line. I guess PT Barnum was right. There really is a sucker born every minute.
Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.
They are taking over the blog!
Everybody run!
Training Camp '09 = Mega Thunder Dome....80 men enter, 53 men leave.
It's only now dawning on me...
Dunk has reproduced? Is that legal?
Doomsday returns... Wade Phillips style.
Injuries are gonna happen one way or another
You cant go on thinking worrying about getting hurt because thats how you really get hurt. Just play what happens happens
What the French?! Toast!
you can't avoid injuries
but you can certainly do things to minimize the risk when you don’t have to take any risks. That is all I am saying, I personally don’t buy into the idea of Camp Cupcake, but I think there is something to not tackling our own players.
mmhhm...yup
"Let us so live that when we come to die even the undertaker will be sorry." - Mark Twain
But you can manage training sessions
so people aren’t lost for the season before the first real snap. I don’t buy that all these guys forget how to tackle because no one made them do it for a month out of their lives.
Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.
What about
gradually introducing full contact towards the end of TC? I don’t see the necessity in the beginning but towards the end a little bit.
Well they do
they have four pre-season games to tackle. I’m sure if they looked like they needed the work, they would then get it in practice.
Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.
Camp Cupcake results
Stats don’t lie. Cowboys 7-1 first month under Wade “Cupcake” Phillips. Keep on Camp Cupcake.
My favorite semi pro teams are the Eagles and Giants
by RealAlbertEinstein on Aug 3, 2009 10:17 PM CDT reply actions
Bye Dawk :( had a little story on the Eagles' blog a few days ago
mocking Phillips and the Cowboys for “Camp Marshmallow,” as I recall. All the other Eagles fans started jumping up and down and throwing feces in celebration of an Eagles cakewalk. It was amusing.
Ah, but there for the grace of God, go us.
Wade said so himself
If he sees something wrong tackling in the preseason games, it could be the first, he’s going to have the players tackling in practice.
And I believe that most defensive player will be looking up hitting someone, so he isn’t going to see anything wrong… He didn’t in his first couple of years…
Viva México! Go Cowboys!
Right
when you think about it. every collision could hurt either the hitter or the hittee and both are your players! Not much upside unless they demosntrate that they can’t tackle.
Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.
I think their is a time and place for both.
If your a young team in a rebuilding mode then I think you should run a very physical camp with lots of tackling. A young player can bounce back faster physically and he needs to brought up to speed on just how intense and how hard these guys hit. As a coach you need to know who likes to hit and who doesnt.
With an older team you dont need to know if they have what it takes to play. You dont need to teach them just how physical the game is. You need them to get in game shape and get their timing back down. Their foot work and technique sharpened up.
Does anyone thing that our Oline, all on the wrong side of 30, need to be out there beating each others brains out to prove their toughness or the fact they are physical enough to play. No. The season will beat them down enough. Coaches know when to lay it on and back off. Even with younger teams, when coaches know they are going to hold a very physical practice, they will pull some of the older guys out and let the younger guys get after it.
The Boys play in the East and this is one of the most physical divisions in football. I have never felt we werent physical enough to play with them. Thats not to say we havent been out hit in some games but that day in and day out I dont see us backing down or getting pushed around by anyone. Eagles beat us in the last game because they came to play and wanted more. Throw in TOs and its a route. Having said that we moved the ball on them we had our chances to score.
I find the harder I work, the luckier I get. Thomas Jefferson
It's stupid to tackle in camp and practice
For one, these players are pros, not high school kids. I’m pretty sure they know the fundamentals of tackling at this level. If not, they have no business playing pro ball.
Second, the preseason games exist so players can shake the rust and get reps tackling. To subject players to more tackling outside of games is just dumb.
In Romo we Trust
If it so dam stupid because they are pros, then why in the hell do we even bother with camp. Lets just go straight to the season.
No practice needed, they are pros. I prefer physical camps overall but the age of the team must be considered.
No tackling doesnt mean its not physical. It just means you dont wrap up and take them to the ground. Ask Roy Williams, after he finds his helmet, if its not physical.
I find the harder I work, the luckier I get. Thomas Jefferson
I think that's a problem, personally.
The Roy Williams thing. You play like you practice. Last year, the Cowboys did a lot of popping guys but then not wrapping them up, so the guy would bounce off of them and keep going. Maybe they don’t have to take them to the ground, but they should at least be practicing wrapping them up if they are going to be hitting them.
by Baked Potato Soup on Aug 4, 2009 12:26 PM CDT up reply actions
The Eagles are great tacklers.
The Cowboys suck at it. The trade off appears to be an increased risk of injury in the preseason vs. allowing 2 carries for 160 yards when you are trying to get into the playoffs.
by Baked Potato Soup on Aug 4, 2009 11:11 AM CDT reply actions
Those 2 runs dont tell us we cant tackle any more than MBIIIs 70 yard touchdown prove he is
a break away runner in the Felix mold.
I find the harder I work, the luckier I get. Thomas Jefferson
They have nothing to do with each other.
One is talking about the exact thing, and one is trying to compare a pass reception where a guy broke 3 tackles on the way to a long score to another guy’s elusiveness. My reference is to a situation where the people that I’m talking about, the Cowboys defense, did the thing that I referred to, missing tackles.
I’m not saying that someone else doing something else shows that they are poor tacklers. I’m saying that the Cowboys defense missing tackles shows that the Cowboys defense has a tendency to miss tackles.
A pretty good indicator of a team’s tackling ability, in my opinion, is their opponents’ yards per carry. Philadelphia was 4th in the league and Dallas was one of 5 teams tied for 16 through 20th. The Eagles never allowed a run of more than 28 yards all season, and the Cowboys allowed 160 yards on 2 carries in the same game.
A few other games last year when I thought they shows signs of poor tackling: first Eagles game, first Redskins game, Rams game, first Giants game, 2nd Eagles game. And those are just off the top of my head. Are you saying that you thought the Cowboys defense and special teams did a good job of tackling last year?
by Baked Potato Soup on Aug 4, 2009 12:22 PM CDT up reply actions
Im of the opinion that back to back 70+ yard TDs runs by the same team has never ever happen in the NFL before.
I think that was one of those freaky things that happen and not symbolic of our ability to tackle. We have had players here quilty of going for the knock out shot only to bounce off and watch the guy go for more yardage. We have had game where tackling was bad. Im just not sold that we are/were a bad tackling team.
I think fans have knee jerk reactions to every bad play. We watch our team with hawk eyed vision and dwell on every bad play. We dont watch other teams with the same passion and intensity.
An example would be Grizz’s report that Romo threw an interception in the red zone in practice. You would have thought the season was lost. That debate went on and on until Grizz could take it anymore and elaborated more on the pass to Witten. If I read it correctly he said it wasnt neccessarily a bad throw but there was a better throw.
When people use those 2 plays as an example of us not being able to tackle, I feel that is emotion talking. Prior to those 2 runs, they ran 34 times for 106 yards or 3 yards per carry. That doesnt sound like a poor day tackling against a powerhouse running team.(They are also a physical team)
What Im saying is I am not sold that this team is such a bad tackling team that we need to expose guy to injuries. They are hitting. Its still very physical. I dont think anyone is playing touch. If we tackle like crap in the preseason we can always add it.
I find the harder I work, the luckier I get. Thomas Jefferson
Admittedly, his point was exaggerated for effect
But your reply is a bit harsh, no?
I’m not sure I care one way or the other whether the Cowboys tackle in camp because I really don’t know if that carries over to the regular season…HOWEVER, as teams go, the Cowboys do have issues with tackling in real game situations. No doubt.
Everything's looking up, Milhouse!
by accidental innuendo on Aug 4, 2009 11:58 AM CDT up reply actions
Go away.
The grown ups are talking.
by Baked Potato Soup on Aug 4, 2009 11:59 AM CDT up reply actions
the thing is that I absolutely love a nice big bowl of baked potato soup, I just can’t find a single positive thing you say about the Cowboys, your own professed favorite team.
You need to look harder.
It’s not really that hard to find. I’ve repeatedly said that if Romo played as well in December as he did the rest of the year, he would be the best in the league. That seems like a pretty good thing to say about someone to me. I’ve said that the TEs and RBs are all set and should have a great year with the right play calling. Isn’t that positive?
I’ve defended the defense several times on the board against people saying they played poorly last year when they were top 10 in yards allowed, and even said that Sensabaugh is just competent they will probably be top 5 in points and yardage. That seems like a pretty positive thing to say, too. Just because I see an aspect that I believe needs some work doesn’t mean that I’m slamming the team.
I think it’s much more disingenuous that so many people on this board seem to think the QB doesn’t need to improve, the WR situation is fine, the D doesn’t need to improve, and that the coaching staff is great, but the team still missed the playoffs. If every unit on this team is as good as they are going to get, then that’s a scary thought as a fan. I know that that’s obviously not the case, so why pretend that the team’s flaws aren’t actually flaws? The team had a clear road to the playoffs last year and collapsed. They had poor tackling performances in several games, most notably the Ravens game, but also against the Eagles, Redskins, Rams, and Giants. 3 of those teams are in our division. They need to do better.
by Baked Potato Soup on Aug 4, 2009 5:43 PM CDT up reply actions
I don't mean to harass
I know you are a Cowboys fan like the rest of us on here, except when Bye, Dawk :( comes a trollin, and to each his own. Some may see your comments differently than you intend them, but it takes all kinds to make this blog the best on the web, and it would be really boring if we all just agreed all the time.
I have been arguing for the last week with VA_Skins over at hogshaven about his theory that on paper the foreskins are better off than our Boys. So I have been a little more naturally aggressive on blogging. I respect your opinions and although I disagree with some of you analysis, you argue your points well and try to at least provide some info to back them up. Keep on keepin on.
In reference to above. I think that everyone recognizes that there is room for improvement from Romo, but I think if he stayed exactly how he is we would be just fine and very successful for years to come. The flaws are flaws, but I think that we have addressed everyone of those concerns this off-season, I am in the camp that thinks our WR will be more than efficient this season, and with Austin and Hurd coming along will have one of the better corps in the league this year. The D will improve with Wade calling the games and coaching them up each and every day.
Those tackles were not missed because a lack of tackling experience (these pros have been tackling since they were kids). Those tackles were missed because the defensive line got out of position and allowed a RB into the secondary to expose Ken Hamlin who was a half step slow getting to the hole each time. If the defense executes and doesn’t allow Baltimore to open a huge hole, those runs never happen. I am just fine with the Cowboys working more on execution than risking injury by practicing tackling.
If I had a nickel for every Super Bowl the Eagles have won, I would have zero nickels.
Just to play the devil's advocate here...
(and replying to multiple posts)
The defense held the Ravens to a 3 yard average before the two infamous runs … because of the scheme they were playing that involved stacking the box. Any time you put 8 guys up front, you risk a long gain because you are only leaving one safety back. The defensive line was not out of position, they were doing the same thing they did all year. On those two plays, this scheme was exposed for the risk it carries. Hamlin, as the last guy, needs to make the play. When he was late to the hole (twice), we were in real trouble.
I’ve been advocating a small amount of tackling practice, but the more I think of it, that is what pre-season games allow. I still think we could at least do some walk-through stuff. It can’t hurt to review fundamentals, at any level.
Doomsday returns... Wade Phillips style.
I disagree, the line definitely got out of position on the first run. Our RE (pretty sure it was Spears) got pushed back into the line backing core and there was a monstrous hole. Couple that with Hamlin being too far up to get a good angle, and you have a huge hole for McGahee to stride through. I still say that if everyone executes and is in position, those runs don’t happen.
If I had a nickel for every Super Bowl the Eagles have won, I would have zero nickels.
by Cowboyfan729 on Aug 5, 2009 10:34 PM CDT up reply actions
*corp not core
If I had a nickel for every Super Bowl the Eagles have won, I would have zero nickels.
by Cowboyfan729 on Aug 5, 2009 10:34 PM CDT up reply actions
*corps not core
Why do I suck at typing?
If I had a nickel for every Super Bowl the Eagles have won, I would have zero nickels.
by Cowboyfan729 on Aug 5, 2009 10:35 PM CDT up reply actions
the Ravens play wasn't the first time
Do you remember the year before when we were playing the Packers and Grant did the same exact run up the middle? Whatever you want to call it: Bad reaction time, bad tackling, whatever….it needs to be fixed. Running the play to the point where it’s tackle or get burnt and stopping sounds silly to me. Put someone in the situation so many times that the tackle becomes second nature.
This game is supposed to be physical and if one injury is the cost of making the crucial tackle when it matters, I’ll take the injury and hope that it’s not someone like D Ware. Even if it is, at least he went out doing his job and making the tackle when he is supposed to.
+1 on the idea that preseason games allow following through on tackling.
I still think we could at least do some walk-through stuff
My understanding is the drills are full speed up to the point of actually taking the man down. Wade said the point is for the defender to get into position in these drills. That seems to make sense, because tackling drills start in earnest in, what, sixth or seventh grade? These guys know how to tackle. Tackling in practice is not going to make Ken Hamlin arrive a step sooner. Knowing how to get into position is.
JFE’s “Camp Cupcake” myth was largely self-serving. She came up with a “hook” and rode it for what it was worth. the pre-salary cap days of deep, deep rosters and Jimmy Johnson’s “asthma field” and cutting guys to make a psychological point are over. Some refuse to believe it.
"We'll see." --Bill Parcells
Here's a thought
The vets might be too valuable to lose in camp — but there’s no reason for the rooks and second-stringers to not have a (more?) physical practice.
If we do believe that it’s a matter of tackling in camp that will improve tackling in the regular season, then some of the less valuable players should have at it.
This way, the rookies that will hopefully be filling roster spots for years to come will start off with a solid background in tackling emphasizing how important it is in the NFL. Get them in the right mindset early. Also, these guys might push borderline starters to better themselves too if they push for the starting job.
Everything's looking up, Milhouse!
by accidental innuendo on Aug 4, 2009 12:07 PM CDT reply actions
Hitting, wrapping up and taking down is something in...
… Which most of the players have spent countless hours training in HS and College.
In a no-tackling Training Camp what do you have? You were either in position to make the tackle or you got beat. Positioning is the harder thing to do in with the Pros and it’s something that even Pros have troubles with from time to time… You only need to look at Choice’s highlights in the Steelers game to see Polamalu missing some tackles due to poor angles…
Is this the right way to train? Dunno, but I can see the logic behind no-tackling offseason.
Viva México! Go Cowboys!
Tackling is a matter of heart and desire
Either you want to tackle or you don’t and the players in the league who want to tackle and love contact, will tackle well, bottom line.
If a CB or DB doesn’t like contact then he’s not going to be a great tackler no matter how much he practices it. (see Deion)
For those who played football should know what I’m talking about.
In Romo we Trust
I dont agree with Terry often but he is spot on.
Coaches need to know who the hitters are.
I find the harder I work, the luckier I get. Thomas Jefferson
i played all the way up to my senior year in high school when i had my leg snapped in half during practice
i was on my way to play for Texas, but after missing my entire senior year, noone wanted to look my way. I totally understand Wade’s thinking behind no tackling. I also agree that tackling is something most players don’t have to work on too much at the pro level. the ones who love contact always seem to find it during a game.
I played football, and I disagree with you.
Even leaving aside the fact that practice on tackling technique isn’t the same as contact or hitting hard, what you said goes against the whole concept of influencing one’s mind set through training. The military does this even more than football does. When people preparing to jump out of a plane practice repeatedly on jumping off a tower onto a soft target first, it’s at least partly to psychologically condition them and increase the chances that they’ll jump without hesitation when it’s for real. When the Marines have you fight each other with pugil sticks, run through a “confidence” course, and even repeatedly shout "Kill Kill Kill " at the end of certain activities, it’s largely for the purpose of cultivating aggressiveness (“heart and desire”).
Now, sure, professional football players should already be past the equivalent of the boot camp stage, but my point is simply that the things you talked about can be improved on with practice, people can change, and it’s possible for players to become more physical. Harvey Martin’s first nickname was “Too Nice”, and only later did it become “Too Mean”.
A big part of the tackling in practice debate is about technique more than mind set though.
its really a matter of preference
things we all agree:
- positioning is very important
- they dont jump out of airplanes or plan on fighting/killing in the NFL
- tackling is more risky than not-tackling
- practice means “perfect”
some people believe its best to “not tackle” and go all out during PRACTICE. maybe its because you have the confidence in ur players already or maybe you dont want to risk injury. maybe a bit of this and that.
some people believe you have to practice and play tough. tackling in practice means better in games. its the NFL, man up you wimps! its risky and its why they dont alow girls to play the game.
I prefer an increasing amount of tackling. if anything that will “cultivate aggressiveness”, follow the flow of the nfl season itself (gets harder every week), promote toughness, and most importantly allow players every bit a chance to experience the killing of nfl. risk is medium. this is my opinion. its not wades and therefore doesnt mean a damned thing.
One point
I’m agnostic on the “risky” thing, which you probably know after reading my post below. Show me some statistical evidence. Then we can debate whether the net “risk”, if it exists, is enough to warrant not practicing to keep your skills sharp, as is done with other skills.
Bradley not hurt in full tackling drills
check out this link from bleedinggreennation, the video at the bottom apparently shows the actual play where he was injured, and it wasn’t full tackling or anything, he didn’t even have contact. So we can argue one way or another about full tackling in training camp, but Bradley’s injury really isn’t relevant to the debate.
okay, may have been attempting a tackle
but you can see from the video he completely missed the guy, didn’t even touch him, and just twisted his leg on the turf, so it is not accurate to say “he was injured in a pile up at practice” or that it was due to a collision or contact of any sort, and it is the type of injury that could happen pretty much as easily just trying to “tag” someone in a non-tackling practice.
or I should say
specifically how this injury actually happened could happen as easily just trying to "tag" someone in a non-tackling practice.
I totally agree
ACL tears can result in non contact actions such as planting and twisting movements, however, the odds are much greater when there is contact with a blow directly to the side of the knee.
In Romo we Trust
my point is just that in this case there wasn't
any contact or blow, so this incident itself can’t really be used as an argument against full tackling practice.
I understand that your argument
however, doesn’t it make sense that if he wasn’t attempting to tackle him instead of just running through him like our defenders do in practice, his knee wouldn’t have buckled and twisted??
In Romo we Trust
maybe
but it just looks like the way he was stretching out, it would have been the same whether he was just trying to “tag” him or tackle him.
and keep in mind, I actually do believe in Wade’s approach, I’m not trying to argue that tackling can’t lead to injuries, just that this incident isn’t a clear case of injury because of full-tackling contact.
my point is that tackling can lead to more injuries
than non tackling in practice. Maybe the Bradley injury wasn’t the best example, but I think players get hurt more in games than in practice and thats the reason.
In Romo we Trust
This whole discussion no one has mentioned the turf.
Weren’t they saying ealier that because of the ‘bubble’ accident they’re practicing on some crappy fields?
that would make a difference for me, although the players could also easily catch a foot and ruin a knee or ankle without tackling.
I think the no-tackling for a few weeks makes sense, but for the whole camp? That comes across as overkill-I’d hope they’d be doing at least some tackling 2 weeks before real games!
It could be tackling drills, also, w/no tackling during scrimmages. Why has no one mentioned this obvious compromise???
This turf issue is serious
I was surprised the Cowboys chose to run TC on turf. It’s hard on the body, as you point out.
Doomsday returns... Wade Phillips style.
That's VERY few reps for a lot of guys, esp. starters.
I’d think SOME tackling the last few weeks
it doesn’t have to be the whole practice, it could be just one or two sessions, for instance-or a drill
would make sense.
by Realist Larry on Aug 5, 2009 5:53 PM CDT up reply actions
I disagree
Starters usually play at least one series in the 1st preseason game, a quarter in the 2nd game, and almost 3 quarters in the 3rd game.
thats plenty of reps IMO.
In Romo we Trust
I am really concerned about our pass rushers not sacking the QB in practice
I am afraid Ware might forget how to sack properly if he doesn’t get enough reps on Romo. And how will Spencer ever get it right if he doesn’t drive Romo into the ground repeatedly?
I suggest 1-on-1s, one Pass Rusher against Romo, preferrably from the blind side from 20 yards out. Oh, and just to make sure the communication between Spencer and Ware is working, alternate the 1-on-1s with 2-on-1s, with both rushing Romo simultaneously.
The great benefit of those drills is Romo can practice protecting the ball at the same time. Win-win for all involved.
by One.Cool.Customer on Aug 4, 2009 4:35 PM CDT reply actions
HAHAHAHA! Awesome!11!!!
I guess it was silly to suggest that a team that hasn’t won a playoff game in over a decade needs to improve in some way. I’m crazy like that.
by Baked Potato Soup on Aug 4, 2009 5:47 PM CDT up reply actions
You are definitely right
that things need to improve.The problem is always the “what”. And that’s because this is a team and teams have so many dependencies that even the coaches can’t be 100% sure why things happened and how to fix them. And we are two or three levels removed from that. Is it Romo in December or the line or the coaching or the WRs? Is it tackling or are guys out of position or ist a bad defensive call by Phillips?
You are among the more rational people on this blog which is the reason I dialogue with you. I learn a lot by doing so. And while I can’t put my finger on the problem, but I feel comfortable saying that it’s most likely a team problem, not an individual one because I can’t find a good reason why any of these individuals (whether it is Romo or Phillips) suddenly cannot perform when the calendar changes. Until that makes sense in some fashion, I can’t buy in. if it’s discovered that Romo doesn’t play well in the cold or Wade is in a hurry to get back to his secret love slave who is only avaiable from 20 December on, then I have my answer. But knowing the effect isn’t enough for me to assign a cause.
Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.
I don't know the exact cause, either.
But I look back at the games that they lost last year, and I can see reasons why I believe they lost those games. Then I say, what has to improve for them to win those games?
For example, they lost 2 games last year when Romo played well – the Redskins game and the Cardinals game. So what happened? Poor offensive play calling, in my opinion, and poor tackling by the defense against the Redskins. Horrid special teams play against the Cardinals. Garrett is under the microscope this year, and special teams got an almost complete overhaul, but everyone disagrees about the tackling?
They lost 2 games when Romo was out, obviously due in large part to poor QB play, but also due to Rams and Giants running all over us.
Then they lost 3 games when Romo played poorly, in my opinion. At least one of those lies mostly on Romo, the Bmore game seemed to be competitive until yet another bout of poor tackling from the D, and the Philly game was a breakdown on almost every level.
So in my opinion, poor tackling by the D contributed to 5 of our 7 losses. Almost half of the defense has been replaced, so obviously someone felt something needed some work.
by Baked Potato Soup on Aug 4, 2009 6:30 PM CDT up reply actions
Ok, so let me understand
It’s hard to find one facet to pinpoint blame for some of the horrific losses from last year. And it’s really not a consistent problem you can point to. Who would you hold responsible for overall consistency with the team?
I think there are consistent problems.
Dunk and I disagree about the extent of Tony Romo’s role in Dallas’ December woes. I didn’t see the need to rehash it with him. I’ll just say that when Dallas’ starting QB, whether it’s Romo, Bledsoe, or Johnson, has a QB rating above 72, Dallas is 29-5 over the past 3 years. When the starting QB is below 72, they are 2-12. Tony Romo has had exactly 1 game with a QB rating below 72 from September to November. Dunk feels it is not that cut and dry, and it is a team-wide problem that is reflected in Romo’s stats. Because he does not accept that Romo is to blame and I cannot accurately pinpoint exactly what makes Romo play so much more poorly in December, that is what I was referring to when I said I don’t know the cause other than Romo and Wade just tank in that month. But if there is one area that I think would make the difference between the Cowboys winning and losing, it’s consistent QB play. A 72 QB rating is far from good, and is actually below average, but not terrible. So, as long as the Cowboys starting QB is just not terrible, they usually win.
So, ignoring that argument that invades almost every thread on this board, that leaves the rest of the offense, special teams and the defense. TEs are solid, RBs are solid if healthy, WRs is going to be rather interesting this year, and OL is a little scary but in theory are fine if healthy.
The Special Teams coverage teams have been very bad and were almost completely overhauled this offseason.
That leaves the D – what ails them? They led the league in sacks, so they can pressure the QB. They were 8th in yards allowed, which isn’t bad. They were 5th in fumbles forced and recovered, so they’re pretty good there. But they were only 30th in INTs and 20th in opposing QB rating. There will be 2 new starters in the secondary, so that was addressed. That leaves rushing D where they were tied for 16th-20th in opposing yards per carry. Based on the games I mentioned, I think this has a lot to do with tackling ability, which is what this thread is partially about.
If you were saying that the coaches are responsible for team consistency and therefore are responsible for their losses, I can’t entirely disagree with you.
by Baked Potato Soup on Aug 4, 2009 7:28 PM CDT up reply actions
Actually, to be completely accurate
I only think that Romo is partly to blame.I think that the team on the other hand is also.
My full theory is that this team needs to build itself for the playoffs, and not for the regular season. Sort of like the NBA – an NBA team built for the playoffs is strong defensively and lets the points take care of themselves. In the NFL, a strong defense and a running game offer the best (but not the only) route to success, in part because you can more easily scheme to take away a passing game, but that’s more difficult with a running team. So if a team makes one of those aspects – phases as some call it – superior, they stand a better chance of getting through the playoffs. Dallas, conversely 9and even under PArcells) has been a passing-heavy team and I think down the stretch they falter because teams don’t have to stop the pass, they only have to disrupt it.
Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.
I guess my point
is you can point at different facets, whether it be the QB, the offense, defensive INTs(which was scheme BTW, how can you play 12 yards off the WR and expect to be in position to int) and ST for sure, the problems all fall to the feet of the HC and his inability to put a consistent team together for 16 to 16+, no?
Maybe
Bu they sucked in the years before and during Parcells as well.
Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.
Wrong
ST was always at the forefront of Bill’s style as he stated in many press conferences that approx 1/3 of all plays in a game are ST plays so they were just as emphasized as off and def. ST began to deteriorate at the end of Wade’s first year and completely ignored in his 2nd
I was talking about the team as a whole
The defense was worse under Parcells, as was the offense. So did those fall at Parcells’ feet?
Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.
Why are we still talking about Parcells?
I was responding to your assertion that the “they” sucked under Parcells. Who is “they”? And yes, if your subjective opinion is that both the offense and defense sucked under Parcells that would fall to the feet of the HC although it does appear we are about to change back to the run first style of offense Parcells was successful with
Opinions, by definition, are all subjective
Are you able to stay on track with a dialogue here? Who did you think “they” referred to? They the waterboys? They the Eagles?
I made one simple point – you can lay it all at the feet of the coaching staff, but as my kids used to say “It was like that when I found it”. Nothing has changed in several coaching regimes. Maybe it’s Wade’s fault, or maybe it’s the kind of guys they’ve been drafting. Who knows?
Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.
I cannot disagree with you.
When you are the boss, it’s ultimately your responsibility to see to it that the business runs the way it is supposed to.
by Baked Potato Soup on Aug 4, 2009 10:00 PM CDT up reply actions
In the end, you're right.
The players are adults, they are professionals, they shouldn’t need ‘motivating’ and basics and psychological coddling.
But they’re human, and they do, and it’s up to a head coach-preferablyw/ some "leaders’ and vets among the players-to get the best from his team.
That’s through coaching, x’s and o’s, and motivating, whatever approach is used.
Some coaches consistently succeed w/different personnel, proving there’s a difference.
by Realist Larry on Aug 4, 2009 10:02 PM CDT up reply actions
There is a difference, but there's not a formula
Landry’s famous quote (someone’s signature line?) about not worrying about motivation, demonstrates that is not THE thing.
Jimmy Johnson, on the other hand, was an absolute genius at motivation.
Wade’s defensive scheming is his strong suit, but don’t be so sure his leadership style will not work as well. He’s the opposite of Parcell’s heavy-handed style, but this helps generate leadership among other coaches and players.
As you said, these guys are adults, professionals that can step up, motivate themselves, and assume their own leadership roles. Wade’s style encourages this. And I think you’ll see the fruits of his labor in this year’s performance.
Doomsday returns... Wade Phillips style.
I hope so
One thing for almost-sure, I think Wade knows he’s got this one year to at LEAST get to the NFC Championship game, or he’s out.
You’ve got Garrett to deal with, and a bunch of good available coaches next year (can you say ’Cowher?).
He’s got his last chance as a HC-imagine a chance to win a SB w/ the Dallas Cowboys of all teams! So I have to believe he’ll pull out all the stops and do whatever it takes.
Or he’s looking around for DC positions in just 6 short months……
by Realist Larry on Aug 5, 2009 2:01 AM CDT up reply actions
Camp Cupcake to me is
not getting on guys when they dont practice hard, making mental errors etc. I dont care if they dont tackle unless tackling becomes a issue in preseason games. The Tuna was here for 4 years and they never tackled to the ground but his camp was tough with lots of hitting and mental prep, it looks to me they are practicing harder with a sence of urgency this yr over the last couple. Last yr because of the great record they were coming off of they felt they didnt have to work as hard to get to the playoffs and ended up watching the playoffs from home.
Right! Here is what Wade said about tackling and technique
“It’s play entry for those guys,” he said. “It’s the coverage you’re in and where they’re coming from and how they enter the play. Actually, it’s harder to get in position to make a tackle than to actually tackle people in practice, because you can be out of position and make tackles, dive and make tackles, easier than you can get into a position to two-hand touch, basically, or wrap up or whatever you want to call it.”
Not that he’s learned anything about defense and technique over the past 40 years.
Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.
That doesn't change the fact that getting into position and making a good tackle are two different skills. I think they should practice both.
Not tackle all the time, but more than just whatever opportunities they get in the pre season games.
As for whether Wade knows more than all of the great coaches over the years who have disagreed with him on the importance of tackling in camp and practice, at this point it would be generous to say that the jury is still out. The truth is that it would still be out even he does manage to finally win a Super Bowl. Plenty of coaches have won plenty of championships doing it differently.
I like your definition here in the first sentence.
There is something to be said for discipline and accountability, two aspects I think most of us here would agree were questionable with all the penalties and finger-pointing after giving up TDs.
"We'll see." --Bill Parcells
scottmaui's post destroyed the premise of this thread. Bradley wasn't hurt in a tackling "pile up".
Not that it would have mattered if he had been. Obviously players can be hurt tackling. They can also be hurt by planting their foot wrong or having someone else bump into them awkwardly during a non tackling scrimmage. Only a moron would change his mind on this issue based on a single anecdotal example either way.
1. There are cons and pros (even from an injury standpoint) to being fundamentally sound tacklers. I’m not even sure there’s a net increase in the likelihood of such injury if you tackle, and I won’t be until there’s some type of real study on the issue.
2. Even if there is a somewhat higher incidence of injury on teams that tackle, there’s also a skill tradeoff since teams that practice tackling, all things being equal, will probably be better at it than those that don’t.
3. Pros should know how to tackle, but they should also know how to throw, catch, block, run routes, kick, and punt, and yet a pro has to work on all of these fundamentals, and not just from a scheming/situational standpoint.
4. There’s a reason that most people don’t mean pre season games when they use the word “practice”. They can provide opportunities for sharpening your skills I guess, but they’re more to show the coaches what they have. When flaws in technique are identified, the coach will usually try to correct it in practice, and then see if the practice paid off in the next pre season game. You never know how many opportunities a player will get to make a tackle in a preseason game.
5. “Contact”, even hitting hard, is not the same as tackling. In fact players in games often miss a tackle because they’re trying to lay the ball carrier out and get on a highlight clip.
6. The Dallas defense was not very good over the first several games last year, so don’t cite the overall record as proof of anything, because the offense, as usual, was carrying this team.
7. All pros do not tackle equally well, which obliterates the argument that “pros know how to tackle”. I guess it depends on whom you’re comparing them to. Clearly some pros are better at it than others.
All that being said, I’ve never liked the term “Camp Cupcake” either, and I like most of what the Cowboys are doing in this training camp. I’d just prefer that they also run some controlled tackling drills from time to time and maybe even do a little real tackling in scrimmage before camp is over. Tackling is only one of many factors, however, and, even if they don’t tackle, the optimist in me still thinks this defense has potential with the improvement in speed and Wade’s hands on approach.
by krl97a on Aug 8, 2009 11:38 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
hmm theoretically
agree on most points …. couple things want to point out
2. practice too is limited. its not like the teams are tackling in practice are going to have 50% less missed tackles. plus there is a tradeoff. might not practice tackling, but instead practice positions or special teams or maybe some trick plays. my main point is to point out that there is more than likely a trade-off with regards to whats being practiced.
3 & 7. Pros DO know how to tackle. Some are clearly better than others. Wether they can do that against the Pros on the offensive side of the ball is always the question. Keep in mind, most players have their specialty and they dont ALL do the same thing. Is tackling in practice worth injuring ALL your players to better the duty of half? Will tackling drills alone be really worth anything?
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 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.
