2010 Dallas Cowboys To-Do List: Turnover Efficiency
"Whoever wins the turnover battle will win the game." How many times have you heard someone - a player, a coach, a broadcaster or a fellow blogger - say that? There's no denying that protecting the ball is vital to a team's success.
In fact, last season the NFL team that won the turnover battle won 78% of the time (164 wins out of 211 games), and the bigger the difference in turnovers the higher the likelihood of winning the game. Ladies and gentlemen, this is not rocket science.
| NFL win record by Turnover Ratio, 2009 regular season | ||||
| TO Ratio | +1 | +2 | +3 | >3 |
| Win %-age | 67% | 78% | 93% | 100% |
Last season, the Dallas Cowboys turned over the ball 19 times (9 interceptions, 10 fumbles lost). That was the fourth lowest giveaway total in the league. On defense, the situation was less rosy. Over the regular season, the Cowboys recorded only 21 takeaways (11 interceptions, 10 fumble recoveries). Rank in the NFL? Tied for 27th. Unusual for a defense that ranked 2nd in points allowed in the league.
Overall, the Cowboys finished the season slightly above break-even with a +2 in the turnover department and ranked a joint 13th in the league with that TO ratio. While breaking even is a lot better than league worst Detroit at -18, it's also nowhere near league leading Green Bay at +24. But what matters more than just the raw stats is what a team does with the ball after the turnover.
The Cowboys scored a total of 50 points from their 21 takeaways, but allowed 61 points following their 19 giveaways. While the Turnover Ratio (TO) is marginally positive at +2, the TO Points Differential is -11 points. NFL rank: 19th.
The average points scored on the drive immediately following a takeaway in the NFL in 2009 was 2.8. In the rare event that the Cowboys managed a takeaway, they recorded a lowly 2.4 points on average on the ensuing drive. When the Cowboys gave away the ball, their opponents scored an average of 3.2 points on the ensuing drive.
This average points differential of -0.8 ranks the Cowboys 27th in the NFL behind such 'powerhouses' as the 49ers, Jaguars, Browns, Rams and Raiders. The Ravens have the best average points differential with +2.4, followed by the Patriots (+1.6), Vikings (+1.3) and Chargers (+1.2).
But why look at average TO points differential at all? Because it is a good indicator of turnover efficiency, or how well teams convert turnovers into points and how well they prevent giveaways from turning into points scored by the opponents.
The TO ratio is the prevalent stat for measuring how well a team is performing in terms of turnovers. But while it is easy to understand and easy to calculate, what it doesn't do is reflect the impact of a turnover. In that sense it would be comparable to evaluating a RB by the number of carries, not by his yards per carries. Let's look at some examples:
- The 49ers had a TO ratio of +9, 5th best in the league last year. And while they scored 78 points on the drives immediately following their takeaways, they gave up 92 points on the drives immediately following a giveaway. The TO Points Differential of -14 ranks them 20th in the league. The 49ers were highly inefficient in the turnover game, and looking only at the TO ratio would give you a very distorted picture of what actually went on on the field.
- Similarly, the Eagles had the 2nd best TO Ratio last year with +15, but their TO Points Differential of 38 ranks them a slightly disappointing 8th in the league.
- At the other end of the scale, the Ravens had 'only' the 4th best TO ratio with +10, yet recorded a league leading 89 TO Points Differential. The Ravens were by far the most efficient team in the turnover game last year.
Back to the Cowboys: In the five regular season games the Cowboys lost last year, they had four takeaways and ten giveaways. The opponents scored a combined 45 points of those giveaways while the Dallas offense scored only seven points off the four takeaways. We've all lamented the low number of takeaways the team generated last year. Hopefully Wade Phillips has long realized that something needs to be done about this. Why? See below.
Turnover Ratio by season, 2000-2009
| 2000 | 2001 | 2002 | 2003 | 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | |
| Cowboys | -14 | -9 | -4 | -4 | -15 | -5 | +1 | +5 | -5 | +2 |
| Eagles | +2 | +9 | +14 | +4 | +6 | -7 | +5 | -8 | +3 | +12 |
Note on the background colors: The casual reader might assume that I've chosen the green background color to simply highlight the best TO ratios. Not so, dear reader, not so at all.
The trained observer immediately recognizes that the green color background highlights the years in which the Cowboys or the Eagles made the playoffs - any correlation with the TO ratio is pure coincidence. After all, the Giants won the Super Bowl in 2007 with a -9 regular season TO ratio. The other teams to win a Super Bowl with a negative regular season TO ratio in the last 30 years? The 1987 Redskins and the 1983 L.A. Raiders. That's it.
You don't need an advanced degree in statistics to intuitively understand that teams that are able to gain a turnover advantage are more likely to win games. Giveaways and takeaways are often the fine line between winning and losing, but what teams do after a turnover ultimately is more important than the simple fact of having created a turnover.
Of course, in the overall scheme of things, when, where, why and how turnovers are created may be even more important than any stat.
Takeaways and Giveaways by NFL team, 2009 (click column header to sort)
| Team | Takeaways |
Takeaway Points | Pts/TA | Giveaways | Giveaway Points | Pts/GA |
TO Points Differential |
| Ravens | 32 | 115 | 3.6 | 22 | 26 | 1.2 | 89 |
| Packers | 40 | 139 | 3.5 | 16 | 69 | 4.3 | 70 |
| Saints | 39 | 134 | 3.4 | 28 | 71 | 2.5 | 63 |
| Patriots | 28 | 98 | 3.5 | 22 | 42 | 1.9 | 56 |
| Chargers | 25 | 97 | 3.9 | 17 | 46 | 2.7 | 51 |
| Vikings | 24 | 105 | 4.4 | 18 | 55 | 3.1 | 50 |
| Broncos | 30 | 102 | 3.4 | 23 | 61 | 2.7 | 41 |
| Eagles | 38 | 112 | 2.9 | 23 | 73 | 3.2 | 39 |
| Jets | 31 | 98 | 3.2 | 30 | 73 | 2.4 | 25 |
| Bengals | 25 | 73 | 2.9 | 25 | 52 | 2.1 | 21 |
| Bills | 33 | 89 | 2.7 | 30 | 70 | 2.3 | 19 |
| Colts | 26 | 66 | 2.5 | 24 | 57 | 2.4 | 9 |
| Steelers | 22 | 52 | 2.4 | 25 | 43 | 1.7 | 9 |
| Texans | 27 | 66 | 2.4 | 28 | 61 | 2.2 | 5 |
| Falcons | 28 | 74 | 2.6 | 25 | 71 | 2.8 | 3 |
| Giants | 24 | 99 | 4.1 | 31 | 97 | 3.1 | 2 |
| Chiefs | 28 | 76 | 2.7 | 27 | 83 | 3.1 | -7 |
| Panthers | 37 | 86 | 2.3 | 31 | 95 | 3.1 | -9 |
| Cowboys | 21 | 50 | 2.4 | 19 | 61 | 3.2 | -11 |
| 49ers | 33 | 78 | 2.4 | 24 | 92 | 3.8 | -14 |
| Titans | 27 | 83 | 3.1 | 31 | 100 | 3.2 | -17 |
| Cardinals | 29 | 79 | 2.7 | 36 | 99 | 2.8 | -20 |
| Seahawks | 23 | 63 | 2.7 | 31 | 94 | 3.0 | -31 |
| Jaguars | 25 | 33 | 1.3 | 23 | 65 | 2.8 | -32 |
| Dolphins | 21 | 55 | 2.6 | 29 | 88 | 3.0 | -33 |
| Redskins | 17 | 37 | 2.2 | 28 | 70 | 2.5 | -33 |
| Bears | 28 | 75 | 2.7 | 34 | 111 | 3.3 | -36 |
| Buccaneers | 29 | 66 | 2.3 | 34 | 102 | 3.0 | -36 |
| Lions | 23 | 60 | 2.6 | 41 | 98 | 2.4 | -38 |
| Browns | 19 | 29 | 1.5 | 31 | 101 | 3.3 | -72 |
| Rams | 20 | 36 | 1.8 | 33 | 117 | 3.5 | -81 |
| Raiders | 20 | 29 | 1.5 | 33 | 111 | 3.4 | -82 |
55 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
This is why Alan Ball is a bad choice as our safety.
One area where the team can clearly improve is forcing turnovers. It would help the offense, defense, and special teams, and increase our scoring efficiency. Ball is not skilled at creating turnovers. If only there had been a free agent safety that was at least Ball’s equal in all other areas and among the best in the league at creating turnovers…
by Baked Potato Soup on Jul 13, 2010 11:46 AM CDT reply actions
We'll see.
I think Ball had 2 interceptions and 1 forced fumble in his entire college career and has zero so far in the NFL, including preseason. He obviously can’t do worse than Hamlin did last year, but there’s nothing that indicates that he will do better. At the same time, he will likely be a good bit worse at directing traffic and QBing the defense than Hamlin.
by Baked Potato Soup on Jul 13, 2010 12:02 PM CDT up reply actions
He can be worse than Hamlin
This entire decade has been a comedy of bad safety play. We’ve seen what worse than Hamlin looks like and Ball is entirely capable of being worse.
by Blue Eyed Devil on Jul 13, 2010 12:41 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
not in the turnover department
That’s the subject of this post and Soup’s comment. Hamlin 0 INTs and 0 FFs last season. So Ball actually cannot possibly be worst than Hamlin was last season.
Cowboys safeties produced 5 total INTs+FFs in the last 2 years
2 of them were Hamlins.
I’m don’t think we should have kept him, but the sad truth is Ball could be worse and all of our other safeties have been. We’ve had the worst safeties in the NFL at creating TOs for 2 years running.
That said, the cast on his hand seemed to cost Sensei several TO’s last year so he should have a better year in 2010.
by Left Coast Cowboy on Jul 13, 2010 5:29 PM CDT up reply actions
Ball made the catch against the Raiders...
but was out of bounds. If he had the body control to stay in bounds he would’ve had the INT. Of course, if he had that kind of body control he’d probably be a WR instead of a DB.LOL
Rabid and luvin' it
He COULD....
recover a fumble and then drop it himself. That would actually put him negative for the category…
Of course, to be able to do that, someone in the secondary would have to be forcing fumbles.
Football is an incredible game. Sometimes it's so incredible, it's unbelievable. --
Tom Landry
by Pnut Gallery on Jul 14, 2010 7:03 PM CDT up reply actions
Atogwe is overrated
there’s a reason why no other teams wanted him. 7 million for a safety who’s not even in the top 20 is crazy.
by Pete Mccullagh on Jul 13, 2010 12:52 PM CDT up reply actions
Atogwe creates turnovers as good or better than any safety in football
He also rarely gets beat deep, and does all of this on a team where he has little defensive help. He’s not a Cowboy, so I’m rooting for our guys this year, not him…but broad, unsubstantiated comments like “overrated” do get under my skin.
One reason why he may not have been the best fit for us is he’s always played behind a 4-3 defense, and judging by how Gabril Wilson struggled in Miami that transition might be harder than most realize.
by Left Coast Cowboy on Jul 13, 2010 5:18 PM CDT up reply actions
all the fans rambling on about how we should sign him
why? because he picks off some passes? Big deal, he also gave up a lot of long passes as well, which tells me he’s not as good as his press clippings indicate.
In Romo we Trust
he rates himself at 7 mil.
obviously the league disagrees
by Pete Mccullagh on Jul 27, 2010 8:41 AM CDT up reply actions
how could be overrated?
tell me, for you who are the best 5 players at his position, and i’ll tell you he got more turnovers than at least two of them
The top 20 what?
How is he overrated when he drew little interest in free agency?
He has been the best in the league at the Cowboys’ biggest defensive weakness. This is a team that is supposedly ready to contend for a Super Bowl, so it seems odd that they don’t take a chance on a guy that can put them over the top if he simply plays at the same level as he has in the past. Instead, they are going with a guy that has less experience, has displayed zero ability to create turnovers, and is neither considered a standout nor superior to Atogwe in any area.
It just seems odd to choose the hope/expectation that Ball will do something he hasn’t done in the pros or in college, be a ballhawk, over a guy who has proven to be one of the best in the league.
by Baked Potato Soup on Jul 14, 2010 12:24 PM CDT up reply actions
Apparently good at batting them down
I don’t know the number but apparently he had a decent number of pass deflections during his 3 starts I think it was while covering for hamlin. Sensabaugh got his HAND on a bunch of them throughout the year. I emphasize HAND because he had that cast on most of the year. Its hard enough to catch a pass one handed, not to mention when it isn’t intended for you. I was glad that he was able to catch one with the cast (in philadelphia).
Tony Romo off in dat hole, Watch roll and watch him throw, Watch him lead dem cowboys to the super bowl, now watch me "yua!" crank dat cowboys, Now watch me "yua!" crank dat cowboys, Now watch me "yua!" crank dat cowboys, Now watch me "yua!" crank dat cowboys!
by ProBowlFactory on Jul 14, 2010 12:06 PM CDT up reply actions
Haha
That could be looked at as saying that teams went after him when he was in the game and that he can’t catch. I hope he proves me wrong, if he wins the starting job, but I can’t help but feel that the defense has not improved.
by Baked Potato Soup on Jul 14, 2010 12:29 PM CDT up reply actions
And I think our low points scored is primarily because we had so few interceptions. Interceptions are more likely to be returned for big yardage or a score than a fumble.
by Baked Potato Soup on Jul 13, 2010 11:51 AM CDT up reply actions
What would be interesting
is what positions deliver the most turnovers. I would guess that CB is number one, so I’m not sure a different safety would help a lot. Add to that the fact tht Sensi was in poistion to make three picks he couldn’t execute because of his cast, and I think the team will be OK if not inspiring at S.
FREE THE OGLETREE!!!
I have basis for this, but my feeling is
that Ball is a placeholder for Hamlin II or Ansah *depending on who emerges). Hamlin Der Erste was too expensive and no more productive, so the move made management sense.
FREE THE OGLETREE!!!
i think both Hamlin and Ansah are our future safeties
and i think they will be good, that’s why i don’t want sensi to get a long term deal, he would be a progress stopper
SS Mike Hamlin FS AOA
Yes Ball could be more of a ballhawk
What helps the cowboys D this time around..
Sensi wont have a cast
Spencer gets “it” now
Barbie is gone
Spears should be more motivated isnt it a contract year?
Then hopefully another semi decent pass rusher will emerge along with ILB
Either way the front 7 is better and thatll make the secondary better. Jenkins Scandrick have another year. I expect alot more turnovers.
Ware and Spencer and Rat in the middle are just too much to handle
Really?! Really?!
If the Cowboys defense can finally find that turnover creating ability
this defense has real potential to be elite. If not, then the Cowboys will probably see a lot of what we saw last year where the defense is a bend-don’t break defense that hurts us in the field position battle yet doesn’t give up a lot of points.
If I had a nickel for every Super Bowl the Eagles have won, I would have zero nickels.
The reason for the -11 TO Points Differential is as follows:
Week 2 NYG (4 Turnovers—>24 points)
a) Bruce Johnson Pick 6 +Extra Point
b) After Felix Jones loses fumble on the kick off return Giants go 7 plays 18 yards for a field goal.
c) Ken Phillips Int of Romo at Dal 28; Giants go 3 plays 28 yards for TD
d) Romo Picked off at NYG 5; Giants march down field and score TD
Week 4 @ Denver (2 Turnovers—>7Points)
a) Tony Romo is sacked and stripped of the ball at the Dallas 9; next play Orton throws a swing pass to Moreno for 9yard TD.
Week 5 @KC (2 Turnovers—>7 Points)
a) Romo fumbles at Dallas 22 and the Chiefs Offense get the ball at Dallas 16. KC scores a TD on that drive.
Week 10 @GB (3 Turnovers—>7 Points)
a) Romo fumble leading to Green Bay scoring a TD immediately on a 3 play 3 yard possesion
Week 13@NYG (1 Turnover—>7 Points)
a) Marian Barber has a 6 yard reception then fumbles the ball, the Giants recover, and their offense scores on the ensuing drive.
In these 5 games we turned the ball over 12 times and allowed the other team to score 52 points.
Never underestimate the power of a neck brace and wheelchair. In Donnie Walsh I trust!
However, I would argue that from those game logs I just posted
Our (Romo’s) week 2 meltdown was the primary reason for this -11 differential. However, I did spot a trend of turnovers happening on our side of the 50 last season quite a bit. We definitely played with fire last season, in this regard.
Never underestimate the power of a neck brace and wheelchair. In Donnie Walsh I trust!
Week 2 of last year was all kinds of crazy
Interception off of a player’s foot? How often does that happen? Also that touchdown where I believe it was Steve Smith caught it as he was laying on the ground? How about that? I deduced that the Giants signed a pact with the devil. I mean, they won a Super bowl with Eli. Just look at his face! HOW? Also as it turns out, the Giants LT is a child molester. That has to be some sort of a sign.
we have to notice the position on the field for the turnovers, killer for the defense
a lot of few yards TD
I'd like to deconstruct that...
You argue that the reason for the -11 differential is poor turnover performance in 5 games. The implication is that our poor performance in that area is concentrated in a small number of games and not spread out evenly nor generally representative of the season as a whole. A further implication is that by virtue of the concentration of our poor performance to those five games, some or all of the magnitude of that negative differential is merely noise.
First, we have no data regarding a typical spread of turnover differentials across the regular seasons of various teams. So there isn’t a starting point from which to argue that the Cowboys’ negative differential is spread in a more concentrated fashion, and therefore not representative of the season as a whole.
Second, no Super Bowl aspiring team can afford to drop 5 games. The article points out that simply by losing the TO battle by even one, you immediately have a two-thirds chance of losing the game. The magnitude of the differential apparently dramatically affects the likelihood of victory.
Lastly, you are basically saying that our overall negative differential is a byproduct of the individual games where we had a negative differential, which, to me, is like saying the negative balance on my checking account is a byproduct of the individual withdrawals I made. It’s obviously true, and doesn’t really say anything.
by speedmetal on Jul 14, 2010 2:22 AM CDT via mobile up reply actions
Alan Ball shouldn't be that bad of a safety, he did fairly well replacing Hamlin which is a good sign
sure he didn’t get any interceptions, but he broke up the pass play which is just as important, now lets see if we can turn those deflections into interceptions
For some reason I can't post a reply, so this is for Leftcoastcowboy above.
Atogwe is definitly NOT overrated. However I think there must’ve been some pretty big injury concerns.
There are plenty of teams that need a playmaking safety and the fact that interest seemed so low is only a testament to me that the hernia and other injuries he had just weren’t enough to justify a big contract.
Anything said above is purely the opinion of AFB unless said otherwise.
by The Immortal Iron Fist AKA AFB on Jul 13, 2010 6:11 PM CDT reply actions
I don't think it was injuries so much as salary concerns
Atogwe’s major injury was his shoulder (torn labrum), which usually isn’t too bad, and we have to hope so because it’s the same injury AOA is recovering from. Plus if it was about injuries I wouldn’t expect the Rams, who knew his situation best and need help everywhere not just safety, to give him a big, long contract.
I think more than anything this came down to:
1) Jerry being one of the ownership leaders who is trying to play hardball against the players this year and make a lockout as painful as possible for them; and
2) Paying big money to Atogwe would make it harder for him in negotiations with current players, especially Sensei and Austin
Whatever the reason, I’m gonna keep my fingers crossed for our Safeties and Defense. We’re smaller than I’d like to see, but Wade’s earned my trust…I just hope he’s as confident behind closed doors as he is in public.
by Left Coast Cowboy on Jul 14, 2010 3:13 PM CDT up reply actions
Nice lay out of the particulars OCC.
While what you do with it after you take it away is obviously important, since we aren’t taking it away we need to concentrate on that first. One step at a time. I have a feeling that our offense will cash the points in if we give them a short field. Maybe, maybe not, but my point is we have to improve in the first area in order to even have a chance in the second area.
Now, Jenkins has a nose for the ball. I have a feeling Scandrick will pick a few this season, as well. We all saw that Sensabaugh had a few bounce out of his reach because of that cast. Between those three I think we’ll get some picks. Who was it? Ware, that said he wants to pick the ball off this season? We’ll probably step up the picks a level or two this season.
Turnovers, however, probably isn’t the rationale for Wade going with Ball. He has stated more than once that Ball has better coverage skills, which allows him to do more things with the defense. That something is blitzing. Though we have had a formidable pass rush the last couple of years, it hasn’t created turnovers. I think Wade wants to dial it up a notch with the blitz, and create some havoc in the backfield. Disrupting the other teams rhythm, patterns, and timing, is the key to creating turnovers.
When I die I want to go peacefully in my sleep like my Grandfather -- not screaming like the passengers in his car.
Creating turnovers and interceptions would be great....
But wouldn’t it be EVEN greater to stop teams on 3rd down with greater efficiency? If your defense has playmakers on it, turnovers will come, if few and far between. However, stopping teams on 3rd down will also create those turnovers as teams desperate to score will take desperate measures to do so.
Stopping the other team on those long 3rd & 13’s and not just the 3rd &2’s will keep their offense off the field and ours on the field.
"Drew is a winner"....Roger Staubach
To the comment above...
That is true, but Dallas was tied at 4th all season long with 3rd down efficiency. So it isn’t like that is the big department they are lacking.
Anything said above is purely the opinion of AFB unless said otherwise.
by The Immortal Iron Fist AKA AFB on Jul 14, 2010 8:39 AM CDT reply actions
I believe Mike Hamlin was a ballhawk at Clemson
with 14 career ints. I don’t know ACC football very well but I assume he wasn’t facing terrible passing offenses.
It is truly amazing that with the ostensible pass rush the Cowboys have had the past few years, they can’t force more turnovers.
Hamlin does have good ball skills
which is why it’s wrong to think Ball will simply be handed the job….I think the Ball/Hamlin competition will be the most interesting battle this preseason.
In Romo we Trust
I believe he got about 1/2 of those INTs against Citadel and Duke
Which are not top-tier football programs.
But I also believe he set a new Clemson record for INTs by a safety, and Clemson certainly is a good school.
by Left Coast Cowboy on Jul 14, 2010 2:47 PM CDT up reply actions
I've been thinking a lot about this
Theere are two types of teams that do well in terms of takeaways;
One is when you have a stifling run defense that forces your opponent’s offense to become one-dimensional.
The other is when your offense gets on people early and often, again, forcing your opponent’s offense to become…wait for it…one-dimensional.
The problem is that there are very few teams who can stuff the run consistently enough to change the opposing OC’s play calling. The Jets, Ravens and Vikes are the ones that jump out at me. The Broncos did it for the first half of the season until they broke down.
There are a lot more teams with average defenses who put intense pressure on their opponents to score in bunches in order to stay in the game (Saints, Pats, Packers, Chargers, Eagles) and it just makes things so much easier when all you need to do is get after the QB and jump routes.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
I have thought long and hard about your comment
and I’m not sure I agree with the point on run defenses. The No. 3 and No. 4 run defenses by yards allowed last year were the Steelers (1,438) and – wait for it – the Cowboys (1,448). Yet the Cowboys ranked only 26th in the league with 11 INTs, the Steelers 25th with 12.
I do agree with the high scoring offenses: The Saints led the league in yards and finished 2nd in takeaways. More often than not, their defense punished teams who tried to keep up with their offensive pace.
Without the turnovers, the Saints are a pretty average defense – they ranked 27th in the league with 4.5 yards allowed per rushing attempt, a weakness many teams found hard to exploit because they were busy trying to catch up with the Saints’ offensive juggernaut. The weak rush defense was and is no big secret, but when grandfather Sharper picks you off two times per game, it’s kind of hard to make a living against the Saints running the ball.
by One.Cool.Customer on Jul 14, 2010 12:01 PM CDT up reply actions
I see zero posts under robbo24 so I guess it's gone...but now you've got me curious
What could someone post about Garrett that was so egregious that it needed to be censored? Was he blatantly racist against redheads? Or relying more on 4 letter words than Ice-T?
Why you beating the drum of dismissal there Dire?
by Left Coast Cowboy on Jul 14, 2010 2:59 PM CDT up reply actions
There are 12 post I never read showing.
Unless someone got out of line in those post I didn’t read, I saw nothing that would cause it to be taken down.
Strange, his profile comes up with 0 posts for me...
…and the mysteries continue.
by Left Coast Cowboy on Jul 14, 2010 4:35 PM CDT up reply actions
Well, philosophically, your point would make sense...
if not for the FACTS! (cue the old TV Horror movie music).
How did those two team you mentioned rank in terms of total rushing attempts? Now how did those same teams fare when it came to passing attempts?
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
I'll add one more thing...
Marty Schottenheimer’s RB’s always protected the ball better and stripped the ball better on defense because it was a focal point for him. He always had special drills which simulated the game situations and taught players how to strip it and hold onto it.
I think John Fox is of that same ilk.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
If they aren't satisfied with the safety position this year...
I am just hoping the cowboys look into Deunta Williams, FS UNC. He was converted from WR so you know he has at least decent hands, and it shows with 12 picks in three seasons. He’s a senior with good size (6’ 1" 210) I guess we’ll see how things pan out. I’m always pulling for the current players and personally I want to see AOA step up and be that guy since he has the prototypical size for a safety AND we got him in the fourth round so another late draft steal for us like we’ve been known for lately.
Tony Romo off in dat hole, Watch roll and watch him throw, Watch him lead dem cowboys to the super bowl, now watch me "yua!" crank dat cowboys, Now watch me "yua!" crank dat cowboys, Now watch me "yua!" crank dat cowboys, Now watch me "yua!" crank dat cowboys!
by ProBowlFactory on Jul 14, 2010 12:18 PM CDT reply actions
NBC has it
Tony Romo off in dat hole, Watch roll and watch him throw, Watch him lead dem cowboys to the super bowl, now watch me "yua!" crank dat cowboys, Now watch me "yua!" crank dat cowboys, Now watch me "yua!" crank dat cowboys, Now watch me "yua!" crank dat cowboys!
by ProBowlFactory on Jul 14, 2010 7:45 PM CDT up reply actions
The lapse in run defense well could include a reflection upon the efficiency of the Dallas offense as well.
Also, in considering the flunctuation from ‘08 to ’09, I wonder how much of that is related to Romo’s injury and Johnson QB’ing in the interim?
There is no right way to do the wrong thing. GO COWBOYS!!

by 






















