Cowboys O-line: Defending The Splash Play
Think back to the Rams game. Now try to visualize what you remember about Doug Free's performance. If you're like me and probably 98% of all football fans, chances are the only thing you'll remember about Doug Free is the sack he allowed on Romo.
That's only one play out of 65 snaps that Doug Free played on Sunday, yet often that's all we use to base our entire evaluation of a player on. That is the reality offensive linemen have to live with. For the most part, they get noticed only when they make mistakes or allow what NFL scouts call splash plays - plays that turn games around. Splash plays include sacks, QB hits, QB pressures and penalties.
The fewer of these an offensive lineman allows, the better.
After the break we look at how the Cowboys linemen compare against the NFL average so far in 2011 and how many splash plays they've given up. And because were in Eagles week, we'll include the data for the Eagles O-line as well, for no extra charge whatsoever.
Before we start comparing sacks, hits and pressures among players along the O-Line, it's important to understand that pressure is not distributed evenly along the line. Tackles obviously give up more pressure than the interior linemen. But even if you had the average sacks given up by a left tackle, you wouldn't necessarily be able to compare one left tackle to the other because one guy may have played 250 pass blocking snaps, while the other guy played only 200 snaps.
Example: Doug Free gave up 10 QB pressures according to Pro Football Focus (PFF). The Eagles' left tackle, Jason Peters, also gave up 10 pressures. If you're a proponent of volume stats, you would argue that both gave up the same amount of pressures. Technically, you'd be right, but this doesn't take into account how many snaps each player played, as Jason Peters only played in four games, while Free played in six.
If you take the number of pass blocking snaps into account, Free clearly has the edge because he allowed those 10 pressures on 250 pass blocking snaps, while Peters allowed his 10 pressures on only 181 pass blocking snaps. So if we adjust Peters' numbers to 250 snaps, his pressures-allowed-per-250-pass-blocking-snaps increases to 13.8, which is not quite on par with Free's performance.
Because the Cowboys played exactly 250 pass blocking snaps so far this year, I have 'normalized' the data for all NFL O-linemen who've played on at least 25% of their teams' snaps to those 250 snaps to make everybody comparable and to see how many sacks, hits and pressures an average NFL O-line has given up so far this year over 250 pass blocking snaps. Because penalties accrue in both pass blocking and run blocking, I've normalized the penalties to 400 snaps, which is roughly the average number of snaps linemen have played this year.
| NFL Avg. 2011 | LT | LG | C | RG | RT |
| Sacks | 3.1 | 1.5 | 0.9 | 0.9 | 2.8 |
| QB Hits | 2.5 | 2.3 | 1.1 | 1.9 | 2.7 |
| QB Pressures | 11.1 | 8.4 | 4.5 | 7.5 | 12.8 |
| Penalties | 3.1 | 2.0 | 1.9 | 2.0 | 3.5 |
The pressure is bigger from the outside, no big surprise there, but I was a little surprised to see that the pressure from the left is about on par with the pressure from the right. I always thought that O-lines and QBs were more susceptible to pressure from the left- or blind side. Perhaps there are more left-handed QBs in the league who balance that out, perhaps it's that teams tend to put their best athletes at LT to counter this threat, perhaps my assumption was simply wrong - no matter, it's the way it is.
Now that we've established the baseline, or 'average' for these splash plays, let's have a look at how the Cowboys linemen compare. Note on the color scheme: green is better than the NFL average at the position, yellow is up to 20% below the NFL average, red is more than 20% worse than the NFL average.
| Cowboys | Free | LG | Costa | Kosier | Smith |
| Sacks | 2.0 | 0.0 | 1.1 | 1.0 | 2.0 |
| QB Hits | 2.0 | 2.0 | 1.1 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| QB Pressures | 10.0 | 7.1 | 10.6 | 6.0 | 8.0 |
| Penalties | 4.7 | 1.9 | 1.0 | 2.8 | 2.8 |
As you look at the table, the first thing you'll notice is that there is a lot of green here. For the most part, the Cowboys' O-line has been above average in defending the splash play. LG is the combined performance of Bill Nagy, Derrick Dockery and Montrae Holland at the position. Nagy by himself would have been below average in the amount of pressures he's given up, with a normalized 8.8. And that is also indicative of the problems this line has had, allowing too much pressure up the middle.
In terms of penalties, Doug Free and Kyle Kosier stand out negatively. Free has already been flagged five times, Kosier three times (although two of those were declined or offsetting).
And as Tyron Smith improves even further with more NFL experience under his belt, it would not come as a surprise if the Cowboys move him to the left side. At this pace, no later than next year.
The Eagles and the splash play
The Eagles O-line presents an entirely different challenge statistically, as there's been a lot of movement along the. Here are the names and weeks I've used to calculate the stats for those positions where more than one player has started this year:
LT: Jason Peters (week 1-4), King Dunlap (wk 5), Todd Herremans (wk 6)
RG: Kyle DeVan (week 1-4), Danny Watkins (wk 5-6)
RT: Todd Herremans (week 1-5), Winston Justice (wk 6)
| Eagles | LT | Mathis | Kelce | RG | RT |
| Sacks | 0.9 | 0.0 | 0.9 | 1.9 | 0.0 |
| QB Hits | 0.9 | 1.9 | 3.7 | 0.9 | 3.7 |
| QB Pressures | 10.2 | 5.7 | 6.5 | 10.2 | 15.7 |
| Penalties | 4.6 | 0.9 | 1.8 | 5.5 | 2.8 |
Of the nine sacks the Eagles have given up this year, PFF only assigns the blame for four to the offensive line. As a result, the Eagles line in this table looks fine in the sacks department. Another point to keep in mind is that with Vick under center, the right side is actually the quarterback's blind side. And this right side is the one that has been struggling early in the season, giving up an overproportional number of hits and pressures.
The good news for the Eagles is that Danny Watkins appears to have stepped in ably at right guard, and has given up only one pressure and one penalty in two games. The Eagles remain vulnerable up the middle, where rookie Jason Kelce is doing his best Phil Costa impression - except that at about 280 pounds, he's almost 40 pounds lighter than Costa, which should make for a very interesting matchup with Jay Ratliff.
Jason Peters was back at practice on Monday, so he's likely to start at left tackle on Sunday, which is further good news for the Eagles. Todd Herremans was practicing at right tackle again, so he'll move back to the right side on Sunday. Herremans has been struggling on the right side, particularly in terms of pressures given up, so expect to see DeMarcus Ware lining up on that side frequently.
138 comments
|
3 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Let's bring splash plays to Vick this week
No better time to test pressure up the middle than Ratliff vs. undersized center collapsing the pocket against Vick. Then, with Ware coming from Vick’s left, he’ll be right where we want him – rolling to his right, unable to pass, and going down.
Now, if the spies can keep up with Vick and McCoy, we should be in good shape there.
The biggest offensive "splashes lately have been the penalties. Cut them out, and with Holland back, we should be in good shape on the line.
Cowboys and Longhorns - getting up off the turf to win another day.
Spurs? It's football season!
Under that scenario...
… which of Scandrick, Butler or Spencer might Vick not see in his hurry to avoid a left/center pocket collapse from putting him down? Does Spears even register? A lesser name? Or Lee? Only the mind of Rob knows what’s cookin’, as my money’s on his having a special nightmare brewing.
Then what happens with a Ware right-side shift? Or that Ware center with Jay? Does Rob roll out something exoctic, a 1-4-6, Ware at nose, Ratliff standing stacked and sending Spencer/Lee/Butler? Or…
btw, how’s this Vick fella at reading D’s? Hmmm…
Cry 'Havoc!'
Since Vicks "Blind Side"
is the right side. I expect to see more of D-Ware on that side. But, since Vick often lines up in the Shotgun, the “Blind Side” is minimized for most of the play.
In Rob we trust and with our full set of DB’s we just need to make sure that little skinny guy Jackson doesnt get behind us.
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
Uhhh yeah, I think people know Vick's blind-side's right
Point is, Ware pressuring from various positionings opens up the oft-overlooked “real” punch, for one. Another, given Ware’s attention-getting status, possibly in Vick’s psyche too, getting him rolling right from Ware being in a more conventional left-side scheme opens up the possibilities of a pick from such tosses, not to mention the mentioned sack/pressure possibilities.
Cry 'Havoc!'
Very well said, and good point.
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
It has been well documented
and used successfully by the Cowboys:
When Vick is forced to his right, he does not set up well or throw a consistently accurate pass. But, when he scrambles left, he can heave the rock a mile with just a flick of his wrist. That’s when Jackson or Maclin running loose fifty yards downfield are at their most dangerous. Vick can fling the ball way downfield and those speedsters can outrun the secondary to chase down the ball, no matter how poorly thrown.
He is much more dangerous when he scrambles left. He is easier to control or force into mistakes when he is flushed right or in a pocket that completely collapses around him, leaving him no escape.
Cowboys and Longhorns - getting up off the turf to win another day.
Spurs? It's football season!
I think I remember
reading about that. Thanks for the reminder.
Most QB’s do their best when rolling/scrambling to their throwing arm side, so that made perfect sense when I first read it.
But again, thanks for the reminder. Jason Peters is their best Olineman and he will be back at LT but I think Ware might just be positioned in the “A” gaps (either side of the center) and of coarse, pressure from up the middle is what QB’s hate the most.
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
Thus, Ware/Ratliff vs Kelce/Watkins
What’s Hatcher’s status? Supposed to practice today, with chance of being back for Sunday.
Cry 'Havoc!'
Yep, Hatcher
is a real keeper. Two sacks in very limited time. Ryan loves to rotate all of his guys and Hatcher hopefully will get his share Sunday.
I love the thought that of the top 5 teams in the NFC, (of which I consider the Cowboys one), I think we have by far the best defense and now that we have all of our Offensive weapons, I am so stoked about our chances.
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
I think everyone is cautiously optimistic. Confidence will come if they
start to close games out rather than, with the exception of the Rams game, allow the other team to stay competetive until late into the 4th Q.
Wish you were here and comfortably numb.
Yep, sure, it'd be nice...
… but the real test of a “good” team is what you can do when it’s all on the line and you’ve got your shot. Scoring plenty, garnering stats, putting opponents away early, sure, they’re nice. But give me that team that, given that one shot to win, can do it, consistently or with higher probablitiy, I’m good with that “good”. Very good. Betting good.
Cry 'Havoc!'
i still have nightmares of jeremeriah trotter blitzing our center and knocking him on his b@#% for years....
i hope ratliff does the same to kelce… frequently…
"They need security in the world, Craig!"
One of the reasons
why teams finally figured out that when your under center you can be sacked easier than when in the shotgun. (Would love to see the stats on that. A year ago, I think, Payton Manning had gone an unbeliveable number of games of not getting sacked when in the Shotgun).
When your in the Shotgun, there is “NO BLIND SIDE” because you are not turning your back while back peddling…DUH! You are alread set with your body squared up until just before you throw.
I would just screem evertime I would see Aikman being sacked by a guy that timed his leap over center and get Aikman as he was just pulling away from Center.
Parcells said “You are limiting your run plays when you are in the Shotgun” and that he didnt like it. Well, that is why Parcells was not a coordinator thank heavens.
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
Surprise, surprise. Bill Parcells hated Shotgun because it favors passing.
"The tone is business," Garrett said. "Let's get to work. The Giants are going to be at the Meadowlands on Sunday at 4:15. They're an awfully good football team. We have to get ready for them."
by Rohpuri on Oct 26, 2011 3:54 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
Wake me up when its sunday
We're here to win football games. The way to do that is to tell him and to get on him at the right times. I do that when you guys (media) don't see and watch.''
What else makes a strong leader?
"You win,'' Romo said. "You're a very good leader once you win.
"That's' what we're going to do.''
Nevermind
i couldnt sleep
We're here to win football games. The way to do that is to tell him and to get on him at the right times. I do that when you guys (media) don't see and watch.''
What else makes a strong leader?
"You win,'' Romo said. "You're a very good leader once you win.
"That's' what we're going to do.''
by TARHEEL PAUL on Oct 26, 2011 8:30 AM CDT up reply actions
Good stuff...
However OCC I think Using percentages instead of bringing every one up to 250 based on their trend would have been more efficient. I say this not to down play an Outstanding article, but because trends change so often. For example: in 2003(ish) Corey Dillon of the Browns had a rushing extravaganza against a Ravens d that would End up being one of the top run Ds in the league that year. Or we could also say that Romo has a trend of throwing ints late in games and can’t handle 4th Quarter pressure, however, Romo leads the league in 4th quarter comebacks since 2008! Once again I am not trying to take away from your excellently written article, I just think percentages of splash plays would have been more effective. :D great stuff though and I can’t wait to bring it it the sheagles! Go Cowboys!!!!!
by mho on Oct 26, 2011 7:30 AM CDT via iPhone app reply actions
i dont like the romo stat (assuming its correct)
and you kind of said why yourself. of course he leads in comebacks, they hardly blow anyone out.
A lot of that stat isnt just
about Romo. The last time I checked the OC has a lot to do with being ahead or behind, not to mention that if the QB is on his back all the time, (like he was in that Minnisota Playoff blow out that we were on the wrong side of), then it is even more not just the QB.
Teams win, not coaches or QB’s. Wonder how many SB wins Brady has if he was drafted by the Bengals?
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
That was a
rhetorical question. LOL.
Hopefully we all know the answer to that one.
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
Apparently you missed our recent NE visitors
And there’s been a few Cowboys fans that’ve some choice evalutions of the man, regardless of team. Soemwhat delusional, but either way, it ain’t reality. Not even my assessment that while he’s a decent pivot, one whose made the most of the opportunity, in another situation he’d not have come close to this Tom Terrific crap. Nowhere near. Period.
Cry 'Havoc!'
We are definately
thinking along the same lines. What does make him a very above average QB is his ability to read defenses and his accuracy.
Other than that, the NE offensive scheme like the west coast scheme for Montana have a lot to do with the QB’s success. IMHO.
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
Oh, and more important than that,
is the protection he gets from his O-line.
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
Your right,
good point!
Walsh was asked once if it was his “system” or Montana that was the key to the wins.
His resonse was, (paraphrasing), “Well, let’s just say that if Montana was on a different team, he would have far less wins”.
Montana moves to KC and no SB’s. He was so mad and even downplayed Steve Young, (Who I thought was the better QB), by saying that Young’s SB should have been his!.
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
The better question is: Wonder how many SB wins Belichick has if someone else drafted Brady?
Everyone forgets BB’s losing record before Brady.
"It’s football season and usually football players play football during football season." - Tony Romo
"The next starter is up!" - Coach Garrett
That is why
it is important to remembe, Coaches (Belichick), or QB’s (Brady) dont win games, Let alone Superbowls, TEAMS DO.
It takes all three phases and then some to win or lose.
One could rightly argue that Organizations win and lose. Drafts, Scouting, etc. It takes everything that is put into winning and loosing. Not just the QB and not just the Head Coach.
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
That is one of my pet peeves
and really gets to me when I hear, Well, Romo isnt any good because HE hasnt won any Superbowls.
Or, Dan Marino isnt really a GREAT QB because HE never won a Superbowl. No one takes into account that Marino did all he could, but couldnt do it by himself, and niether can Brady.
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
Thanks for...
All the comments piggybacked off of my mornings post. It’s sad to say, but that’s the best thing to happen to me all day. Lol!
by mho on Oct 26, 2011 5:28 PM CDT via iPhone app up reply actions
Sorry cant agree with ya there
Football is the only sport that a coach can win the game ive seen it over and over in High School systems and even more in college. NFL we see it also just not as much cause the coaching is mostly on par with each other. Coaches that can understand talent and places the best guy he has and addapts his system to there streghtns wins games. Look at the eagles they have pro bowlers every where on the defensive side give rob ryan half there pro bowlers and all of ours see what he can do Castillo though doesnt have the know how to put the guy who does what he wants to be done in the right place to get it done. Coaches CAN win games not that they do win games. They CAN and have through out football history.
Everyone can be the difference maker,
but they dont do it by themselves is my point. If the coach makes a beautiful decision and the play fails because someone fumbles, or throws a pick, then it is all for not.
But the guy that hired the coach gets SOME of the credit, so my point was none of them are responsible in a vaccuum, they have help in one way or another.
See the neuance?
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
It is also interesting the Eagles
Should give up less splash plays due to Vick’s unique ability. You want to keep pocket integrity with Vick and that makes it a lot harder to rush the passer.
MacGruber!
First person to be happy Holland is back.
I’ve always preferred a line that was a little heavy in the ass. I know the argument can be made that the footwork is better and the reaction times can be quicker with lighter guys, but I feel comfy with a mountain or two.
The Football fan that hates Football fans.
by thablackwizard on Oct 26, 2011 8:09 AM CDT via mobile reply actions
About pressure from the left....
I was a little surprised to see that the pressure from the left is about on par with the pressure from the right. I always thought that O-lines and QBs were more susceptible to pressure from the left- or blind side.
In years past because the left side is usually the blind side, and because most teams are “right handed” ( they run to thier strong (TE) side, the defenses would put thier best pass rusher on the blind side, and their best run stuffer on the stong side. But, as more defenses began to recognize that since the RT was usually the “mauler” and the blind side LT was usually the “quick of foot”, they would either move their best pass rusher to take advantage of the “slow of foot” guy (Columbo), or they would draft more “speed” rushers to attack both sides more and rely on the linebackers more on the “stong” side.
So, your perception was correct for the past.
Another great post OCC, I’m a huge fan of yours.
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
And in order to have two "quick of foot" Tackles,
Garrett has gone to the “lighter” and more mobile Offensive line in general, and with that he has moved away from the “Man Blocking” scheme of the past, and has gone with the Shanahan “Zone Blocking – Strech” plays that take advantage of the more mobile line.
The Zone Blocking scheme is sound from a physics stand point because it recognizes that when you block the man to your side, and move him sideways, it is easier to move him than if you try to block him straight on and try to move him directly backwards.
That is also a reason why so many teams use the “influence” play on Suh, and then “Wham” block him with the Fullback or H-back once he in through the hole. Same result, block him to the side.
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
Oops,
I mis-spelled two words above. Strech should be stretch and “in” should be “is”.
Sure hope this site doesnt have too many pedantic Nazi’s around.
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
Only when it comes to player's names.
"It’s football season and usually football players play football during football season." - Tony Romo
"The next starter is up!" - Coach Garrett
hmmm....it didnt like my "close quote" for some reason.
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
Happens sometimes with the SBNation HTML Editor
Occasionally, something won’t close properly, and the rest of the thread will be all bold, or all italics. At least, we’re not all in block-quote format. It did finally close when you posted that comment.
Cowboys and Longhorns - getting up off the turf to win another day.
Spurs? It's football season!
It would be nice
if the moderator could (if possible) go in and edit the comment to fix it. I wanted the block quote on the first part of my comment.
“I was….or blind side.” should be what is block quoted. Weird. Probably was me and not the editor. These editors still can’t read your mind for some reason.
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
That’s not possible. We can edit fanposts and fanshots after they are published, but comments cannot be edited, only deleted.
by One.Cool.Customer on Oct 26, 2011 11:04 AM CDT up reply actions
It is probably possible to set it up
for the commenter to edit his own comments because I have seen that before, but there is probably a good reason why we cant do that on here?
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
Everything is possible, of course. Just not here at SBNation.
by One.Cool.Customer on Oct 26, 2011 11:11 AM CDT up reply actions
Oh man, imagine, deleted comments
That way there’s no telling if I’ve been right, wrong, plain looney, none of it. Does your power extend beyond th econfines of Asgard BtB, Oh Wodenish One?
Then again, some points get lost when a comment’s deleted, don’t they?
Cry 'Havoc!'
That is probably
the reason most sites dont allow edits of comments either. Once in the blogosphere, your stuck with any “stupid” or “silly” comments forever. UGH!
But, then you cant go back and make yourself look better either. Double edge sword.
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
The ideal
would be to allow edits for some small period of time. Say, 15 minutes or something like that, so you could correct silly spelling errors or nonsense sentences that need clarification badly.
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
Nope, wrong
Like in Life, once spoke, live with it. Brain farts and all. Makes for chanced smarts and stupidities, ribbing evidence, “hey, you were right”‘s, the works. That’s ideal, the sweet simple conundrum of what mighta been, what-I-meant-to-say/do not being and getting one chance to get it right the first time. Brings the mistakes we get an opportunity to learn by. So, I gotta disagree.
Cry 'Havoc!'
I can see
that side too. I just like the other side a little more.
But again, like most things in life, there are always two sides to everything, even the thinnest pancake.
Up/Down, Left/Right, In/Out, Matter/Anti-Matter….
Called the “Universial Opposites” or a more well know as “Yen / Yang”
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
Without which
there would be no choice and without choice, there is no freedom.
If all choices were clear cut, we would all be alike. UGH!
Like the jury looking at the same evidence and having a hung jury, 6 for and 6 against, but looking at the same facts and evidence….
Conclusions are what make opinions interesting.
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
Point being,
when it comes to many opinions, there often isnt a right or wrong, just which side you like more.
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
Mine. Obviously.
Unless I’m wrong. In which case, being shown the way to see in the right light, I’ll change to right and therefore thereafter be.
Cry 'Havoc!'
I once thought
I was wrong, but then after I thought about it, I realized I wasnt.
LOL.
Ask my wife, I am never right.
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
That "other side" ain't reality, however
Once done, a thing cannot be undone. Revision’s not re-vision, rather corrected version of vision.
Cry 'Havoc!'
The point is when
is it done? In some cases it isnt done until after you revise it, unless your saying there are NEVER any revisions?
That is why some talks are rewritten several times, and some of us believe in being able to correct our mis-speaks. Doesnt mean that you should be able to un-speak, but I am glad I have the opportunity to clarify and sometimes that is before it is caught by others.
As in fixing the mistake before others can respond. It just makes it nicer if you can delete or revise it before it gets commented on.
Again, doesnt mean one way of the other is right, because that is why there are two sides to everything. And we get to choose which side we want to take.
If I say I should get up today a half an hour later than I did yesterday, would my answer be right or wrong? Neither….
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
And the best answer for every question
that has ever been invented…..
“It all depends!”
You can use that answer on almost any question….
LOL!
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
The above is a great example
of what I am saying.
I said….“If I say”
But what was in my mind as to what I wanted to say was…
“If I ask” not “say”
See, just because your thought was not what was intended, does not mean you have to be saddled with a mis-speak if you can catch it before you tell everyone that it was not what you had in mind. If people dont trust you, then it can be a problem, but if they knew what you really meant, then you should be able to clarify and not be saddled with a remark that someonce can quote out of context…..
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
And again, I am not saying I
am right, just saying my side has valid points too, and it is personal preference as to which one position others take.
Now, when it comes to morals, there is always a right or wrong, by definition.
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
I was going to comment before you, but stopped myself.
I don’t want to get into religion, but morals are not universal.
"It’s football season and usually football players play football during football season." - Tony Romo
"The next starter is up!" - Coach Garrett
No, but by definition
they have a fixed standard to measure against. And that is the purpose of having rules and standards.
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
How can morals be a fixed standard when different societies and religions
disagree on what is morally right and wrong?
"It’s football season and usually football players play football during football season." - Tony Romo
"The next starter is up!" - Coach Garrett
Each religion has
its own standards and then the question becomes right or wrong based upon that standard.
However, one could argue that if there are say 10,000 different religions, each with their own view or standard, then it would logically follow that it is possible that one religion has the right standard and just because someone else thinks differently doesnt detract from the fact that there is or might be a correct standard.
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
And to make a point...
Tell me one religion that doesnt think Murder is wrong.
Some moral concepts are universal, at least that is what I have found….
Could be wrong, the mere fact that people argue over who is right and who is wrong kinda makes a point in and of itself that people belive that there is a right and wrong.
But only morals have an absolute position, if one can accept that there may be one correct standard….
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
Sometimes it semantics,
sometimes its definitions, and sometimes it just brain-farts.
LOL!
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
"Morality is absolutely not absolute"
In my opinion it is….
But then that is why we discuss.
If I catch a fish and no one sees me do it, that doesnt in anyway take away from the fact that I did.
If someone sees that a religion is “the standard”, just because a lot of others dont see it that way, doesnt change the fact that some have had the “proof.”
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
Some religions do think murder in some cases is good.
For instance suicide bombers. They go blow up as many innocent people as possible and are promised a reward in the afterlife.
Suicide bombers are acting
in the capacity that it is a “War” and they dont agree that they are killing innocents, which is by definition of Murder.
In the bible for instance, one of the commandments is “Thou Shalt not Murder”, but when translated to English, it was translated into “kill”.
Point being that Murder is killing someone who is innocent, where killing can be justified….Self Defense, accidently killed by a car accident, etc.
Dont think any Religion would admit that Murder is OK, just some Religions have a wierd view of who is innocent.
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
See?
Human self-justification based on shifting definitions and perspectives, even within your own reasoning. Any human judgment call is, by definition, not an absolute.
Unless it’s a zebra’s against us in a critical situation. Then, it’s absolutely wrong mistaken. As my loud explanation to them screen-to-field instructs, despite their not heeding the lesson.
Cry 'Havoc!'
Unless the action is
justified by a set of rules that are rigid and firm.
Anyone can rightly argue that War will have casualties and that if civilains are killed, then by definition, it is not Murder because most definitions consider “collateral damage” as more by chance and accident, of being in the wrong place at the wrong time….
Again that old…other side of the coin rears its head.
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
And the Zebras are absolutely
right if the call is in our favor!
LOL!
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
If it's not a universal constant...
… embedded in the very structure of the physical universe, it’s not an absolute. All else is subject to Change. Which may well be the only absolute, the only constant.
For reference (click here).
Cry 'Havoc!'
Great reference.
I can use that to support my point.
If we assume for just a moment that there is a Supreme Being and he is perfect, then it would follow that he would have a perfect set of rules.
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
You just err'd.
One, in assuming the existence of a “supreme being”. Two, in assuming perfection (which,btw, ask your wife or any female about, and use the term “he”, please). Three, in assuming that so flawed a creature as Man might know the mind of such a supreme being. For while what a man might see as perfection may well be imperfect from the perspective of said being. More simply, no, it would not.
You were saying?
Cry 'Havoc!'
Since everything is possible, then
we certianly can assume that there could be a supreme being.
And just because it may not be P.C. to use the term “He” there are certianlly documentation of “eye witnesses” to support the “He” statement.
And if man was told about perfection by said Supreme Being, then unless someone can prove that “he” doesnt exist, which is impossible, (Cant prove a negative), then the Assumption can be logically made.
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
I love deep discussions.
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
I should not have said the word "prove"
because it is a “conclusion” and is not the same as fact or evidence.
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
Again, error.
Assumption all is possible. Assumption of said “documentation” and “eye witnesses”. Your position is inherently based on human judgment, if not belief-based, and thereby circular.
Suggest you revisit the fundamentals of logic.
Cry 'Havoc!'
About those suicide bombers...
the key concept to understand is sovereignty. Understand that and you will be able to perceive the similarities in all kinds of fundamentalism, either that of the suicide bombers or that of the religious right. Begin with what happened to the concept as a result of the Enlightenment. It becomes privatized, individualized. That is both good and bad. The good came first, the so-called “rights of man” and its concomitant institutions and governments, then the bad, though much later, the suicide bombers. With the latter, we seem to moving from a privatized conception of sovereignty back to quasi-public one, quasi- because it seeks to express itself outside of political institutions. Think of freedom of opinion or faith as conducted on the Internet. A lot of stuff to think about. Hope I was able to help.
"[Sean] Lee has more value now...than our entire 2010 draft"--- An Eagles' fan.
As in fixing the mistake before others can respond. It just makes it nicer if you can delete or revise it before it gets commented on.
I am okay with the immediate reply to self. It shows your human nature and in my case, gives me a chance to practice one of my favorite forms of humor: self deprecation.
"It’s football season and usually football players play football during football season." - Tony Romo
"The next starter is up!" - Coach Garrett
It is "Yin" and Yang.
But at least you know there is no “g” on the first one. Too many people say Ying and Yang.
"It’s football season and usually football players play football during football season." - Tony Romo
"The next starter is up!" - Coach Garrett
That is what typing at 50 words
per minute will sometimes do to a person and leaves me in the position of having to say….“I knew that and then have to worry that someone will not believe me that it was just a typeo.” :)
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
No worries. As you know, people develop reputations
and you have a good one. I am sure that many people here know who your are from DC dot com. You need to spend more time here, it is way better.
"It’s football season and usually football players play football during football season." - Tony Romo
"The next starter is up!" - Coach Garrett
I plan on
being here a lot more than there from now on.
I was hooked on trying to get some of those nay-sayers, (and they by far are out weighting the half full guys like me) into seeing a different perspective.
But, I have just about given up. You can only beat your head into a wall so much and then you have to remember the definition of the word “Crazy”…..
“Doing the same thing over and over and expecting a diffeerent result.”
I must be crazy….look it up in the dictionary and you’ll see a picture of me, I guess.
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
That way there’s no telling if I’ve been right, wrong, plain looney, none of it.
All of it.
"It’s football season and usually football players play football during football season." - Tony Romo
"The next starter is up!" - Coach Garrett
Correct
See the downside of revisionism and censorship? Rhetorical question, considering who I’m asking.
Cry 'Havoc!'
Again hope you at least see
the other side.
My main point is all about the word “DONE”
When is anything done?
There are two obvious positions on this concept.
First one could logically take the position that something is NOT done until they say it is….
Example: I show a friend a painting I am doing, and they say, “looks nice”, but if I tell the truth when I say back to them….“Its not done yet” do I get to take the position of it is not done until I say it is, or the mere fact that I showed it to someone means it is done? I think it is obvious that it is perfectly fine to take that position.
The other obvious position is that once shown or said, then it is done. But the above position proves that there is indeed as I have been saying, two really good sides to the “Done” concept or position.
Unless on can say that the first position is without any merit, and then an outside observer would protest “bias” in that opinion.
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
Gary, you are talking to the right guys (on the right blog).
We see your point and are just enjoying the discussion. It’s what we do here.
But if discussions are your bag, you need to join “Viva El Birdos”, the St. Louis Cardinals blog. Yeah, I know they are the enemy (and it’s “only” baseball) but they get into very interesting discussions about a crazy amount of wide ranging topics.
"It’s football season and usually football players play football during football season." - Tony Romo
"The next starter is up!" - Coach Garrett
No, I am just being me...
Being stubborn when someone says the word “Wrong”
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
Then get ready, because you and tanstaafl are about to become BFFs.
;)
"It’s football season and usually football players play football during football season." - Tony Romo
"The next starter is up!" - Coach Garrett
I can only go so long
and then feel guilty for detracting from one of my favorite topics…..NFL Football in general and Dallas Cowoys in specific.
Dont mean to hi-jack the thread at all, just hoping some of my unique perspectives will be appreciated, because I am definately not the typical 67 year old college grad.
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
You are always welcome here.
"It’s football season and usually football players play football during football season." - Tony Romo
"The next starter is up!" - Coach Garrett
Wow, my first double post!
And the time stamp switched to CDT instead of EST. And I am on a PC, not a mobile phone.
"It’s football season and usually football players play football during football season." - Tony Romo
"The next starter is up!" - Coach Garrett
You don't know me
You’ve little experience as yet in that regard. I almost always see the other side. No need to be concerned that I don’t “get” where you’re coming from.
Cry 'Havoc!'
I didnt intend for it to be taken
that way. I have a great respect for what you are saying….
Been there done that, meaning I have had the other view.
I think from your posts that you are a deep thinker and I really like that in a person.
Please never take anything I say as not having respect for what you or anyone says.
Deal?
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
Let me clarify.
When I talk about things, I make the assumption taht the person I am discussing with has more than likely not argued my side, and that is the point that I am trying to make.
Not that they dont understand it, but rather they probably have not tried to defend it.
One of the lessons in life as far as being able to be clear and able to understand life’s greatest questions, is that to really know both sides you must “take” or argue “both” sides before you really can have a feel for which has the greater list of good points.
I have argued both sides on just about anything someone can think of, because I believe it is the best way to avoid what most people do…..which is this……
Most people will assume a worldview on whatever they encounter, and when someone else comments on anything, they will automatically agree with any new information that supports their set view, and summarily dismiss any counter argument. I never do that because I think it leads to narrow-mindedness, so I take the other side with myself if no one else is around and see where it leads me.
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
And the most important concept
in the universe is the Yin and Yang.
It is my favorite subject because if you took all of lifes greatest concepts, at the very apex in the hierarchy of ideas / concepts is the concept of Choice because without it we are all just puppets on a string.
Without two sides to choose from there is no choice. No choice, no freedom. So, arguing both sides is of the utmost in understanding life. Without fulling appreciating both sides we cant make an intelligent choice.
I better stop….I am sucking all the air out of this post….sorry.
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
I didn't. So, deal.
Understand your perspective, where the stance comes from, etc. Will but caution, Assumption introduces error. Including those on deep thought.
Now, please, you needn’t be concerned. Other than about how we’re going to come out with a minimal +1 on the points differential. This game and every.
Cry 'Havoc!'
I never concern myself
with who is winning a point, merely that if the side differs from mine, that I be allowed to disagree and present my side for purely enlightenment purposes.
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
And we almost always must
make some assumptions or we would be constantly writing a dictionary.
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
None the less,
I agree caution is needed. I should have said that as well, BUT I couldnt edit my post…LOL!
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
Interesting...
It doesn’t seem like Herremans has been struggling, the guy that most Eagles fans would say that was would be DeVan & he thankfully got benched. Do you know how many pressures have came from the other team blitzing because that has been the weak spot for the OL
Nope, I don’t have the data about pressures given up on blitzes. I do know this though: 7 of Vick’s 8 interceptions came when he was blitzed. Only 2 of 6 for Romo.
by One.Cool.Customer on Oct 26, 2011 11:10 AM CDT up reply actions
Doug Free
Doug was responsible for the pressure that lead to Tony’s cracked rib/punctured lung. Kosier’s guy got the hit, but Doug’s man made Tony step up into the pocket and thus into the hit. I don’t know about the stats, but I don’t recall Doug playing this poorly last year. Another case of a guy excelling in a contract year.
by Mighty Blue Star on Oct 26, 2011 10:50 AM CDT reply actions
A lot of the success
that Free had last year was playing next to Kosier. Free has not regressed, he just is having more trouble in the first part of the year, but he more than likely will get stronger as the year goes on.
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
Having said that,
Most people expect Smith to move to the LT position and move Free back to the RT spot because Smith is our most talented Olineman and he will be our perennial ProBowl LT for years to come. As I said before the draft, he is the best looking Tackle I have seen in years.
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
Just not this year.
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
Could it also be...
that they are not slanting protection to his side as much as they did last year and just leaving him on an island. From Rafe’s analysis of many games last year, I was left with the impression that they were doing that, or chipping with a RB/TE, or just lining up a TE to help on that side.
"[Sean] Lee has more value now...than our entire 2010 draft"--- An Eagles' fan.
if he was simply going for the contract he would have signed with the Eagles....
they were offering him more money…Free has been struggling this yea no doubt but from what I understand besides playing with a new face almost every week beside him, he has also been struggling with back issues from what I heard….don’t be so down on him….nothing up to this point indicates that he was just a contract player….
Good Luck to the 53. Stand with Honor, Play With Pride. Bring It Home
by TruBluToTheCore on Oct 26, 2011 11:22 AM CDT up reply actions
+1
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
Good Points
I sure hope you guys are right.
by Mighty Blue Star on Oct 26, 2011 11:39 AM CDT up reply actions
The RT's role is becoming increasingly important in the pass happy NFL.
Pressuring the QB from every angle is paramount for every DC. I’m not surprised at all that
the stats reflect this. The popularity of the 3-4 in today’s game places increasing pressure on the right side of the OL.
Wish you were here and comfortably numb.
Yea, if you look at my "Block Comment"
above, I have already pointed this out but you have added a little more to my comment by bringing up the 3-4 side of it.
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
last time we played them
McCoy ran down our throats and DeSean Jackson killed us
we cant have that again
somebody needs to spell Vick
Bruce Carter+Sean Lee=BRUCE LEE!!!!
Follow me at my blog
http://chiacrackscowboysblog.wordpress.com/
by Archie Barberio on Oct 26, 2011 12:28 PM CDT reply actions
Outstanding
One of the best I’ve read in a long time, OCC.
You’re right that we tend to base these things on the most memorable of plays. For offensive linemen, we’ll remember the the sack given up or the holding penalty that negated what might have been a game-changing play. For the FB, we’ll remember the missed block that gets Romo creamed and forget the three blitzers he picked up and the 2 blocks that allowed big plays in the running game.
But how do you change that?
If each of our O-lineman played like Free and did quite well but gave up a sack, well, that’s 5 sacks that our QB (he of the ribs, clavicle and pinkie) would have had to endure. I’m not sure Tony could make it through that kind of beating.
For linemen in the NFL, this, much like the huge burden Romo carries with being the QB, is what it is.
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
It is what it is.
I completely agree with your points, and even one bad play out of 65 can be too much.
But I also know that when I watch a game, I cannot keep track of all 22 men. In fact, I have a hard enough time not watching the ball and keeping track of the line play or the blocking or something else. For example, after I wrote the Grading Rams @ Cowboys yesterday in which I once again praised Bennett’s blocking, I realized that I could not remember a single block Bennett has made in his Cowboys career. I remember a lot of drops though. So I went back and watched part of the game, with an eye specifically on Bennett. That dude can block, man, it’s not even debateable. But I do not see things like that during the game because my eyes usually focus on th ball and where the action is.
Knowing my own limitations as an observer is one of the main reasons I appreciate these advanced stats from PFF, FO and others so much. The metrics may not be perfect, far from it, but they add an additional level of comprehension and insight to my understanding and, much more importantly, my enjoyment of the game.
by One.Cool.Customer on Oct 26, 2011 1:55 PM CDT up reply actions
Great points by
5Blings and you OCC….
As usual.
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
Which is where stats and film allow for analyticial insight
And the moment of the game’s event may allow passion to reign free.
Cry 'Havoc!'
Maybe Bennett just needs to put on 35 pounds and grow into the O-lineman that he is
He might be an upgrade over some of the depth we have there.
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
I have posted before
Bennett could be this generation’s Rayfield Wright.
Wright came to the Cowboys as a tight end (wore #85). One day, Coach Landry told him that he would like to try him at tackle. He changed to #70, never looked back, and the rest is history.
Cowboys and Longhorns - getting up off the turf to win another day.
Spurs? It's football season!
Linemen in Garrett's system have to be intelligent
That may be the dealbreaker for Telly B.
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
i dont pay attenetion to bennett
because i know he isnt getting the ball let alone a play called for him unless he’s split wide in the red zone or some busted play that turns into a helter-skelter screen
The realist keepin it real amongst the surrealists
R.I.P. Big Homey Nate Dogg: "Cuz Iiiiiiiiii have ne-evv-ver met a giiiiiiiiiirrrrrrllllllllllllllllllll tha-at I loved in the whole wide wooorrrlllllddddddd"
by starbury_to_s-jaxci2000 on Oct 26, 2011 9:22 PM CDT up reply actions
Very informative post about the offensive lines.
It seems to me, teams are doing 1 of three things that have caused RT pressures to go up.
a) Some teams are choosing to put their best pass rusher on the RT b/c these guys are typically better run blockers, and slow of foot.
b) Teams are attacking both the LT and RT positions with speed rushers forcing teams to choose which End/OLB to double team.
c) Teams are doing a combination of options a and b, like the Cowboys: Ware and Spencer come off the edges; Ware also moves around to get the best matchup (finally someone thought to do that).
As far as attacking Michael Vick this Sunday:
a) I’d have Ware, Spencer, and Butler rush Vick and force him to his right given his struggles throwing that side. I’d move all three of them around, with one of them along with Jay Ratiff attacking from the middle so he can’t step up into the pocket.
b) I’d have Sean Lee spy Vick with other inside linebackers (James, Carter, and Brooking taking turns blanketing Brent Celek).
c) I’d put Newman, Jenkins, and Frank Walker on Jackson, Maclin, and Avant. I’d use Scandrick to blitz Vick from the left side and have him, along with the pass rusher chase Vick to his right, forcing him run for cover. With the the defensive ends playing containment so he can’t get to the edges.
d) I’d have Elam and Sensabaugh play cover two over the top to take away the deep passes.
The goal, force the Eagles to use McCoy, because I don’t believe this team is patient enough. The offense is built to strike quick.
b) Other teams are
"The tone is business," Garrett said. "Let's get to work. The Giants are going to be at the Meadowlands on Sunday at 4:15. They're an awfully good football team. We have to get ready for them."
by Rohpuri on Oct 26, 2011 6:22 PM CDT via mobile reply actions
Why not...
variations such as left-side Ware pressure forcing Vick into a rightside corner blitz, a leftside corner blitz into a rightside Ware, Ware centered with Ratliff hitting either A or dropping back letting Spencer/Lee/Butler come, throw Hatcher into the mix, and on and on. Point is, it could be a looong day for Mikey, esp given his brain and ability to read coverage. Given we blanket his downfield options for those seconds, watch McCoy/Celek and cut his (Vick’s) lanes once he’s rolling, he’s not only prone to mistake, but irritablity. And you’re right, we force them into one-dimension, McCoy, likelihood is they lose.
Now, to execute, which is easier said than done.
Cry 'Havoc!'
Yup. As soon as I wrote that, it also dawned on me to come up with variations like you suggested.
I think our guys are adept to excuting this game plan.
I’d also suggest, that our corners hit and jam the receivers at the line of scrimmage.
"The tone is business," Garrett said. "Let's get to work. The Giants are going to be at the Meadowlands on Sunday at 4:15. They're an awfully good football team. We have to get ready for them."
by Rohpuri on Oct 26, 2011 7:24 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
Roh, you, we all, could go on and on coming up with guesses at...
… what Rob’s cooking up, fill pages, and serve only to list possibilities, muddle our poor brains (mine, at least) and I’d be willing to be he’d still surprise us with something if we looked close in hindsight. Esp when it’s walk time for his talk regarding Philly earlier this year. Like the jamming, esp on a certain wee pest, set him off a clean break downfield.
Cry 'Havoc!'
Wow Kelce is 280 pounds?
Ratliff will eat him alive.
by CaliCowboysFan92 on Oct 26, 2011 7:28 PM CDT reply actions
Which is why I was asking the visiting eagles fans about Jackson maybe seeing time?
They say nay.
Cry 'Havoc!'
Great post
If the play works, never run it again. If it fails, keep running it.
First and goal at the one. Run it three times in a row, and then kick a field goal. Sound familiar?
by CoachGary on Oct 26, 2011 10:43 PM CDT via mobile reply actions

by 




























