Gamebreaker Posted April 24, 2002 Share Posted April 24, 2002 Just wanted to add a little side note in this discussion, I haven't read all the posts yet, but I want to address a point Art said about Smoot being our best corner last season. Smoot did give up less plays than Champ, yet Camp was the one shadowing each team's best WR in the second half of the season. The only other corner who does that is Charles Woodson. Until Smoot takes on that type of role, Champ was still the best CB last season. I'm not downplaying anything Smoot did, he had a great rookie year, and as a rookie looked better than 80% of the corners in the league. He just wasn't Champ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eagle_typeX Posted April 24, 2002 Share Posted April 24, 2002 Originally posted by SPare Guys, I hate the cowboys as much as anyone on this board. However, as of right now, I think that they've got a really decent team. This will NOT be the same team that lost 22 games over the last two years. Their games will be 10-7 snooze fests, but they won't be losing as much. I would even go so far as to say that they will be a better team in 2002 than both the Giants and Eagles (I really think that the Eagles are going to take a fall). I still have to think that the Redskins will finally break the string, but I just don't know. :puke: Dallas better than the eagles next year??? Are you redskins fans dillusional? We own them like they own you. I wouldn't be suprised if they stole one from us being division rivals and a substancial upgrade from last year, but to say they'll end up better.... Our offense comes back totally intact, our defense lost Trotter. Thats all. We got Barber, but he might not even win the starting job because we already have one maybe two guys that were close to getting it last year. If he is not an upgrade, he won't start. We replaced our SS with a 4 time probowler who had an injury so thats a wildcard. I can't wait to play you guys:finger: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RySkins Posted April 24, 2002 Share Posted April 24, 2002 The anticipation is mutual X-man. The Eagles have still done nothing to shore up their purous run defense, so until that happens, I'll continue to like our chances in head-to-head matchups with the birds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eagle_typeX Posted April 24, 2002 Share Posted April 24, 2002 I agree RySkins, but don't you have almost the same problem? Anyway the head to heads should be fun and close. With all this hype, I'm looking foward to see your "new" team. The offseason is way too long:cheers: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurman Posted April 24, 2002 Share Posted April 24, 2002 Yes, we have similar problems with run defense and Trotter probably won't improve it too much. But as far as head-to-head matchups go, while we have a running game and a sub-par run defense, you have no running game to speak of -- and a sub-par run defense. While we may not have as good a defense (and quite possibly for this year an offense) as productive as yours, we should still matchup very well to your personnel with our personnel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cowboykilla Posted April 24, 2002 Share Posted April 24, 2002 SPare, I agree with you that the Cowboys will be better next year, I think we can all agree on that. Maybe. HOWEVER, I dont know if you meant that they'd be beating US more, or just the league in general, but hear this: There is a special air about the cowboy/redskin rivalry which always makes the outcomes of the games indeterminable. I dont care if the redskins had 22 pro-bowlers playing and jerry jones suited up to play QB, I think the boys would have a shot. This also goes in reverse. I remember we used to beat the cowboys all the time during their run in the mid 90's. So I dont think we can give the cowboys the "W" just yet. I have a feeling, the better they get, the easier it will be to beat them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted April 24, 2002 Share Posted April 24, 2002 GB, I understand your point and it's not a bad one. But, Smoot was a better performer on the field for us than Bailey was. Bailey didn't play as well as the previous two years. He played the other team's best receiver, and he gave up some big plays. Smoot was a lock down guy on whoever was near him last year and though he didn't always get the challenge of playing the best player on the other team, he took the challenge he was presented and won almost always while Bailey won only most of the time . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Posted April 24, 2002 Share Posted April 24, 2002 Originally posted by Art Ken, reply within..... "Wow, The Cowboys sure get no respect around these parts, huh. How many times in a row do we have to beat you guys before you give us a little credit? I mean really. " I think it was mentioned, a 10-22 team is nothing to respect. It doesn't matter if you beat us when we keep finishing ahead of you. Cowboy fans seem to think it doesn't matter to finish in last place in the division. But, sadly for you, it does. ------------------------------------------------------------------ Fair point, but to get where you want to go, you have to get the Dallas Monkey off your back. At this point, the Monkey has morphed into a 500lb. Gorrilla though. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Art, I guess I have to remind you that WE, not YOU, are the ones who had the 4th ranked defense in the NFL last year." I guess I have to remind you that YOU not us, made nine interceptions. You, not us, had fewer sacks. Your defense was fine, but, your defense wasn't better than ours. Hell, we had three atrocious games that defy reason, our defensive ends were injured for parts of the year on an already questionable line, and we still were the better defense. Remember, there's more to playing defense than giving up yards. Strictly speaking, surrendering fewer yards is great. But, if you're not really stopping people along the way, it's not meaningful. You were no more happy with your defense last year than most Redskin fans with their No. 4 ranked defense the year before. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OK, Art, I got ya. It's Ok that the Redskins had injuries and off games but the same doesn't hold true for the Cowboys? Hello, we had injuries too. We didn't make excuses, the next guy off the bench or practice squad filled in. We didn't stop people? Since when? I guess the fact that so many teams started in our half of the field has nothing to do with giving up a lot of points, huh? You want to say that our offense was inept, I'm right there with you. It was horrible. Biggest reason why we gave up a lot of points. Turnovers and just plain ineffectiveness. There isn't a defense alive that can withstand a team starting in its own territory all game, for an entire season, and not give up a lot of points. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Your defense was soft and passive. You sacrificed making plays for giving up fewer yards. It's a careful balancing act. When you lack talent to man up offensive players and you can't generate pressure, you are at a team's mercy unless you go to an umbrella coverage and pray you have speed at linebacker to be disruptive. Let me remind you that if you had it to do over, you'd have picked a lot of defenses ahead of your own. Your initial response will be "no way, not us, not me," and I'll simply point you to what your own team is doing to actually get a good defense as all the evidence I require. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I actually find this statement kind of funny. My initial response is, "No, really?" I know I stated in another thread that we were playing 22 million in the hole last year. I guess the logical thing to do when you have a lot of "Dead Money" and are playing young guys on defense is to man up and blitz like crazy? Am i right with this assumption, Art? Unlike most teams, our Coaching staff recognized this and devised a defensive scheme that would bend and not break. Worked like a charm. I guess my real point here is if we could be extremely competitive last year with "lesser" talent, we should be even better when we bring in more talent(spend $) this year? Makes perfect sense to me. We didn't sack the qb last year, that was one of the teams shortcummings. They also didn't create a lot of turnovers. They are addressing those areas this offseason. One thing they did do well was play disciplined and passionate. Something that most teams do not. That counts for a ton. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "I also have to remind you that OUR pass defense was #1 in the league. Not yours. I also would like to know how Fred Smoot all of the sudden became one of the best corners in the League? I must have missed something there." Yes, you must have. Smoot, playing on the opposite side of Champ Bailey was the corner most avoided last year because he was, as a rookie, better than Champ was last year. Teams went at him early, and he made them pay. Teams stayed away from him late and went at Bailey. Smoot was the Redskins best defensive player a year ago. Some would say Lavar was and they'd make a legitimately powerful point so I won't debate it. But, Smoot was the Redskins best corner last year, so, you must have missed it. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I will admit that he is a nice player. I did more research on him after my initial post and was surprised that he had 5 picks last year(2 vs dallas which is no biggie.). ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "Granted, Westbrook did make the Pro Bowl two years ago, so that shouldn't count for anything." How much does it count that Gus Frerotte made the Pro Bowl a couple of years ago? How much does it count that Ryan McNeil left Dallas and made the Pro Bowl? Of course, whether you find this persuasive or not is less relevant than you lied to make a point and when you lie to make a point, it tends to limit you. Look here: http://www.nfl.com/probowl/2002/roster_nfc.html http://www.nfl.com/probowl2001/nfc.html http://www.supernfl.com/ProBowl2000.html http://www.supernfl.com/ProBowl99.html These are the last four Pro Bowl rosters. Guess who's name isn't on them? Would it be Bryant Westbrook perhaps? Why must you puff an average player up to make yourself feel better? Now, Westbrook was, two years ago, voted as an alternate to the Pro Bowl. And, that's as meaningful as Big Daddy Wilkinson being voted to as an alternate to the Pro Bowl this year, but you all think Wilkinson sucks and somehow Westbrook's alternate two years ago should count extra. Sorry chief. Not working for you. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Valid point, sorry I did not spell it out for you that he was an alternate. To me, pro bowl alternate is as good as being a pro bowler. That is my oppinion but oh well, sorry for misspeaking. But you really should admit that Bryant "Pro Bowl Alternate" Westbrook should be a signifigant upgrade over Duane "I Played in NFL Europe Last Summer" Hawthorne, right? Maybe that was the point i was trying to make. In addition, i don't think Big Daddy and Ryan Mcneil should be discounted in any was for their nominations. I wish you wouldn't put words in my mouth. Big Daddy is a solid player(not vs Larry Allen but who is?), why shouldn't he be a Pro Bowl alternate? Ryan McNeil was solid even when he was with Dallas. I really hated having to give him away a couple of years ago. Again, no sleight there. Gus on the other hand.......Even the sun shines on a dog's *** once a day! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "I don't think you should discount the Cowboys 4th round pick Derek Ross, either, he is considered to be a quality cover guy." God no. I wouldn't think of discounting your third round draft pick. Sheesh, you got me there. Oh, wait. No you don't. You shouldn't discount our third round draft pick, Bauman. He's said to have first round cover skills in a smallish body. Fortunately you have smallish receivers so, that won't really bother him, at least against you guys right? How about we just don't drag out our draft picks as if they somehow trump the other? Or, at least not in the THIRD EFFING ROUND. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fair Enough. I should have left it out like my next sentence suggested. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "But I am not going to hang my hopes on him performing because, Frankly, I think were fine with or without his help. Last year's defensive ranking proves that point. " Last year's defensive ranking proves you needed to bring in a starting CB, draft for defense, add Glover and Hardy just to be solidified. That's what last year's defensive ranking proves. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ OK Art, Our defense sucked last year and your mighty skins put a wallop on them. I assume that you watched both games and noticed that the Mighty Skins couldn't do anything on our poor Defense. Whatever. We needed to add playmakers to our defense, plain and simple. Our defense was sound. Not flashy, but sound and well coached. I think that if we had to do over again with the same guys, our defense would be just as sound. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- "And as far as Westbrook being our best player, you might want to rethink that logic. He may not even be our best corner, Edwards played damn good last year. " Edwards had one interception and just seven passes defensed as your starting corner. We got that out of our nickel corner. For any other team that type of performance gets you to make fun of them. For your team, it appears, that's just pretty damn good. Hey, how does one argue with such a powerful argument as that? --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hey Art, Sometimes stats don't tell the whole story. See, Edwards was our best corner and recieved the least amount of attention. Kinda like Bailley on your team. Teams tend to sway away from the better players and limit their opprotunities. Now stats also don't mention that Edwards had a sweet pick vs David Boston(same game he was holding him in check) that was called an incompletion by the baffoon ref. Like how Smoot's pick in the 2nd game vs. the cowboys where Q. Carter was trying to throw it out of bounds and didn't get enough on it. It sailed right into the waiting arms of Mr. Smoot. Not a whole heckuva lot to do there. Unfortunately, Edwards didn't have any plays like that. Edwards is a good player, his stats don't bear that out though. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Now, to your Wr's. I do like Rod Gardner, he is a nice player. But the rest of those retreads your throwing out there, come on now. Are you being serious or what? There is a reason Tampa couldn't throw the ball last year with Green and Anthony." Yes. It's called Keyshawn Johnson who was limiting in being able to hurt a team and demanding in his requirements for seeing the ball. And, of course, it's called Brad Johnson and another new offensive coordinator down there. Green and Anthony are far from great receivers. Both are fine in the roles they are likely to fill here. Your No. 4 receiver, for example, has a decided lack of interest as compared to OUR No. 4 receiver and that is what we're talking about. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hold on just a second here, Art. You might not remember me, but we used to argue that Brad Johnson wasn't as good as Troy Aikman and vise versa at the old Sporting news boards. That was two years ago when the Redskins made all of those moves and were Paper champs. You used to go on and on about how Brad Johnson is efficient and a winner....blah...blah.....blah. So now your saying he is the reason why Green and Anthoney blew chunks last year? Which is it? All i ask for is a little consistancy here. So what was Green and Anthoeny's excuse the years prior to Johnson and Johnson's arrival? I never thought that Having a guy who demands double and triple teams on your team would take away from the other WR's. I have to admit, that is the first time i've heard that logic. Must be why you are nominated to be GM, huh, ART? And how did our WR's come into this conversation anyway? I wasn't saying a thing about our Wr's. This conversation was originally about how everyone was so scared of the Redskins and their offense. The Cowboys offense never entered the equation here. Stick to the topic. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "They don't scare anyone, that is for sure. Even if you did manage to make a convincing arguement that somehow, 3 out of your 4 WR's were something more than average, how would you rationalize how you would get them the ball? Is this going to be a wishful thinking thing or will it be done through Osmosis?" Well, I don't know. It would seem Quincy Carter can have a 63 QB rating and complete 51 percent of his passes and you aren't too concerned, are you? We actually have a good offensive coordinator, and a QB with a better, more accurate arm than your QB, and OURS won't be handed the job by the owner as yours was. Advantage us . -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- OK, i am really lost now. How did Q. Carter get into this conversation? I would have sworn that we were talking about the Redskins offense and how everyone is scared. Heck, I'll be the first to tell you that our offense doesn't scare anyone but that wasn't the topic. So, now I am assuming that you are talking about Patrick "I Prefer" Ramsey(s) and not Danny Woefull or Sage Rosenthals, correct? I know that Woefull and Rosenthals have all of 1 TD pass between them for their CAREERS, so that couldn't be who your talking about, correct? I know Quincy has 5 career TD's to his credit and 3 wins(most by any rookie last year). Now, I will also start wondering about your Proclamation that your QB(assuming your talking about Ramsey) has both,"a Better and more Accurate Arm than yours". Hmmmmm.. Last I checked, your qb is a rookie, right? Never played a down in this league. How can you make this observation? Is this based on his vast experience at frickin' TULANE!!!!!?????? Gimme a break here. Also, I thought we weren't going to bring Rookies into this conversation(see Ross arguement)? In light of this futile arguement you made, I think you said it all yourself, your offense scares NO ONE!!!!!!! -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "I HARDLY think that Andy Reid is shaking at the thought of ANY of your qb's picking apart his defense. I mean, let's be realistic here." Let's. "Think a little bit before you spout off." Self-assessment's are lovely things. :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: ------------------------------------------------------------------ Again, Let's be realistic here. Your up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted April 25, 2002 Share Posted April 25, 2002 Ken, Work on your formatting brother. I'll just bullet point responses in approximate order of your comments. -- The fact that the Cowboys have beaten the Redskins nine straight is a nice footnote for Cowboy fans and a painful one for Redskin fans. But, at the end of the day, we've been the better team for three straight years and it doesn't mean a whole lot. We got swept by you a couple of years ago when we nearly got to where we wanted to get. You got swept by us the last time you did get where you wanted. I've always taken more stock in the final record than the head-to-head matchups, though, I understand how you feel better for not having lost to the Redskins while at the same time being a bad team. I felt good too the last time we swept you. Too bad we sucked then, like you did this year and last. -- Ken, when I indicate to you that the Redskins had a better defense I'm not making an excuse for it. I'm telling you that despite certain factors, we were better than you were. Clearly we were not if you count yards surrendered. Certainly we were in creating turnovers and impacting a football game. You'll understand the difference this year when you drop spots in the rankings and yet feel so much better about things. -- I think the Cowboys have done a fine job of collecting players to help the defense. That was a clear need for the Cowboys to accomplish this offseason which is why Dallas has done just that in order to improve THAT unit so much. I like what the Cowboys have done to improve themselves on defense, but, it's clear from this, that last year's "ranking" was not the type of team the Cowboys wanted to field and not the kind of team they are expecting to field this year. Jones has done the smart thing to shore up your defense. He didn't stare at NFL.com's stat page and say, "Nah, that's good there." The attention your team has paid that unit explains the need it felt that was there. -- A Pro Bowl alternate is not a Pro Bowl player. But, if you made a poorly worded statement I can live with that. I said in my post that Westbrook would be better than who you had at the spot a year ago. But, again, in any given game against two of your division rivals, he's no better than the fourth best corner on the field and you're telling me he's really the fifth, behind Edwards. That's fine, but, while an improvement, it's not so great a one that it will likely make a great impact. The Cowboys will engage in a more aggressive defense and the fact is you don't have great corners to limit the type of big play mistakes you'll witness. You will create more turnovers and probably be happier with your overall play, but, your corners remain the worst in the division as a whole and that is a very valuable spot to be more solid. -- I don't think the Cowboy defense sucked a year ago. You seem to think it was fine and to clarify how fine it was I wanted to assure us both that we remembered what the Cowboys have done to solidify the defense. It wasn't fine. It now will be. Last year you lacked personnel to be fine. Now you will be. Which is why you've gone out and made the changes you've made. -- On Brad Johnson it might be helpful if you fully recalled the conversation we had about him. I don't remember you, but I remember conversations about Johnson. What I said about him was that he simply was better than Aikman at that point in time and that Johnson was a superior player for the Redskins today (then) than Aikman was. This, of course, proved remarkably accurate. Our conversations on Johnson favored me because you, among the rest of the Cowboy faithful, couldn't understand how anyone would think that in 1999 a QB like Johnson could be better than a QB like Aikman with all his rings. As I wrote at the time, Aikman was the ghost of greatness past. Johnson was the better player at the time and that was correct. Johnson remains a winning QB with an accurate arm. He's got flaws and in the offense the Bucs ran, he went to his fail safe in Keyshawn. No one had a good year in the Buc offense, including Keyshawn's one touchdown in triple digit opportunity. Anthony and Green have never been great players. They've been fair players and as a No. 2 and No. 4 on a team, they fit in well. As a No. 3 and No. 5 on a team, they provide remarkable depth. Right now they are No. 2 and No. 4 and may remain so. And that depth down to our fourth receiver is better than most teams, including YOUR team. Gardner will have to step up because until he does, we won't have a great unit, just a pretty fair one with solid starting quality depth. As for Keyshawn, he was rarely doubled much less tripled. Teams knew Keyshawn couldn't hurt them other than to catch the ball. He never demanded safety attention and that limited the ability of the Bucs to stretch the field. You should have watched a bit more. Again, no one is claiming that Green and Anthony are saviors. They are, however, great fits in Spurrier's scheme and they are fair players who provide decent depth. -- Quincy Carter came into the conversation because you, as a Cowboy fan, seem to think you have some advantage and Redskin fans must worry about our situation while yours is settled. Patrick Ramsey is a more accurate QB with a better arm than your QB. He doesn't have to have played in the NFL to have that qualification over Carter. Ramsey has a better arm than Rich Gannon too. No conversation with a Cowboy fan is going to turn sour on a Redskin fan when a simple comparison indicates your hopes are pinned on Quincy Carter. Yes, anyone we throw in there in Spurrier's offense may well outplay and perform Carter. That's how little he showed as a rookie. He may have a substantially better second year and build on his two good games. He may not and like Shuler, build on his bad games, of which there were more. Now, a Philly fan or a Giant fan can actually concern themselves with the Redskins QB situation. You can't. Right now, I'd take Ramsey over Carter. Just as I'd take Harrington over Carter. Just as I'd take Carr over Carter. I might not take Sage over Carter, but only because as a Redskin fan that might sound too biased . Whether Carter succeeds or not is irrelevant. He enters any game against the Ramsey's Redskins, assuming Ramsey even earns the starting job, as a QB with a lesser arm and with less accuracy. Without having played a down in the NFL, we know this, because while your QB spent his first season learning how NOT to throw a knuckle ball, our QB will actually be simply throwing the ball. But, it's not of consequence. No Redskin fan feels set at the QB position. Our advantage is Spurrier has produced great stats at this position and we're not overly concerned by what's to come because of that fact. You asked how we'll get the ball to our receivers and my answer is that Spurrier will find a way to get whoever he has there to very likely outperform your body at that spot and it doesn't have to be the rookie. Matthews or Woeful could very well be better fits. And, Carter may become a good player. That neither of us knows is what makes it fun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nerm Posted April 25, 2002 Share Posted April 25, 2002 Originally posted by bulldog who's kidding who. the Cowboys finished 5-11 in 2000 and had a last place schedule to play in 2001. A few notes here from another Cowboy fan. 1. At the end of last year, the skins had played the weakest strength of schedule of ANY team in the league. 2. If Q Carter playes like he did over his first two games Dallas will be horrible on O next year. If he plays as well as he did in his last two games of the season, Dallas will probably be in the playoffs. Dallas fans (myself included) generally think that he improved over the course of the season and it wasnt a fluke. We will see. 3. Our 3rd string QB (Hutchenson) would have been a top 20 pick in this draft. Until you drafted Ramsey there was not a QB on your roster who even would have been invited to camp in Big D. 4. The skins have lost a bunch of players this offseason. The Cowboys added players while keeping their best FAs. Some of our starters are now quality backups. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Posted April 25, 2002 Share Posted April 25, 2002 Originally posted by CounterTre The Dallas defense being #4 is one of the biggest misnomers out there. They were by far one of if not THE most over-rated defense out there last year. Throw out all of the stats you want, but the most telling stat of all is points allowed, and the Pukes didn't even crack the top ten for the NFC on that one. Hell the Redskins got absolutely murdered the first 5 games including a nasty drubbing from GB and KC, and their D STILL allowed 3 points less a game than the Cowboys. Best Pass D??? Yea look at the attempts given up and then look at run attepmts and then come crow about a hollow stat some more. Of course they were high in pass D, their run D sucked and no one needed to pass on em. 9 in a row is a stat ya can't really fight, but when it comes from a team that has gone 10-22 and resided in the basement the last two years it becomes rather meaningless. But hey if that's what you Cowboy fans want to hang your hats on that's fine, suit yourselves. CounterTre, I just had to correct you just a bit here. Our run D sucked? No we were 13 in the league, that is 6 slots higher than your beloved skins. And to boot, I believe we were either #1 or 2 in the league in Avg Rushing Yards Per attempt Against. That tells me that we boned up pretty well vs the run. Two years ago when the Cowboys had the #1 pass defense, your statement was accurate. But there was an entire season played last year and we were staunch vs. the run. You might want to check on your own Run D though, I mean, the cowboys did rush for over 200 yards in each game last season. BTW, the points against can be explained two ways. 1. At bunch of turnovers by our offense returned for TDs. 2. A totally inept offense which often gave the opposition great field position. Thanks for your effort though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted April 25, 2002 Share Posted April 25, 2002 Nerm, To be fair, if Carter plays like he did the last two games, the Cowboys are probably not going to be too happy. I mean, yes, he had a great game against San Francisco which he followed up with an atrocious game against Detroit. Heath Shuler had good games too, as a rookie, and he threw for more yards and touchdowns than Carter, but, we know how it turned out. In the final game against Detroit, Carter had a 46.6 rating, and completed 42 percent of his passes. This was not even his WORST game as a pro. So, if you're banking on something similar to carry you through, all I can say is, so are we . As for Hutchinson, I'm sure he's a fine prospect. To guarantee a guy, though, who hasn't played football since 1997 a total of $5 million that he'll get for the next three years is a bit of a reach, don't you think? I don't believe he would have gone in the Top 20, but, I'm sure I just don't understand. I mean, had the Redskins signed him, he'd have been a, what, fifth or sixth rounder? But, the Cowboys got him, so that makes him Top 20, is that how it works? He hasn't played football since 1997. And you gave him a $3.1 million bonus. Outstanding work there. But, if you're happy, who am I to quibble? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Posted April 25, 2002 Share Posted April 25, 2002 Originally posted by Art Nerm, To be fair, if Carter plays like he did the last two games, the Cowboys are probably not going to be too happy. I mean, yes, he had a great game against San Francisco which he followed up with an atrocious game against Detroit. Heath Shuler had good games too, as a rookie, and he threw for more yards and touchdowns than Carter, but, we know how it turned out. In the final game against Detroit, Carter had a 46.6 rating, and completed 42 percent of his passes. This was not even his WORST game as a pro. So, if you're banking on something similar to carry you through, all I can say is, so are we . As for Hutchinson, I'm sure he's a fine prospect. To guarantee a guy, though, who hasn't played football since 1997 a total of $5 million that he'll get for the next three years is a bit of a reach, don't you think? I don't believe he would have gone in the Top 20, but, I'm sure I just don't understand. I mean, had the Redskins signed him, he'd have been a, what, fifth or sixth rounder? But, the Cowboys got him, so that makes him Top 20, is that how it works? He hasn't played football since 1997. And you gave him a $3.1 million bonus. Outstanding work there. But, if you're happy, who am I to quibble? Art, I do believe that Nerm misspoke there but maybe he didn't. Again, this is an instance where stats don't tell the complete story. Carter actually played well in that game but his WR's and Offensive coordinator failed him. His Wr's dropped, by conservative estimates, 7 balls that day. The pick that he threw actually bounced off a receiver and into the defender's hands. The playcalling that day, IMO, was pretty shoddy as well. But that is a pretty subjective thing. The 7 drops are a pretty good reason for the sub par stats though. As far as Hutch goes, we probably did overpay for him. I am not familiar with him at all other than what i have read about him. As i remember, the Cowboys weren't the only team interesting in Hutchinson, I believe there we at least 10 other teams who went to his personal workout. I know Dallas and Chicago showed the most interest. I also believe the Redskins showed interest in him as well. In any event, i have seen various places(major news outlets) say that he has first round talent. I have no idea personally. If he actually does have all of the ability that people say he has, then he is well worth the signing bonus he was paid. Time will tell but I am glad we have something to fall back on in case Quincy pulls a Heath. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nerm Posted April 25, 2002 Share Posted April 25, 2002 Originally posted by Art Nerm, To be fair, if Carter plays like he did the last two games, the Cowboys are probably not going to be too happy. I mean, yes, he had a great game against San Francisco which he followed up with an atrocious game against Detroit. Like Ken said, QC had a lot of receivers drop balls (at least 6 or 7) in that game in Det. Also, he hit Galloway on a 50yd TD strike that was called back because Galloway had steped out of bounds. I dont want the results he got in Det, but if he plays that way Dallas will be very happy. I was being conservative with the top 20 pick thing for Hutch. When Hutchenson was being persued by 12 teams, the articles I read said he would go after Carr and Harrington, probably in the top 15 even with the layoff. Sure he hasnt played in a few years, but neither had Roger Staubach. If he had to start this year it may be a major problem, but he is 3rd on the depth chart. I have nothing against Ramsey, I think he has the physical tools to do well. If the info that I had read said that scouts think Ramsey is better than Hutch, I wouldnt say otherwise. Im just going on what I have read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mardi gras skin Posted April 25, 2002 Share Posted April 25, 2002 BTW, the points against can be explained two ways. 1. At bunch of turnovers by our offense returned for TDs. 2. A totally inept offense which often gave the opposition great field position. Ken, don't you think there might be a link between the total number of yards your defense gave up and your inept offense? You have to give up fewer yards if opposing offenses are starting on your 30 rather than their 30. It will mean that you are giving up fewer yards (and earing a higher defensive ranking) but it does not mean that your defense is stopping offenses at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted April 25, 2002 Share Posted April 25, 2002 Guys, in no way would Hutchinson have been a first round pick in this draft. In no way was he a first round pick in 1997 either. He's always been a fine prospect though. He's got good size and he looks the part of a QB. Teams were very interested him, I'm sure, because here's a free agent with some interesting physical qualities that might worth taking a look at. Dallas took that a step further and made a financial committment to. No matter though, I just find it kind of funny to always hear everyone you guys have be referenced as some super stud player but, anyone we sign is going to tear our team apart in some magical fashion -- i.e. Trotter. As for Carter, I don't care if receivers caught every ball or dropped every ball. What we KNOW is he completed 42 percent of his passes IN A DOME. If the receivers are dropping balls at the rate you suggest, in a dome, may I suggest one of two things. Either your receivers are not any good, even as good as ours, or, Carter has a delivery on his ball that receivers are not used to, perhaps a wobble, that causes some issue. I don't really care which it is, but, the final results were 42 percent and a 46 QB rating. So, yes, I'd say Nerm didn't mean he wanted that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CounterTre Posted April 25, 2002 Share Posted April 25, 2002 Ohhh puhleeze. Nice try yourself Ken, but the bottom line is your team ranked outside the top ten in the NFC let alone the whole league in points allowed and the Redskins were ranked much higher. This is including an 0-5 start with two of the worst a$$ beatings given out by teams all year. Oh yea that Dallas D was sure tough! You guys sure make a lot of excuses "yea but his receivers dropped a lot of balls" blah blah blah whatever. Ok I can go that route too, The skins were close to leading the league in dropped balls and false starts all year long. So if you go by that stat and use the "Quincy" Postulate, then Tony Banks had an all pro year! See it doesn't work fellas(Tony Banks is horrible) you can make any point you want with stats...no matter how stupid it is. Oh yea...Great run D with 6 games played against the Eagles Cardinals and Giants....real running powerhouses . Please get real, I'm not saying our team was all world in any stat last year(well our special teams was fantastic) but you Cowboy fans need to take off the rose glasses and realize Dallas doesn't have ANYTHING to crow about from last year...well except the Redskins games. Like I said before if you wanna hang your hat on that ok, but we'll keep looking for a trip to the playoffs, a victory over Dallas is just Candy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Posted April 26, 2002 Share Posted April 26, 2002 Countertre, Ok, Fair enough point. Our defense WAS solid last year but I'm through with living through last year. It is pretty difficult to make any points about the cowboys, be they right or wrong, when they won 5 games. One thing i will say about Carter and our Defense, I watched them with a microscope last year knowing that they are a key to our future. I watched Carter in the begining of the year and was disgusted. He threw horrible passes that wobbled and his balls were very inaccurate. He did make great plays with his legs but that seemed a small consolation for the ducks he was chucking. Fast forward 10 weeks after an early season injury. He's throwing tight spiraled darts all over the field. First game vs the Skins(i know you remember this), makes a big time play fake and throws a perfect stike to Ismail over Champ. One of a handful of nice plays in limited attempts that game. Comes back the next week and torches the Gmen. I mean, was the major reason the Cowboys won. Moved away from pressure to buy time and hit Wr's. He controlled the game. Same vs the 49ers. He was simply outstanding. He showed the ability on a few different occasions to take over games both with his feet and with his arm. Traits that i like in the kid. Great competitor. Great Leader. He has both young and veteran players meeting in the offseason at 8 A.M. to learn the new offense that Bruce Coslett is installing. That is an amazing thing to see in a first year player. He also throws one of the best deep balls that i have seen. Consistantly puts the ball on the money deep. In his last 5-6 games, he threw at least 6-7 deep strikes to wr's. Escapeablity, is in the same ballpark as McNabb in this area. Not quite in McNabb's class, but is very hard to bring down. Ask Warren Sapp if this statement is true. I think his Jock is still sitting around the 20 yardline at Texas stadium. Work Ethic- Lost 15 lbs. while he was injured for 10 weeks. That is pretty amazing considering he had surgury to repair his torn hamstring. Totally fixed his throwing problem by carrying around a ball with his new grip 24/7. Is the first one to the Ranch every day to workout and watch films in the offseason. Is Coachable- See his dramatic improvement in throwing from early to late season. Another example, vs. the skins, tried to throw the ball away but didn't get it far enough out of bounds. Very next week, had the same situation and fired it into the first row. Little thing, big improvement. Enough about Carter. I just wanted to TRY to shed some light onto why Dallas fans are fairly content with their qb situation. We know he is going to have his ups and downs. All young players do, but we feel that he has great intangables that will pull him through. That is all there really is to say about him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CounterTre Posted April 26, 2002 Share Posted April 26, 2002 Fair enough, every fan is going to see their teams players in a different light than non fans. It happened with many of us and Jeff George, and I'm sure it will happen again. "First game vs the Skins(i know you remember this), makes a big time play fake and throws a perfect stike to Ismail over Champ." How could I forget? I was very close to a trip to the store for a new TV after mine nearly got kicked in. One of the very few times all year long he got burned...happens to the best of em. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonnyJ Posted April 26, 2002 Share Posted April 26, 2002 Ken, That was a pretty glowing review of Carter. I am betting part of it is wishful thinking, but as I did not watch as closely as you, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. A couple of points, however: 1) How will QC fare once defensive coordinators start game-planning for him? Don't give me any tripe about how they were already doing it. The only thing opposing teams concerned themselves with was stopping your rushing attack. 2) Again, if you saw all this improvement in him, how come JJ went out and plunked a bunch of money down on a raw player who hasn't played in 5 years? I still haven't seen one of you guys adequately explain this. Don't tell me he's being brought in just to see what he has. He's being paid like a first round choice. I infer that to mean that JJ sees him as his QB of the future, not Carter. What's your (lame?) explanation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Posted April 26, 2002 Share Posted April 26, 2002 Originally posted by SonnyJ Ken, That was a pretty glowing review of Carter. I am betting part of it is wishful thinking, but as I did not watch as closely as you, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. A couple of points, however: 1) How will QC fare once defensive coordinators start game-planning for him? Don't give me any tripe about how they were already doing it. The only thing opposing teams concerned themselves with was stopping your rushing attack. 2) Again, if you saw all this improvement in him, how come JJ went out and plunked a bunch of money down on a raw player who hasn't played in 5 years? I still haven't seen one of you guys adequately explain this. Don't tell me he's being brought in just to see what he has. He's being paid like a first round choice. I infer that to mean that JJ sees him as his QB of the future, not Carter. What's your (lame?) explanation? Sonny, Both valid questions and I will try to answer them. 1. In all honesty, no one knows. He may very well struggle, wouldn't be the first qb or player to do that either in their second season. But he has shown an ability to adapt and that is important. I also agree with you that teams concentrated on stopping our rushing attack. I also do not see that changiing either. If anything, our OL has gotten stronger with the addition of Andre Gurode in the draft. Emmitt is a year older but is still effective. Hambrick also showed some really nice things last year. Given that, I don't think a lot of teams will gameplan to stop Quincy and only Quincy this year either. It is, though, a concern and that is what leads us to the next question..... 2. Well, there are a couple of reasons and all of them make a heck of a lot of sense to me. When the cowboys watched him workout, they graded Hutchinson as a 1st round talent, in their eyes. They also know that nothing is a given in this league. JJ also knows what has worked for him in this league before, ie. Drafting Aikman AND Walsh(Later traded for a 1,2,and 3 from the Saints) to make sure he gets it right. JJ has often talked about this when asked ,"Why bring in another qb?". Given the state of the team last year(5 wins) and the importance of the qb position, they signed Hutchinson. No matter how good Quincy Carter looked last year, they didn't want to put all of ther eggs in one basket. I think this is a sound philosophy. Now, looking at it on the surface, a 3.1 million dollar signing bonus for a player looks like a lot of money. But when you add up what the Cowboys are paying all 5 of the qb's on their roster, it doesn't even add up to as much money as most of the qb's make in this league. Also note that Hutchinson's 3.1 million is the only real guaranteed money between the 5 of them. Leaf has no guaranteed money, Neither does Wright or Stoerner. Carter got a 2nd round signing bonus last year which couldn't have been more than 600k. It is a small risk to take(especially with their improved cap situation) when it could potentially have a big reward. One reward could be, Carter falls flat on his face this season. The Cowboys now have Hutchinson as a backup plan. Another possible scenario is Carter takes a step forward this year. Hutchinson shows in preseason games or real games(ie a Rob Johnson) that he has some ability. A team will take a chance on him and possibly trade a high pick for a player with Hutchinson's ability. The last scenario is they both suck this year and the Cowboys have to start all over again next year! :mad: Hope this wasn't a Rosey response to your questions..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.