Archive - Random Cowboys Related Stuff Thread...

ravidubey · Nov 22, 2015

No OL has ever won a single game the the history of in this league, and with so many good players in the box several on the OL didn't know which guys to block.

The passing game has to beat that or you'll never get a rhythm.

When New Orleans did it in 2014, Romo backed them the fuck off. Every other team the Bucs have lost to managed to do the same, but we have a QB and WRs who didn't have their shit down.

L.T. Fan · Nov 22, 2015

ravidubey said:
No OL has ever won a single game the the history of in this league, and with so many good players in the box several on the OL didn't know which guys to block.

The passing game has to beat that or you'll never get a rhythm.

When New Orleans did it in 2014, Romo backed them the fuck off. Every other team the Bucs have lost to managed to do the same, but we have a QB and WRs who didn't have their shit down.

Does that mean the OL isn't performing up to their hype?

ravidubey · Nov 22, 2015

L.T. Fan said:
Does that mean the OL isn't performing up to their hype?

It means no OL possibly could.

People were imagining them winning games by themselves, that scrub RB's and scrub QB's and average WR's would suddenly become stars "behind this offensive line".

L.T. Fan · Nov 22, 2015

ravidubey said:
It means no OL possibly could.

People were imagining them winning games by themselves, that scrub RB's and scrub QB's and average WR's would suddenly become stars "behind this offensive line".

I don't think anyone thinks the OL wins games but they are largely responsible for the other offensive players to be able to execute without being shut down by the opponents defense. If they don't pave the way the train don't roll and the scoreboard doesn't light up especially the scrubs who are filling in. Even the best can't perform well without their help.

1bigfan13 · Nov 23, 2015

ravidubey said:
It means no OL possibly could.

People were imagining them winning games by themselves, that scrub RB's and scrub QB's and average WR's would suddenly become stars "behind this offensive line".

I've pointed this out before, Garrett and the Jones should have firsthand knowledge this. They were around in the 90s when despite having that great OL, pretty much every RB not named Emmitt Smith struggled to put up big numbers.

I can understand the average fan getting swept up in this idea but it's inexcusable that our coaches and front office bought into the flawed logic.

p1_ · Nov 23, 2015

ravidubey said:
It means no OL possibly could.

People were imagining them winning games by themselves, that scrub RB's and scrub QB's and average WR's would suddenly become stars "behind this offensive line".

Correction, one person thought that. Just like he thought that anyone of 500 coaches could win with Jimmy Johnson's team.

ravidubey · Nov 23, 2015

An OL at its best enables success of other players. A bad OL is a fractional multiplier and a good one is a number above 1 but below 2.

Even if an OL makes you magically 2x as good as you were before, 2 times garbage is still basically garbage.

townsend · Nov 23, 2015

ravidubey said:
An OL at its best enables success of other players. A bad OL is a fractional multiplier and a good one is a number above 1 but below 2.

Even if an OL makes you magically 2x as good as you were before, 2 times garbage is still basically garbage.

I think OL, gets a lot of credit for less visible variables. Such as quality play design, game planning, and play calling. High quality OLs are still important, but not the way they were back when football was a "game of inches" instead of a game of wild ass flukes and ref interference.

Smitty · Nov 24, 2015

A strong OL is the most important thing to have on offense besides QB.

2 other thoughts:

1) So should David Irving be starting or what?

2) It's pleasantly surprising at this point that I'm asking.... when will Claiborne be back?

Rev · Nov 24, 2015

Claiborne has been playing well but just cant count on him to stay healthy.

Genghis Khan · Nov 24, 2015

I don't think that Claiborne has been playing well, particularly in the last several games.I would just as soon move on to be honest.Next season we will presumably have a healthy Scandrick, car, Patman, and maybe we might have to pick up another mid-level type guy or draft a guy in a min rounds, But we will be OK without Claiborne. Especially since Given Claiborne has a pedigree, you may have to pay him a salary that is a little bit uncomfortable. He won't break the bank because he hasn't lived up to his draft status, But he will make money then I don't think we need to be paying to a mediocre player.

Cowboysrock55 · Nov 24, 2015

Genghis Khan said:
I don't think that Claiborne has been playing well, particularly in the last several games.I would just as soon move on to be honest.Next season we will presumably have a healthy Scandrick, car, Patman, and maybe we might have to pick up another mid-level type guy or draft a guy in a min rounds, But we will be OK without Claiborne. Especially since Given Claiborne has a pedigree, you may have to pay him a salary that is a little bit uncomfortable. He won't break the bank because he hasn't lived up to his draft status, But he will make money then I don't think we need to be paying to a mediocre player.

I'd rather Claiborne then Carr I think. At some point we have to move on from that albatross of a contract Carr has.

L.T. Fan · Nov 24, 2015

Cowboysrock55 said:
I'd rather Claiborne then Carr I think. At some point we have to move on from that albatross of a contract Carr has.

Probably true but has any LSU player for Dallas ever really worked out?

jsmith6919 · Nov 24, 2015

Claiborne's in a contract year and he suddenly starts playing through a little pain and putting in time studying...I let him walk and not think twice about it.

Cowboysrock55 · Nov 24, 2015

jsmith6919 said:
Claiborne's in a contract year and he suddenly starts playing through a little pain and putting in time studying...I let him walk and not think twice about it.

So do you keep Carr around next year at his 14 mil cap charge? My thought is cut Carr and save about 6 mil next year in cap. Use the 6 mil in cap space to sign someone new or sign Claiborne. That way in 2017 you free up more cap when Carr is totally off the books.

L.T. Fan · Nov 24, 2015

Cowboysrock55 said:
So do you keep Carr around next year at his 14 mil cap charge? My thought is cut Carr and save about 6 mil next year in cap. Use the 6 mil in cap space to sign someone new or sign Claiborne. That way in 2017 you free up more cap when Carr is totally off the books.

If Clairborne isn't cutting it why not let him walk as well as cuttin Carr. If both are problematic get out the broom.

Cowboysrock55 · Nov 24, 2015

L.T. Fan said:
If Clairborne isn't cutting it why not let him walk as well as cuttin Carr. If both are problematic get out the broom.

I think Claiborne has been pretty solid all year. He isn't perfect but at a reasonable price I think he gets the job done opposite Scandrick. Of course if the price isn't reasonable I'd go into free agency and find someone. No reason to pay 14 mil for a performance you can get out of basically a 2-4 mil corner.

boozeman · Nov 24, 2015

L.T. Fan said:
If Clairborne isn't cutting it why not let him walk as well as cuttin Carr. If both are problematic get out the broom.

Claiborne getting hurt helps. Especially if this lingers.

He will be cheap to sign back and he has not been bad.

Maybe he can have a Terence Newman like career here after he was massively overdrafted.

L.T. Fan · Nov 24, 2015

boozeman said:
Claiborne getting hurt helps. Especially if this lingers.

He will be cheap to sign back and he has not been bad.

Maybe he can have a Terence Newman like career here after he was massively overdrafted.

Maybe so but if he is signed cheap he may not be as inclined to play well. I know, the argument would be if he doesn't work out then cut him because you lost nothing by getting him cheap and that would be true. It would precipitate a delay however in getting a replacement.

Jiggyfly · Nov 24, 2015

L.T. Fan said:
Maybe so but if he is signed cheap he may not be as inclined to play well. I know, the argument would be if he doesn't work out then cut him because you lost nothing by getting him cheap and that would be true. It would precipitate a delay however in getting a replacement.

And maybe if he is signed cheap he plays well to get another contract or incentives.

You have no idea what his motivations are.

Archive - Random Cowboys Related Stuff Thread...

DCC 4Life

I'm Easy If You Are

DCC 4Life

I'm Easy If You Are

Your favorite player's favorite player

DCC 4Life

DCC 4Life

Banned

DCC 4Life

Good, bad, I'm the guy with the gun

The worst version of myself

Super Moderator

I'm Easy If You Are

Honored Member - RIP

Super Moderator

I'm Easy If You Are

Super Moderator

28 Years And Counting...

I'm Easy If You Are

Banned