Cowboys offense evolves from idealistic to realistic

boozeman said:
It actually can help if you scheme it. The comfort of being able to send a TE on a wham block can free up an OL to get to the second level.

That's helped the 49ers for the last several years. That's why their 2TE concept was a success. Same with the Patriots because Gronkowski is such a physical blocker.

I love me some Witten, but he's not a great blocker. He's a get in the way type like Novacek was. Back then we had Alfredo Roberts to block if we needed it. We didn't have to spend second round picks on the stupid concept either.
Click to expand...

That's what I really don't understand. We can have fifty tight ends but we don't seem to understand that one of them should be a blocker. Those types practically grow on trees and are inexpensive to acquire. Yet even our scrub TEs aren't blockers.
 
Genghis Khan said:
That's what I really don't understand. We can have fifty tight ends but we don't seem to understand that one of them should be a blocker. Those types practically grow on trees and are inexpensive to acquire. Yet even our scrub TEs aren't blockers.
Click to expand...

They acknowledged this early in camp and that's why they are still considering Andre Smith for the 53.

They know it, but gosh darn it dagnabbit, they just can't find that blocker. Oh well. They tried!
 
Jiggyfly said:
My point is simple, Sturm said Atkins destroyed our guards and that they were pushed into the backfield all game, this simply did not happen.

I am in no way saying the o-line problems are solved, I am just surprised Sturm said these things, he is not one to usually go so overboard to make a point.

I agree once the season starts our weaknesses will be targeted especially if Free starts at guard I was just happy to see the interior was not getting manhandled.
Click to expand...

I think it was not as good as you are making it out to be. "Destroyed" might be a tad harsh but it was not good.
 
mschmidt64 said:
I understand the importance of getting a utility player like Escobar, who in theory could allow you to do a bunch of different things, into the fold. However, I question the sanity of the person deciding such a utility player is more important than upgrading the OL to the point where it can be counted on to sustain a merely competent rushing attack (which it still is not capable of doing unless Leary can stay healthy and continue to progress and someone can figure out how to man the RG spot).

That is the one area that I agree falls on Garrett. It's ultimately Jones' job to realize the problems with his OL, since he's the GM. But I'm sure he hears Garrett say that he wants a 2nd TE and he allows Garrett to have his toy with that pick.

It's foolish of Garrett for wanting it instead of fixing his line; it's even more foolish for Jones not to put his foot down.
Click to expand...

I am completely stunned...
 
Genghis Khan said:
That's what I really don't understand. We can have fifty tight ends but we don't seem to understand that one of them should be a blocker. Those types practically grow on trees and are inexpensive to acquire. Yet even our scrub TEs aren't blockers.
Click to expand...

To be fair, everyone complained about Martellus Bennett only being a good blocker but being worthless in the passing game.
 
mschmidt64 said:
To be fair, everyone complained about Martellus Bennett only being a good blocker but being worthless in the passing game.
Click to expand...

If he was a fifth round draft pick no one would have bitched. You don't spend premium resources on a blocking TE. That and his personality made him unlikable in my opinion.
 
Cowboysrock55 said:
If he was a fifth round draft pick no one would have bitched. You don't spend premium resources on a blocking TE. That and his personality made him unlikable in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Right. You can get that with much lesser resources.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom