Dez 4th in the NFL in YAC

[Cotton]

You should have seen some of the PMs Carp and I have had.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

though a small sample size of 17 catches last year, Harris' YAC per game average was 6.4

YAC per game, or YAC per catch?

By the way put me in the category that thinks Dez is excellent with the ball in his hands and at getting YAC. That's why he was a bad ass punt returner here as well.

 

[Deuce]

YAC per game, or YAC per catch?

By the way put me in the category that thinks Dez is excellent with the ball in his hands and at getting YAC. That's why he was a bad ass punt returner here as well.

It didn't specify so I assumed game, but catch makes more sense.

 

[Smitty]

You're the one who said it. MANY TIMES.

Yes, it is many times.

So I ask, how many?

I don't know how many times is many.

Maybe if you ask again, you'll somehow trick me into changing my stance.

It's a handful. If you don't want to call that "many" then fine. It's enough that I have a recollection of him excelling.

Sorry that I didn't sit down and watch every game the last 3 years with a pen and paper marking the exact down, distance, and time on the clock of every Dwayne Harris screen.

Dick.

Out of 23 catches, was he on 15 screens? 10? 5? Less? More? And of the ones he was on, how many of those did he excel on? You're words, Schmitty.

And it's also my words that I don't have an exact number, it's just a bunch.

Try something else, this approach is lame.

Admit you were talking out your ass, or show me numbers. How many, and the yards gained on them.

I'm not talking out of my ass.

Dwayne Harris has many times shown he is good on screens, with respect to the small number of chances he has had.

I tend to agree that he'd be a great weapon on those routes. But I'm not claiming to have seen him excel many times at them.

I know, you're just being a dick even though you know my point has merit that Harris has shown that he can be good doing that role enough to warrant more looks instead of Bryant.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

Also I don't like the idea of bringing a WR into the game only to run short curls and WR screens. It is too predictable and defenders will jump the short routes. Part of what makes those routes successful is a defenders fear of the big play.

 

[Deuce]

Also I don't like the idea of bringing a WR into the game only to run short curls and WR screens. It is too predictable and defenders will jump the short routes. Part of what makes those routes successful is a defenders fear of the big play.

I agree. Special packages become predictable. But if Harris had been the slot guy all season like he should have been, we could mix some solid downfield routes for him along with a screen or two per game. Make Beasley that 4th guy to help move the chains and we'd be solid.

But apparently we don't want to use him at all on offense.

 

[NoDak]

No, what's lame is he's probably been on a small handful of screens. Of which maybe a couple/few went for decent yards.

Yet you claim he's excelled on the route many times.

Tell us again how you're not talking out of your ass.

 

[Smitty]

Also I don't like the idea of bringing a WR into the game only to run short curls and WR screens. It is too predictable and defenders will jump the short routes. Part of what makes those routes successful is a defenders fear of the big play.

Harris can do more than run curls and screens, no one said only use him as that.

The point is that Bryant has had a lot of days where we deliberately throw him those short things because we are clearly thinking "Hey, lets feed him these short ones and hope he breaks one."

I think that is counterproductive. He's not great at breaking those and turning them into big gains. He's much better crossing the middle of the field.

I'd rather mix in those screens and hitches to Harris, along with Beasley on that little out route. I think they are more effective in that role.

And I think Harris, as Deuce has stated, has more of a chance for maneuvering through traffic to turn one of those into a big play than Dez does.

Terrell Owens was different. You could throw him that hitch and he'd shake off a defender and be gone. Conversely, I can think of exactly 1 time that Dez has done that, his rookie year against the Giants, with Jon Kitna at QB I think. Now, Harris isn't gonna pull a Terrell Owens, but I do think he can shake some more yards out of those routes than I've seen Bryant get recently.

 

[Cotton]

A bunch and many times does not equal "a handful".

Carry on with your doublespeak.

It will get you into more of these debates.

 

[Deuce]

Ironically, nobody on the roster was better at YAC on the hitch route than Austin and we all want him gone.

 

[Smitty]

No, what's lame is he's probably been on a small handful of screens. Of which maybe a couple/few went for decent yards.

Yet you claim he's excelled on the route many times.

When he's only been in the game for such limited amounts of time, 5-6 is many, relative to the opportunities he gets.

Tell us again how you're not talking out of your ass.

I'm not talking out of my ass. I'm on a board full of Cowboys fans who have watched the vast majority of snaps taken since Harris has been on this team. I'm not trying to fool anyone by saying "many." I know (and I know everyone else knows) that the guy has less than 30 catches for his entire career.

Obviously, if I say "many times" -- for a guy with 23 career catches -- that word should probably be taken a little different, contextually, than if I said I had seen Jerry Rice do it "many times" with his 1,500+ receptions.

I would apologize for you not being able to pick up on that subtlety, but I know you're just being a dick and you actually know very well what I'm trying to say and you're just trying to nail me to a wall.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

I agree. Special packages become predictable. But if Harris had been the slot guy all season like he should have been, we could mix some solid downfield routes for him along with a screen or two per game. Make Beasley that 4th guy to help move the chains and we'd be solid.

But apparently we don't want to use him at all on offense.

I've been pretty thrilled with what I have seen from the combination of Williams, Bryant, and Beasley. So I'm not going to sit here and say I want to see Harris in place of one of those three at this point. However if someone gets hurt I have faith that Harris can step in and be productive.

Plus I don't want to potentially hurt what Harris is doing on special teams because he has been an absolute ace on special teams. Sometimes when you tire a guy playing offense he isn't as effective on special teams.

 

[Cotton]

I'm fine with Harris being used on STs and spared on offense, but I would like to see him used more on offense as well. He does have break away speed.

But, he isn't close to Dez in YAC ability.

 

[Smitty]

A bunch and many times does not equal "a handful".

Sure it could. The word "many" is contextual.

You could say "many years ago" and mean a thousand years ago, or 20.

Depends on what you are talking about.

Again, you and I both knew that Harris only has a handful of career receptions. It should have been obvious to all parties who weren't trying to be dicks that many didn't equal like 50.

It's many, relative to his number of opportunities.

 

[Smitty]

But, he isn't close to Dez in YAC ability.

Except on screens and hitches.

 

[Smitty]

Ironically, nobody on the roster was better at YAC on the hitch route than Austin and we all want him gone.

That's cause he sucks at actually making catches or staying on the field anymore.

 

[L.T. Fan]

"Was better" is the operative word.

 

[NoDak]

When he's only been in the game for such limited amounts of time, 5-6 is many, relative to the opportunities he gets.



I'm not talking out of my ass. I'm on a board full of Cowboys fans who have watched the vast majority of snaps taken since Harris has been on this team. I'm not trying to fool anyone by saying "many." I know (and I know everyone else knows) that the guy has less than 30 catches for his entire career.

Obviously, if I say "many times" -- for a guy with 23 career catches -- that word should probably be taken a little different, contextually, than if I said I had seen Jerry Rice do it "many times" with his 1,500+ receptions.

I would apologize for you not being able to pick up on that subtlety, but I know you're just being a dick and you actually know very well what I'm trying to say and you're just trying to nail me to a wall.

There was no subtlety to pick up on. You know it. I know it. And anybody who's read this thread knows it. It was you speaking in absolutes, without thinking. Again. And when called on it, you do what you always do. Argue incessantly, spinning away from what is said, until you can move the goal posts. Like you've done in this post. Took you longer than usual this time, tho.

Wash. Rinse. Repeat.

 

[Cotton]

Sure it could. The word "many" is contextual.

You could say "many years ago" and mean a thousand years ago, or 20.

Depends on what you are talking about.

Again, you and I both knew that Harris only has a handful of career receptions. It should have been obvious to all parties who weren't trying to be dicks that many didn't equal like 50.

It's many, relative to his number of opportunities.

I'm going to play. You meant majority then, not many. If you say the majority of his passes have been on screen plays that he broke then fine. But, not many times he breaks away on screen passes. #smittydoublespeak

 

[Smitty]

There was no subtlety to pick up on. You know it. I know it. And anybody who's read this thread knows it. It was you speaking in absolutes, without thinking. Again. And when called on it, you do what you always do. Argue incessantly, spinning away from what is said, until you can move the goal posts. Like you've done in this post. Took you longer than usual this time, tho.

Wash. Rinse. Repeat.

I'm not moving the goal posts. I maintain that Dwayne Harris has shown many times that he's excelled on screens.