On February 2nd, Bob Sturm posted this comment from NFL analyst Pat Kirwan (http://sturminator.blogspot.com/):

"We always talk about the 3-4 outside linebackers when talking with Bill Cowher, and he wants to start with his defensive ends. Go study the tapes. Aaron Smith sets up a lot of things. He's so good that he forces the tackle to go with him into the B-gap and then the outside rusher is on a back. The guys that build (the 3-4 schemes) will tell you to start right there (with the defensive ends). Not with the outside linebackers. They are the finishing touch - we are going to set it up so that they are going to be on backs a lot, and when that happens, you are going to win."

I tend to agree and believe that Dallas' greatest defensive deficiency on the front seven is the lack of a consistent pressure player at the 3-4 defensive end position (http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2012/1/29/2755797/is-the-problem-anthony-spencer-or-is-he-the-victim-of-his-surroundings). According to reports, the Cowboys are seriously considering moving Jay Ratliff to defensive end next season. The development of Sean Lissemore on limited snaps may be the catalyst for this move finally taking place (http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2012/2/9/2786800/dallas-cowboys-pro-football-focus-trending-players). This looks to be a step in the right direction according to Pat.

"I think if you were playing a true 3-4, then Ratliff should not be a nose tackle. He should be out, just like Vince Wilfork, who is playing more as a 5-technique quite a bit now and I think Haloti Ngata got everybody creatively thinking about how to do it. But as long as you are playing basically a 4-3 defense and Ratliff is basically a 1-gap player, he's ok there."

Under Parcells, Dallas ran a more traditional 3-4 defense. Wade ran the Phillips-version of the 3-4. Rob Ryan had his tendencies, and as stated by Kirwan, Ryan's defense, like those of his predecessors became stale due to a lack of flexibility with personnel. The 3-4 defense is most potent when the coverage schemes are unpredictable.

"You better do it [drop Ware into coverage] once in a while, because if you don't, they will just call him the end in the protection schemes and the tackle is always going to turn to him. And the guard will always turn to the "5-technique" and the back will always be on the (inside) linebacker.

Most guys treat Dallas as if they are a 4-3 defense. They don't believe DeMarcus is ever going to drop and they don't believe the other guy is that much of a threat, so they look at you as if you are what we call a "4-3 Under". If you stop the film right after the snap, the Cowboys look just like a 4-3 Under defense all of the time."

At a press conference, Jason Garrett mentioned that the Cowboys would consider moving to more of a 4-3 base defensive front in 2012. In reality, the Cowboys play a similar scheme in nickel situations when Ware and Spencer act as 4-3 defensive ends, with Ratliff moving to defensive tackle.

According to Kirwan, opposing offensive coordinators have their blocking schemes based on a "4-3 Under" look that the Cowboys essentially employ. Notice the phrase, "...they don't believe the other guy is that much of a threat."

Pat is referring to Anthony Spencer. Since the defensive ends are not attracting the offensive tackles to help the guards, Spencer is consistently required to beat an offensive tackle. The same could be said for Ware, as none of the defensive ends are attracting the offensive tackle into the B-gap: DeMarcus is just better.

Today Bob Sturm makes the argument against the acquisition of Mario Williams. His final analysis consists of, "Basically, what I am saying is that Ware and Williams are birds of a feather. You cannot have both and still have a sound 3-(http://sturminator.blogspot.com/)."

I believe that Sturm, however, missed some very obvious points in his column. This will be the biggest contract Mario will sign in his career. He is currently 27 years old and this contract will likely be at least 5 years in length. If he sees the contract through to its conclusion, he will be 32 years old.

Therefore, it would come as a surprise if he did not follow the money. Consequently, every team with cap space is in play: including the Cowboys. If Dallas signs him, there is no reason why Dallas could not play him alongside Ware on the blindside as a 3-4 defensive end on first down and some second downs.

Mario seems to fit the mold of pressure 5-technique defensive ends. He has the size and the power to anchor as well as pressure the passer.

Justin Smith: 6'4", 285 (DE, SF)

Aaron Smith: 6' 5", 298 (DE, PIT)

Calais Campbell: 6' 8", 300 (DE, ARI)

J.J. Watt: 6' 5", 288 (DE, HOU)

Antonio Smith: 6' 4", 280 (DE, HOU)

Jared Odrick: 6' 5", 304 (DE, MIA)

Pernell McPhee: 6' 3", 280 (DE, BAL)

Stephen Bowen: 6' 5", 306 (DE, WAS)

Jay Ratliff: 6' 4", 287 (NT/DE, DAL)

Mario Williams: 6' 6", 283 (DE/OLB, HOU)

Wes Bunting had this to say about Mario Williams in comparison to Quinton Coples (DE, North Carolina) (http://www.cowboysnation.com/2012/02/cowboys-draft-2012-good-fits-for-4-3.html):

"Williams was more powerful on contact. He was explosive, but he wanted to play in contact. He was long and he could fend off blocks. And there were not any motor questions with him. He played hard play-in and play-out. He was a little raw, needed to use his hands better. Overall, he was more of a force physically than Quinton Coples."

Although Bunting is referring to Coples as a 4-3 end or tackle, realize that Bunting has also noted in the past that Coples could play end in the 3-4. In addition, the Cowboys had Mario Williams as the best player available in the 2006 NFL draft, when Bill Parcells was playing the more traditional 3-4 defense.

Mario Williams seems to have the physical attributes to play the 3-4 defensive end position and then switch to defensive end in a traditional 4-3, which Dallas employs in nickel packages. Remember that Rob Ryan switched Oakland's 3-4 front with Warren Sapp to a 4-3 in order to take better advantage of the individual talents of each player.

Ryan also likes to utilize players with position flexibility. The word "multiplicity" was bandied about in training camp last season from almost all of the defensive players. Mario Williams' positional flexibility could be maximized under a scheme like Ryan's.

If Mario were to line up next to Ware, either Williams or DeMarcus would face many single man-on-man opportunities due to presence of the other premier pressure player. If Mario was able to consistently attract the attention of the offensive tackle in the B-gap, Ware would find himself taking on tight ends and running backs on a regular basis. Conversely, if the offensive tackle stayed on Ware, Mario would be mano-a-mano with a much slower guard.

On the opposite side, the Cowboys could have Spencer/Butler alongside Ratliff, with an improved Lissemore at the nose in a base 3-4. Ratliff might do for Spencer/Butler, what Williams would be projected to do for Ware. After listening to Bryan Broaddus state that the Cowboys may franchise Spencer, I tend to think as Rafael Vela does: (http://www.cowboysnation.com/2012/02/its-fibbing-seasons-eve.html) this is lip-service and nothing is really being decided. That $9 million cap-hit would be put to better use with Mario Williams.

This would also afford Dallas the opportunity to drop Ware into pass coverage more often while sending Ratliff, Lissemore, and Williams. The front would still be expected to provide pressure with those three rushing the passer. The added benefit of making the Cowboys defense more unpredictable would yield long-term benefits, such as turnovers.

Employing that strategy (dropping Ware) now, just gives opposing quarterbacks plenty of time to wait for receivers to break into the clear. This is what Kirwan sees as the biggest deficiency currently on the Cowboys front.

It makes me nervous to disagree with a football mind such as Sturm. He has shown great insight in the past. But I believe that Mario Williams would solve many of the issues Kirwan brought up on his show last week.

How about you?

It has been interesting listening to representatives of the Cowboys reveal the team’s off season needs. Stephen declared that the Cowboys needed to address the interior of the offensive line and the secondary. Rob Ryan echoed Stephen’s sentiments regarding the secondary.

Most Cowboys fans witnessed the debacle that cost Dave Campo his job as a long-time Dallas assistant coach. Quarterbacks such as Grossman, Moore, and Kolb carved the secondary to accumulate ratings of 95.2, 99.5, and 109.9 respectively over a three game span.

Continue reading this post »

When my wife was pregnant, I stopped drinking alcohol to show support for her in fostering the best environment possible to give our child every advantage. Those were nine long months.

I did not know that she would need to abstain from ingesting alcohol for another 6 months while breast feeding. In for a penny, in for a pound, I guess.

Just as the six months were over, we were blessed with our second pregnancy. It was almost immediate, and I had not taken advantage of the small window, thinking that I would have a few months to enjoy the wonderful flavor of a malty, smooth beverage trickling down my throat.

Pardon me while, uh... Aaaah. Thank you.

Continue reading this post »

This weekend was as painful for the Green Bay Packers and their fanatics, as the divisional playoff round was for Dallas Cowboys fans following the 2007 regular season. The New York Giants once again upset the number one seed in the NFC playoffs and may again meet the New England Patriots in the Super Bowl.

Last season, the only team to play a competitive post season game against the World Champion Packers was the Philadelphia Eagles. After a tremendous off season, the Eagles were once again favored to win the division and anticipated to make a deep run through the playoffs.

It seems that the NFC East may still have its share of beasts despite an awful regular season by the Giants and Eagles in 2011. Both teams, however, exhibited strong finishes in the regular season.

As OCC noted in one of his responses to a previous post, Jimmy Johnson believed that Dallas needed to win the NFC East to meet its goals. In order for the Dallas Cowboys to once again become a playoff contender (no talk of Super Bowl around here until the Cowboys win a playoff game), Dallas needs to beat the Eagles and Giants.

Good luck with that.

The Cowboys were 0-4 against the Giants and Eagles in 2011. Worse yet, in the 4 losses Dallas suffered against teams outside of the NFC East, the Cowboys were outscored by 17 total points. In the four games against the Eagles and Giants, the Cowboys were outscored by a combined 60 points.

Yes...it really was that ugly. Maybe it is not too late to petition to join the NFC West. After all, Dallas was the only team to beat the 49ers in San Francisco in 2011.

Oddly, lifelong rivals can often answer questions that illuminate important facets regarding ones performance providing valuable insight during reflection and self-assessment. Who else would better know how to beat you than a long-time rival?

In this case, the 49ers also showed where the Cowboys need to improve in order to beat the Giants and Eagles. San Francisco beat New York (27-20) and won at Philadelphia (24-23) during the 2011 regular season.

The 49ers gave up an average of about 354 yards passing and 101 yards rushing against the Giants and Eagles. The Cowboys defense yielded an average of 318 yards passing and 140 yards rushing versus the same opponents.

Defensively, Dallas permitted New York and Philadelphia to gain 458 total yards per game, while San Francisco had the same teams average 455 yards per game on offense. The Cowboys sacked Vick and Manning 8 times and hit them 20 times in four games. The 49ers had 3 sacks and 7 quarterback hits in 2 games against those quarterbacks.

One of the biggest defensive differences was that San Francisco forced five turnovers (3 interceptions, 2 fumbles); compared to the 2 takeaways Dallas registered in twice as many games. Perhaps due to the turnovers, the 49ers only allowed 43 points in two games, while the Cowboys gave up 122 points in four games.

The greatest differences, however, lie on the offensive side of the ball. The 49ers were able to run for over 120 yards per game while the Cowboys gained an average of about 88 yards per game on the ground. Alex Smith was sacked 5 times (with 7 hits on the quarterback) in two games, while the Cowboys' quarterbacks were sacked 16 times and hit 26 times in 4 games.

In fact, Romo getting sacked in Dallas' losses was a trend in 2011. Cowboys' quarterbacks were sacked 28 times in the 8 losses. In winning efforts, Dallas yielded but 10 total quarterback sacks.

That difference does not exist on the defensive side of the ball. Dallas actually averaged half a sack more in the losses than in the wins. Considering Romo's mobility, giving up 28 sacks in 8 losses implicates the offensive line's performance.

Comparing teams with offensive lines that pass protect effectively, or are among the best in running the football, in games versus the Giants and Philadelphia, yields favorable results. Buffalo, which gave up the fewest sacks in 2011, beat Philadelphia and lost to New York by 3. New Orleans, which has an incredibly potent passing attack, ranked second in fewest sacks given up, and mauled the Giants 49-24.

New Orleans and Buffalo also rank 4th and 5th respectively in rushing yards per attempt. Both teams were also ranked 24th and 26th in total defense respectively during the 2011 regular season.

New Orleans is recognized for having a strong offensive line. That makes what San Francisco did on Saturday all that more impressive. The 49ers defeated the Saints' strength and earned the right to host the NFC Championship game.

As rabblerousr wrote earlier today (http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2012/1/16/2711021/dallas-cowboys-wishlist-divisional-round-edition#storyjump), the 49ers have invested heavily on linemen and linebackers early in the draft and through free agent signings. Comparatively, the Cowboys have allocated their resources to receivers, running backs, and cornerbacks: the players furthest from the line of scrimmage.

In order to beat the Giants and Eagles, the Cowboys need to invest early picks on the players battling in the trenches. According to the teams that have the greatest success against the Cowboys' NFC division rivals, bolstering the interior of the offensive line is a solid investment. This strategy should be especially effective in a draft featuring two offensive linemen (DeCastro and Konz) that are rated among the best prospects entering the NFL.

The Cowboys moved up twice in the 2010 NFL draft to take Dez Bryant and Sean Lee. Both players made an impact in their sophomore seasons in Dallas, leading the team in major categories at their respective positions. The Cowboys did not make a single trade in the 2011 NFL draft: that was the first time since Jerry Jones bought the team that Dallas did not move out of its slots.

The numbers show that selecting earlier in the draft leads to acquiring better talent more often than later in the draft. Over the last 10 NFL drafts, 47.7% of the positional Pro Bowl players (114) were selected in the first round. Approximately 15 players out of the 32 selected in the first round make a significant impact in the NFL.

Eliminating special teams Pro Bowl selections, the second round yields 19.7% of the positional Pro Bowl players (47). About 6 players picked in the second round of each NFL draft are recognized for their playmaking skills.

There is not a significant difference in the number of positional playmakers selected in the third and fourth rounds (18 and 19 respectively). About 8% of players recognized for excellent play come from the 3rd round and another 8% are picked in the 4th round: or about 2 players in each round.

The Cowboys have selected two possible playmakers in the third round over the last 10 NFL drafts (Jason Witten and possibly DeMarco Murray). While Dallas seems to be more successful in the third round than most teams, the Cowboys have missed on many more third round selections (Jason Williams, Robert Brewster, and James Marten to name a few).

So considering that there is less than a 10% chance to find a playmaker in the third round, is it worth it to move up? Here is a real case study:

Over at Wes Bunting's site (http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/scouting_department.html), Peter Konz (C, Wisconsin: 6' 5", 315) is the 5th rated pro prospect, behind Morris Claiborne (CB, LSU: 6' 0", 185), and David DeCastro (OG, Stanford: 6' 5", 310) in Wes Bunting's latest prospect ratings. Claiborne and DeCastro are the 2nd and 3rd rated prospects respectively, only trailing top rated Andrew Luck. Trent Richardson rounds out Wes Bunting's top five pro prospects, rated 4th.

Bunting's approach resembles how the prospects may be rated on a professional team's draft board. Currently, the first 20 names on the board project with first round grades (at or above a 7.0).

CBS Sportsline writer Rob Rang has Morris Claiborne lasting until the 6th overall pick, and Peter Konz lasting until the 29th pick of the 2012 NFL draft. Another CBS Sportsline writer, Dane Brugler, has the Cowboys selecting David DeCastro with the 14th overall selection. Rob Rang has DeCastro lasting until the 17th pick (http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/mock).

That presents a couple of very interesting scenarios in addition to staying put in the draft:

Dallas selects David DeCastro with the 14th pick, and then trades up to draft Peter Konz at the bottom of the first round. By trading the 45th and the 82nd selections, the Cowboys could move up to the 29th or 30th overall pick.

Morris Claiborne, one of the few elite prospects in this draft, slides out of the top five. Dallas trades the 14th and 45th selections to move up to the 6th or 7th overall pick to select Morris Claiborne.

Trading up or down in the draft requires two parties to express a real interest to do so. Even if the Cowboys would like to trade up or down, as these scenarios project, Dallas may not find a willing partner. Since an absence of a trading partner will result in the Cowboys staying with the 14th, 45th, and 82nd selections in the upcoming 2012 NFL draft by default, it will be assumed that the losing teams in the AFC and NFC Championship games, as well as either the team in the 6th slot (as I believe Washington will not remain in the 6th position) or Jacksonville would be willing trade partners.

By selecting David DeCastro and then trading back up into the first round to select the top rated center out of Wisconsin, Peter Konz, the Cowboys could immediately provide Tony Romo with one of the best, young offensive lines in the NFL. The biggest limiting factor to the potent Cowboys offense could be upgraded to an elite NFL level in one draft, permitting Garrett to utilize Witten, Austin, Bryant, and (hopefully) Robinson with few if any limitations.

The new identity of the Dallas Cowboys could be akin to that of the Saints, Packers, Patriots, and Manning-led Colts. Those teams have won 6 of the last 10 Super Bowls, and have 8 Super Bowl appearances in the last ten years.

Imagine attacking a weak Giants secondary with Witten, Austin, Bryant, and Robinson, while only occasionally keeping a healthy DeMarco Murray in to help block. Every route combination could be utilized, as throwing deep would no longer require keeping in two tight ends and a running back to keep Romo from getting mauled.

The thought of DeMarco Murray running behind a line comprised of Smith at left tackle, DeCastro at left guard, Konz at center, Free at right tackle, and Arkin, Nagy, or Kowalski at right guard could excite the most downtrodden Dallas fan. NFL.com shows that despite his struggles against premier pass rushers, Free continued to open holes in the running game.

Most of the runs gaining 10-yards or more during the 2011 regular season were accomplished when running towards Doug Free: 19 runs of 10+-yards to the left, compared to 17 runs of 10+-yards when running to the right and up the middle combined. The Cowboys had more rushing first downs when running behind the left side of the offensive line, than when rushing either behind the middle or the right side of the offensive line.

On the other hand, the Cowboys would forfeit their 3rd round pick to move up into the first round. Dallas needs all of the draft picks it can get in order to infuse good players into a talent poor team.

Drafting DeCastro and Konz would rob a wilting defense of the opportunity to add much needed young talent. Such is the state of the defense, that any playmaker added on the defense could be done at almost any position.

But if playmakers are needed on the defensive side of the ball, why not move up to capture the best defensive player in the draft if he begins to slide out of the top five. With two elite quarterbacks expected to be chosen in the top five, and at least one offensive tackle expected to be a top five talent, it is not out of the realm of possibilities that Claiborne could begin to slide.

Jenkins had a better 2011 NFL regular season, than 2010 season. Mike made the Pro Bowl following the 2009 NFL season along with Terrence Newman. Newman's game, however, suffered a severe drop-off the last two seasons.

Combining Jenkins with Claiborne could be the secondary tonic that this Cowboys team sorely needs. Scandrick (working out of the slot), Jenkins, and Claiborne could line up against the elite receivers in the NFC East, and lock down most of them, permitting Rob Ryan to simulate the success his brother Rex had with a similar strategy in New York.

Claiborne has been favorably compared to Patrick Peterson, and considered a better pure cornerback prospect than Patrick Peterson was last season by several scouting services. With Claiborne and Jenkins starting at cornerback, the Cowboys could boast one of the best young cornerback tandems in the NFL: as long as Jenkins continues to progress and not take another step back. Adding a playmaker to the weakest part of the weakest unit of the team would result in exponentially better play in 2012 and beyond.

Unfortunately, trading up would cost the Cowboys the 45th selection in the draft. As with the argument against trading up for Konz, this Dallas team needs every pick to add talent. The 45th best player in the draft would likely be better than most of the players starting on the defensive side of the ball, as there is about a 1 in 5 possibility of acquiring a playmaker in the second round.

Without including free agent acquisitions, which choice would lead to this franchise's 6th Super Bowl victory sooner?

1. Stay put.

2. Pick at 14th and trade up to 29th.

3. Trade up to 6th.

It comes down to the preference of the organization: make a strong offensive unit dominant, or add more talent to improve the weakest unit on the team.

It is interesting how looking through a pair of binoculars is a lot like analyzing statistics. Looking through one end magnifies the desired object, distinguishing features that are often unnoticed by the naked eye. Turn the binoculars around, and the object blends into the background as an unremarkable dot in the distant matrix.

Somewhere in the middle, lies the truth.

But like that object being viewed, the truth is often not as interesting when it is studied in its natural context without amplification. Interest stimulates controversy, as perception is rarely uniform. Controversy leads to discussion, and often to further observation.

It is easy to turn around the binoculars and have Jason Garrett's comments blend into the background during his press conferences. Jason, however, sublimely highlights several important factors that he emphasizes to the players and the team.

Jason Garrett has voiced that most games in the NFL are still within one score going into the fourth quarter, and are therefore decided during that final 15 minute stanza. During the 2011 regular season, almost 52% of the games were decided by 8 points or less.

The Dallas Cowboys had 9 games that were decided by less than 9 points. The Cowboys won 4 of those games (Washington twice, Miami, and San Francisco). In fact, as the season got underway, Dallas had a streak of six games decided by 3 points or less from 2010. The Cowboys added three more games to start the 2011 season to set a new NFL record.

The explanation for the seemingly endless string of close games that characterized these Jason Garrett-led Cowboys produced considerable speculation. Whispers that this edition of the Cowboys played down to the level of its opponents experienced a crescendo following a 2-point victory against the Redskins.

Then the popular philosophy shifted to the Cowboys just not knowing how to win. Consecutive fourth quarter leads that resulted in four point losses to the Lions and Patriots were the catalyst for questioning the ability of the quarterback and the head coach to lead this team to victories.

The next four games were all decided by at least 10 points. During the following four game stretch, however, Dallas won or lost on the final possession. The media stoked the fire under Garrett's seat as head coach; but Jerry made the right decision in supporting his new leader.

Only six teams had more games decided by less than 9 points than the Dallas Cowboys. One of those teams, Cincinnati, had a winning record (9-7). The overall record of those six teams was 39-57 (.406 winning ratio).

It is not surprising that the teams that had the fewest close games included New Orleans (6), New England (7), Baltimore (7), and Green Bay (7). Those teams were a combined 19-8 in games decided by 8-points or less (.704 winning ratio).

In conjunction with the mantra coming from Garrett at Valley Ranch, winning games in the fourth quarter is a major criterion in differentiating between successful teams and those selecting early in the upcoming NFL draft. In addition, there were 64 games during the 2011 regular season (exactly 25% of the games played) in which the team that held a lead in the 4th quarter lost the game.

Baltimore, Atlanta, Green Bay, and New Orleans were among the teams that did not lose one game in which they held a lead during the 4th quarter. The combined record of those teams was 57-23 (.713 winning ratio). With the exception of the Kansas City Chiefs, every team that won every game after it captured a 4th quarter lead made the playoffs (and the Chiefs are the only team that defeated the Packers).

Unfortunately, the Cowboys distinguished themselves in this category. During the course of the 2011 regular season, no other team lost as many games while relinquishing a lead that existed during any point throughout the 4th quarter, as the Dallas Cowboys (5).

Five teams blew 4th quarter leads that led to losses almost as often (4 times) as the Cowboys. Those teams had a combined record of 27-53 (.338 winning ratio). None of those teams (Philadelphia, Carolina, Cleveland, Miami, and Minnesota) made the playoffs.

The teams that made a living from overcoming 4th quarter deficits included Arizona (6), Cincinnati (5), Denver (5), San Francisco (5) and the New York Giants (5). As with teams that secure 4th quarter leads, all but one (the Cardinals) of the teams that had led the NFL in 4th quarter comebacks made the playoffs.

Obviously, the Cowboys do not belong in the same category as Baltimore (12-4), Green Bay (15-1), San Francisco (13-3), New England (13-3) and New Orleans (13-3). Dallas, however, does resemble the following teams: Carolina (6-10), Cleveland (4-12), Miami (6-10), and Minnesota (3-13).

Based on the results of the season, a strong argument could be made that the 2011 Dallas Cowboys closely resemble a team that should have won only 5 or 6 games. Dallas snatched defeat from victory more than any other team, played in more close games than all but six teams, and did not make the plays necessary to come back from enough 4th quarter deficits (3).

With improved play in the 4th quarter, the Cowboys could join the elite in the NFL. In order to perform better in the 4th quarter, however, Dallas needs more elite talent. As Garrett continues to add talent to the roster, it is reassuring that Jason has the correct focus: winning the 4th quarter.

The predominant belief regarding the abundance of talent that existed on the 2011 edition of the Dallas Cowboys was brought into focus this season, and further investigation revealed the true dearth of talent that existed. In lieu of this transposition, perhaps it is appropriate to reverse some of the popular opinions made throughout the season, and turn around the questions:

In place of a team that has underachieved since 2007, could this edition of the Dallas Cowboys actually be overachieving or outplaying the talent present on the team?

Instead of blaming Jason Garrett for not engineering more convincing victories, should Jason be getting the lion's share of the credit for keeping this team competitive in most games?

If the Eagles, with all of the talent added to their roster, underachieved this season, how can a Cowboys team with far less talent that finished with an identical 8-8 record be considered anything but an overachiever?

Considering that this edition of the Dallas Cowboys resembled teams that finished with 5 or 6 wins, will a rebuilding process take more time?

Could these be the initial signs that a new culture is taking root at Valley Ranch?

Will the emphasis Jason Garrett places on winning the 4th quarter begin to manifest as more consistent and improved play in the games' final 15 minutes?

Just some observations from behind the binoculars...

And hopefully a building block for America's Team.

The upcoming 2012 NFL draft will either propel the Cowboys to future success, or continued mediocre performance. Thanks to poor drafts in the recent past, it is easier to point to the positions that are solid, than list all of the team needs.

DeMarcus Ware, Jay Ratliff, and Sean Lee solidify one outside linebacker, defensive line, and inside linebacker position on defense. Mike Jenkins is still a question mark at cornerback, but is coming off a solid season in 2011.

On offense, Tony Romo, Jason Witten, Tyron Smith, Miles Austin, and DeMarco Murray are the reasons that the Cowboys should feel confident standing pat at the positions of quarterback, tight end, offensive tackle, wide receiver, and running back. In addition, a strong case could be made that Dez Bryant, Doug Free, and Dan Bailey will also help the positions of wide receiver, offensive tackle (likely on the right side), and kicker contribute to future success in Dallas.

That leaves all three interior offensive line positions, two defensive line positions, an inside and outside linebacker position, and at least one cornerback position, as well as both safety positions. So three offensive line positions, and seven defensive positions need an immediate upgrade. A new punter may also be needed.

Here lies the great debate. What philosophical premise do most Cowboys fans support in regards to the development of a competitive team?

"What?" may be uttered aloud? Here is the crux of the decision Jason, Jerry, and Stephen have:

There are obviously many needs that need to be addressed on the Cowboys defensive unit. The defense is obviously the most talent starved unit on this Dallas team. Should the Cowboys draft the best defensive players available, or...

Should the Cowboys draft the best interior offensive lineman available, given that the talent levels between the defensive player and offensive lineman are on par with one another? Drafting a great guard would obviously move towards solidifying the strongest unit on the team.

The practical example is easy to present. Assuming that the Dallas scouting department has similar grades on Melvin Ingram (DE, South Carolina), Dre Kirkpatrick (CB, Alabama), and David DeCastro (OG, Stanford), with all three available at pick 14 in the 2012 NFL draft, which player should the Cowboys select?

This basic problem exists in all competitive situations. Should an individual or organization allocate resources towards the area of relative strength, or should the weakest part of the whole be given a higher priority?

Listening to many draft pundits, sports radio talk show hosts, former football players, and former NFL front office types, an argument is made to allocate the best resources towards the improvement of the weakest unit in order to facilitate winning with a balanced team. Finding a great pass rusher to line up opposite the elite DeMarcus Ware could have several benefits. Having a great pass rusher pressure the quarterback from one side, should elevate the performance of the best defensive player on the unit, DeMarcus Ware.

With a partner effectively rushing the quarterback from the opposite side, Ware should have more opportunities to make a difference. Regardless, greater pressure exerted on the quarterback with only a 4-man rush would also greatly help the secondary. Just look at how the recently crowned NFC East division champions, New York Giants allocated their resources on defense.

But if the Cowboys were to take Dre Kirkpatrick, the secondary is greatly improved. The Dallas secondary is obviously the weakest part of the defense. Drafting a great cornerback directly addresses the biggest weakness on the weakest unit. In essence, it is the extreme of the philosophical construct: address the weakest part of the weakest unit.

On the other hand, drafting a blue-chip offensive guard, such as David DeCastro does very little to improve the weakest unit on the team. Fortifying the weakest link on the offensive line, however, may make the Cowboys offense incredibly explosive. By scoring more points and effectively running (or controlling) the ball, the defense is indirectly helped.

So which approach would lead to more wins?

Fortunately, the NFL has offered a possible answer to that question. Look at the most successful teams in the NFL playoffs this season:

Green Bay (15-1, #1 seed in the NFC): #3 on offense, #32 on defense in NFL

San Francisco (13-3, #2 seed in NFC): #26 on offense, #4 on defense in NFL

New Orleans (13-3, #3 seed in NFC): #1 on offense, #24 on defense in NFL

New England (13-3, #1 seed in AFC): #2 on offense, #31 on defense in NFL

Baltimore (13-3, #2 seed in AFC): #15 on offense, #3 on defense in NFL

San Francisco and Baltimore have dominant defenses with a poor and an average offense. Green Bay, New Orleans, and New England have elite offenses, but with poor defenses.

Chances are very good that two teams will face off in the Super Bowl with obvious deficiencies on one side of the ball (only Baltimore has an average unit combined with a great unit). Most of the top five teams in the NFL rely heavily on their offense to win games. In fact, the top three offenses in the league are the three favorites to win the Super Bowl.

Which way will the Cowboys lean?

Consider that Jason Garrett is an offensive coach that is the head coach. Remember that Garrett oversaw the drafting of Tyron Smith with the ninth overall selection of the 2011 NFL draft. That pick broke the longest active streak in NFL history of not drafting an offensive lineman in the first round.

Recognize that the greatest asset on the Dallas Cowboys at this time is quarterback Tony Romo. Because of shoddy blocking Romo has missed all or significant parts of 12 games over the last two seasons. That does not include the other 6 games (at least) where Romo had to play hurt over the course of the last two years.

Because of poor blocking, Tony has been limited in more than half of the games over those last two seasons. That means that the effectiveness of Miles Austin, Dez Bryant, DeMarco Murray, and Jason Witten has also been compromised. From a financial standpoint, that translates to approximately $20 million in salary that has been rendered ineffective.

There is also the possibility that Jerry Jones would prefer to have a high-scoring team over a stouter defensive unit. High-scoring teams tend to sell more tickets, have higher accessory sales (e.g., jerseys), garner more attention, and have more success than defensively stout units.

So assuming that very little difference exists between a great offensive guard and a great defensive player at a position of need, which way should the Cowboys lean?

Which way would you go?

I find it fascinating how adults frequently learn from children. Last holiday season, my father in law's health was failing rapidly. My wife flew out at last minute to be with him during his last few hours on earth.

He served in the army and fought at the Battle of the Bulge. Heartfelt thanks to him and all of those who have so selflessly served our great country.

So Mommy was not going to be home for Christmas morning, but she would be back on the 26th. The kids were presented with the following choice:

1. Would you like to open presents without Mommy on Christmas morning, or

2. Would you mind waiting an extra day to open your presents so Mommy could be here too?

Now I imagine those that do not have children, can still remember the ardent fever that overcomes children on Christmas morning when presents are sitting under the tree. For that reason, I was amazed when my kids picked choice 2...

They were willing to sacrifice one day of playing with toys that had been enticing them for days to share the experience with their Mommy. The kids knew Mommy would like to be around, and they would like to have her at home too. Children that were younger than 6 years old showed great patience and foresight.

They made me very proud. If only adults could see things this clearly: if only I could more frequently...

These days, a diluted, diminished fever overcomes me when I know a big Cowboys game is on the horizon. It is not quite like opening a present under the tree as a kid, but it is similar.

About a week ago I posted this on BTB:

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2011/12/28/2666443/where-for-art-thou-romo

The post described how the Cowboys had twelve quality players on the roster. Today I read a well-penned piece by one of my favorite sports personalities, Bob Sturm.

http://sturminator.blogspot.com/

Both stories touch on the same subject: the Dallas Cowboys lack the talent necessary to win a Super Bowl. Jason Garrett reiterated the point that he made last night today in his press conference this afternoon: "We need to get better". Garrett alluded to adhering to a long-term plan that included purging overpaid-underperforming veterans, making coaching changes, and infusing more talent through the draft with the right kind of guys.

Garrett mentioned correcting the financial inequities present on the team and weathering the growing pains these changes would bring about. He spoke about staying the course or maintaining the current direction. Jason wants this team to be more talented, creating more competition within the team, leading to more consistent execution throughout the entire season, with improvement noted as the season progresses. Garrett intimated that he wants a younger, more talented team, and that Jerry Jones was completely on board navigating this course.

"But where is this team right now? How long will this reconstruction take?" These were the questions volleyed to Jason from the Dallas media.

Here is where the team currently stands:

Against teams that had losing records, the Cowboys were 7-0 (Washington 5-11 [twice], St. Louis 2-14, Seattle 7-9, Buffalo 6-10, Miami 6-10, and Tampa Bay 4-12). Dallas defeated one team with a winning record (San Francisco 13-3) and lost to every other team that had a non-losing record (New York 9-7 [twice], Philadelphia 8-8 [twice], New York Jets 8-8, New England 13-3, Detroit 10-6, and Arizona 8-8).

Not one team that is worse than the Cowboys beat Dallas this season. The Cowboys are not a bad team, merely a slightly below average one: that is why Dallas sports the 14th overall selection in the 2012 NFL draft. A fair representation of the team's standing within the NFL.

In contrast to the scattershot approach to talent acquisition utilized by former Cowboys coaching greats (tongue in cheek) Dave Campo and Wade Phillips, this coaching regime has a plan. Listening to Bryan Broaddus last night for the season's final post game wrap-up offered some insight.

Broaddus is a former Cowboys scout with contacts still littering the Dallas scouting staff. Bryan bellowed that his scouting associates were all impressed and pleased with how Garrett understands the scouting process and facilitates talent acquisition through the resources available in the scouting department.

According to the scouts at Valley Ranch, Jason Garrett has an eye for talent akin to that of Jimmy Johnson. And Jimmy also has had a major influence on Garrett's philosophical approach of talent acquisition, improvement through youthful competition, and the elimination of relatively non-productive players.

This is what Cowboys fans have been longing for since Jerry and Jimmy split up. This is an exciting transitional time in the history of this storied franchise.

But it will take time...

Take into account the Cowboys' inability to beat most average and above average teams this season when looking at the Cowboys' schedule for 2012. Remember that Dallas went 1-4 against playoff teams this season (losses to New York [twice], Detroit, and New England).

In 2012 the Dallas Cowboys play 7 games (New York [twice], Pittsburgh, Baltimore, Cincinnati, New Orleans, and Atlanta) against teams that have made the 2011 NFL playoffs. The Cowboys also have three more games against teams that finished with 8-8 records in 2011 (Philadelphia [twice], and Chicago).

In the second season of this restoration project, the Cowboys may be slightly improved, but based on this last season's results, the Cowboys projected finish is around 7-9. In essence, 8-8 in 2012 may be an improvement in performance despite no difference in the record.

Last season, the starting offense underwent a facelift with about a 45% turnover rate. Expect similar results in 2012 given the similar strategy that will be employed to improve the defense.

Look at how the abbreviated 2011 offseason took shape. Garrett released Marion Barber III, Roy Williams, Leonard Davis, Marc Colombo, and Andre Gurode. Expect to see Terence Newman, Abram Elam, Bradie James, Keith Brooking, and Anthony Spencer to be dismissed next season. That is about 36% of the starting defensive lineup.

This voyage has had a promising start on some fronts, with some unexpected setbacks at others. Garrett acknowledged this in his press conference today. The highly amoebic draft will dictate the arrival time from this trip. That the captain of the Cowboys has a singular focus on the right kind of guy, and has already shown a propensity to select quality players (e.g., Tyron Smith, DeMarco Murray, and Dan Bailey) should suggest that better days are just beyond the horizon.

But patience will be necessary. This present may not be opened until 2013.

In less than an hour, the Dallas Cowboys will play for the NFC East title. Here is what is on the line.

With a win:

The Cowboys win the NFC East and earn the 4th seed in the NFC East.

The Cowboys would host the Atlanta Falcons next weekend.

The Cowboys would finish with a 9-7 record and can draft anywhere between 21st and 32nd.

The Cowboys 2012 regular season schedule would include: Washington, Philadelphia, New York, New Orleans, Atlanta, Carolina, Tampa Bay, San Francisco, Green Bay, Baltimore, Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, and Cleveland

With a loss:

The Cowboys finish 3rd in the NFC East (just like last season)

The Cowboys would finish 8-8 and draft 14th overall.

The Cowboys 2012 regular season schedule would include: Washington, Philadelphia, New York, New Orleans, Atlanta, Carolina, Tampa Bay, Seattle, Chicago, Baltimore, Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, and Cleveland

Here is the 2012 NFL draft order (top 20) with a Dallas loss:

1. Indianapolis

2. St. Louis

3. Minnesota

4. Cleveland

5. Tampa Bay

6. Washington

7. Jacksonville

8. Carolina

9. Miami

10. Buffalo

11. Kansas City

12. Seattle

13. Arizona

14. Dallas

15. Philadelphia

16. New York Jets

17. Oakland

18. San Diego

19. Chicago

20. Tennessee

Here is the 2012 NFL draft order (top 20) with a Dallas win:

1. Indianapolis

2. St. Louis

3. Minnesota

4. Cleveland

5. Tampa Bay

6. Washington

7. Jacksonville

8. Carolina

9. Miami

10. Buffalo

11. Kansas City

12. Seattle

13. Arizona

14. Philadelphia

15. New York Jets

16. Oakland

17. San Diego

18. Chicago

19. New York Giants

20. Tennessee

William Shakespeare's underlying premise in most of his wonderful works pertains to the discrepancy between appearance and reality. The NFL's version to Hamlet is the Pro Bowl.

Tony Romo has a 102.2 passer rating throwing the ball to receivers that have not amassed 1,000 yards (Witten 873, Bryant 858, Robinson 797, and Austin 559). Stafford and Manning have 96.6 and 90.3 passer ratings respectively throwing to receivers that have 1,437 (Calvin Johnson - Pro Bowler), 1,358 (Victor Cruz) and 1,116 (Hakeem Nicks) yards. It is obvious that Romo has not had the dominant receiver that Manning and Stafford had this season.

As with Shakespeare, the perception is that Romo cost the Cowboys wins. The reality includes the passer ratings for Eli, Matt, and Tony in their respective teams' losses:

Manning: 82.26

Stafford: 72.4

Romo: 94.55

Yet there is something to glean from the Pro Bowl voting. "To be or not to be..."

Pro Bowl candidates on offense

Tyron Smith: Tyron has been spectacular as a rookie. If Smith continues to improve, he will surely be a stalwart at the Pro Bowl. Tyron will likely be a left tackle next season.

Miles Austin: Miles was injured far too much this season to make another run at the Pro Bowl. Just look at his total yards through 15 games for the season: 559.

Dez Bryant: While Dez has improved in many areas, he is still not Pro Bowl worthy. At this point, he is behind Tyron Smith and Sean Lee in Pro Bowl consideration, and needs to continue to get much better. Dez had some injury problems early in the season.

Demarco Murray: Demarco's biggest issue may be his health now that he has showcased his talent. The verdict is out on this kid's Pro Bowl potential until he puts together several healthy seasons.

Jason Witten: Jason has had a solid season again, and may end up making the Pro Bowl if Gonzalez or Graham elect not to go. Witten is a legitimate Pro Bowl player on this roster.

Tony Romo: See Jason Witten and statistics above. Romo also toughed it out through a pneumothorax and two broken ribs early in the season.

Pro Bowl candidates on defense

DeMarcus Ware: He is in the Pro Bowl and will hopefully continue going for a long time. He has been hampered by an injury towards the end of this season.

Sean Lee: Like Tyron Smith on the offensive side of the ball, as Sean continues to improve, the Pro Bowl invitations will come. Sean needs to avoid the injury bug for a few seasons. Like Tyron, however, he is not there yet.

Jay Ratliff: He also made the Pro Bowl, and his performance this season warranted the honor. Like Ware, he has played through a significant injury for the last few games.

Mike Jenkins: Mike made the Pro Bowl in 2009, then played very poorly in 2010. Jenkins has played much better in 2011, but not to his 2009 Pro Bowl level. In his defense, Mike has been beat up for most of the season.

Pro Bowl candidates on special teams

Mat McBriar: He has made the Pro Bowl, and when healthy, he should garner consideration for the Pro Bowl. As with many other good players on the Cowboys, however, he has not been healthy this season.

Dan Bailey: Dan had a spectacular rookie season, making 26 (I believe) field goals in a row, including several game tying and game winning kicks. If Dan can continue to develop from a strong rookie season, he could become a Pro Bowl player.

Of the 12 players mentioned above, 9 had injuries limiting them this season (all four on defense), 5 have been on the team for two seasons or less (which is promising), 2 made the Pro Bowl, and 2 more could make it before the game in Honolulu is played. The breakdown includes 6 offensive players, 4 defensive players, and 2 players on special teams.

Not everyone in the kingdom can be a King. Now look at the role players that subjectively contribute more than expected on this Cowboys team:

Laurent Robinson (as a 3rd wide receiver)

Tony Fiammetta

Felix Jones (as a 2nd running back)

L.P. Ladouceur (or whomever one may insert here)

"Thou wretched, rash, intruding fool."

Of the 53 players on the Dallas Cowboys active roster, 12 have the potential to be among the league's best. Perhaps 4 more players are performing well in their roles. That leaves over 30 players that are not contributing to a satisfactory level.

The 2012 Pro Bowl voting exposes the real problem that was most evident in the first game against the New York Giants: there is a chasm of difference between the performance of the 12 most talented players on this team and almost everyone else. Consider that 9 of the 12 elite players have missed time due to injury this season, and the abyss of talent down the roster is further exacerbated.

"O, from this time forth..."

There are players that will likely play better in new roles or with more experience that are currently on the roster, but they seem to be few. These are the best candidates:

Doug Free: Doug played surprisingly well in his first action during the 2009 season when he took over for Marc Colombo at right tackle. As a left tackle last season, Free's performance dipped as he led the offensive line in penalties and had his share of problems in protection. This season Doug has regressed further from his 2010 play, all but insuring his move back to the right side of the offensive line.

Kevin Kowalski: The coaches have been effusive in their praise. He has demonstrated good mobility in his limited action. If he can demonstrate that he can effectively anchor as a center, he will become the new starting center if Dallas does not draft a center.

Bruce Carter: He lost almost his entire rookie season recovering from an ACL injury he suffered at the end of his senior season at North Carolina. His punt block against Philadelphia was impressive, but he needs time to show the type of player he can be: considering James and Brooking are past their prime and in the final seasons of their respective contracts, Carter will probably have plenty of opportunity next season.

Sean Lissemore: He has steadily improved this season and is pushing to get more playing time. An injury to Josh Brent has opened the door for Sean, and he has responded with very good play the last few games.

There may be some other draft choices and free agents that may blossom next season (e.g., David Arkin, Dwayne Harris, Raymond Radway, and Bill Nagy to mention a few), just as some of the afore mentioned players may not play to their potential in 2012. In other words, it will probably be a wash if other players contribute.

"Suffering the slings and arrows..."

About 20 players from the 53-man roster will probably significantly contribute to the Cowboys season in 2012. This team has a grave dearth of talent after the top 12 players are eliminated from the roster, as injuries did this season, especially on the defensive side of the ball.

"Alas, Poor Yorick (or Jason Williams, or Robert Brewster, or...); I knew him..."

The cause of this problem is obviously poor drafting. Drafting one or two playmakers at outside linebacker (opposite Ware), cornerback, or safety will not completely solve this problem. The gaping disparity in talent will still exist on different units.

Unfortunately, Cowboys fans, current players, and coaches are suffering through the indiscretions of the past under former administrations. Fans, players, and coaches, however, can take solace in the fact that the last two drafts have begun to address this sobering problem.

Hopefully this trend will continue: let this not end in a tragedy. "Perchance, to dream..."

With a win on Sunday evening in the New Meadowlands (where the Cowboys are 1-0), the Cowboys officially become a playoff team. In order to enter the playoffs, Dallas needs to win a direct elimination match: in other words, a playoff game.

Depending upon ones point of view, the Eagles game had several very encouraging developments. For the first time since blowing out the Buffalo Bills (44-7), the Cowboys defense gave up fewer points in the second half of a game.

In fact, Dallas went from yielding 239 rushing yards in the first meeting between the Eagles and Cowboys, to a meager 105 yards despite trailing the entire game again. For only the second time since playing Buffalo, the Cowboys defense did not permit a receiver to catch passes totaling over 100 yards (Tampa Bay was the other game).

Dallas also held the Eagles to 38.5% on third down conversions (compared to 58.3% on 10/30/11), well below Philadelphia's current 41.2% third down conversion rate. The Cowboys defense also limited the Eagles' offense from their previous 24.4 points per game average.

Rob Ryan is proving to be closer to the solution as a defensive coordinator, and making it apparent to most observers that the Dallas defense lacks talent at too many positions. Ryan made many good defensive calls, and showed the admirable ability to be flexible in revising his preferred blitzing schemes. Several times during the game, Ryan made the right call in the right situation, only to see a player (or players) screw-up. Rob finally came out in the post-game interview and indicted the players for not executing properly (see dallascowboys.com).

It is interesting that as the season has progressed, the offense has improved and played smarter (scoring an average of 28.1 points per game the six games leading into the Eagles game, compared to the 22.4 the offense was scoring during its first eight games). The defense, on the other hand, seems resolute in continuing to play with the intellectual malaise that marred the Phillips regime.

If Ryan is able to manipulate the defense into another above average performance despite its obvious talent limitations, the Cowboys will enter the playoffs. If Rob is unable to offset Romo's hand injury with a strong defensive performance, the Cowboys begin the process of trying to improve a defense with obvious holes throughout the secondary and defensive front.

As of this moment, the Cowboys would draft 18th. Santa, however, has given the Cowboys a realistic opportunity to draft as high as 13th in the 2012 NFL draft.

If Dallas loses (hopefully Santa gives Dallas an extra gift of making the playoffs), the Cowboys will be 8-8. Here is what needs to happen for Dallas to move up to the 13th pick (each occurrence moves Dallas one from its current 18th position):

Philadelphia defeats Washington (@ Philadelphia)

Seattle beats Arizona (@ Arizona)

San Diego vanquishes Oakland (@ Oakland)

Chicago wins one of its last two games (@ Green Bay and @ Minnesota)

Tennessee overcomes Houston (@ Houston)

Philadelphia is playing well right now, as is Seattle. San Diego has improved lately, and Tennessee has a chance to make the playoffs. Chicago gets to play a Minnesota team sans Adrian Peterson (who will also miss the majority of next season with an ACL rupture).

If Dallas cannot make the playoffs, it would be nice to get a top 15 pick. Here is the current top 12 draft order:

1. Indianapolis (2-13)

2. St. Louis (2-13)

3. Minnesota (3-12)

4. Jacksonville (4-11)

5. Cleveland (4-11)

6. Tampa Bay (4-11)

7. Washington (5-10)

8. Miami (5-10)

9. Carolina (6-9)

10. Buffalo (6-9)

11. Kansas City (6-9)

12. Arizona (7-8)

Since the Cowboys game has been flexed to the Sunday night game on NBC, all of the games impacting the Cowboys draft position will already have been played. It should make for a great day of watching football...

PS: Santa, I haven't received that phone call from Jerry yet offering me the team at a MUCH discounted rate. I wasn't as naughty as in past years...what do you say? I promise that I would never second guess Jason Garrett, nor go to the field in the first half to talk to him. I would even invite all fellow BTB'ers to my new luxury suite.

Pleeeease...

Merry Christmas to all, Happy Hanukah and Kwanza!

After watching Eli Manning dissect a secondary that left receivers so open that he could have successfully performed the operation with a hatchet, I had a moment of enlightenment:

All quarterbacks fall along a continuum in how they achieve success.

For a change, I do not have any statistics to verify this theory. This is purely an observational analysis: more on why this is so in a moment.

In order to better understand this quarterbacking concept, I broke up the continuum into categories. As with all continuums, there are no obvious criteria separating adjacent categories. It is much like crossing over from Nebraska to Colorado on I-76. If not for the sign at the state line, you would not know you were in Colorado until the Rocky Mountains were in view.

The quarterback continuum:

Read and pass -> Read and buy time -> Buy time and react

Continue reading this post »

Far from it.

Dallas and New York would both be 7-6. Both would be 2-2 in the division with the Giants playing Washington next week and the Cowboys hosting the Eagles before the finale against the Giants.

If Dallas loses Sunday night, but wins their last three games, the Cowboys win the division. In fact, if the Cowboys lose Sunday night and Saturday night at Tampa Bay, but beat the Eagles and Giants, the Cowboys still win the division regardless of what New York does. Both teams would be 9-7, with Dallas having a better division record (4-2 to 3-3).

If the Cowboys lose to the Giants twice, Dallas would need to beat both Tampa Bay and Philadelphia and hope that New York loses to both the Redskins and the Jets. "So you're saying there's a chance..." Dallas would be 9-7 and New York would be 8-8.

If Dallas loses Sunday night, but splits the season series with New York by winning in the New Meadowlands, the Cowboys only need help if they lose to the Eagles. Dallas would be 3-3 in the division, and either need the Giants to lose to Washington (making them 2-4 in the division), or lose to the Jets (meaning that the Cowboys and Giants have the same record against similar opponents [third tie-breaker], but Dallas has a better NFC record).

If the Giants win Sunday night and lose to EITHER the Redskins or Jets (the Jets are making a strong playoff push), the Cowboys could lose to BOTH the Buccaneers and the Eagles and still win the NFC East (if the Eagles lose one more game: like this weekend against Miami). In this case, the Eagles would be no better than 7-9, and the Giants would be 8-8 with the Cowboys but lose due to division record or NFC record (see previous paragraph).

So this game is far from a must win for the Cowboys. On the other hand, if the Giants lose Sunday night, New York needs help from the Eagles to win the division, and have to win the last three games. A win by Dallas on Sunday night, combined with a win by the Cowboys over the Eagles would ensure that Dallas would have no worse than a 4-2 division record, and New York could do no better than 3-3 in the division.

A Dallas win on Sunday night with a loss by New York to either the Jets or the Redskins, eliminates the Giants from the division title. Again, the Giants would lose the tie-breakers by having a worse divison record or a worse NFC record.

A win by Dallas on Sunday night with either one more win in the regular season or an Ealges loss, eliminates the Eagles from the division title. The Eagles would have 9 losses, while Dallas would have 8 wins.

In other words, if the Eagles lose one more game (say to a hot Miami team this weekend), Dallas beats the Giants on Sunday night, and the Giants lose one more game (to either the Redskins, Jets or Cowboys), the Cowboys win the NFC East.

While this Sunday night is not a must win, it would all but eliminate the other teams from winning the NFC East.

By the way, Dallas holds the tie-breakers against Atlanta, New Orleans, and San Francisco for the number 3 and number 2 seeds...if it gets to that.

Plenty to watch this weekend.

What's the phrase? Oh yeah...

FEAR THE STAR!

(BTW, all Cowboys fans know that Tuck really does have Star envy. Considering the parallels between Freud's penis envy theory: it really is about your manhood!)

In baseball, it is not how many hits a team gets, but rather the timeliness of the hits. A base hit with the bases loaded could result in winning a pitcher's duel. Conversely, getting one hit every inning (9 hits total) could leave a team losing without scoring a run.

The timeliness of the hitting in baseball is measured by the number of runs scored. The inverse of situational hitting is measured by how many base runners were left on base at the conclusion of the game.

On Sunday afternoon, Dallas left too many men on base. Ironically, these Cardinals also won against a team from Texas by making the clutch play.

Continue reading this post »

At the beginning of the season, several Dallas Cowboys players went on the record stating that they expected Tony Romo to have a career season.  Jason Witten and Miles Austin voiced their preseason opinions before anybody could imagine what DeMarco Murray could add to the offense.

Tony has exceeded his career quarterback passer rating (94.9) so far this season with a 97.5 passer rating through Thanksgiving.  In addition, Romo has a better winning percentage so far this season (63.6%), than during his career prior to this season (61.5%).

So far, it seems that Miles and Jason were Nostradamus-esque with their preseason prediction.  But how much of Tony’s perceived improvement as a passer and as a winner is due to the emergence of DeMarco Murray?

In order to have some measure of Murray’s effect on Romo, it was necessary to examine the effect successful running backs have had on successful quarterbacks.  A successful running back was defined as a player that rushed for at least 100 yards during a game.  A successful quarterback was defined as one that has won a Super Bowl (sans Tom Brady).

Back in October, Tony Romo’s performance was measured against the active Super Bowl winning quarterbacks (excluding Tom Brady) in the NFL.  Here is the link:

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2011/10/5/2470409/the-data-suggests-that-romo-the-gunslinger-is-dallas-best-chance-to

It is interesting to see how those same quarterbacks flourish collectively when each has the benefit of handing off to a running back that rushes for at least 100 yards.  In other words, how does a 100-yard rusher affect the quarterback passer rating of Eli Manning, Ben Roethlisberger, Aaron Rodgers, and Drew Brees (which as a group will be referred to as SB QB’s in the post)?

The result is unexpected.

Passer rating of SB QB’s when a 100-yard rusher is absent: 91.4

Passer rating of SB QB’s when a 100-yard rusher is present: 91.0

There is statistically no difference between the performance of Super Bowl winning quarterbacks when a running back runs for at least 100 yards, compared to when nobody exceeds 99 yards rushing.  Individually, several quarterbacks (Eli and Drew) actually have slightly lower passer ratings when they play with a 100-yard rusher.  Conversely, the other quarterbacks (Ben and Aaron) boast better passer ratings when a back rushes for at least 100 yards.

Roethlisberger is the quarterback that most benefits from a 100-yard rusher, as his rating jumps from 91.7 to 101.9.  Manning’s rating drops more than the others, from 81.5 to 76.6, when a back breaks 100 yards rushing.  Collectively, however, there is no significant difference in how the quarterbacks play when a 100-yard rusher exists as opposed to when nobody gains 100 yards rushing in a game.

So how does Tony Romo compare to the SB QB’s before DeMarco Murray’s amazing ascension?

Passer rating of Tony Romo when a 100-yard rusher is absent: 96.7

Passer rating of Tony Romo when a 100-yard rusher is present: 79.4

Before Murray’s record breaking performance against St. Louis, Romo had a 100-yard rusher in only 15.8% of the games in which Tony played significant minutes.  Only Aaron Rodgers has had a lower percentage of games with a 100-yard rusher (14.8%).

Eli Manning has had a running back gain at least 100 yards in 33.3% of the games in which he has led in passing.  Ben Roethlisberger has enjoyed having a 100-yard rusher in 36.9% of the games he has played.  Drew Brees is in the middle of the SB QB group, with a running back gaining 100 yards or more in 21.2% of the games in which he has played.

While no other quarterback from the SB QB group varies more than 10.2 rating points (Ben), and Eli has the greatest drop of 4.9 rating points, Tony has an extraordinary drop of 17.3 rating points.  That is a drop of 17.9% in Romo’s passer rating that in no way corresponds with the results produced by the SB QB’s.

It would be easy to point to this discrepancy and jump to the conclusion that Romo is clearly not a Super Bowl quality quarterback.  If that is the case, however, then one would expect that there would be little, if any change in Romo’s performance with a change in running backs.  After all, Drew Brees had LaDainian Tomlinson contribute most of his 100-yard rushing efforts, and although Tomlinson was regarded as an elite running back in San Diego, Brees’ passer rating stays relatively stable, only dropping from a 93 to a 91.8 when any running back gains at least 100 yards.

In games where DeMarco Murray has rushed for at least 100 yards, Tony Romo has a passer rating of 125.3.  At no time during his career has Romo had a three game series with a 100-yard rusher that has resulted in a higher passer rating.  In addition, only twice has Romo had a four game stretch where Tony has had a higher passer rating regardless of whether a running back has run for at least 100 yards or not.

DeMarco’s emergence as a running back has resulted in a swing of 45.9 rating points for Tony Romo.  That is a remarkable 57.8% positive change in Romo’s passer rating, and a significant difference.

As referenced at the beginning of the post, however, there is more to playing quarterback in the NFL than passer rating.  Many people measure quarterback play in wins and losses.

This is really where a running back rushing for over 100 yards has an impact.  Among the SB QB group, there is a significant difference in winning ratio between games with and without a running back gaining at least 100 yards.

Winning ratio of SB QB’s when a 100-yard rusher is absent: .609

Winning ratio of SB QB’s when a 100-yard rusher is present: .814

Prior to the game against St. Louis, Romo’s winning ratio between games with and without a running back gaining at least 100 yards actually drops: staying in line with Tony’s passer rating.

Winning ratio of Tony Romo when a 100-yard rusher is absent: .619

Winning ratio of Tony Romo when a 100-yard rusher is present: .583

Of course, Tony Romo is 3-0 as a quarterback when DeMarco Murray rushes for over 100 yards.  Notice how Romo’s winning ratio without a running back gaining at least 100 yards rushing is slightly greater than the SB QB group.  Combine that winning ratio with the fact that only Rodgers gets less productivity from his running game, and this goes back to the theory that Romo has had to carry the team more than other quarterbacks (see the link above): and that Tony has done so successfully.

It could be argued that Tony Romo has been the key to the Cowboys offense over roughly the last six seasons.  In an effort to stop (or slow down) the prolific Dallas passing attack, some teams over commit to stop the pass, leaving opportunities for average backs to gain an occasional 100 yards.  For that reason, Romo has a dip in his passer rating, and the Cowboys tend to lose more than expected. 

It has been truly a case of the passing game creating opportunities for the running game, rather than actually having a threatening running game in place.  That argument also passes the eye-test when thinking of all the draws, traps, and counters designed to maximize a generally anemic running attack that play off of the success of the passing game.

So is this a new and improved Tony Romo because of DeMarco Murray?

You tell me…

When I was young, I never understood why elite athletes could not perform at a high level all the time.  I expected my favorite athletes to have great days every time they competed.

Then I started competing…

I eventually made an Olympic team representing the United States, but my progress from beginner to expert was hardly linear.  Reflecting fondly upon my successes, I frequently overlook the days that I floundered and failed to meet my expectations.

They were many…

Yesterday, the Cowboys had a day like that.

Continue reading this post »

This game served as a great baseline for the stretch drive of the season.  It is rare when all of a team’s warts are revealed in one game, but that may very well have been the case in Foxborough.  Dallas had no chance to win this game based on where this team is in its development.  Facing a team that is based on minimizing mistakes, just made the Cowboys’ deficiencies all that more obvious.

Continue reading this post »

Tony Romo has been the biggest story this NFL season.  It will be a relief not to hear about him as much this week, since the Cowboys have a bye week.

The moratorium on Romo-bashing will likely be lifted by Wednesday October 12th.  That is when unfounded opinions, backed by violent emotions will once again surface.

Here are a few facts: 32 different quarterbacks have won a Super Bowl.  There is about a 98% chance that Romo does not join them.  People bashing Romo (talking to you Deion…) saying he will not win a Super Bowl have better than a 98% chance of being right.  Way to go out on a limb.

There are currently only five quarterbacks playing that have won a Super Bowl since 2001.  Peyton Manning is obviously out following his cervical fusion surgery; leaving Tom Brady as the best quarterback in the NFL (he has won three Super Bowls).

Following this latest weekend, there is little doubt that Romo (and perhaps nobody currently playing outside of Aaron Rodgers) compares favorably to Tom Brady.  Since Brady has been playing much longer than Tony, Tom’s data was not included to reduce bias secondary to his longevity and in a way, his excellence recently. 

Rather, data from several of what can be considered Romo’s contemporaries: Aaron Rodgers, Drew Brees, Ben Roethlisberger, and Eli Manning were included in this quick study.  Those quarterbacks have won 5 of the last 6 Super Bowls (Peyton Manning won the other).

Tony Romo has played significant time in 70 games after the first four games of the 2011 season.  Rodgers is the only quarterback from this list to have played in fewer (56), while Brees has played in the most (148).  Ben and Eli have played significant time in 116 and 115 games respectively.

Playoff games are included in the totals, since Super Bowl champions are being compared to Tony Romo on wins in respect to the number of interceptions per game.  Fumbles are not included since it is difficult to consistently assign blame to the correct individual for a fumbled handoff, fumbled snap (or premature snap), a fumble caused by a blindside hit, and so forth.

Note: I will not be examining fumbles anytime in the near future, so if someone else would like to add this with all of the appropriate explanations, please feel free to do so.

While Tony Romo has the fewest percentage of games played without throwing an interception, Romo has the second best (only behind the unbelievable Aaron Rodgers) in the percentage of games played in which one interception or less was thrown.  In other words, Tony has only played in 24 games where he did not throw an interception (only 34.3%).  Eli was the next lowest, only completing 41 games without throwing an interception (35.7%).  Rodgers is tops, registering an incredible 53.6% of games in which he did not throw an interception.  Neither Brees nor Roethlisberger are over 50% (43.2% and 43.1% respectively).

In games where one of those quarterbacks throws no more than one interception, however, only Rodgers is better than Tony Romo.  Aaron has completed that goal in an amazing 83.9% of his games, while Romo is a relatively close second (80%).  Eli has thrown no more than one interception in 70.4% of his games, which is last on this list.  Ben and Drew accomplish the feat 75% and 73.6% of the time respectively.

Now how does this relate to wins?

The four afore mentioned quarterbacks (not including Romo) win games as follows:

0 interceptions: .811 chance of winning

1 interception: .583 chance of winning

2 interceptions: .432 chance of winning

3 interceptions: .207 chance of winning

4+ interceptions: .000 chance of winning

Oddly enough Romo is undefeated when throwing more than three interceptions.  Go figure…

Romo, on the other hand has a much different chance of winning:

0 interceptions: .708 chance of winning

1 interception: .719 chance of winning

2 interceptions: .143 chance of winning

3 interceptions: .000 chance of winning

Three things jump-out about those numbers.

1. When Tony Romo does not throw an interception, the Cowboys do significantly worse than the teams sporting Rodgers, Brees, E. Manning, and Roethlisberger.
2. When Tony throws one interception, the Cowboys are remarkably successful.
3. When Romo throws more than one interception (but less than 5), the Cowboys almost always lose (the exception was a 14-10 win versus Washington in 2008, when Tony returned a little early from the broken hand he suffered at Arizona).

It is interesting how poorly the Cowboys do when Romo throws two interceptions.  The modern Packers, Giants, Steelers, and Saints win almost half of their games when their respective starting quarterback throws two interceptions.  Obviously the Cowboys are not able to overcome two interception games (1-6), while the other teams still find a way to win almost as often as they lose.

Those other teams also win one out of every five games when their respective starting quarterback throws three interceptions.  The Cowboys are 0-6 in those games.

Conversely, when Romo throws one interception, the Cowboys are the most dangerous team of the bunch.  The other teams win just over half of those games, while Dallas almost wins three out of every four of those games.

This data would suggest that when Romo takes chances down the field and pushes the limits (resulting in one interception) the Cowboys win much more often than teams led by Super Bowl champion quarterbacks.  Combine the finding with the fact that Dallas does not win nearly as often as those other teams when no interceptions are thrown, and several other conclusions can be drawn.

Most likely is that the Cowboys are not a good team when Romo does not take enough chances down the field.  Considering the number of penalties Dallas used to incur, the dropped passes, and the countless mental mistakes seen since 2007, it is not hard to see why a conservative passing game does not suit this team.

Another conclusion could be that this Dallas Cowboys team is really not that good if Romo is not taking chances and making plays.  Emmitt Smith is not in the backfield, Deion Sanders is not in the secondary, and none of the interior offensive linemen will be confused for Nate Newton, Larry Allen, or Mark Stepnoski.

When Tony Romo takes one too many chances, and gets intercepted twice, this Cowboys team is unable to overcome it.  That is a tough position for Tony Romo: make one mistake or fewer while taking chances down the field, and there is a better than 70% chance that the team wins.  Make more than one mistake, and a loss is almost inevitable: something that is not the case for Romo’s contemporaries.

According to Romo’s statistics, Tony will probably have one or two more games where he throws two interceptions.  Just as Dallas lost to Detroit on Sunday, the Cowboys will lose those two games.  Pittsburgh, New Orleans, Green Bay, and New York will manage to win at least one of those games.

So according to the statistics above, even if Tony dials it back and throws zero interceptions in several games, Roethlisberger, E. Manning, Brees, and Rodgers would win one more of those games than Romo’s Cowboys.  That means that Tony Romo is working from a two game hole if he either makes one too many mistakes, or plays too conservatively.

That is being a little harsh…isn’t it?

Entering last season, the Dallas Cowboys had the highest all-time regular season winning percentage among current NFL teams.  One 6-10 season later, the team no longer holds that distinction going into 2011, but there are several historical statistics the Cowboys can achieve this season.

Of the 31 opponents that are currently in the NFL, Dallas has a winning regular season record against 22 teams.  The Cowboys all-time series is tied versus the defending Super Bowl Packers (12-12), but Dallas is 4-2 against the Packers in the postseason.

Many of the teams that have historically held an edge over the Cowboys in the regular season will not play Dallas this season.  Most Cowboys fans remember the humiliating loss against the Ravens that closed Texas Stadium.  Surprisingly, Dallas has never beaten the Ravens (0-3). 

The Cowboys have an all-time losing regular season record against the following opponents that do not play Dallas this season:

Baltimore Ravens (0-3)

Cleveland Browns (11-15)

Denver Broncos (4-6)

Jacksonville Jaguars (1-2)

Minnesota Vikings (10-11)

Oakland Raiders (4-6)

Dallas will have the opportunity to even up the all-time regular season record in Arlington against the St. Louis Rams (10-11) this season in week 7.  The teams that will give the Cowboys the opportunity to reduce the all-time regular season record advantage include:

Miami Dolphins (4-7)

San Francisco 49ers (10-14-1)

St. Louis Rams (10-11)

Remember that victory the Giants had over the Cowboys in Texas Stadium in 2007?  That was the only time the Giants and Cowboys have met in the post season.

Teams that have a post season all-time record advantage over the Cowboys include:

Arizona Cardinals (0-1)

Carolina Panthers (0-2)

Cleveland Browns (1-2)

Indianapolis Colts (0-1)

New York Giants (0-1)

Pittsburgh Steelers (1-2)

Seattle Seahawks (0-1)

Washington Redskins (0-2)

Of the teams that Dallas has played in the post season, only the Detroit Lions (1-1) and the St. Louis Rams (4-4) have won as many as those teams have lost in the all-time post season series.

Dallas is still tied with the Steelers with the most post season wins (33).  The Cowboys own the highest all-time overall winning percentage (.575), but are behind the Bears and Dolphins for the best regular season winning percentage (.578 to .576 to .575).

If Dallas finishes this season with at least an 11-5 record, Chicago finishes no better than 8-8, and Miami finishes with a 10-6 record or worse, the Cowboys reclaim the title of all-time best winning percentage in the regular season.  Correspondingly, Dallas would also retain the best overall winning percentage.

The most important all-time statistic is Super Bowl victories (championships included, but in the modern era it is the Super Bowl).  With a Super Bowl win, the Cowboys can tie the Steelers for most Super Bowl championships all-time (6).

All stats courtesy http://www.profootballhof.com/UserFiles/file/W-L_Start_2011.pdf

Instead of completing a power ranking, I decided to make a draft order for 2012.  I based the ranking on strength of schedule, anticipated quarterback play versus pass defense, but mostly through observation during the preseason.

I am sure that there will be changes after a few weeks have passed, but this is a ranking to show where teams will end up at the conclusion of the 2012 season.  Please feel free to share your thoughts, as I will probably revise some teams based on good points that posters make.

So, with the first pick in the 2012 NFL draft the...

1. 1. Carolina Panthers (3-13): The Panthers have more needs than any other team in the league.  They lack playmakers everywhere.  I could see them auctioning off this draft position to gain more picks to fill their many holes.

1. 2. San Francisco 49ers (3-13): The Niners have some talent on defense and offense, but have a horrible situation at quarterback.  If Andrew Luck comes out, I wonder if they move up one spot to get him and reunite him with Harbaugh.

1. 3. Cincinnati Bengals (4-12): The Bengals have very good young talent on the offensive side of the ball.  The defense and offensive line, however, need a huge infusion of talent: specifically a pass rusher and another cornerback.

1. 4. Washington Redskins (5-11): I actually think the Redskins will be a decent 5-11 team, if that makes sense (turnovers will doom their season).  They really need a quarterback, however, as neither Beck nor Grossman look like winners.

1. 5. Tennessee Titans (5-11): Jake Locker will be starting fairly early in the season.  Tennessee’s defense needs some more talent to combat the offenses in their division and the AFC.  Chris Johnson's holdout will also affect this team negatively.

1. 6. Kansas City Chiefs (5-11): Kansas City needs a quarterback badly: Cassel is this generation’s Scott Mitchell (Dan Marino’s back-up that was traded to Detroit and flopped).  The Chiefs may also look to upgrade the cornerback position.

1. 7. Miami Dolphins (5-11): Another team needing a quarterback.  New head coach, Rob Ryan will look to build up the defense in order to compete with Belichick and his brother.  Mike Nolan will be in Dallas after Ryan takes this job.

1. 8. Buffalo Bills (6-10): While the Bills could use a quarterback, I expect that Chan Gailey will focus on building up the defense.  Buffalo could also use playmakers at wide receiver (he used 5 WR sets as an offensive coordinator in Pittsburgh).

1. 9. Seattle Seahawks (6-10): Pete Carroll really did a great job last season with limited talent.  Seattle needs upgrades in talent everywhere.  The fact that they play well at home and play the 49ers twice keeps them drafting here.

1. 10. Jacksonville Jaguars (6-10): Jack Del Rio also did a nice job coaching this team up last season.  Garrard will be replaced around the middle of the season, however, and the Jaguars need upgrades everywhere.

1. 11. Oakland Raiders (6-10): The Raiders defense took a huge hit with the loss of Nnamdi this offseason.  Oakland needs better talent, not faster players, on both sides of the ball.  A new quarterback not named Pryor would also help.

1. 12. Chicago Bears (7-9): While Cutler makes plays, he also throws a lot of interceptions, which will haunt the Bears in 2011.  The offensive line needs a lot more talent, and the defense could use some new faces.

1. 13. Minnesota Vikings (7-9): The Vikings have some talented players on both sides of the ball, but lack playmakers in the secondary, and are a step slow in coverage at linebacker.  McNabb will run his normal dink-dunk, and throw deep offense.

1. 14. New York Giants (7-9): Injuries and poor offensive line play will derail the Giants season in 2011.  The Giants need some improvements on defense, but the offensive line will hold this team back.

1. 15. Denver Broncos (8-8): The Broncos are actually headed back in the right direction.  Denver will run the ball more, but the defensive front seven needs a few more playmakers (Von Miller and Elvis Dumervil excluded).

1. 16. Indianapolis Colts (8-8): Even if Peyton Manning does return for the first game, it is obvious that the Colts have done a poor job of surrounding perhaps the greatest player in the game with talent.  It reminds me of the Cowboys of the late 90’s.

1. 17. Tampa Bay Buccaneers (8-8): This is an up and coming team, although I think Freeman is another version of Jason Campbell (Oakland).  This is a fairly solid roster, but a few more playmakers on both sides are needed to be a playoff team.

1. 18. Philadelphia Eagles (9-7): Poor offensive line play and linebacker inexperience will prove too much for the Eagles to overcome.  Vick has struggled with turnovers in the preseason: expect that trend to continue throughout 2011.

1. 19. Baltimore Ravens (9-7): Joe Flacco runs hot and cold: the Ravens offensive line also looks inconsistent.  The Baltimore defense could use an infusion of youth at several positions, and another pass rusher opposite Suggs.

1. 20. Arizona Cardinals (10-6): Kolb really does make a difference, and the defense has some playmakers.  The Cardinals are not that far removed from the playoffs, and some more pressure players on defense will make them better in 2012.

1. 21. Houston Texans (10-6): The legend of Wade the defensive genius is perpetuated.  In reality, the Texans have an extremely talented offensive team with many playmakers.  With a good match-up, the Texans could advance in the playoffs.

1. 22. Cleveland Browns (10-6): This is a team built around a solid defense and a tough running game.  That will be enough to get into the playoffs, but Colt McCoy needs more weapons around him to make any type of deep run.

1. 23. New Orleans Saints (10-6): The Saints have a great quarterback and the interior of the offensive line is solid: the tackles, however, are questionable.  The defense still gives up too much yardage and will only succeed if they get takeaways.

1. 24. Detroit Lions (10-6): The Lions are a tough match-up for any team.  An explosive offense with a rock-solid defensive front four.  Some more linebackers and secondary talent will make this team a Super Bowl contender.

1. 25. St. Louis Rams (10-6): The Rams have a good offensive line, a young, quality quarterback, a great running back, and a good defensive line.  Some better secondary play and some offensive weapons would have the Rams contending for a Super Bowl.

1. 26. Atlanta Falcons (11-5): This team is loaded at the offensive skill positions.  The secondary has a future star in Grimes, but needs a few more pressure players.  The offensive line also needs some more talent, and will limit their playoff success.

1. 27. San Diego Chargers (11-5): The Chargers defense is the weak point on this team (if the special teams are fixed).  San Diego’s offense will carry them into the playoffs, but such a one-sided team may go one-and-done.

1. 28. New York Jets (11-5): At first I thought this team got worse during the offseason, but I think they are actually about the same.  Rob Ryan’s brother really needs a DeMarcus Ware type pass rusher that can just get pressure without all the tricks.

1. 29. Green Bay Packers (11-5): The Packers are very good on both sides of the ball, but a lack of a running game will catch-up to them.  The defensive and offensive lines are the weakest spots on this good young team.

1. 30. New England Patriots (11-5): New England needs more talent on the offensive line (as the Lions showed).  The Patriots defense is not the intelligent, flexible, playmaking unit that helped Brady win three Super Bowls.

1. 31. Pittsburgh Steelers (12-4): Offensive line problems will limit this team, but the Steelers are so strong on defense and the offensive skill positions that they are the front-runners to the Super Bowl in the AFC.

1. 32. Dallas Cowboys (12-4): The Cowboys offensive line will no longer limit the offense.  Playmakers like Felix, Dez, and Miles will be unstoppable at the end of the season.  As the offensive line and defense improves throughout the season, with young players improving weekly, new playmakers will emerge: Demarco Murray, Sean Lee, and Bruce Carter.  Veterans will also emerge as playmakers as the team peaks in December, January, and February: Mike Jenkins, Anthony Spencer, and Orlando Scandrick.  Witten, Ratliff, and Ware will continue to be All-Pro players, while Romo will raise his game behind a well-balanced offense with solid protection.  Superior coaching will unlock the potential this team has been wasting since 2007.

I could see Denver getting a few breaks and actually finishing 9-7 or 10-6 and threatening for a playoff spot.  The Redskins are another team that could do better than 5-11, as are the Buffalo Bills (could do better than 6-10).

One quick point I took away from the Cowboys game that gave me great hope for this season: the players listen and respond to Garrett.  After losing to San Diego last week, Jason had one clear, defining message: turnovers without takeaways lead to losses.  This week, Dallas did not turn the ball over and got an interception.

It seems to me that Garrett is trying to teach this team how to win.  Scandrick came out after the game and noted that yards do not lead to wins or losses.  Orlando even noted that San Diego had the best offense and defense last season in terms of yardage, but missed the playoffs.

For too long, this team was consumed by individual statistics. Michael Strahan even alluded to that by stating that the Pro Bowl was "Dallas’ Super Bowl".  Bradie James has finally admitted what most fans already suspected: this team was bogged down by a sense of entitlement. 

I believe that all of the cries for leadership were really misplaced opinions that were picking up on the lack of focus on this team.  A lack of focus towards a common goal: winning the Super Bowl.

 Innovation, rule changes, and new financial agreements in athletics generally revolutionize the sport.  The changes that occur as a result of simple differences are often unanticipated, and frequently lead to many transformations of the sport: both subtle and overt.

One of the oldest Olympic sports, fencing, had an innovation completely change the strategy of the sport.  Prior to the Berlin Olympics (1936), epee fencing was judged by 5 people that would determine whether the tip of the epee (sword) hit the opponent.  The tip of the epee is the second fastest object in the Olympics, only behind the bullet shot out of a gun.

With the advent of electronic scoring, it was no longer necessary for epeeists to make their touches obvious.  Since a light and buzzer would signal a touch and was over 99% accurate, touches to the hand and foot could now be effectively executed on a consistent basis.  The French epeeists were the first to adapt, and many medals ensued.

Now the Italians and Germans (there you go O.C.C.) have won their share utilizing the Hungarian school of epee.  This was in response to the dominance of the French style.  In other words it was a natural evolution of the sport following an innovation.

Although studies have shown fencers have lower extremity strength comparable to football players, I am afraid that there are not too many more comparisons between the two sports.  Football, however, is very good at adding innovations and rule changes to improve the sport.  The most recent is the new kickoff rule that I believe will be around for a very long time due to how it spares players from additional risk of injury.

In 2010, there were about 3,083 kickoffs (23 were returned for touchdowns).  The average starting position following kickoffs was around the 24-yard line.  If offenses start closer to the 20-yard line this season, the average team will have lost 24 yards per game in field position.

By making offenses start about 80 yards away from their opponent’s end zone, I believe an emphasis will be placed on other ways to gain field position.  I have thought of the following and invite further suggestions:

1.       Big plays

2.       Turnovers/takeaways

3.       Punt returns and coverage

4.       Penalties

5.       Sacks and tackles for loss

It is difficult for teams to string together 10+ play drives spanning 80 yards to score.  For that reason, explosive offenses capable of gobbling up yardage in fewer plays will have a better chance to score, or pin their opponents back in their own end.  In 2010, the future “Dream Team”, the Eagles and the Giants had the most plays over 20 yards (80 each).  San Diego (79) and Pittsburgh (78) followed, with Dallas finishing 8th (68).

Turnovers and takeaways will instantly change field position.  In 2010, New England (28), Pittsburgh (17), Atlanta (14), Green Bay (10), Philadelphia (9), Kansas City (9), Tampa Bay (9), and the New York Jets (9) led the league in turnover differential.  With the exception of Tampa Bay, all of those teams made the playoffs.  Since the average punt nets approximately 39 yards, any takeaway less than 20 yards from the line of scrimmage would at least benefit the team with 20 yards of field position.

There were approximately 1.68 takeaways per team per game in 2010 (860 total).  Comparatively, there were about 3.7 plays of over 20 yards per team in each game played last season (1892 total).  Most of the changes in field position, however, came from the punting game.  There were about 4.8 punts per game per team in 2010 (2454 total).  The average return was around 9.6 yards, leaving the afore mentioned 39 yard net per punt.

Better punt coverage would benefit any team in 2011 tremendously.  Notice that despite having the most and third most big plays (of over 20 yards) the Giants and the Chargers missed the playoffs last season.  Correspondingly, the Chargers had the worst punt coverage, yielding an average return of 18.9 yards per return.  The Giants were second worst in the league, giving up 14.9 yards per punt return in 2010.

The average team had almost exactly 6 penalties per game played in 2010.  The average yardage lost was a little less than 51 yards per team per game.  With the most explosive plays of over 20 yards last season, it is surprising that the pre-“Dream Team” Eagles did not win more games.  Only Oakland (Surprise! 148) and Detroit (136) had more penalties than Philadelphia (129) in 2010.  Dallas (109) was 6th worst in 2010, but as noted in other posts, that number would have been much worse had the early trend of penalties continued from the first half of the season.

Sacks obviously have a negative impact on field position and the ability to score (see another fine O.C.C. article written several months ago).   The average team suffers around 2.2 sacks per game leading to an average loss of almost 15 yards.  Chicago, a team known for its great special teams, suffered the most sacks in 2010 (56).  Protecting Cutler better would have led to better field position.

As I tried to demonstrate, many teams do well in one of the five major influences to gain field position, but give some of those gains back in another area.  Last season, Dallas was awful with penalties, return yardage, and turnovers at the beginning of the season.  The Cowboys started 1-7, despite having a good amount of plays over 20 yards.

With the new rules affecting field position on over 3,000 plays, the five factors listed above will be magnified in importance.  For this reason, I believe that Dallas tries to keep more special teams players to effectively contain punt returners, the single biggest change to field position in the game.

Teams that have bolstered their offensive lines, such as Dallas, will have more opportunities for big plays downfield while minimizing negative plays, such as sacks.  Teams that operate with more discipline will also avoid penalties that adversely change field position.

Every team tries to avoid turnovers and maximize takeaways, but those teams that emphasize it will be better off than in the past.  Oddly enough, this is the style of defense that Garrett has asked for from Rob Ryan.

In writing this, I found myself remembering many of the nuggets that Garrett drops in his press conference.  Perhaps this edition of the Cowboys will pay attention to these small details, leading to another division title and sixth Super Bowl championship.

Answer: Jeremy Maclin

Question: Name the only first round draft pick selected by the Eagles that will see significant playing time for the Philadelphia Eagles in 2011?

Continue reading this post »

I hear that Admiral Halsey used to board a battleship and ask many of the sailors this question:

“Who is the most important person on this ship?”

Some sailors would reply the captain.  Others would state that the Admiral was the most important person on the ship.  The answers would continue until one insightful crewman would respond, “The gunner, sir.”

Halsey would then launch into his discourse.  “You see, the only thing that sets this ship apart from a cruise ship are the guns.  This ship moves from point to point to get a better shot at the target.  Everyone one this ship works in concert to give the gunner the best chance for success.”

Guess who the Cowboys’ gunner is?

If you did not think or say “Tony Romo” quietly to yourself, you need to spend more time on this site reading O.C.C’s fine work and less time searching for cheerleader pics  If this were a post by O.C.C., this would be a great place for a picture of a cheerleader.  Feel free to put one in…or imagine one if this lockout has not erased those precious memories.

Conversely, if the gunner is the most important person on the WWII battleship U.S.S. Iowa, then the gunner must have also been the most important person on the old Japanese battleship Yamato.  While the Iowa and her big 16-inch guns survived WWII, the Yamato and her massive 18-inch guns did not.

Why?  The U.S.S. Iowa had better support around her.  The Yamato was sunk after squadrons of dive bombers and torpedo bombers devastated her while she was with minimal escort.

Sometimes it is not all about the size of the guns.

Looking at the past nine Super Bowl winners, I find that the team that can best help their “gunner” while disrupting the opponent’s quarterback has been successful with only a few exceptions.  I measured this assistance and disruption utilizing the quarterback passer rating formula.  By subtracting the defensive quarterback rating from the offensive quarterback rating, a quarterbacking differential was derived.

In 2010, the Packers won the Super Bowl over the Steelers.  The Packers had a quarterbacking differential of 31.7 (98.9 – 67.2), first in the NFL.  The Packers had the best defensive quarterback rating, and the third best offensive passer rating.  The Steelers had a quarterbacking differential of 22.1, good for fourth in the NFL.

In 2009, the Saints had the best quarterbacking differential: a whopping 37.4.  Green Bay was second (33) and Indianapolis was fifth (14.8).  Dallas was ninth with a quarterbacking differential of 14.1 that season. 

The list of Super Bowl winners and their respective quarterbacking differential is as follows (Super Bowl losers are in parentheses):

2010: Green Bay – 1st (Pittsburgh – 4th)

2009: New Orleans – 1st (Indianapolis – 5th)

2008: Pittsburgh – 4th (Arizona – 17th)

2007: New York 24th (New England – 1st)

2006: Indianapolis – 4th (Chicago – 10th)

2005: Pittsburgh – 7th (Seattle – 4th)

2004: New England – 5th (Philadelphia – 4th)

2003: New England – 2nd (Carolina – 12th)

2002: Tampa Bay – 1st (Oakland – 2nd)

Notice that the only two Super Bowl winners that do not rank in the top 5 in quarterbacking differential beat teams that were.  The Giants continued their magical (lucky?) run against a superior New England team with an injured Tom Brady.  The Steelers beat a better Seahawks team with a big assist to the referees.

Only Carolina and Arizona (as well as the afore mentioned Giants) made the Super Bowl with a quarterbacking differential not in the top ten.  Defensively the teams noted above ranked as follows in defensive quarterback rating:

2010: Green Bay – 1st (Pittsburgh – 2nd)

2009: New Orleans – 3rd (Indianapolis – 12th)

2008: Pittsburgh – 2nd (Arizona – 30th)

2007: New York 17th (New England – 11th)

2006: Indianapolis – 15th (Chicago – 3rd)

2005: Pittsburgh – 8th (Seattle – 13th)

2004: New England – 7th (Philadelphia – 8th)

2003: New England – 1st (Carolina – 11th)

2002: Tampa Bay – 1st (Oakland – 12th)

Again, the Giants 2007 Super Bowl victory stands out like a sore thumb.  Peyton Manning outplayed Rex Grossman (big surprise there) in winning Peyton’s only Super Bowl in 2006.  Interestingly, the Manning brothers are the only quarterbacks to win Super Bowls with teams owning worse defensive quarterback ratings.  Otherwise, the team with the better defensive quarterback rating won the Super Bowl.

To those wondering about the Cowboys 2007 season that ended in Irving against the Giants, the Cowboys had the best quarterbacking differential in the NFC and 4th overall.  Here is how Dallas has ranked in quarterbacking differential the last nine seasons:

2010: 15th (29th defense)

2009: 9th (16th defense)

2008: 19th (20th defense)

2007: 4th (5th defense)

2006: 12th (20th defense)

2005: 9th (9th defense)

2004: 30th (27th defense)

2003: 13th (3rd defense)

2002: 24th (7th defense)

Dallas made the playoffs in 2003, 2006, 2007, and 2009.  Compare those defensive quarterback rating rankings against the Packers over the last few years.

Under Dom Capers, the Green Bay defense ranked 4th in the NFL in defensive passer rating in 2009 and 2008.  The Packers defense was ranked 6th in defensive quarterback rating in 2007 and 8th in 2006.  Those were significant improvements given that Green Bay was ranked 25th in defensive passer rating in 2005, and 31st in 2004.  Despite having Brett Favre, Green Bay did not make the playoffs in 2005 and 2006.  The Packers missed the playoffs with Rodgers in 2008.

It seems evident that defending against the opponent’s quarterback is more important than getting a great performance from the team’s own quarterback.  That would mean that players such as DeMarcus Ware, Anthony Spencer, and Mike Jenkins have more to do with winning a championship than Romo, but Tony’s importance to the team remains paramount.

As stated before, however, without a good supporting cast, including defensive players that can disrupt opposing “gunners”, Romo and the Cowboys will struggle.  Scary when considering that Akwasi Owusu-Ansah and Barry Church are currently the safeties on the Cowboys roster with a chance to start.

"The Earth is flat!"

"Women cannot run Marathons (26.2 miles): they would collapse and die."

"Romo stinks in the playoffs!"

Women have proved the pundits wrong in regards of withstanding the physical rigors of running Marathons.  It is quite possible that in the upcoming years, women marathoners will post faster times than the men: just look at the statistics and how they mark the radpid improvement in women's Marathon times.

While I do not pretend to compare myself with Galileo, I cannot help but imagine the resistance he received to his revolutionary finding is similar, albeit more significant than the resistance encountered to supporting Romo as the quarterback of the Dallas Cowboys.  It seems Tony receives more scrutiny than any of his contemporaries.

Hopefully Romo will win a Super Bowl in the near future to mute the critics.  Until then, a quick glance at the statistics makes a fairly strong case for Romo to remain “the guy” in Dallas.

Let me present the case of Phillip Rivers.  Rivers was a top 5 selection in the NFL draft the year Romo went undrafted.  Phillip Rivers has a playoff record of 3-4, with a career playoff quarterback rating of 79.230.  Rivers reached the AFC Championship game in 2007.

Rivers has only been sacked an average of 2.14 times per game in his playoff appearances.  Many rate Rivers as a better quarterback than Tony, but Romo seems to perform slightly better in the playoffs according to their comparative career playoff quarterback rating.

Tony is 1-3 in the playoffs, but sports a quarterback rating of 80.849.  Romo has been betrayed by his offensive line in his playoff appearances, as he has been sacked an average of 3.0 times per game: which is strikingly high for such a mobile quarterback.

Eli Manning was the first overall selection in that same draft that produced Philip Rivers.  Eli has won a Super Bowl despite having a career playoff quarterback rating of 77.580.  The younger Manning also is 4-3 in the playoffs, and has only been sacked an average of 2.0 times per playoff start.

Looking at the rest of the NFC East quarterbacks, it is evident that Romo is a little better.  Michael Vick has a career playoff record of 2-3 with a playoff quarterback rating of 77.645.  Vick also has only been sacked an average of 2.2 times per playoff game.  Vick has reached a NFC Championship game, where he lost to McNabb and the Eagles.

Donovan McNabb, who was the quarterback in Philadelphia from 1999 to 2009 before leading the Redskins in 2010, has a career playoff record of 9-7.  He was sacked an average of 2.0 times per playoff game, and is ranked just behind Romo with a 80.015 career playoff quarterback rating.  McNabb has also been to four NFC Championship games, winning one, and losing the corresponding Super Bowl.

How does Romo compare to Tom Brady and Ben Roethlisberger: winners of 24 of 32 playoff games and a combined 5 Super Bowl wins (with an additional two Super Bowl losses).  Brady has a career playoff quarterback rating of 85.704, while Roethlisberger has a career playoff quarterback rating of 84.525.

How close is Romo?  Well if Crayton would have finished his route against the Giants with just seconds remaining in the game (2007) and caught Tony’s pass for a touchdown, Romo’s career playoff quarterback rating jumps to 88.619.

That is how close these ratings are: just one broken pattern from a receiver away from having a better rating than “Tom Terrific” and “Big Ben”.  That shows how close all these quarterbacks are, yet none receive the criticism aimed at Romo for their playoff performance.

By the way, Ben averages getting sacked 2.38 times per playoff, while Tom goes down 1.63 times a playoff game.  Compare that to Tony getting sacked 3.0 times per playoff game.

Only Matt Ryan gets sacked more in playoff games than Romo.  Is it any wonder that his career playoff quarterback rating is just 71.226, and that he has a 0-2 career playoff record.  Looks like trading a bunch of picks for a wide receiver may not address the Falcons' real needs.

Joe Flacco is on the bottom of the list of Romo contemporaries.  His career playoff quarterback rating is 61.639.  Joe’s career playoff record is 4-3, which brings up the fact that quarterback performance is not necessarily a good indicator of playoff success.  Eli won a Super Bowl and has a career playoff quarterback rating of 77.580.  In Tom Brady’s first season as the starter, his playoff quarterback rating was 77.3.

Despite boasting a career playoff quarterback rating of 90.386, Peyton Manning actually had a 70.5 playoff quarterback rating the season the Colts won the Super Bowl (2006).  While Manning is arguably the quarterback that means the most to the success of their respective team, it is obvious that the playoff success of the Colts was not intimately linked to Peyton’s performance.

In other words, judging a quarterback solely by his playoff record is extremely flawed.  Mark Sanchez has a higher career playoff quarterback rating than Peyton Manning, but has not led his Jets to a Super Bowl yet.  “Sanchize” has a career playoff quarterback rating of 94.307.  Of note is that Mark is only sacked .667 times a game in the playoffs.  Peyton gets sacked about 1.47 times a playoff game.

Not getting sacked, however, does not necessarily lead to better quarterback playoff performance, but it is a strong indicator.  Despite only getting sacked 1.86 times per playoff game, Flacco has an abysmal career playoff quarterback rating.  Aaron Rodgers has the highest career playoff quarterback rating, 112.644, but is third on the list in sacks per playoff game.  Only Ryan (4 times per playoff game) and Romo (3 times per playoff game) have gotten sacked more times per playoff game than Rodgers (2.6 times per playoff game).

Drew Brees has the second best career playoff quarterback rating, 101.966.  Brees gets sacked an average of 1.57 times per playoff game and is 4-3 in the playoffs.  The interesting part of Drew’s career playoff quarterback rating, however, is that from Sunday January 10th, 2009, to Friday January 15th, 2009, Brees was 1-2 in the playoffs, and so was Tony Romo.  Romo had a career playoff quarterback rating of 86.0 before the Vikings game.  Brees had a 92.7 career playoff quarterback rating at that time.

Brees was getting sacked in playoff games at an alarming rate: 2.67 times per playoff game.  Since that time, Drew has only been sacked 3 times in 4 playoff games (.75 times per playoff game), and has posted a playoff quarterback rating of 108.98 with 10 touchdown passes, zero interceptions, and a 3-1 record in the playoffs.

The switch seems to have gone on for Brees in his ninth season.  In a weird twist of fate, Peyton Manning also won his Super Bowl in his ninth season.

By the way, Tony Romo is entering his ninth season with the Dallas Cowboys.

Use your left hand…it feels like somebody else’s!"

That is what a friend told me after I whiffed with yet another girl at Papa Joe’s bar on High Street while attending The Ohio State University.  It also aptly describes the act of writing about football when nothing is truly happening.

By the way, I was careful never to shake my friend’s hands…either hand.

"…but she has a great personality…"

The kiss of death when trying to get your friend to be the wingman.  Occasionally you will find a friend that is so hard up that he will accept the challenge.  It is usually the guy that you do not like to shake hands with…

Funny how those girls with great personalities end up marrying your friends from time to time.  It is OK to shake hands after the wedding…at least for a few months.

Continue reading this post »

There were more than 1,000 student athletes enrolled at The Ohio State University during the 2010-2011 athletic seasons.  Remarkably, more than 400 student athletes were recognized as Scholar-Athletes at OSU.

Conspicuous in his absence: one Terrelle Pryor.  Surprised?  Probably not.

Here are some other athletes that were not included on that honor roll: DeVier Posey, Dan Herron, and Mike Adams.  Those athletes will also not be playing football for The Ohio State University in September.  Along with fellow starter Pryor, those three were also found to violate NCAA rules last season.

I am not trying to imply that athletes which do not qualify as a Scholar-Athlete at Ohio State are ignorant.  Afterall, about 600 student athletes failed to meet the academic requirements (All of the Scholar-Athletes recognized at OSU have maintained a cumulative grade point average of 3.0 or better since the end of the winter quarter of their freshman year).  Personally, I wish more would be made out of the record number of Scholar-Athletes at The Ohio State University this year (413); but that would not attract viewers, listeners, or readers to media outlets.

A topic for another day.

Forty-one of just over 100 football players were recognized as Scholar-Athletes.  But the number I really want fellow Buckeyes to focus upon is this one: 99.5%.

A little more than 99.5% of the student athletes at The Ohio State University managed to avoid committing NCAA infractions over 2010-2011.  Conversely, less than .05% were caught breaking NCAA rules.

These are not the numbers an NCAA investigator would find indicative of a lack of institutional controls.  As Buckeyes, we should all feel proud of the record 413 Scholar-Athletes and 99.5% of the student athletes that did not cheat over the last academic year.

Again, those facts will not drive ratings for the media, so I turn to the slimey, smelly, sludge that is found at the bottom of the Buckeyes barrel.  So enter the alleged $40,000.00 man: Terrelle Pryor.

As a former graduate, student athlete, Scholar-Athlete, Big Ten Co-Champion, and Academic All-Big Ten Team member, why should I be saddled with the humiliation that the latest administration at my alma mater has permitted to fester?  May I suggest that this current administration compete with Penn State and Stanford (as major colleges devoid of recorded NCAA infractions) and separate themselves from the current state of the SEC by instituting consequences for the very few athletes that unfortunately run awry of the NCAA?

How about athletes such as Maurice Clarrett and Terrelle Pryor be made accountable for their illicit activities?  Most children experience consequences for actions as relatively innocent as sneaking a cookie before dinner.  Why not negatively reinforce real infractions that affect many?

If I may interject, please remember that over 99.5% of the student athletes at OSU will not be affected by these new consequences.  In fact, this new contract with the student athlete would lead to the very real possibility that those .05% of athletes that thumb their noses at the rest of us would find another campus to pollute with their presence.

In an effort to contradict my title, here is my new contract to enact with the student athlete:

Any student athlete found to violate NCAA rules and receiving any benefit from that crime equivalent to less than $5,000.00 will be suspended for the remainder of their respective sport season (as well as any subsequent season in another sport during that academic year [e.g., a two-sport athlete would be suspended for the season corresponding to the two sports]) and forced to complete several competencies including a NCAA conduct class, community service, demonstrate academic competence, and suffer no more academic or legal trouble.

During the suspension, the student athlete may continue to receive academic benefits provided to student athletes (e.g., free tutoring and preferential scheduling).  The student athlete, however, may not participate in any athletic endeavors with the respective varsity team (e.g., weightlifting or training with the team). 

If the student athlete in question completes all of the required work satisfactorily, the athlete may petition to be reinstated.  If the student athlete does not complete all of the required work satisfactorily, the athlete enters the second-level of punishment.

The second-level of punishment applies to athletes that violated NCAA rules as above and do not satisfactorily complete the requisites set forth by the university.  In addition, any student athlete that violates NCAA rules and receives a benefit valued at $5,000.00 or more will immediately be subjected to the second-level of punishment.  Any student athlete in the second-level will immediately be dismissed from the university and required to pay back the market value of the benefits received by that athlete as calculated by the university.

In other words, Terrelle Pryor would now be on the hook for the fair market value of the education he completed.  He would also be required to pay back The Ohio State University for the books, room and board, and the value of the other tangible benefits he received while on campus.

So Pryor would now owe OSU about $250,000.00.  By my primitive calculations, Terrelle would have made $40,000.00, but now be in debt for about $210,000.00.  Just like most students utilizing student loans to get through college.

Good luck with that career in pro football, heh?  Pardon the "heh", just practicing my Canadian.

But as the title points out: you cannot legislate against stupidity.  On the other hand, implementing such a policy may keep the riff-raff off the Oval.

I think there is a point that is being missed.  Here is the starting roster on opening day 2010:

Continue reading this post »

and thank their lucky stars (pun intended) that Jerry Jones owns the Dallas Cowboys.

http://mirror.washingtoncitypaper.com/articles/40063/the-cranky-redskins-fans-guide-to-dan-snyder.html

It is hard to slam Jerry for his many football blunders after reading this.  I realize that Jones may have skeletons in his closet that he has done a better job hiding, but the owner of the Redskins is a tool.

Dan Snyder is truly a slimeball.

Last season, the Dallas Cowboys accumulated 4,287 yards passing in 550 pass plays.  The Cowboys ran 274 pass plays from formations utilizing three receivers or more. Dallas gained 1,861 yards from those sets.

The Cowboys also gained 1,961 yards through the air from sets with two or more tight ends (Note: 5 plays gained 21 yards with two tight ends and three wide receivers).  Dallas passed 247 times from formations with two (or more) tight ends.

Ranking the formations in regards to production (as defined by yards gained per pass attempt):

Jason Garrett called 484 passing plays (88% of all passing plays) from the above packages.  Depending upon how one wishes to interpret the data, an argument can easily be made that Garrett called the most successful passing plays most often.

Makes sense.

Plays involving S11, S12, and 12 personnel were called 450 times (82% of the total offensive passing plays).  The Cowboys also ran 128 times out of those three personnel groupings. 

Again, it seems that Garrett goes with what works.  Look at how few times the Cowboys ran out of a two tight end set from shotgun.

Why?

The Cowboys averaged a lowly 3.78 yards per rush attempt from that personnel package.  3.78 yards per attempt is good for Indianapolis, Houston, and San Diego (ranked 30th through 32nd in rush average in 2009), but the Cowboys averaged about 4.8 yards per rush attempt.

Dallas ran more plays from S11, than any other package.  The Cowboys averaged 6.47 yards per carry and 7.04 yards per pass attempt from that personnel grouping.

The second most productive offensive rushing package was the 22 grouping.  Dallas ran the ball 140 times from the 22 package (5.8 yards per rush attempt), 70 times from the 21 package (4.3 yards per rush attempt), and 75 times from the 12 package (4.28 yards per rush attempt).

The 22 personnel package was the second most used by the Cowboys in 2009, but it was primarily a running package.  Dallas only passed 41 times (4.61 yards per pass attempt) from that grouping; probably because it was not effective.

So will Garrett get Dez the ball?

If Dez is productive, history suggests that Jason will find a way to get him the ball.  I would expect to see much more S11 from the Cowboys next season with Roy, Dez, and Miles terrorizing secondaries.

Reference:

http://insidecorner.dmagazine.com/2009/09/09/garrett-08-vs-garrett-09/

As a fellow Buckeye leaves the Cowboys, I cannot help but wonder why some fans blame him for his average career in Dallas.  After all, it is not as if Carpenter chose not to succeed: Bobby did not go JaMarcus Russell on the Cowboys.

Carpenter was a beast of an outside linebacker at The Ohio State University.  Bobby came from good stock, as his dad played for Bill Parcells in New York.  Linebackers have the highest success rate of any position in the first round of the NFL draft.  Parcells was coaching the Cowboys, Greg Ellis was making the difficult transition to outside linebacker in Parcells’ version of the 3-4, and was complaining (how odd…) about the position switch.

Carpenter was a pass rushing, play making stud in Columbus.  He would come off of the edge and terrorize backs of all shapes and sizes.  He could even drop into coverage and cause chaos there.  He beat the living daylights out of Vince Young in Texas’ championship year.

But Ohio State played a defensive line scheme very similar to that employed by Bill Parcells.  The linemen in Columbus were big, strong guys that were nothing more than “dancing elephants” (as Marcus Spears described his role in Parcells’ 3-4).  That permitted fast linebackers with a sense for the ball to penetrate without having to engage a tackle, guard, or center with any frequency.

Parcells drafted Bobby to play an outside linebacker spot in his 3-4, but Ellis, despite all of his complaining had other plans.  Greg had a very good season, and kept Carpenter on the bench.  Carpenter switched positions to inside linebacker during the season, and had his greatest game as a pro in the playoffs against Seattle.

Bill Parcells left that offseason, and with the arrival of the new Wade Phillips 3-4, Bobby became a true square peg trying to fit a round hole.  Carpenter was great at evading contact at Ohio State thanks to the defensive line interference.  In Phillips’ 3-4, the defensive linemen took on more of an attacking role.  Gone were the days of consistently having a 300 pound offensive lineman engaged by a 300 pound defensive lineman.

Now Carpenter is going to linebacker starved St. Louis, to play with fellow Buckeye great, James Laurinaitis.  Bobby finds himself in a 4-3 defense again, but Spagnuolo made his mark in the NFL running an attacking style defensive line that disrupts pockets and backfields.

The switch to the 4-3 alignment may be enough to get Carpenter’s career back on track, but the attacking style defensive line may negate that advantage.  I would not be surprised, however, if Bobby has a career season and accumulates more sacks than anyone on that defense.  After all, that is what made him a first round pick coming out of Columbus.