Cowboys bring in RBs for workout

[LAZARUS_LOGAN]

I think we need to tap the brakes on the "this O-line" thing. Unless we are talking about playcalling and/or the scheme having heavy contribution to the success of the offense, the O line can't be considered anything great until it does something great.

This current O line has nothing other than hope that they can at least have some or most of the success from last year. But I don't know how that is going to be measured other than running back production in yards or TDs and/or QB protection.

I agree that the O-line has been overhyped to say the least. Then again, there is this:

During the last four regular season games Room threw 13 TD's and 1 Into and qaa sacked only 5 times, fifth least in that period.

I call bullshit on this. Watch the videos. The Oline is for real. You can be Debbie Downers all yo want. But the Oline is for real. That doesn't mean that they cannot or will not take a step back. With that said, I like the attitude that they have: they're not buying into the hype of themselves. They've adopted a "business as usual" attitude.

Sturm: Cowboys’ Joseph Randle’s chances to start at running back: Absurd, useless stats | | Dallas Morning News


People will always find some shit to bitch about. I get it. We should temper our expectations and such, but that is not what you people are doing, you're shitting on what the OL accomplished, and it's unwarranted

 

[cmd34]

what you people are doing

 

[Doomsday]

We should temper our expectations and such, but that is not what you people are doing, you're shitting on what the OL accomplished, and it's unwarranted

What it "accomplished" with three first round picks. One of Tony Romo's most sacked seasons. Of course I doubt you ever saw them getting blown up, in spite of it happening pretty regularly. There is much improvement needed and yes, it IS overhyped.

If some are "shitting" on it, you're putting lipstick on a pig and calling it Caitlyn. It's quite possible neither is actually happening.

 

[LAZARUS_LOGAN]

What it "accomplished" with three first round picks. One of Tony Romo's most sacked seasons. Of course I doubt you ever saw them getting blown up, in spite of it happening pretty regularly. There is much improvement needed and yes, it IS overhyped.

If some are "shitting" on it, you're putting lipstick on a pig and calling it Caitlyn. It's quite possible neither is actually happening.

Most sacked seasons? He was sacked 29 times. The year before he was sacked 35 times, and each of the two years before that, he was sacked 36 times, and in 2009 he was sacked 34 times because that was when he became more of a pocket passer and relied less on his scrambling. Far from being his "most sacked seasons" as you assert.

I've watched the games ass-fuck. And a lot of those sacks Romo needlessly took. The WRs would not be open, and rather than either scramble to a first --- like he did early in his career as a starter, or throwing it away, he would take the sack. You see the damn stat of how many times he was sacked and immediately knee-jerk and blame the OL.

Keep your fag fantasies to yourself.

 

[Doomsday]

You see the damn stat of how many times he was sacked and immediately knee-jerk and blame the OL.

I "blame the OL" for the times they were blown up, which was alot more frequent than you believe, seeing it all through rose colored glasses. Not for the number of sacks even if it was only 6 less than his all-time worst sack season. But he also had far fewer dropbacks than that year too. So on average it was worse.

But I might be one of the few here who knows Romo wasn't Romo last year, when it came to mobility and scrambling.

You buy all the hype about this line and think it's oh so great, I say shit, with three #1 draft picks it falls way short of that. You see no room for improvement, I see plenty.

 

[LAZARUS_LOGAN]

I "blame the OL" for the times they were blown up, which was alot more frequent than you believe, seeing it all through rose colored glasses. Not for the number of sacks even if it was only 6 less than his all-time worst sack season. But he also had far fewer dropbacks than that year too. So on average it was worse.

But I might be one of the few here who knows Romo wasn't Romo last year, when it came to mobility and scrambling.

You buy all the hype about this line and think it's oh so great, I say shit, with three #1 draft picks it falls way short of that. You see no room for improvement, I see plenty.

No they were blown up as nearly as you claim. You're full of shit as usual. Not rose -colored glasses. Just refuse to pump that, "we're 8-8 to our core because in 200-and something we were 8-8, despite none of the players from that squad are still on the team" bullshit.

 

[Doomsday]

"we're 8-8 to our core because in 200-and something we were 8-8, despite none of the players from that squad are still on the team" bullshit.

Except of course and as you know, that's not the meter. Lie about what I have been saying all you want so you can claim you win the innernets, but I will explain it again for you - We are a 8-8 team demonstrably, over the last 18 years. Throw out the statistical anomaly that was last season and you are exactly .500 ball since 1997. Period. It's just a fact you can't absorb and just like after the 2007 13-3 season, you think they have built something here and have Lombardis dancing in your head. By the way apparently you forgot the three 8-8 years we had in a row, most of the players on our current roster were part of those teams. So yeah, that's the core.

You mentioned the many times it appeared to you that Tony just laid down and took unnecessary sacks? First clue for you - that is what a veteran QB does when his line just gets blown up and the D is putting his guards and tackles in his fucking lap. And it happened far more than you believe or will accept. For having three #1 picks populating it, this line is underachieving so far. It's good, but as I have been saying there is much room for improvement. If you're arguing "no" to that you're just a fucking moron.

You miss Statman and Omega's central point - "bad" lines from the past really weren't all that bad, just average, and this one is overhyped and really not all that great. Just good, so far. Better than average. But of course it should be toweringly great, considering the investment in 1st round picks. It still doesn't in any way compare to the "Great Wall" line of decades past, which had zero blue chippers or first rounders.

The O-line is a plus, a strength of this team, but has much room for improvement. That's hardly a unreasonable position and certainly nothing to get your panties in a wad about.

 

[peplaw06]