Playoff bound!

Dallas shutout the Washington Redskins. It was their first shutout since 2003 when they shutout... the Washington Redskins. The Wade Phillips defense has become one of the best in the league, and that's going to need to continue if the 'Boys plan to win their first playoff game in some embarrassingly long amount of time.

Sunday afternoon the Cowboys take on the Eagles in Arlington for the division championship. The Eagles control their own destiny with respect to the NFC's #2 seed and a 1st-round bye, so the game has a 3 or 4-seed swing on the line for Philadelphia (Dallas is technically still in the running for the #2 seed, but they'd need some help from other teams losing).

If Dallas wins, it's also possible that the Eagles would be their wild-card round opponent in the playoffs, so they could face Philly two weeks in a row at Cowboys stadium... which would be weird.

I'll say this, though. Over the last few weeks, both New Orleans and Minnesota have shown serious flaws in their respective games, and seem to have peaked too early this year. It seems that the Eagles, Packers, and dare I say Cowboys are the teams to be most wary of in the NFC playoffs. I honestly believe that Dallas has a solid chance to get the playoff winless streak monkey off its back in a couple of weeks. As I mentioned, the defense is playing just spectacularly. After a slow start to the season from its pass-rush, Anthony Spencer, DeMarcus Ware, and Jay Ratliff are playing some of the best football of their careers. Linebackers Bradie James and Keith Brooking look great, and cornerback Mike Jenkins has a legitimate shot to be announced for his first Pro Bowl tomorrow night. On the other side of the ball, Miles Austin continues to give the kinds of performances no one expects from undrafted receivers from Monmouth, New Jersey. Jason Witten is taking advantage of defenses that are being more and more geared toward stopping Austin. And in case no one's noticed, Tony Romo has been one of the league's best quarterbacks since Thanksgiving. The whole team looks immensely more mature and focused than December-and-beyond fade-outs of the last decade (and beyond).

The running game also looks very good, though in the past couple of games Marion Barber has been frighteningly bad on 3rd- or 4th-and short runs. His whole career he's been nothing but a battering ram, but he can't seem to get first downs or touchdowns from about 1-2 yards away. I don't know why.

Again, I'm a rose-colored glasses kind of fan, and I'll continue to be.

I'd LOVE to see the kind of whooping of the Eagles this week that we saw the Eagles give the Cowboys in last season's finale. If Dallas turns in a 44-6 loss like they did a year ago, I might cry. It'd be terribly disappointing.

On another note, I've said it before and I'll say it again: Washington, to me, has looked like by FAR the worst team in the NFL all year long. I don't know how they have the wins they do. I've watched them play three or four times this season, and each time I swore I was watching a decent division III college team.

So here are the scenarios for the Cowboys regarding the playoffs:

They've clinched a birth. If they lose on Sunday, they'll be a wildcard team. If they beat the Eagles, they win the division and will most likely be the 3rd or 4th seed (which comes with a home playoff game). If they beat the Eagles, and the Vikings lose, and the Cardinals lose, they can get the 2 seed and a first-round bye.

Honestly, I'm not sure any of that matters, though. Even a loss on Sunday isn't devastating. It'll depend on how they look. If they lose by 20 or 30 points in a gutless performance, I'll be worried. I really don't think Philadelphia's the superior team.

Alrighty then...

My not-so organized thoughts from tonight's HUGE win over New Orleans:

During the pregame show on NFL Network I heard Deion Sanders talking about how the Cowboys can't win in December. He said, "But it's not all Wade Phillips' fault. People like Tony Romo have to take responsibility for winning big games like this..." (I didn't really hear the rest of what he thought because I was busy calling him an idiot.)

As I've pointed out before, Romo had played two unbelievable December games prior tonight. Tonight, by the way, made three straight.

Further evidence that coaching is the numero uno problemo in Dallas: The Cowboys are OBVIOUSLY a talented team, with the ability to beat even the best teams. But sometimes, they just don't show up. They act like they're not a talented team, or like winning games isn't that important. You will NEVER see stuff like that happen with coaches like Bill Belichick. If his team is the best on the field, they win pretty much 9 times out of ten. With Dallas and they're coco-puff aw-shucks slow-talking cup-cake coach, Wade Phillips, they often get wins by virtue of the other team being awful (witness this year's Redskins win... which wouldn't have been a win against anyone else in the league).

Jason Garrett called a pretty good game. There was a solid balance between passes and runs. The strengths of all of the offensive players seemed to be put to good use.

It couldn't have been clearer who the true #1 Cowboys receiver is. Miles Austin caught a 49-yard touchdown pass to finish up Dallas's opening drive. In the fourth quarter after a New Orleans touchdown (bringing them within 14), the Cowboys faced a 3rd and 4. A slant route pass to Roy Williams went right through his hands. Dallas had to punt, and the Saints drove right down the field to score again and bring themselves within a touchdown. On the ensuing Cowboys possession, they faced a 3rd and 7. Romo hit Austin on a short route, and Miles turned it into a 34-yard gain, sustaining the Cowboys drive, taking more time off the clock, and effectively winning the game.

Nick Folk is as good a kicker as my left foot wrapped in aluminum foil. He should have been fired at halftime of last week's game. Now he'll definitely be fired after this one. And I don't really care who replaces him. Can't be any worse.

Players of the game: Tony Romo, Miles Austin, Anthony Spencer, DeMarcus Ware (6 days ago he was being taken out of Cowboys Stadium on a stretcher... tonight he had two sacks, and two forced-fumbles -- the guy's an animal).

Dallas is now in a decent place to make the playoffs (something I didn't think was going to happen prior to tonight's matchup). They'll still have to win at least one of the next two (both against division rivals), and could very possibly have to win 'em both.

This is actually right where Dallas stood a year ago. They were 9-5, had to beat the Ravens to keep themselves in good shape for the playoffs, and fell apart in the fourth quarter of the last game ever at Texas Stadium. After some other favorable games kept Dallas in the hunt, they went to Philadelphia for a winner-makes-the-playoffs battle, and got humiliated 44-6, showing no heart or effort at all. That could happen this year too! Let's see...

How I see it

If I ran the world, this is what would happen over the coming months:

Dallas loses out (or come close) and misses the playoffs (let's just assume they play their final three games just like they've played their last two). The next day Jerry Jones calls me up and asks me to be his top football consultant.

I'd start by saying, "Jerry, I know you own 80% of the oil on the planet, along with the most valuable sports franchise in the history of mankind... but you need to understand that you're part of the problem here. Keep your meddling little hands to yourself for two seasons and see what happens."

Then I'd advise him to...

1. Fire Wade Phillips as quickly as humanly possible. The guy has demonstrated for three seasons now that he doesn't have the backbone to lead America's Team to a successful postseason, even with tremendous talent on the field.

2. Fire Jason Garrett. He was a god in 2007 when Dallas went 13-3. Since then he's frankly been mediocre at best. At the beginning of today's game they mentioned that Dallas was (I think) 3rd in the league in total offense (by yardage). Kudos to Garrett. But they have not scored a touchdown on a game's opening possession yet this season. In fact, they currently have the longest active streak in that category (I'm pretty sure today made it 17 games). They failed to score a touchdown in the first half of the game for the third time in the last five games. They failed to score on a 1st and goal from the Chargers 3 yard line in the first half. An offensive coordinator who can ONLY seem to score on big huge long passes to Miles Austin, and big huge long runs by Felix Jones just isn't good enough. You have to score when it counts too. And on another note, he tends to freak out if the running backs don't average 12 yards per carry the first three or four times they rush, and then he passes the ball the rest of the game -- a completely silly philosophy when you actually watch what Jones, Marion Barber, and Tashard Choice can do in a game when given the chance.

3. Fire Nick Folk. In fact, if Jones had given me this coordinating position at halftime of today's game, I might have had him fire Folk right then and there. I'm sure Jon Kitna can miss just as many fieldgoals as Folk can.

4. Hire a new head coach. Shanahan, Cowher, Holmgren. Heck, offer John Gruden $100 million to reconsider his ESPN job (it's not like you can't spare the change). Or Tony Dungy. Someone with Super Bowl experience. Someone who can get his team to win those really important games at the end of the year and in the postseason. Let him bring in his own staff if he wants.

5. Keep most of the player personnel. I think the Cowboys put a pretty talented team on the field every week. It's leadership and coaching that they lack. And mental toughness (which also has to do with coaching). Probably most important to the team would be these guys: Keith Brooking (provides the most emotion and leadership on the defense... and is also quite good physically), DeMarcus Ware, Mike Jenkins (he's emerged as a really great corner), Anthony Spencer, Tony Romo, Miles Austin, Jason Witten, and all three runningbacks.

There you have it. Those are my initial steps to making this team a Super Bowl contender again. I remember when it was one. But that was an awfully long time ago.

This thought just hit me: Since the Cowboys last won a playoff game, the Minnesota Vikings (not the most storied franchise in the league, even if I do root for them against everyone but Dallas) have gone through an entire cycle of being really good (1998 - remember that team? Cris Carter and Randy Moss were unstoppable), to being really average and not scaring anyone, to being really good again (2009 - remember that team? Brett Favre, Percy Harvin, and Adrian Peterson seem to be virtually unstoppable).

Let's face it

This is not a playoff-caliber team. If they make it (which I'm highly doubting right now), they won't win their wildcard-round matchup.

One observation I've been meaning to make all year, though: Why doesn't anyone treat Dallas for what they are? Every loss triggers gloom and doom talk (whether a Week 2 loss by TWO points against a division heavyweight, or a Week 14 loss to division leading team who hasn't lost since before my first theology assignment of the semester was due). Some of it is justified. Much of it is not. Cowboys wins are discussed as if they're a so-so team ("It was a good win... but they could have done this this and this better..."), and losses are discussed as if they're the 2007 Patriots ("I can't beLIEVE they couldn't get that win!"). Perhaps Marshal Faulk on NFL Network's Gameday Morning show today said it best (and worst) when he said, "We talk about them like they're an elite team, but they really haven't earned that status." To which I would respond, "Well, then, wouldn't that be YOUR fault for giving them an unearned status?" You just can't have it both ways.

What they're not: A great team. So stop treating them like one.

What they are: A so-so team who hasn't really beaten anyone that impressive this year (with the exception of the Eagles a few weeks ago), and who struggles MASSIVELY with leadership/coaching issues, a FAR too involved owner, and end-of-the-season mental and physical toughness that rivals a 3-year old girl with swine flu. So let's treat them like one.

(I've got a follow-up post coming right away, but I want to keep each post to a reasonable length, so stay tuned.)

Harrison and Dungy: You're both wrong

Wow. I've got the Sunday Night Football game on even though I'm not really watching it. It's halftime. After a re-cap of the Cowboys-Giants game (New York won by a touchdown, in case you didn't know) Dan Patrick asked Tony Dungy (who I respect immensely) and Rodney Harrison (who I don't) about the trip to Las Vegas that Tony Romo took "to relax" (according to Patrick) the day after their Thanksgiving win over Oakland. Harrison took Romo to the woodshed for taking the trip saying that the perception in the locker room is that he was partying, and what does it say about your leadership when you go off partying right as you enter the most important stretch of games in the season. When Harrison finished Dungy jumped right on board. "I agree," he said. When you're the quarterback of the Dallas Cowboys you have to remain focused.

Really, guys? REALLY?!?!?!

Let me set a few things straight: By every report I've read (and that's quite a few, believe it or not), Romo's trip to Vegas was for a private charity function. He was in the city for about 14 hours on Black Friday, and at 7 a.m. on Saturday morning he was reported to have been back at Valley Ranch to work out and watch game film (hardly the kind of thing you would expect from a partying playboy hanging out in Las Vegas for fun).

Now take a look at this: Tony Romo threw for 392 yards today. THREE HUNDRED AND NINETY-TWO YARDS. I read a brief blog post shortly after the game (before I knew Romo's numbers) and the writer said, "Romo did throw for over 300 yards today, but it took him 45 attempts to do it." When you throw ALMOST 400 yards, describing it as "over 300 yards" is misleading, frankly. That's quite a feat. His passer rating was over 112 (and by that I don't mean 112.99). He completed 75% of his passes. That's a FABULOUS day. Ask any quarterback in the league if they'd like to have those numbers for a game. Payton Manning, Tom Brady, they'd both take it in a heartbeat. To basically suggest that Romo's 14-hour trip to Vegas on a completely dead weekend 9 days before their next game was one of the reasons the Cowboys got beat today is absolutely ludicrous.

Mr. Dungy, I'm a huge fan of yours, but you missed this one. Bigtime.

An Eagles-Redskins related post

NFC East blogger Matt Moseley is picking the Eagles in a tight one against Washington today. He says that though everything points to a Philadelphia win, he doesn't trust them, and that "I just watched the Redskins outplay the division-leading Cowboys."

I can understand not trusting Philly, and believing it will be a close game, as I do (if for no other reason than it's a division rivalry). Still, I don't quite understand how "I just watched the Redskins outplay the division-leading Cowboys" is any kind of positive statement for Washington. They "outplayed" a completely schizophrenic team... and LOST, scoring a whopping six points on four fieldgoal attempts. That's, frankly, sad. When you're an NFL team and you look AWFUL and still win the game (Dallas), your opponent (Washington) isn't that great.

Giants = BAD

As I write the Broncos are about to finish up an absolute dismantling of the New York Giants. Frankly, the Giants haven't done ANYTHING impressive this season. I don't consider them very good at all.

Dallas travels to New York a week from Sunday. It'll be a tough game because a) it's a divisional matchup, which are never easy, and b) even though the Giants aren't good, in recent history they're MUCH better late in the season than Dallas is. Now, I don't know how much will change between tonight (where the Giants look awful) and 10 days from now, but I'll be honest and say that I'm not completely confident in a Cowboys win, but they'll definitely be the better team on the field. Unfortunately, that doesn't always translate to wins.

Quick Thanksgiving day recap

Dallas took care of the Raiders today with a plethora of big-time plays. Felix Jones had a 46-yard run for a touchdown. Miles Austin had almost 150 yards receiving with a touchdown. Romo threw for more than 300 yards. Marion Barber had a long catch-and-run. Jason Witten had his best game of the year -- 5 catches for 107 yards. Roy Williams caught a touchdown pass. Oh yeah, and the defense gave up just 7 points. It probably would've been 10 if Oakland had decided to kick a field goal from deep in Dallas territory in garbage time at the end of the game (they instead tried to go for it, and failed).

The Raiders are no great team, but they're supposed to have a really great defensive secondary. Apparently nobody told that to Austin or Witten, who ate the Raider defense alive all day long.

It was a solid win, and for the first time since playing Philadelphia three weeks ago the Dallas offense looked like it knew what it was doing. Now the Cowboys head into December, the month in which they've struggled for years, with an 8-3 record. Their last five games include the Giants, Saints, Chargers, Eagles, and Redskins. I'm guessing that 11-5 will win them the division (which would mean 3-2 the rest of the way), but 10-6 would still put them in the playoffs (2-3 the rest of the way). I'd like to think that both of those are very doable, but if recent history means anything, I'm none too confident!

Remember Gordon Bombay?

In my previous post about Bill Belichick and his decision to go for it on 4th and 2 at the end of the game, I meant to make a Coach Riley connection from The Mighty Ducks.

"It's not worth winning if you CAN'T WIN BIG!!!" Sometimes I think Belichick is just like that guy... but with less personality.

Mighty Belichick STRUCK OUT!

If you didn't catch the Patriots-Colts game on Sunday night, you missed out. For future reference, it's ALWAYS a good idea to watch this matchup as long as Tom Brady and Peyton Manning are the quarterbacks involved.

It was a FABULOUS game, but what I want to focus on (no surprise) is what Peter King named "The Call Heard Round the World."

With 2:08 left and the Pats leading by 6 with no timeouts (Indy had 1 left) they faced a 4th and 2 at their own 28 yard line.

If you punt it, you give Manning and the Colts the ball somewhere around their own 30 (most likely), with 2:00 to go and 1 timeout. Manning has to drive 70ish yards for a winning touchdown.

If you go for it and make it, you effectively win the game. With just one Colts timeout left and the two-minute warning, New England could run the clock WAY down, and if they didn't convert another first down, Indy would get the ball back with very little time on the clock.

If you go for it and DON'T make it, Manning and his 1 timeout (plus the warning) have to go less than 30 yards for a winning touchdown.

Belichick decided to go for it. The Pats were stopped just short of the first down marker. Manning took about four plays to put the ball in the endzone on a 1-yard slant to Reggie Wayne with just 13 seconds left. Colts win.

People are shocked Belichick decided to go for it. I'm not. As much as I respect the guy (and I do) for being a brilliant coach (there's no denying it), he's an arrogant son-of-a-gun who wants to win more than anything, but only slightly less than his desire to win is his desire to win big, defiantly, and to rub the losers' faces in it. In 2007 when the Pats were on their 18-win tear that took them all the way to the Super Bowl before they were beaten, they did this kind of thing all the time. The annoying thing is, they most often convert that 4th-down and win the game. It's frustrating to me because I just wanted a team to stop them (like they should) and make Belichick eat his hot-headed rub-it-in playcalling -- make him pay for his risky decisions.

Well, Sunday night that happened.

P.S. Not only were the last two minutes thrilling, but so was most of the fourth quarter. The Pats entered the 4th with a 17-point lead over the Colts. Under Belichick the Pats had NEVER lost a game in which they led by 13 or more points heading into the 4th. Now they have. I like Peyton Manning quite a bit.

Nearly shutout? C'mon, guys.

I watched the game via NFL.com's live gamecast thingie. From what I hear, the Cowboys looked about as good in person and on television as they did on my little computer graphic tracker (which is to say, not very).

What I noticed while following what's essentially a play-by-play written description of the game was:

LOTS of penalties

FIVE sacks of Tony Romo. FIVE!??!!?

Giving up 1st downs on Packer 3rd downs constantly

Major, costly fumbles. Interceptions.

Complete lack of rhythm on offense

and perhaps most avoidably and stupid...

COMPLETE ABANDON OF THE RUNNING GAME!!! Marion Barber had 4 carries for something like 27 yards in the first quarter (almost 7 yards/carry). I'm pretty sure I read that he then had ONE carry the rest of the game. Dear Jason Garrett, for a guy who aspires to be an NFL head coach, you sure make some STUPID decisions. How about this stat: In this decade the Cowboys are 1-16 when rushing the ball fewer than 20 times. 1-16!!!! Geez, with a stat like that, if I'm the offensive coordinator I'd start the game off with 20 straight runs and THEN rely on my own whims for play-calling strategy. Completely ridiculous.

Roy Williams took the blame for the loss because of one play in the 2nd quarter when he caught a 42-yard pass... and then fumbled it. The most promising Cowboys drive of the game was halted in its tracks. No points. I appreciate Williams' shouldering the burden, and that was a costly mistake. BUT, the guy had his first 100-yard game as a Cowboy, and with how poorly the rest of the team looked, it's not all your fault, big guy.

Pretty much seems like the 'Boys played like they looked at the end of last season, and that's not comforting. I was beginning to think they were completely different.

(Stay in your seat... I've got another post on its way in just a few minutes! Hint: It has to do with a very entertaining Sunday Night game.)

mid-game

For the third time in the last four Cowboys games, they're not being shown here in Denver. So, as I watch the Chargers completely smoke the Eagles on the TV, I'm watching the NFL gamecast of the Cowboys-Packers game online.

Not actually being able to view the game, I won't say that these comments won't need some tweaking.

Right now the score is 3-0 Green Bay, midway through the 3rd quarter, and that sounds shocking. Dallas is supposed to score more than that! It appears they can't really get into a rhythm on offense, and when they do make a big play, they fumble it. I feel like there's been at least three Romo sacks, and that's far too many.

On the other hand, the Dallas pass rush seems like it's starting to come alive, as they've sacked Rodgers a couple of times already in the 3rd quarter.

Let's hope they click at some point on offense and score a few points.

Wow

I'm watching the Broncos-Redskins game right now. I'm not sure I've ever seen a team more inept than these Washington Redskins. They've allowed Brandon Marshall to run a deep fly route, twice, COMPLETELY wide open. No one anywhere near him. Marshall has two LONG touchdown catches. They also allowed Eddie Royal to do the same thing on the Broncos' last drive, but Orton misfired and didn't hit him (it would have been a long touchdown too). Ironically, heading into this week Washington is apparently the 1st-ranked pass defense in the league. They certainly don't look like it right now. It kinda makes me excited for the Cowboys-Redskins game next week. If Washington plays at all like this next week, Miles Austin, Roy Williams, Patrick Crayton, Sam Hurd, Kevin Ogletree, and every other wide-out on the team will have a field day.

P.S. I can't figure out how ESPN still power-ranks the 'Skins at 26. They've been this bad for WEEKS, and I KNOW that every other team in the league could beat them.

A couple more tidbits

Keep an eye on Kevin Ogletree. He's a rookie wide receiver (from Virginia or Virginia Tech, I can't remember which one) and he made a couple of big plays against the Eagles the other night. Both were in Eagles territory and set up scores. They were screen plays that went for 21 and 17 yards. Obviously, a screen play is designed to gain yards after the catch, but his athleticism was rather impressive.

People didn't think a Tom Coughlin-coached team could lose 4 straight, but that's what the Giants have done. Remarkably, they can't be counted out yet (but I don't think it'll be long). People keep asking, "What's happened to the Giants?" and I think Joel and I would both say, "They were never as good as you thought they were."

HUGE win in Philadelphia

You could argue that Tony Romo was largely responsible for the Cowboys win last night. He threw for 307 yards and a touchdown. Although he threw his first interception in more than three games, he also played the way Cowboys fans have wanted him to play for about three years now. He looked confident. He played smart, opting to take a sack in multiple instances instead of forcing passes that weren’t there, risking more interceptions. And he hit the open man when he needed to.

You could argue that Roy Williams was largely responsible. For the first time as a Cowboy he caught five passes. Many are considering it his “coming out party” of sorts. He’s obviously a long way from the #1 wideout that Jerry Jones gave up half of Texas for, but he made his biggest impact yet as a Cowboy.

You could argue the Cowboys defense was largely responsible. DeMarcus Ware disrupted the Eagles passing game all night. Jay Ratliff had two huge sacks of Donovan McNabb. Marcus Spears and the rest of the defensive line stopped Philadelphia cold on several important 3^rd- and 4^th-and-1 situations. Mike Jenkins and Gerald Sensabaugh each had an interception. The linebackers and the Dallas secondary all but shut down the big-play threats Jeremy Maclin and DeSean Jackson.

I might be in the huge minority, but I would argue that (among a couple of the others above) Marion Barber was largely responsible for the Cowboys win. The guy didn’t do anything terribly impressive most of the game. But with something like four and a half minutes left, the Cowboys started a drive with a 4-point lead and the Eagles had no timeouts. Everyone in the WORLD who was watching the game knew that what was coming next was a heavy dose of Marion Barber. The Eagles could have left every tight-end and widereceiver uncovered and stacked all 11 defenders in the box to keep Barber from getting 1^st downs… and they couldn’t do it. Somehow the machine that is Marion Barber actually gets fresher, stronger, and better as games wear on, and when it’s time to run out the clock I don’t know if I’ve ever seen a team stop him. The guy’s unreal.

There is a bigger, more convincing argument for the success of these Cowboys, however, and here it is: The Dallas Cowboys as a team were responsible for maybe their biggest win since 2007.

After getting clobbered 44-6 in Philadelphia in Week 17 last season, in a game with the NFC’s last playoff spot on the line, the Cowboys were in a pit. Jerry Jones then made some of the best decisions he could possibly have made. He released T.O. He released Tank Johnson. He released Pacman Jones. These moves suggested that he wished to create a more team-oriented atmosphere than the me-first teams of the past few years. This year, I believe we’re watching the Cowboys grow up before our eyes. Roy Williams thinks winning is more important than whether or not he’s getting 100-yard games. Miles Austin had only one catch last night (for what ended up being the winning touchdown) and it came midway through the final quarter. After the game SI’s Peter King asked him if he was a little testy having had such huge games in the last month and then not contributing 50 minutes into such a big game last night. Austin responded (I’m paraphrasing from memory), “There are times when I think I’m open and I want the ball, but I’m not Tony and I don’t know what Tony’s going through back there. A lot of times he’s got a 300 pound defensive lineman coming after him and trying to rip his head off, so no, it doesn’t upset me when I don’t always get the ball.”

These are the kinds of quotations you hear from TEAM-oriented players.

The Cowboys next three games are Green Bay, Washington, and Oakland. None of those are gimmes, but they’ll likely be favored in each of them. Although I would argue that this year’s team looks different from the December-collapsing Cowboys teams of the last several years, it would be nice to come out of Thanksgiving at 9-2, needing only a couple of wins out of the last five (which I think are New York, Philadelphia, Washington, New Orleans, and San Diego – not in that order) to make the playoffs.

This is a new and different team. Watch out.

Comments from Week 8

I'll start with the Cowboys because my poor mother's been waiting patiently for my commentary for days now.

Unfortunately, the last two Cowboys games (you know, the ones in which they've played really well) have not been shown in my local area. As far as I can tell, though, they're performing at a decently high level. They defeated a very good Atlanta team two weeks ago (quite handily), and put away the Seahawks early in the game on Sunday. Both of those impressed me, because prior to these two games the 'Boys had won an overtime game against a BAD team (Kansas City), a home game against Carolina that they didn't put away until fairly late, and a Tampa Bay team that may not get a victory this season (have you seen them play? they're awful). It was exciting to see them beat a good team with room to spare, and even though the Seahawks aren't impressive by any means, Dallas never really let them stay in the game with any hope.

This week's game is a Sunday nighter in Philadelphia in a battle for 1st place in the NFC East against the Eagles. Both teams enter the game 5-2, and the winner will be in the proverbial driver's seat for the division championship. Cowboys receiver Patrick Crayton was asked about this game and said something like (I'm quoting from memory), "I'm not gonna call it a must-win, but it's definitely a have-to win." He's gotten a little bit of jeering from Cowboys bloggers (from what I've read), but I actually think that's a very accurate way to describe the upcoming showdown. It's not a must-win in the sense that a loss would break the Cowboys season or anything. If they lose they'll still be sitting in an okay spot. But it is kind of a have-to win game in the sense that good teams win games like these. You go on the road against a division opponent (and not just any road game, but into hostile, blue-collar Lincoln Financial Field in Philly) who's playing really well, and you beat 'em, putting yourself in a very good spot for playoff contention. Last season Dallas played in Philadelphia in their last regular season game, if you remember. The winner of the game was to earn a playoff berth, and Dallas got walloped. The official score was 44-6, but it looked far less close than that. That was an example of a team with no heart. We'll have to see if 1) that loss provides motivation for the 'Boys this week, and 2) throughout the rest of this season we'll determine if this year's team does have heart or not.

A couple of weeks ago, prior to the Giants-Cardinals Sunday night game, I commented to a close friend (Eagles fan -- fellow NFC East follower) that the Giants could lose that game and then Philadelphia and Dallas would be in decent shape in the division. He told me, "No way. Against the Cardinals? Giants by 20." I told him I'd take that bet. If you recall, Arizona won the game, and New York looked bad losing. The week before that the Giants had been trounced (and I mean absolutely go-home-crying-to-momma-because-you've-been-embarassed kind of trounced) by the Saints, so everyone thought that "This team'll bounce back. Tom Coughlin won't let them lose two straight." So after falling to the Cardinals, people said, "Well they certainly won't lose THREE straight," but they went to Philadelphia last week and got killed again. Finally everyone's starting to say, "Maybe this team isn't as great as we thought." Something my brother and I have been saying all along. Other than the last-second fieldgoal win over Dallas in Week 2 (a game in which New York looked good, but not great), the Giants haven't beaten anyone decent. They're in an absolute freefall, and I'm pretty sure they face San Diego this week. They're 5-3, but on a quick slide, and if they get beat by the Chargers I will (first, have a party, but then) consider them quite a long-shot for the playoffs. Right now, they look like they're in the hunt for worst-looking team on the field in the whole league.

Denver suffered its first loss at the hands of the Ravens on Sunday. The Ravens are good (they had lost three straight, but those were to Cincinnati, New England, and Minnesota... three of the better teams in the league) and they were coming off a bye-week. Denver went to Baltimore and lost 30-7. Some say that's a killing, and it's obvious Denver was never that good. I won't say that until we see how they rebound against Pittsburgh on Monday night. With all of the negativity that surrounded Broncos coach Josh McDaniels over the first 6+ months of his arrival to town, the guy seems like a pretty decent coach to me. After the loss he didn't make any excuses. He said, we'll see how we respond next week. As for right now, I'm going to consider this one of those kinds of losses that's good for a team to experience. My prediction is that they come out fighting at home against the hated Steelers.

And Brett Favre is still playing like a 28-year old. Someone pointed out that Favre hasn't missed a start since Percy Harvin (Vikings receiver and likely rookie-of-the-year candidate) was four years old. I thought that was funny. After a bye this week Favre will make his 300th consecutive start against the Detroit Lions. For those of you who aren't aware, that's a ridiculously impressive stat.

The Redskins: They ARE that bad.

An almost universally true statement in the NFL is that division road games are NEVER easy victories, even if it's the best team in a division against the worst. I think that last night was an illustration of when that statement is not true.

The Redskins are one of the worst teams I've ever watched play an NFL game. I think that if this Redskins team had faced last year's winless Lions sometime last season, Detroit would have won by 17 or more. They're awful. And showing not signs of improvement.

Even though Philadelphia lost a humiliating game to the Raiders last week, they looked like a team full of all-stars in Landover, MD last night.

DeMarcus Ware: A good deal for everyone

Todd Archer of Dallasnews.com reported an interesting tidbit regarding the pretty huge contract extension that the Cowboys just signed with DeMarcus Ware yesterday. Ware was asked if he felt he should have gotten more money (he probably could have, as an elite pass rusher, but this deal is still quite substantial). He answered, "You can't ask for too much money when you need other players in here and you know you've got to be able to build." That's an answer that means Ware understands the process, and is as concerned about contributing to a winning team as he is about making sure he makes more money than the other guy. I like that answer.

Let's Review

I understand that in many ways, I've got the proverbial rose-colored glasses when it comes to the Cowboys. I'm hopelessly optimistic regarding the team, and I tend not to see the struggles nearly as clearly as I see the triumphs. I admit that (not as a weakness, because I'm a fan, and I don't consider optimism to be a weakness of a fan, but I know that I can't consider myself an unbiased analyst either).

Nevertheless, let's consider this:

Prior to the season, expert analysis concluded that Dallas would finish this season anywhere between 7-9 and 10-6. That's pretty much what the expectations of the team were before any football had been played.

Week 1: Dallas beats Tampa Bay handily. Fine. That's what they were supposed to do.

Week 2: Dallas gets beat by the New York Giants (at the time considered to be one of the top two or three teams in the league) on a last-second field goal. All of a sudden, Dallas is terrible. They completely sucked, and Tony Romo will never be anything but a turnover machine who can't win a meaningful game. Among experts, the Cowboys stock plummets.

Week 3: Dallas defeats the 0-2 Carolina Panthers without too much drama on Monday night. Fine. That's what they were supposed to do.

Week 4: Dallas is beaten by the 3-0 (now 6-0) Denver Broncos at Invesco after giving up a late touchdown and then being unable to punch in a score even after driving all the way down the field in the final 1:46. The Cowboys are in "serious trouble" and aren't playing very well this season. Can't really do anything right. Among experts, the Cowboys stock plummets.

Week 5: Dallas defeats the winless Kansas City Chiefs in overtime. (I'll concede, you shouldn't need overtime to beat Kansas City if you're a real contender, but note a few things: 1. In the NFL, wins are tough to come by. Witness last week's Philadelphia Eagles collapse against the just-about-as-bad-as-the-Chiefs Oakland Raiders. 2. The size of the win means absolutely nothing when the season ends. 3. If you watched the game, Dallas never really felt like they were in real danger of getting beat. Even in overtime, when Kansas City won the toss and started with the ball, they never threatened to score.) Since it was such an ugly win, Dallas is mistake-prone and still can't get their act together. Among experts, if there was much lower to go, the Cowboys stock would have likely plummeted.

Week 6: Dallas has a bye. They sit at home and get healthy. Every other NFC East team gets beaten, including a humiliating Eagles loss to the Raiders, and a perhaps even more humiliating (they got KILLED) Giants loss to the Saints. Even so, Dallas slips two spots in ESPN's power rankings.

Preceding today's game against the Falcons: The Cowboys are a team stuck in the mud with a lack of playmaking at receiver, an inconsistent defense, an "Aw shucks" southern coach who should have remained a defensive coordinator for someone, and a Hollywood quarterback who'd rather have his picture taken than go a game without turning the ball over.

I guess what I mean by all this is, isn't this exactly what we should've expected thus far from a 7-9 to 10-6 team? Their losses were to unbeaten teams (Giants, Broncos), and both were extremely close, winnable games. I understand that the Cowboys are one of those franchises (like the New York Yankees) that completely polarizes people, but if a team is more or less mediocre, shouldn't they beat bad teams and lose to good teams? In other words, should we really have expected anything more from these guys?

Today Dallas beat a very good team, the Atlanta Falcons. The defense caused problems for Matt Ryan all day long. Tony Romo was something like 21-29 for 311 yards, 3 touchdowns, and no interceptions. The talk of the team is receiver Miles Austin who, in the last two games, has 16 catches for 421 yards. Re-read that. It's not a typo. That's an average of more than 26 yards per catch. The Falcons were 4-1 entering this game, and showing every sign of being a serious contender in the NFC race. Dallas defeated them 37-21, playing an all-around great game. Shouldn't this be the first thing that really surprises us about this team, and will they get credit for being, frankly, a little better than we thought? The Cowboys are now a game behind the Giants for first place in the NFC East (which will be either 1.5 games or just .5 games after the Giants game ends this evening).

I'll continue to be optimistic.

Welcome back to Green Bay, Mr. Favre

I know that the one (or two?) people who read this blog will enjoy this.

Apparently the Mayor of Green Bay, Wisconsin is soliciting suggestions for how the city can playfully welcome Bret Favre when the Vikings come to Lambeau to take on the Packers on November 1. Packers website Cheesehead.tv put together a small list of ideas back in August that you can find by clicking here. I think my favorite suggestion actually comes from the comments section of the linked post. Someone said, "The Packers should retire Favre's number 4 before the game... and then unretire it." Another suggestion I liked was to have the high school marching band from Benedict Arnold's birthtown perform at halftime. Or display a gigantic waffle in the shape of a number 4 outside the stadium. Or encourage all Packer fans to wear flip-flops to the game.

The Rundown

The Redskins might be the worst team in the league. Interesting fact: They haven't yet played a team with a win. They're 2-3, but both of their wins were desperate battles of Who's Worse?

The Saints might be the best team in the league.

The Vikings have the best running back in the league, and their 40 year-old quarterback is playing like he's 28. New Orleans and Minnesota don't face each other in the regular season. It's WAY too early to make speculations like this one, but if the two teams face each other in an NFC Championship game (at this point, that looks like a strong possibility) it'll be tough to make any kind of assessments or predictions about who might win and what the keys to the game will be.

If I were Wade Phillips I'd be trying to trade draft picks for more bye weeks. Yesterday the Cowboys sat at home and gained a half game on everyone in their division. Their new slogan should be, "At least we didn't lose!"

Not that I'm giving up on the Cowboys, but it's very fun to be living in Denver right now with how well the Broncos are performing. We're now three games into the 8-game stretch in the Broncos schedule that's supposed to expose them for the young team with the so-so quarterback and the wet-behind-the-ears 18 year-old coach (or at least that's what he looks like) that they are. So far all that's been exposed is that this is a tough team that doesn't seem like they're gonna give in to how they were supposed to play this season. The Broncos defeated a desperate Chargers team tonight, IN San Diego. It was a must-win for the Chargers. I watched the highlights and it pretty much looked like Philip Rivers got hit on 90-96% of his dropbacks in the second half.

Tom Brady looked like the 2007 version of himself. So did the rest of the Patriots as they beat the Titans by a I-had-to-do-a-double-take score of 59-0. That's not a typo. This stat from Peter King's MMQB column this morning: Last season through six games the Titans had given up 7 touchdowns. In a 36-minute stretch on Sunday they gave up 8 to the Pats.

How 'bout this other stat from the aforementioned column: The Phillies scored 11 runs in the NLCS game Sunday afternoon. The other Philadelphia sports team in action on Sunday, the Eagles, scored 9 against the Oakland Raiders. Funny.

The two unbeatens in the NFC, as mentioned above, won't play each other in the regular season. The two unbeatens in the AFC, the Broncos and Colts, do play each other at Lucas Oil Stadium on December 13, but I highly doubt that either of those teams will still be unbeaten when they clash.

The Bye Week

Sometimes the best thing you can do is just take a week off.

With the Cowboys idle this week on their Bye, they gained a half game on all three of their division foes. The Giants suffered their first loss in a 48-27 drubbing in New Orleans (it wasn't that close). The Redskins continued their bid to be regarded as one of the league's worst teams by providing Kansas City with its first win of the season in a game that had ZERO touchdowns. And in probably the most embarrassing loss for the NFC East this week, the Eagles dropped a game to, of all teams, Oakland.

Some interesting facts:

The Cowboys have only lost to teams that were undefeated when they played. They've only beaten teams that were winless when they played.

The Giants beat (in this order, with records at the time of the game) Washington (0-0), Dallas (1-0), Tampa Bay (0-2), Kansas City (0-3), Oakland (1-3) and then today were pretty well dismantled by the unbeaten Saints. I'm not at all trying to say that Dallas is just about as good as the Giants because the Giants haven't played anyone. Read that sentence again. I'm just saying, I think that to an extent we've given the Giants a little bit too much credit.

I don't like how announcers and analysts use the phrase "come-from-behind victories" because it's ludicrous. I like the Vikings and I'm glad they hung on to beat Baltimore today (barely!), but that was NOT a come-from-behind victory. With something like 5:00 left in the game Minnesota led 30-17. With under 3:00 left Baltimore had taken the lead 31-30. At the two-minute warning Minnesota kicked a field goal to go ahead 33-31. The Ravens missed a last-second field goal and the Vikings won. How is that a come-from-behind victory? It looked more like a "gave-up-a-significant-lead-very-late-in-the-game-and-thanks-to-the-other-team-missing-a-field-goal-that-most-pro-kickers-make-they-lucked-out-a-win" victory. A few weeks back, I don't remember which game, a team scored a field goal on its first drive. The other team came back with a touchdown and went on to win handily. The announcers spoke of it as a come-from-behind victory. They came from behind by being down 3 points for 2:00 in the first five minutes of the game? That's ridiculous.

Some thoughts

I haven't posted since before I attended my first NFL game where the Cowboys were defeated by the Broncos. Regardless of how you might interpret that, let me assure you that the reason was not because I've been bummed out for a week and a half and couldn't bring myself to talk about the Cowboys. That's simply untrue. As big of a fan as I am of football, and as much as I like the Dallas Cowboys, their performance and results on the field do not actually impact my life that much. When I'm watching a game at home and they're playing poorly, sometimes I bang my fist (once) on the coffee table. When they lose a game I spend about 15 minutes being somewhat less happy than I usually am. Then everything's normal again. For some reason, I'm often treated by friends and coworkers as if I live and die with Cowboys victories and losses. I don't believe there is any evidence to support such ideas, but I welcome any feedback from anyone who thinks that my week is strongly influenced by how the Cowboys played on Sunday.

Moving on... I commented to a friend this week that I think winning a close game over the Chiefs and losing a close game to the Chiefs are about the same thing. There's no way a good team should be playing a close game with the Chiefs. Of course, that's not actually true, though, because the only stat in the NFL at the end of the day that really matters is who won the game. At the end of the season if Dallas is on the verge of making the playoffs, no one can say, "Well, but since the Chiefs game was so close and they almost got beat, we'll have to keep them out of the playoffs." If Tony Romo throws 5 interceptions in a game against the Raiders but Dallas wins, it means exactly the same thing for the team as it would if Tony Romo threw 5 touchdown passes and 430 yards. Obviously, there's still something to ANALYSIS, because when we consider how a team looked in a win we can better understand its strengths and weaknesses, and how good of a team it is and whether or not it has a legitimate shot to make the playoffs.

So, now we're on a bye week. I've probably got some other stuff coming. But that's all for now.

Hype vs. Truth

The Hype:

Denver has the best defense in the league. They lead the league in all kinds of defensive categories. Maybe the biggest one is that they've allowed only 16 points in three games. The next-best defense in that category has allowed more than TWICE as many: The Jets with 33. The Cowboys have relied too much on the run thus far. Today they've got Marion Barber trying to come back from an injury, Felix Jones out with an injury, and their only fully healthy back is #3 on the depth chart, Tashard Choice. The Cowboys will have to put the ball in Romo's hands more than they'd like, and we all know he's probably the worst quarterback in history when he's forced to play under pressure.

The Truth:

Two of the three teams Denver has played are ranked 31 and 32 in the league in offense (in case you're new, that's second-to-last, and last). The other team? Cincinnati. I'm not saying the Denver defense isn't any good -- they really are. But the "next closest team" that has allowed "more than twice as many points" is the Jets, and they have played Houston, New England, and Tennessee. I don't understand how the best rushing team in the league through three weeks (that would be the Cowboys) can be said to have relied "too much" on the run. For years people have been saying that the reason Dallas can't ever finish seasons strongly is because they don't have a good enough run game. That's just an idiotic statement, in my opinion. Marion Barber's coming back from an injury, true, but have you EVER seen Marion Barber run tentatively? This isn't Mary-Ann Barber, baker from Elm Street. It's Marion freakin' Barber, Bash-Attack. Tashard Choice is a starting back for half the teams in the league. The run game will be fine.

I think the game will be a good one, and a close one. Denver's Elvis Dumerville leads the league in sacks, and he's a very strong, quick player that the Cowboys will probably have a hard time containing. The point of this post is simply to point out that there doesn't seem to be a whole lot to the Denver hype... yet.

P.S. I'll be at the game. I'LL BE AT THE GAME!!!!!!!!!

The first win at JerryWorld

Colin Cowherd on his radio show this morning calls the Cowboys "good, not great." He also has some negative things to say about the Dallas running game. Maybe he's right, but I'm a fan. Emotion plays a part in my Cowboys analysis. And that's the way it is.

The Cowboys got a much-needed win last night against the Carolina Panthers on Monday Night Football. The game headed to halftime with the Panthers up 7-0, but the Cowboys were the only ones to score in the second half and put the game away with about 5 minutes left when Terrence Newman returned an interception for a touchdown to give Dallas the two-touchdown lead.

WHAT I LIKED:
For the second consecutive game the Cowboys rushed for over 200 yards. Through Week 3 Dallas leads all teams in rushing and are averaging almost 7 yards per attempt. It should be noted that last night's 200+ yard performance was without their headliner, Marion Barber.

Tony Romo played smarter. Offensive Coordinator Jason Garrett seemed to call this game better than last week's too, because he stuck with and relied on the run for the most part, and stopped putting Romo in situations that could lead to bad decisions and bad throws. Without a huge playmaking threat like T.O. at the receiver position the Cowboys have to understand their strengths, and going for home run deep passes six or eight times per game isn't it. It's running the ball, and using Jason Witten, Patrick Crayton, and Roy Williams to pick up first downs and getting into position to score.

The defense finally showed up. They got a couple of sacks on Jake Delhomme, they caused a fumble, and grabbed a couple of interceptions. After the first two weeks Dallas was the only team without a sack and a takeaway, and they finally changed that last night.

I also liked that they put away an inferior team. I feel like Dallas has a tendency to get into close games that come down to a final drive with teams that just shouldn't be hanging around. Last night, though it took them a little too long to do it, they put the nail in the coffin against Carolina.

WHAT I DIDN'T LIKE:
Felix Jones came out of the game in the third quarter with a knee injury. It sounded pretty minor, but today he's getting an MRI to check it out. With Marion Barber already banged up, and Felix proving to be almost unstoppable, a significant injury would not be good for this quite promising rushing attack.

The Cowboys two-minute defense at the end of the first half was laughable. Jake Delhomme, of all people, marched his below-average team down the field and got a touchdown for the first points of the game right before halftime. It looked like the Cowboys put 11 guys on the field and told them, don't do anything, we don't want to get a penalty called on us.

Dallas's opening drive looked stellar, and then they got in the redzone and couldn't do anything... and then the always-reliable Nick Folk missed a 40-yard fieldgoal. That could cost you a win against good teams.

WHAT I DON'T UNDERSTAND:
On 2nd and goal from the Panthers 1, Garrett calls a low-percentage fade pass in the corner of the endzone to Roy Williams. Incomplete.
On 3rd and goal from the Panthers 1, Garrett calls the same play to tight-end Martellus Bennett. I think those were two of the dumbest play calls I've seen this season.

Why are the MNF announcers so bad at their jobs? As I watched the game last night I remembered why NBC's Sunday Night Football is my favorite football broadcast of the week. 1) You don't have to have cable to watch it. 2) The announcers are Al Michaels and Cris Collinsworth -- two of the best. 3) Their in-studio counterparts at Football Night in America include some really great analysts and reporters like Tony Dungy, Bob Costas, Peter King, and Dan Patrick. 4) It's usually a better game!

INTERESTING FACTOID THAT MAY INTEREST ONLY ME:
(Yes, this little segment idea is stolen from Peter King's Monday Morning Quarterback column.) I think it was in the 3rd quarter when Flozell Adams was called for a false start. Adams is the NFL's most penalized player over the last few years (and I don't know the exact stats, but I would guess it's not close), and I was frustrated. I said, "Well, it's not really a Cowboys game until Flozell Adams has had a false start penalty called on him." About two seconds after I finished, one of the MNF crew (I think it was Ron Jaworski) said, "It's not really a Cowboys game until Flozell Adams gets penalized, is it?" I laughed.

I might have more to say later, but that's it for now! Your thoughts on the Cowboys win, or any other Week 3 game (including the phenomenal Vikings victory ending)?

Woops.

I officially renounce my post from a couple of weeks ago in which I speculated that the Redskins could win the division. Today they lost to the Lions, who hadn't won a game since before Christmas 2007.

I now think the division will be a fight between New York and Dallas, with Philadelphia coming in third.

Cowboys/Panthers tomorrow night. My prediction: Dallas by 24.

A Week 2 recap

Regarding Sunday night's home loss at the debut of Cowboys Stadium:

WHAT I LIKED:
The offense. Tony Romo didn't get touched all game long. And frankly, I would like someone to tell me how they think teams will be able to stop the Barber-Jones-Choice running attack. It just doesn't look like a realistic goal. In Week 1 the Giants gave up 85 yards rushing. In all of 2008 the Giants rush defense ranked 9th in the league, allowing just under 96 yards a game. Sunday night against the Cowboys the Giants gave up 251 yards on the ground. 251!

WHAT I DIDN'T LIKE:
The offense. Tony Romo threw three interceptions, and yes, they were all his fault (I'm clarifying this because of the, "But that one was a fluke that bounced off the tight end's foot" crowd. It was still a terrible throw.).
The defense. Although the redzone defense looked good early in the game, they came up short when they were needed the most. A usually-solid pass-rush looked totally weak. The 'Boys didn't sack Eli Manning once. DeMarcus Ware seems like he's kind of dropped off the planet in these first two games, and that's not a good sign. The young secondary got picked on all night long. It just felt like they couldn't stop anybody the whole second half.

WHAT I DON'T UNDERSTAND:
The negativity coming from everyone about the Cowboys. Let's think about this. The Giants are ranked 3rd in the league according to last week's ESPN power rankings, which is right about where the vast majority of "experts" would place them. Going into the game on Sunday night, the two teams ahead of them, the Steelers and Patriots, had both lost. If new power rankings were to be released at that moment, one would expect to find the Giants listed at #1. The vast majority of analysts that I've seen picked the Giants to win the game. Those who picked Dallas did so knowing that it would be a very close and hard-fought game.

In a game where the Cowboys were -4 in turnover differential (the Giants didn't turn it over once), it took a long, last minute drive and a time-expiring field goal for the Giants to win... by two points. Now all I'm reading is about how terrible the Cowboys are, how amazing the Giants are, and how they played one of the best games they've ever played to get a win in the Cowboys "housewarming party." If that was one of the best games they've ever played, then they'd better hope every decent team they face this season will have a QB who throws 3 picks right into their hands. They'll no doubt jump to #1 in the power rankings that will be out in just a few hours, while the Cowboys will likely fall from their previous #13. That's all fine with me, because as I've said before, "expert" opinions don't determine who makes the playoffs. All I know is, I'm still feeling okay about the year.

a video and someone else's prediction

Last week NFL films had Tony Romo mic'd up for the season opener against Tampa Bay. Here's the 5-minute clip they put together. It's amusing. I encourage you to watch it!

ESPN.com's NFC East blogger, Matt Mosely, has picked the Cowboys to beat the Giants in the Sunday night debut of the new Cowboys Stadium by a score of 28-24. What do you think of that?

(Sorry, when I first posted this I left out the video link. It's there now)

Giants-Cowboys hatred? Who'da thunk it?

Apparently, Brandon Jacobs of the New York Giants "hates the Cowboys with a bloody passion." He said that in response to a question about Cowboys defensive star Demarcus Ware who shared on a Dallas-area radio show that he hates the Giants. I don't think anyone's surprised by those comments.

The Giants head to Arlington this weekend where they play the 'Boys in the regular season debut of the new stadium affectionately known as "Jerry's World."

Jacobs also made some comments about being excited to play against Dallas in the stadium's opener. He said that the Cowboys should have chosen to play the Lions instead of the Giants in the big premier. I guess he thinks that Jerry Jones selected the Giants as their first home opponents because he wants to get a big win.

Say what you want about Jerry Jones, but the man's not stupid. He doesn't think this will be an easy game by any stretch of the imagination. Even if he had some say in who they played their home opener against, he didn't pick the Giants because he thought it would be a definite win for his Cowboys. If that were the case he wouldn't have picked a division foe at all, let alone the highly favored Giants. He'd have chosen the Raiders. Even if the Cowboys were fantastic and the Giants were terrible, a division game is never EVER a gimme in the NFC East.

Anywho, that's all I have to say. Just killing some time...

A somewhat brief review of Week 1

Here are a few of the things that struck me in my evaluation of the Cowboys after their first regular season game of the year:

WHAT BUGGED ME?

The defense scared me a little bit. The secondary looked porous (it is very young), and it seemed like for much of the game the Buccaneers receivers were able to get open just about whenever they wanted. The Buccs' Cadillac Williams and Derrick Ward also ran all over the Cowboys front line for too much of the game. I kept having to yell at my TV, "Can't we STOP THE RUN ONCE IN AWHILE?!?!" Finally, not having closely analyzed each play of the game, I feel like Byron Leftwich was way too protected. There weren't many sacks or even hurries on him, and considering his glacially slow release, he should have been on his back much more than he was. Good teams with good quarterbacks (which is what you face almost every week when you play in the NFC East) will make you pay for allowing the QB to take his time picking apart an inexperienced secondary.

WHAT DID I LIKE?

The answer to the most common question in the last few months, "Who will replace T.O.'s playmaking ability?" is "About eight different guys." Romo threw touchdown passes to Roy Williams, Patrick Crayton, and Miles Austin today. He threw a big first down to Martellus Bennett. He hit his favorite target, Jason Witten, for a couple of significant gains. All three Dallas running backs looked good. Tashard Choice didn't get much action, but looked like a pro when he did. Felix Jones, in my opinion, has the skills to become the second-best playmaker at the running back position in the league (behind Adrian Peterson, if you were wondering), and Marion Barber had another solid "bash-the-defense" kind of day. I don't think it'll be a struggle for the 'Boys not to have a single big-time playmaker at wide receiver, because their depth at the positions of receiver, tight end, and running back will more than compensate.

Next week against the G-Men will likely be a much tougher test than today's win over Tampa, but I'll still say that Cowboys fans have every reason to be optimistic about this season. I think Tampa was a little bit better than many thought they'd be.

In conclusion, GO COWBOYS!!

A Wacky Divisional Prediction

I'm going to make a prediction about where NFC East teams will finish this season within the division. It's bold for me, I know.

You might expect me to pick the Cowboys to be the division champs, since I'm an overly-optimistic and sincerely misguided fan, but I'm not going to do it. I'm going to be even crazier than that. I'm picking the Washington Redskins. I know, I know, that's a pretty stupid pick. I'm not picking it with any sort of real confidence. It's not based on me thinking they're going to blow people away and be the best team in the league. It's actually based on my belief that the East will beat itself up. I won't be surprised if Washington beats the Giants tomorrow. I won't be surprised if both New York and Philadelphia end up being just slightly worse than everyone expects, and if the Redskins and Cowboys end up being just slightly better than everyone expects. So, my NFC East predictions are almost the exact opposite of what most experts are picking, but I will say this as my disclaimer: I honestly think that the East could finish in any possible order. Usually you can be pretty confident in who might win the division, and it's often even easier to pick who will finish last, but this year I think any team could come in at any position. Here we go:

1 Redskins

2 Cowboys

3 Giants

4 Eagles

I'd love to say that I think Dallas will win the division, but with a really tough late-season schedule, and their propensity for playing like the Detroit Lions in December, I just don't see it happening. Second in the division might be a stretch too, but the optimistic side of me is poking through, and I really want the 'Boys to pull off a wildcard spot and make the playoffs. We'll see...

Silliness

Sign of the season.
Number of posts on this blog between May and July: 3
Number of posts on this blog in the last two weeks: 5

ESPN.com recently posted in-depth analyses and previews of every NFL team. NFC East blogger, Matt Mosely, wrote a good summary post here where he mentioned some of the more "off the wall" predictions of some of ESPN's contributors. I think it's funny that some of these "expert" picks are talked about as "controversial" and as having "upset some readers." I've said this before regarding the weekly power rankings, but it also applies to all of this pre-season prediction-making and analysis and previewing and picking who's gonna be defensive player of the year and everything else. It doesn't matter. Readers who are "upset" over who an ESPN employee said is going to win the AFC wildcard spots really need to find something better to get passionate about. I can picture a couple of morons on their lunch break going, "Can you believe that Adam Schefter thinks Aaron Rodgers is going to be this year's MVP? I'm so mad! What a stupid idiot. Has that guy ever SEEN a football game? GOSH!"

I love to talk about football with friends, and I often ask for predictions and analysis myself (I occasionally even give it). I think it's part of the fun of sports. But I'll never get ANGRY with someone for making a prediction. That's just ridiculous. That's like me picking a fight with someone who thinks Papa John's makes better pizza than Pizza Hut. C'mon.

Rankings & whatnot

ESPN's Week 1 Power Rankings were released today. Each Tuesday afternoon the week's rankings are posted, and even though it really means nothing, it's always a very exciting time for me (believe it or not). As time allows, I'll try to post on this blog each week and let you know where the Cowboys are sitting, and I'll likely include whatever random thoughts from the rankings happen to strike me.

Dallas sits at 17 in the final rankings before the season begins. That's a 3-spot fall since the training camp rankings were released a few weeks ago. I don't have any idea what in the Cowboys' preseason looked that bad to the four ESPN voters, but I guess that's how it goes. I'll just say that I think it's a bit ridiculous to think Dallas is in the bottom half of the league. But anywho...

On a SUPER DUPER FUN AND EXCITING note: Yours Truly will be at Invesco Field on October 4 when the Cowboys take on the Broncos. It'll be my first in-person NFL game ever. And it's my two favorite teams, in my favorite sport. I don't know if I could be more excited.

X-Factors

I'm not giving up on the Cowboys or Wade Phillips for this season, but I just wanted to mention that next season, think about these head coaches that might be willing to come out of retirement to coach the 'Boys if things don't work out this season: Tony Dungy, Mike Shanahan, Mike Holmgren, Bill Cowher. Wow.

I just watched some of the Cowboys-Vikings preseason game. It was fun to watch football, but the Cowboys 35-31 win means about as much as Elizabeth beating her personal high score in her "Turkey Shoot" computer game (which is to say, not much).

I just wanted to give a quick rundown of why I think the upcoming season will be interesting, and here it is: There seem to be a BUNCH of unknowns (more than usual) headed into the season. I'm gonna rattle some off the top of my head. Let me know if you've got more.

-Tom Brady's back for the Patriots (there's no question he's one of the all-time greats, but I consider it an unknown because we don't know if his injury will have lingering effects or anything else... okay, I'm really just HOPING that they don't go 18-0 to start their season again).

-How will Brett Favre impact the Vikings?

-How will Jay Cutler impact the Bears?

-How will the Dolphins follow up their unlikely 11-5 2008 season, and will teams figure out how to stop the wildcat offense enough to stifle the Fins?

-How will rookie QBs like Matthew Stafford and Mark Sanchez impact their respective teams?

-Will there be a "sophomore letdown" in Atlanta or Baltimore with Matt Ryan or Joe Flacco?

-How will T.O. impact the Bills (by joining them) and the Cowboys (by leaving them)?

-Are the Broncos really going to be as bad as they've looked?

-How will Michael Vick perform and in what function? And will he even have to be THAT good, or will his threat simply help the Eagles because defenses will have to take him into consideration?

-Will the absence of Tony Dungy on the Indianapolis sideline create big problems for the Colts?

-Will the absense of Jim Johnson on the Philadelphia sideline create big problems for the Eagles defense?

Okay, I think that's all I've got. What are the nagging questions in your mind as we prepare to kickoff the season?

SIX DAYS UNTIL THE OPENER!!!!

Around-the-league glance

This is not even close to a comprehensive look at the upcoming NFL season (though when I read the soon-to-be-released Sports Illustrated NFL Preview issue I might do one of those posts...), but I wanted to give some thoughts on all the teams I've heard a lot about lately, and see if we can't come up with at least something to say about each division. If you read this blog last year, you'll know that I made some statements and predictions early on that sounded downright stupid after four or five weeks of the season. It's entirely possible that the same thing will happen this season. I make no claims to expertise. Just a fans ramblings...

AFC South

The only stuff I've heard about the Titans this offseason was when I watched them play the Cowboys in a preseason game last weekend. Everything I heard from the announcers was that they're at least as good, if not better than they were last year, when they jumped out to a 10-1 start and captured the #1 seed in the AFC playoffs. I don't agree with that. I don't think they're a bad team, but they're not one of the best in the league, or even in the AFC. Indianapolis will be tough because Peyton Manning is still their quarterback. The other team to keep an eye on is Houston. I have no reason to think that they'll be better than the .500ish seasons they've been having for awhile, but at some level I guess it just feels like at some point they'll get over that hump and make the playoffs.

AFC East

It might be interesting to see how Miami follows up its very impressive 2008 season. It also might be interesting to see how the Matt Sanchez story unfolds for the Jets. It also might be interesting to see what impact T.O. has on the never-spectacular Bills. But it's very likely that much of that won't matter, because Tom Brady will be on the field for the Pats again, and that pretty much spells doom for everyone else.

AFC North

No reason to think that anyone will seriously challenge the Steelers for the division championship here.

AFC West

This might be one of the more dismal divisions in the NFL. The preseason hasn't given Broncos fans a whole lot of reasons to be optimistic. Orton doesn't look great, and their best receiver forgot to grow out of his three-year-old temper-tantrum phase. I think there's some confidence in Josh McDaniels' ability to manufacture some good from the season, but not many are expecting a serious playoff run. San Diego will be the frontrunner in this division as they've been for quite some time. The Raiders are still owned by Al Davis, so there's not a whole lot of good to be said about them either.

NFC West

The reigning NFC Champion Cardinals haven't done anything impressive in the preseason, so I'm not necessarily keeping them at the top of this division in my thinking. Seattle and San Francisco have both shown some promising elements, perhaps most notably would be the young, strong 49er defense. But I hate the 49ers, so we'll hope the Seahawks can take 'em down. I've told people recently, though, that winning the NFC West is sort of like being named Valedictorian of summer school. I mean, congratulations, but look at your competition.

NFC South

It seems like both the Panthers and the Buccs are more or less in panic mode. Carolina's defense doesn't seem to be able to stop anyone, and Colin Cowherd, who originally predicted Tampa Bay to go 6-10, switched his prediction to 1-15 after watching them play a preseason game last week... "and to be honest," he said, "I can't find the one game they might win." I guess that opens the door for the Matt Ryan-led Falcons or the always-in-the-hunt Saints to win that division. I'm (not-so) secretly pulling for Ryan & the birds.

NFC North

This is beginning to look like it could be quite a fight. Obviously, the talk of the offseason has been about Matthew Stafford in Detroit, Jay Cutler in Chicago, and Brett Favre in Minnesota, but if I'm choosing the North champion today, I'm picking Aaron Rodgers and the Green Bay Packers. They've looked better in the preseason than any other team in the league. Favre will help make Minnesota a contender, and I'll grant that they could be quite tough. Although Cutler has looked quite good for Chicago thus far I'm not ready to say that he'll have the Bears fighting for the division championship. And I don't see any reason to include Detroit in talks of who might win, well, anything.

NFC East

The toughest division in football will remain the NFC East for at least another season. The Giants look good, and are predicted by many to win the division. The Eagles look pretty good and are predicted by many to get second in the division and make the playoffs. The Redskins look like they've got a somewhat competent and confident quarterback which will put them right in the mix, even if most consider them merely a spoiler. And despite what everyone says, I wouldn't be surprised a bit if the Cowboys won the division. It'll serve them well not to be quite as hyped-up as they've been for a few years now.

That's all I got. What are your predictions?

For Joel

I'll try not to make this too long, but it's been awhile since I've posted, and there are a number of stories going on in the NFL that deserve some notice. We'll go one-by-one.

Brett Favre

I'll be honest, it's one of the weirdest things in the world to see a #4 Favre jersey that's purple and gold. Many if not most fans are "sick of the Favre story," what with his retiring and un-retiring saga that we've been through about three times in the last 18 months. I guess I'm not sick of it. I just want to know how it'll affect the season! So I'll say this: The Vikings were a good team last year, playing without any talent at the quarterback position. It stands to reason that they'll be very good this year. Adrian Peterson is the most explosive player in the game. But, the NFC North is going to be a tough division. The Lions will still stink, but Chicago will be better than last year, and Green Bay is apparently some kind of dark horse. They haven't gotten a whole lot of press, but that's going to be a tough team. Favre is certainly a better option for the Vikings than anyone else on the roster, but I'd like to see what the team will do in preparation for the next few years to come. The Vikings quarterback of the future is not yet on the team.

Michael Vick

Vick played in last night's Eagles preseason game, and it was the first time he's been on the field for a live game since the end of 2006. He only took a few snaps. It was enough for people to see that he didn't become fat and arthritic while in the slammer (in other words, he seems like he'll be able to handle the speed of the game okay), but not enough for us to get any kind of feel for how he'll impact the Eagles, the NFC East, or the NFL as a whole. I don't think he'll be some fantastic stand-out pro-bowl caliber player this year, but the fact that he's on an already very solid team means there's just one more factor that opponents have to prepare for when planning defensive schemes against Philadelphia. I'm glad Vick didn't end up on my team, but I'm not real happy that he's playing for another team in the East!

Cowboys Stadium Video Board

This is, in my opinion, one of the most ridiculous things being talked about in sports right now. If you're out of the loop I'll fill you in: The big huge ginormous high def video boards hanging in the new Cowboys stadium are 90 feet above the field. In the first preseason game that the stadium hosted last weekend one of the Titans' punters hit the bottom of the board with the ball on one of his kicks. The rules state that if that happens, the play is blown dead and repeated; a do-over of sorts. The competition committee has apparently had a couple of conference calls and meetings this week to determine what must be done about this ghastly imposition. This morning I read that they've officially decided to leave the rule as it is for this season, with the likelihood that they will revisit the dilemma after the season's over (and perhaps make a long-term change in the rules, or make the Cowboys raise the video board so that it's out of reach of kicked footballs). Now, even though the video board is about the biggest thing anyone's ever seen, it's hanging 5 feet higher than the NFL's minimum allowance for such things (which means the Cowboys fully complied with all the rules when building the stadium). Also, this isn't going to cause some kind of disadvantage for visiting teams. The Cowboys punters have to deal with the issue too. And, from everything I've seen and read, it seems like you'd almost have to be trying to hit the board in order to do it. The same rule that determines what happens when a kick hits the board also determines what happens when the ball hits any kind of obstruction over the field, including the cables that carry those "skycam" video cameras that all of the networks are using now. I don't know. I don't really care if they end up having to raise the boards a few feet, I just think there are other things viewers and analysts should be concentrating on this season.

And just so you know, I think the Cowboys will do fine this season. I'm not going to say that they're going to win the Super Bowl (yet), but they're definitely going to be tough to beat. Colin Cowherd predicted they'd go 10-6, getting third in their own division after Philadelphia and the New York Giants. I would consider that a pretty good guess. Of course, I'm hoping for something a little better than that. I think the running attack of Marion Barber, Felix Jones, and Tashard Choice is going to be quite difficult to stop, and that might make things a little easier for Roy Williams and Jason Witten in the passing game. Those are just my brief thoughts, though. I'm happy to argue with you more if you'd like!

Brandon Marshall

As a resident of Englewood, Colorado (home of the Denver Broncos training camp) I feel I must mention the Brandon Marshall drama. Marshall wanted a new contract a few months back, which the Broncos denied him. So then he asked for a trade, which the Broncos denied him. He's a whiner and a complainer who's trying to cry his way out of Denver (much like Jay Cutler did... so this is sort of the team's fault for allowing that to happen), but this time they're not going for it. This morning Marshall was suspended for a week due to "conduct detrimental to the team." If you ask me, his whole attitude is detrimental to the team. I'm glad the Broncos aren't giving in to his cry-baby demands, but this guy is NOT going to be ready for the season. I don't see any way that the Broncos make this city happy this season. They don't have a pancake schedule either. All of the NFC East teams are on it (including an October 4 visit from my Cowboys!). I think a .500 season would be shooting the moon.

What are the other major stories I'm missing? Tom Brady is back. Which is why the Patriots will be one of the best teams in the league (again).

Drought

Sorry it's been such a long drought on this blog. Unless you read Matt Moseley's blog at ESPN.com, there's really not a whole lot to report or analyze at this point. Moseley's full-time job is to write about all of the relationships going on in the NFC East teams, speculate on who will rise up this season, and everything else. I just blog when something truly interesting happens.

The first offseason power rankings @ ESPN.com

ESPN.com released its first offseason power rankings for 2009 (here). They also put out a nice breakdown of how all the experts voted (here).

The Cowboys are listed at #13, FYI.

And I just have to say, every time ESPN.com posts power rankings (each week during the season, and a few times in the offseason) it attracts more comments than just about anything else on the site. It irritates the heck out of me because everyone has something to say about how their team is ranked way too low, and their rival is ranked way too high. I just want ESPN to write a story called "Don't You People Realize That Our Power Rankings Determine Absolutely NOTHING?!?!" I mean, I think the rankings are fun, and I look at them every week during the season to see how they've changed based on that week's games. But I don't get all bent out of shape when things aren't how I think they should be. Why? Because the Super Bowl winner isn't determined from the opinions of others.

A London Super Bowl

In the last few days I've read two different stories about the possibility of the Super Bowl being played in London within about the next decade. You can find the stories here and here. The first is a debate between two ESPN bloggers on whether or not a London Super Bowl is a good idea. The second is a pretty brief story from SI.com on how much sense the idea makes for the NFL.

I find this idea to be pretty irritating, and the best way I can think to express how bad of an idea it is is to respond to what's said in those two stories from the two guys who support it. I'll repeat some of the arguments from the anti-London Super Bowl blogger, and I'll also respond personally to the main points.

A London Super Bowl would grow the sport economically throughout Europe, and it can't really get any bigger here in the States.

So? A London Super Bowl would also deprive an American city of its own huge economic growth. The movie industry can't really get any bigger here either, and no one's saying we should tear down Hollywood and move Sony Pictures to Oslo.

The people who go to the Super Bowl aren't usually common fans anyway. They're corporate types who can afford outrageously priced tickets.

That's largely true, but this is hardly an argument for exporting the world's biggest sporting event to another continent. The few true fans who do spend their life savings in order to travel to the Super Bowl city and get a ticket would be completely left out. As Paul Kuharsky says, "Is it worth alienating people who buy jerseys and tickets and paint their faces in an attempt to soften up foreign populations?" I don't think so.

Game time could be a compromise: an evening game in London could start about 3:30 pm ET, and people will watch the game on TV no matter when it's played.

People will absolutely watch the game on TV no matter when it's played, but they won't be nearly as happy about an early game time. 3:30 pm ET is half past noon on the west coast. For the party event of the year, that's just not very appealing. By itself maybe it's not a big deal, but added to all of the other little irritations it starts to make some fans pretty bitter.

Londoners are fascinated with all things American, and they're ready to embrace something like this. They may not understand a 3-4 defensive scheme, but they'll come out for a show, and that's what the Super Bowl is.

I guess all I can say here is that just because London is fascinated by the Super Bowl doesn't mean it should be played there.

You have to look at the NFL as a business. It's as big as it can get in the U.S., and the room for growth is across the pond.

Fans look at the NFL as fans. I understand that it's a business, and that Roger Goodell and others would love to see it become a global sport, but none of that affects me, the fan. 32 teams made up of two conferences with four 4-team divisions is perfect. The game is a blast to watch and analyze and cheer for. If Europe and eventually the world ends up with their own leagues that's fine with me too... but it better not interfere with the way I love to watch the game right here at home.

The vast majority of NFL fans in the U.S. wouldn't be affected at all by a London Super Bowl, "assuming issues like weather, field conditions, and kickoff time can be worked out."

Well, those are some pretty big assumptions. That's like saying, "The vast majority of 24 fans in the U.S. wouldn't be affected at all if the show went Japanese, assuming issues like acting, studio time, and English subtitles can be worked out." (This is probably my worst argument here... but I'm saving my big gun quotation for the final comments below. Besides, how do you "work out" an issue like the weather?)

FINAL COMMENTS

Even though it may seem like it, I don't think a London Super Bowl would be the end of the world. In fact, since this wouldn't likely happen in the next five or even ten years it's entirely possible that my mind will completely change before it does, and maybe the arguments in favor of the idea take into account the fact that Americans may be more open to the idea once it finally rolls around.

Having said that, it just seems wrong to me. The biggest reason comes from Paul Kuharsky once again: "Average February weather in London is a high of 47, a low of 36 and the month has an average rainfall of 1.34 inches. If I'm Nashville or Charlotte -- or even New York, Washington, Philadelphia, or Baltimore -- I'm asking why the league's willing to play in that weather outdoors across the pond, but not at home. And I am beginning to clamor for  Super Bowl in my stadium, which was paid for, built and is regularly filled by Americans who buy the tickets and merchandise and provide the TV ratings." So there you have it. London would likely not fall into a list of cities qualified to host a Super Bowl if it were here in the U.S. because of its weather. So it just doesn't seem very fair that it can basically take the game away from U.S. cities. That's all I've got. Feel free to share your own thoughts!

John Madden hangs 'em up

After 30 years as the NFL's greatest game commentator, John Madden is retiring (click here for the story).

Sunday Night Football on NBC just won't be the same. Cris Collinsworth will replace him, which is good, because Collinsworth is very good, but it's still kind of bumming me out. Dallas is inaugurating their new $1.1 Billion stadium on SNF in week 2 against the Giants, and I was really looking forward to Madden's call of the game.

Oh well.

Romo-for-Cutler trade?

When the Broncos announced that they would seek to trade Jay Cutler last Tuesday there was obviously a lot of speculation about where he could go and who would want him. I heard numerous personalities on radio and television, and I read a couple of different sources, that said that trading Tony Romo for Jay Cutler might not be a bad idea for Dallas to consider. Now, of course, the point is moot because Cutler has been traded to the Bears. Still, if you're at all interested, I would encourage you to read this article (click here) by Todd Archer of the Dallas Morning News who argues that Romo-for-Cutler would be a pretty bad idea if you're the Cowboys (or one of their fans).

Jay Cutler

This is one of those posts which in a few months I'll look back on and probably realize how big an idiot I am.

So the big news in Denver, and in the NFL as a whole right now, is Jay Cutler. In case you've not been following here's a brief recap of the situation.

Mike Shanahan got fired as head coach and Cutler was unhappy. Cutler requested to have the majority of the offensive coaching staff stay on (understandably, because he's worked with these guys for a few years now). He didn't get what he wanted. Josh McDaniels was hired as the Broncos new head coach. McDaniels got into some preliminary talks regarding a trade for Matt Cassell (McDaniels was New England's offensive coordinator for the last couple of years, and he has a relationship with Cassell). Cutler went pretty much ballistic that McDaniels would consider trading him, and there was a rift. Since then Cutler has declared that he wants to be traded and he will not be happy as a Bronco and he has not returned phone calls (or apparently other forms of communication) from McDaniels or Broncos Owner Pat Bowlen. Yesterday the Broncos finally came out and said that they'll basically honor Cutler's request and are in the market for a trade.

There are those who think Cutler has a right to be angry and are completely on his side in this issue. There are those who think Cutler is a cry baby and he should get over it and play.

I think this: It's true that Cutler was something like 17-20 in his first 2+ seasons as a starter and didn't get his team to the playoffs once. It's also true that those numbers are somewhat misleading since his defense has STUNK since he's been in Denver. In the games where Denver allowed 21 or fewer points Cutler is 13-1 as a starter. It's true that he is one of (if not THE) the best young quarterbacks in the league, and he would be an upgrade for probably 2/3 of NFL teams at the QB position. I don't fault him for being upset at learning that McDaniels was considering trading him.

But all that's past now. There wasn't a trade, and now Cutler is simply being an immature cry-baby. I hate the entitlement issues with professional athletes. Jay has not attended offseason workouts with the team, or the team's first meeting of the year (with the new coach). As I mentioned, he won't return phone calls to his coach or his team's owner. He's basically pouting until he gets his own way. And unfortunately, Denver's giving in. I don't understand it. Denver can't really win in this situation. There's not a trade out there that will be worth it for them. Draft picks aren't good enough, because the highest-drafted quarterbacks every year have so-so success rates in the NFL (in other words, choosing a quarterback in the first round is a crapshoot). There's no other young quarterback who has shown as much promise as Cutler that will be offered either.

If I were Josh McDaniels I'd pull out a copy of Cutler's contract and point to it saying, "Hey Jay, you see your name right here? You see your signature right here? You owe us three more years. You can be pissed off and play like crap for us, you can sit on the bench and rot for three years (guaranteeing that you'll never get another huge contract with anyone), or you can shut the BEEP up, come to our workouts, make yourself better, and lead this team to the postseason."

Anyway, I hope that one of two things will happen. I hope that either a) Cutler gets dealt to some crappy team and never becomes a winner, or b) he gets dealt to the Vikings and they go to the Super Bowl (not cuz I'm a Cutler fan, but because I like the Vikings and he would be one of the last pieces they need to make such a run).

Overtime: Revisited

In his Monday Morning QB this week Peter King wanted to argue about changing the NFL overtime rules again. Since I started reading his column regularly last season he has been adamant that both teams should get a possession in overtime, and that the coin flip bears much too much weight on deciding overtime games. His three reasons are as follows (summarized, of course):

1. In the last 5 years 39% of overtime games have been decided on the first possession with the losing team not even getting a chance to touch the ball.

2. In the last 5 years 100% of teams winning the coin flip in overtime have selected to receive. This is King's rebuttal to the argument that good defenses can win in overtime too. Teams never elect to kickoff, he argues, "because the winner of the coin flip has a far, far better chance to win the game than the team that doesn't win."

3. Steelers president Art Rooney says that he'd like to see each team get one possession (Yes, that's it. His third argument is actually just someone else agreeing with him).

Now, I'm a Peter King fan, which is why I read his column each week and I'll continue to do so. He might not even be that wrong about his opinion here. But at the end of his overtime discussion he describes how he hopes next year's Super Bowl will go into overtime and the team that wins the coin flip wins on their first possession on a field goal, and after the game the losing coach says to commissioner Goodell, "Championship football games should not end this way." Then King finishes, "Maybe then we could have a sensible debate about overtime."

Seriously Peter? We're not already having a sensible debate? The debate isn't sensible because it doesn't look like the rule is going to change this year. C'mon. Give the NFL some credit.

Also, you know why the team that receives first in overtime has a "far far better chance" to win the game? Because in football, the team on offense has a MUCH higher chance to score than the team on defense.

I don't think I'm irreversibly convinced that the current system is the best possible way to run NFL's overtime, but the reason why I don't think King's solution is any better is because football is about BOTH offense and defense. If you can't stop a team from scoring on its first possession of overtime, improve. It's the same reason why we didn't give the Patriots the Lombardi trophy after going undefeated in the regular season and in their first two postseason games. You have to play the games, and you have to win. Suck it up.

A few words about TO, and other stories

Unless you've been living in a box for a couple of days, you know that the Cowboys recently released wide receiver Terrell Owens.

Let me say that I don't think TO is an absolute cancer that has no upside, even though that's exactly what many if not most NFL fans and analysts think. I think TO is immature, I think he's emotionally unstable, I think he's arrogant, I think he's a whiner, and I think he brings a lot of baggage to a team and its locker room. But make no mistake; TO is NOT the one thing holding the Cowboys back from being a great team. He has contributed to the lack of chemistry on the team, and he has certainly been a distraction from time to time, and I do not absolve him from responsibility when it comes to the lack of post-season Ws since he's been a Cowboy. But I also think it's important to remember that the guy has been coddled by an owner who seems to want his team in the spotlight no matter what, and a coach who doesn't have a strong-willed bone in his body. There's no leadership in the Cowboys' organization, and until that changes, they can get rid of every player who's holding them back and they still won't win a Super Bowl.

Having said that, I'm glad he's gone. I think only good comes from releasing him. Roy Williams is a talented receiver who was never going to get a real shot to excel as long as Owens was across the field from him. There should be fewer drama stories coming out of Valley Ranch, and fans don't have to go through the love him/hate him routine with Owens every time he catches a touchdown pass and then drops three in a row.

Other notes from the past week: Jon Kitna will be Romo's new backup. That's good because A) Kitna is not 78 years old, and will therefore be a better backup in case of a Romo injury than Brad Johnson was, and B) He's a veteran player who I expect to kick Romo's butt a little in camp and in practice, competing for the starting spot and by his actions, demanding that Romo improve. Anthony Henry went to the Lions for Kitna, and the Cowboys released Roy Williams (the safety) as well, making it look like they might need a little beefing up in the defensive secondary department. They have some promising young players who can hopefully step up, but it might be an area they need to address a little in the draft. Defensive lineman Chris Canty signed with the Giants, which is bad in two respects: 1) Canty's very good and will be missed (BUT, read on...) and 2) now he's on the Giants; a team with an already suffocating defensive line that the 'Boys have to play twice each year. Fortunately, I think point 1 will be canceled out by the news today that Dallas signed defensive tackle Igor Olshansky out of San Diego. He's been every bit as valuable to the Chargers as Canty's been to the Cowboys, so hopefully he'll keep the Dallas D-line just as strong.

My final interesting note. Everything sports-related that I've seen yesterday and today has been about where TO will go from here. Although almost every analyst swears that there are only 2 or 3 places where he could possibly end up, I've heard the following teams mentioned as possible destinations: Giants, Redskins, Vikings, Panthers, 49ers, Dolphins, Patriots, Jets, Ravens, Titans, Colts, Jaguars, Chargers, and Raiders. That's 14 out of a possible 31 (I'm obviously not counting Dallas). That's almost 50%. So while I frankly couldn't care less where he goes, I sort of don't know who to believe. I listened to three different sports radio shows and one television sports news show just today, and those were all the teams mentioned from all of them... but again, each analyst will insist that all but a couple of those teams are in no way possible. Weird.