I just changed my blog's address to thosecowboys.blogspot.com
I don't know if feed readers automatically detect these things or not. Are you seeing this is in your feed?
Thanks.
Wednesday, October 12, 2011
Tuesday, September 27, 2011
Monday Night Weirdness
Items worth mentioning from last night's Cowboys win over the rival Redskins:
Now Dallas plays Detroit. The 'Boys are still beat-up physically, they have a short week for prep, and the Lions are very good. It's an awful matchup for Dallas, and I won't be surprised at all if Calvin Johnson scores a few touchdowns on them in a Lions win. That won't devastate the season, though, so don't worry. And, fortunately, the week after that is a bye week when they can hopefully recover physically and start the next stretch with full health.
- At some point, Dallas has to get at least somewhat healthy in order to win games. It honestly looked like the Dallas offense was the Dallas practice team offense at times. Felix Jones was more effective than he's been in a long time, but he was limited with a separated shoulder. Romo was playing with a bullet-proof vest (I thought his usual mobility seemed limited). Dez Bryant played with an injured thigh that was clearly not at 100%. Jason Witten was playing with bruised ribs. Laurent Robinson and Kevin Ogletree were the main receivers on the field, and that's not really a good thing. Miles Austin was sorely missed.
- Rob Ryan has his defense playing extremely well. Even with a secondary decimated by injuries, and Jason Hatcher leaving the game early with a strained calf, the defense bent but didn't break, and they came up with huge stops when they needed to.
- Felix Jones seems like he doesn't see the field very well sometimes. As I mentioned above, he had his best game this year, but there were still times (especially early) when it seemed like there were obvious cut-back lanes that he should have hit and could have gained big yards, but he just missed them. I usually feel like he performs best when receiving screens and other passes in the flat where he can turn and get upfield in a hurry, rather than trying to find the seem and get through it.
- Nobody seems to have told Dan Bailey that Cowboy kickers are supposed to be unreliable -- and I'm quite thankful for that. The rookie came up big, going 6 for 6 on field goal attempts, and the 'Boys won the game without scoring a single touchdown.
- Tony Romo is doing some amazing things. He didn't have huge numbers last night, but he led that team in impressive ways. He was dealing with a center who snapped the ball before he was supposed to about 15 times, receivers who didn't seem to know the playbook (and with whom he's only practiced a few times), and a running game that took a while to get going. On top of that, Washington's defensive coordinator, Jim Haslett, was sending all-out blitzes on every play because there was no fear of the young, inexperienced Dallas receivers who were playing. Romo made plays when he shouldn't have, and it looked like he was the only person on the field who had the gumption to go after the win. I'm still not sure how he was successful.
- DeMarcus Ware got hosed toward the end of the game when he was about to go sack Rex Grossman and instead got flat-out tackled by a Redskin blocker. No call. Unbelievable.
- Alan Ball got called for hitting a "defenseless receiver" on a play when Santana Moss caught a first-down reception. Perhaps it's the right call according to the rule, but I think that clearly demonstrates that the rule is absolutely flawed. To be within the rules there, Ball would have had to let Moss land and begin to run upfield before being allowed to tackle him, and there's something fundamentally wrong with a rule that requires you to let the other team gain a few yards before you can do anything about it. Ridiculous (especially since Cowboys receiver Laurent Robinson got "defenselessly" hammered earlier in the game with no flag coming whatsoever).
Now Dallas plays Detroit. The 'Boys are still beat-up physically, they have a short week for prep, and the Lions are very good. It's an awful matchup for Dallas, and I won't be surprised at all if Calvin Johnson scores a few touchdowns on them in a Lions win. That won't devastate the season, though, so don't worry. And, fortunately, the week after that is a bye week when they can hopefully recover physically and start the next stretch with full health.
Monday, September 26, 2011
A few words on rankings
Every Monday I read Peter King's column for Sports Illustrated, Monday Morning Quarterback. It's usually 6 pages long and jam-packed with just about every relevant item from Sunday's NFL goings on.
One of the regular pieces of King's column is "The Fine Fifteen." King basically ranks the top 15 teams in the NFL each week. Today he's taking flak for putting the Patriots at number 3 after they lost yesterday to the Bills, who King places at number 7. Reading these rankings made me want to say a couple of things about "power rankings" in general.
1. They don't matter. People that get bent out of shape because they feel their team is ranked too low are ridiculous. As I've pointed out before on this blog, power rankings have absolutely NO force and effect on the season. When January rolls around nobody looks at the power rankings and says, "Oh, well since the Saints are ranked higher than the Lions, we'll put them in the playoffs, even though Detroit has a better record." That doesn't happen. So don't get so worked up.
2. The better team does not always win. King's rankings, by his own description, are based on who he thinks would win on a neutral field. I think that's an excellent measuring stick, and I think he's right about the Patriots. I might put them a notch or two lower than three, but I would put them ahead of Buffalo. Why? Because if they played again tomorrow on a neutral field, I think New England wins the game. In fact, New England would probably win 6 or 7 out of 10 games against the Bills. But this was one of the other 3 or 4. I don't want to take anything away from the Bills. They're a good team who's playing really well right now, and I LOVE that they beat the Pats yesterday. But that doesn't make them, fundamentally, a better team.
Does anyone really think the 2007 Giants were a better team than the 2007 Patriots? I sure don't. But they had a great game plan heading into the Super Bowl. David Tyree made a (seriously) miraculous catch. The Giants won. I loved seeing New England lose that Super Bowl. It was fantastic. But I think they were the better team.
But again, this is why rankings don't matter. Because I can argue all day that the Pats were better than those Giants, but at the end of the day, the Giants won the Super Bowl, and the Patriots didn't! Winning is what matters. Not being arbitrarily "ranked" ahead of someone else.
3. It's an inexact science. If we were able to make without-a-doubt rankings of all the teams, there would be no such thing as an upset. The Packers (ranked #1 right now, according to King) would win every game, because they're ranked ahead of everyone. Baltimore (#2) would only ever lose to Green Bay. That's obviously not going to happen. Rankings are "best guesses," and they're NEVER 100% correct.
I think power rankings are fun to look at, but I'll never make a heated argument or get upset if my Cowboys are ranked lower than I think they should be. I'll let things be decided on the field.
One of the regular pieces of King's column is "The Fine Fifteen." King basically ranks the top 15 teams in the NFL each week. Today he's taking flak for putting the Patriots at number 3 after they lost yesterday to the Bills, who King places at number 7. Reading these rankings made me want to say a couple of things about "power rankings" in general.
1. They don't matter. People that get bent out of shape because they feel their team is ranked too low are ridiculous. As I've pointed out before on this blog, power rankings have absolutely NO force and effect on the season. When January rolls around nobody looks at the power rankings and says, "Oh, well since the Saints are ranked higher than the Lions, we'll put them in the playoffs, even though Detroit has a better record." That doesn't happen. So don't get so worked up.
2. The better team does not always win. King's rankings, by his own description, are based on who he thinks would win on a neutral field. I think that's an excellent measuring stick, and I think he's right about the Patriots. I might put them a notch or two lower than three, but I would put them ahead of Buffalo. Why? Because if they played again tomorrow on a neutral field, I think New England wins the game. In fact, New England would probably win 6 or 7 out of 10 games against the Bills. But this was one of the other 3 or 4. I don't want to take anything away from the Bills. They're a good team who's playing really well right now, and I LOVE that they beat the Pats yesterday. But that doesn't make them, fundamentally, a better team.
Does anyone really think the 2007 Giants were a better team than the 2007 Patriots? I sure don't. But they had a great game plan heading into the Super Bowl. David Tyree made a (seriously) miraculous catch. The Giants won. I loved seeing New England lose that Super Bowl. It was fantastic. But I think they were the better team.
But again, this is why rankings don't matter. Because I can argue all day that the Pats were better than those Giants, but at the end of the day, the Giants won the Super Bowl, and the Patriots didn't! Winning is what matters. Not being arbitrarily "ranked" ahead of someone else.
3. It's an inexact science. If we were able to make without-a-doubt rankings of all the teams, there would be no such thing as an upset. The Packers (ranked #1 right now, according to King) would win every game, because they're ranked ahead of everyone. Baltimore (#2) would only ever lose to Green Bay. That's obviously not going to happen. Rankings are "best guesses," and they're NEVER 100% correct.
I think power rankings are fun to look at, but I'll never make a heated argument or get upset if my Cowboys are ranked lower than I think they should be. I'll let things be decided on the field.
Thursday, September 8, 2011
The Predictions You've Been Waiting For
In case this doesn't show up in your feed reader right away, I'd like to clarify that this post was written Thursday morning before the NFL season began.
My division winner predictions for the 2011 season:
NFC NORTH: Green Bay Packers
I think Chicago and Detroit are both legitimate contenders in this division, but Green Bay won the Super Bowl last year with about half of their team out with injuries. The Pack is the best team in the division.
NFC SOUTH: Atlanta Falcons
There are three good teams in this division. I think Matt Ryan's the real deal, and he'll lead his team to a division championship.
NFC EAST: Dallas Cowboys
Most people will think I'm simply voting with my heart instead of my head in this case. I can't deny that there may be a little bit of that involved, but if you read my last post, I believe that it can be clearly demonstrated that the 'Boys could be a 12-win team, and they have an easier schedule than the heavily favored Eagles.
NFC WEST: St. Louis Rams
Seattle won this division last year with a losing record. The Seahawks, if anything, have taken a step back this year. The Rams will be better as Sam Bradford continues to improve. Overall, though, it doesn't matter who wins this division.
NFC WILDCARDS:
1. Philadelphia Eagles -- Just because I picked the Cowboys to win the East doesn't mean I don't think the Eagles will be very good.
2. New Orleans Saints -- I wouldn't be surprised if the Saints won the South, so I have to at least put them in the playoffs. I think Tampa Bay is going to be a good team this season, and they will certainly contend for the last playoff spot. I just couldn't put them in because they're (in my opinion) the third best team in their own division, and I don't see them beating out the Eagles/Giants/Bears/Lions for the wildcard spot.
AFC NORTH: Pittsburgh Steelers
They went to the Super Bowl last year, and they didn't get any worse.
AFC SOUTH: Houston Texans
This pick is based almost entirely on the fact that Peyton Manning will not be playing the first couple (maybe more) games for the Colts. Houston has been taking some steps forward, and I think they can come out on top here this year. I think Kerry Collins will perform well for the Colts, but he's had almost no time with the team, and he's no Manning.
AFC EAST: New England Patriots
I don't know what I have to say here. New England has been finding a way to be good for more than a decade now.
AFC WEST: San Diego Chargers
This shouldn't be surprise to anyone. This division is fairly awful. The Chiefs are the only other team that will probably have a winning record.
AFC WILDCARDS:
1. New York Jets -- They've been in the AFC Championship game twice in a row. I think they'll at least make the playoffs.
2. Baltimore Ravens -- It seems like there's a big drop-off in the AFC after the probable playoff teams. Indianapolis can compete for this spot, and maybe the Chiefs? But who else? The Browns? Titans?
NFC CHAMP: Dallas Cowboys
If I'm right about my playoff picks (Packers, Falcons, 'Boys, Rams, Eagles, Saints), then any of the teams will be viable candidates for the Super Bowl - except the Rams. But if I'm right about Dallas winning the division, it's because Jason Garrett and Rob Ryan have been able to get the team to play to its potential, and if that happens, they can beat anyone.
AFC CHAMP: San Diego Chargers
This pick is based solely on the fact that San Diego has been in the hunt until the end quite a bit recently. I did a little bit of eeny-meeny-miny-mo in the AFC, I'll admit.
SUPER BOWL CHAMP: Dallas Cowboys
C'mon, if I end up being right, and the Cowboys end up in the Super Bowl (a long shot, I'll grant you), there's no way I'm not going to be cheering for them to win. I can't put myself in a position where I have to root even a little bit for the opponent so that my predictions will be correct. Plus, I think if you just look at these two teams, the 'Boys are more talented.
SUPER BOWL MVP: DeMarcus Ware
Yes, it can be quite difficult for a defender to win the MVP of the Super Bowl, but for Dallas to be this successful in the first place, they've got to be playing great defense. If they really end up facing San Diego in the Super Bowl, Ware will need to be all over Philip Rivers for the Cowboys to win. I'll predict 4 or 5 sacks for DeMarcus in the Super Bowl. It really all just comes down to this: Ware is the best player on the Cowboys team, so it makes sense to pick him as the MVP.
Argue away!
My division winner predictions for the 2011 season:
NFC NORTH: Green Bay Packers
I think Chicago and Detroit are both legitimate contenders in this division, but Green Bay won the Super Bowl last year with about half of their team out with injuries. The Pack is the best team in the division.
NFC SOUTH: Atlanta Falcons
There are three good teams in this division. I think Matt Ryan's the real deal, and he'll lead his team to a division championship.
NFC EAST: Dallas Cowboys
Most people will think I'm simply voting with my heart instead of my head in this case. I can't deny that there may be a little bit of that involved, but if you read my last post, I believe that it can be clearly demonstrated that the 'Boys could be a 12-win team, and they have an easier schedule than the heavily favored Eagles.
NFC WEST: St. Louis Rams
Seattle won this division last year with a losing record. The Seahawks, if anything, have taken a step back this year. The Rams will be better as Sam Bradford continues to improve. Overall, though, it doesn't matter who wins this division.
NFC WILDCARDS:
1. Philadelphia Eagles -- Just because I picked the Cowboys to win the East doesn't mean I don't think the Eagles will be very good.
2. New Orleans Saints -- I wouldn't be surprised if the Saints won the South, so I have to at least put them in the playoffs. I think Tampa Bay is going to be a good team this season, and they will certainly contend for the last playoff spot. I just couldn't put them in because they're (in my opinion) the third best team in their own division, and I don't see them beating out the Eagles/Giants/Bears/Lions for the wildcard spot.
AFC NORTH: Pittsburgh Steelers
They went to the Super Bowl last year, and they didn't get any worse.
AFC SOUTH: Houston Texans
This pick is based almost entirely on the fact that Peyton Manning will not be playing the first couple (maybe more) games for the Colts. Houston has been taking some steps forward, and I think they can come out on top here this year. I think Kerry Collins will perform well for the Colts, but he's had almost no time with the team, and he's no Manning.
AFC EAST: New England Patriots
I don't know what I have to say here. New England has been finding a way to be good for more than a decade now.
AFC WEST: San Diego Chargers
This shouldn't be surprise to anyone. This division is fairly awful. The Chiefs are the only other team that will probably have a winning record.
AFC WILDCARDS:
1. New York Jets -- They've been in the AFC Championship game twice in a row. I think they'll at least make the playoffs.
2. Baltimore Ravens -- It seems like there's a big drop-off in the AFC after the probable playoff teams. Indianapolis can compete for this spot, and maybe the Chiefs? But who else? The Browns? Titans?
NFC CHAMP: Dallas Cowboys
If I'm right about my playoff picks (Packers, Falcons, 'Boys, Rams, Eagles, Saints), then any of the teams will be viable candidates for the Super Bowl - except the Rams. But if I'm right about Dallas winning the division, it's because Jason Garrett and Rob Ryan have been able to get the team to play to its potential, and if that happens, they can beat anyone.
AFC CHAMP: San Diego Chargers
This pick is based solely on the fact that San Diego has been in the hunt until the end quite a bit recently. I did a little bit of eeny-meeny-miny-mo in the AFC, I'll admit.
SUPER BOWL CHAMP: Dallas Cowboys
C'mon, if I end up being right, and the Cowboys end up in the Super Bowl (a long shot, I'll grant you), there's no way I'm not going to be cheering for them to win. I can't put myself in a position where I have to root even a little bit for the opponent so that my predictions will be correct. Plus, I think if you just look at these two teams, the 'Boys are more talented.
SUPER BOWL MVP: DeMarcus Ware
Yes, it can be quite difficult for a defender to win the MVP of the Super Bowl, but for Dallas to be this successful in the first place, they've got to be playing great defense. If they really end up facing San Diego in the Super Bowl, Ware will need to be all over Philip Rivers for the Cowboys to win. I'll predict 4 or 5 sacks for DeMarcus in the Super Bowl. It really all just comes down to this: Ware is the best player on the Cowboys team, so it makes sense to pick him as the MVP.
Argue away!
Monday, September 5, 2011
Consider this...
I've mentioned to a number of people that I believe the Cowboys will win the NFC East this year. I've been told by more than a few people that I'm off my rocker. Every analyst I've heard has predicted between 8-10 wins for the Cowboys this season, and a 2nd or 3rd-place finish in the division. The hands-down favorite to win the division is Philadelphia. But let's consider a few things:
Dallas started the 2010 season 1-7 against a total of 2 playoff teams and their opponents in that span had a .492 win percentage (so, against teams with a combined sub-.500 record, the Cowboys lost 7 of 8). Then Jason Garrett took over. In the second half of the season Dallas faced twice as many playoff teams (4), and their opponents in that span had a .531 win percentage. They went 5-3. So, against superior opponents and with a backup quarterback, the Cowboys went 5-3. It's not ludicrous to think, therefore, that over a whole season with the first-string quarterback, the Cowboys could go at least 10-6, if not 11-5 (all things being equal).
So, the way I see it, to believe that Dallas will win fewer than 10 games this season, you have to believe that 1) Dallas is worse with Tony Romo at quarterback than with John Kitna, and/or 2) Dallas will perform worse against a schedule with fewer playoff teams and a lower win percentage than last year, and/or 3) Dallas did nothing to make themselves better this year over the offseason (and players won't improve from one year to the next, etc.), and/or 4) Dallas will continue to have one of the worst defenses in the league now that Rob Ryan has taken it over. I just can't embrace any of those ideas. Therefore, I think it is completely realistic to see the 'Boys win 11 or 12 games this season.
Of course, the rational idea that Dallas could win 11 or 12 games still doesn't automatically mean they will win the division. Especially if you believe the Philadelphia hype. But I don't feel like addressing that at this time.
Dallas started the 2010 season 1-7 against a total of 2 playoff teams and their opponents in that span had a .492 win percentage (so, against teams with a combined sub-.500 record, the Cowboys lost 7 of 8). Then Jason Garrett took over. In the second half of the season Dallas faced twice as many playoff teams (4), and their opponents in that span had a .531 win percentage. They went 5-3. So, against superior opponents and with a backup quarterback, the Cowboys went 5-3. It's not ludicrous to think, therefore, that over a whole season with the first-string quarterback, the Cowboys could go at least 10-6, if not 11-5 (all things being equal).
So, the way I see it, to believe that Dallas will win fewer than 10 games this season, you have to believe that 1) Dallas is worse with Tony Romo at quarterback than with John Kitna, and/or 2) Dallas will perform worse against a schedule with fewer playoff teams and a lower win percentage than last year, and/or 3) Dallas did nothing to make themselves better this year over the offseason (and players won't improve from one year to the next, etc.), and/or 4) Dallas will continue to have one of the worst defenses in the league now that Rob Ryan has taken it over. I just can't embrace any of those ideas. Therefore, I think it is completely realistic to see the 'Boys win 11 or 12 games this season.
Of course, the rational idea that Dallas could win 11 or 12 games still doesn't automatically mean they will win the division. Especially if you believe the Philadelphia hype. But I don't feel like addressing that at this time.
Sunday, August 28, 2011
Mark my words...
The Cowboys will finish ahead of the much-hyped Philadelphia Eagles this season.
Hopefully, I'll make some more predictions on this blog before the season begins.
Hopefully, I'll make some more predictions on this blog before the season begins.
Wednesday, August 24, 2011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)