Routilla
Footballguy
This.The team is picking up steam, I was glad to see us not get a slew of penalties. Let's hope we keep the momentum going, F Philly!
This.The team is picking up steam, I was glad to see us not get a slew of penalties. Let's hope we keep the momentum going, F Philly!
The Eagles' offensive line got healthy again, and their defense has the most takeaways in the league.Westbrook will be back and rested, and McNabb just got into rhythm after missing 2 games and the bye.There's very little not to like about the Eagles next Sunday.
Bring it.I get it- but I'll take the win.I'm not sure how to best phrase this. But I almost wonder if Dallas would be better off long-term losing to the Eagles. Obviously, its not a good thing to lose a division/conference game. But if we win, this team will be sky high. Peaking. In early November. We've seen how that plays out with most teams. And its not been a recepiet for playoff success. In contrast, teams that peak later in the season are the ones that have done the best in the playoffs. Would losing this week, and staying grounded, better serve this team in the long run? Something to consider.
I've been hesitating to post as much since last night. I never want them to lose a game. But let's say if DeSean smokes Newman, and Cole beats Flozell silly, and Celek runs wild and unaccounted for, and the Eagles get a nice home win; I won't be too critical or pessimistic. I'll see all of that as necessary lessons learned. The Eagles are good. I agree Dallas needs to peak later. There is a sort of hard to explain 'law of averages' to my thinking. For example, I believe eventually Felix, Witten, and Roy will all get theirs, and it's kind of nice to feel that it's in the future, not the past. And all three aren't just due as players, but will probably be needed if Dallas is to enjoy any impressive success. Now or later? Later works for me, but now would be fine to, I guess.Ridgelake said:I'm not sure how to best phrase this. But I almost wonder if Dallas would be better off long-term losing to the Eagles. Obviously, its not a good thing to lose a division/conference game.
But if we win, this team will be sky high. Peaking. In early November. We've seen how that plays out with most teams. And its not been a recepiet for playoff success. In contrast, teams that peak later in the season are the ones that have done the best in the playoffs.
Would losing this week, and staying grounded, better serve this team in the long run? Something to consider.
Injury talk aside, and I full believe Felix's injuries have just been freakish, and not injury prone type - why the heck isn't Felix the starter?Yesterday he went and averaged 4.9 YPC WITH A FREAKING KNEE BRACE ON!! Barber average 3.8, and while Barber may be hampered by his quad, Felix isn't 100% either, and Felix is clearly the better option.For example, I believe eventually Felix, Witten, and Roy will all get theirs, and it's kind of nice to feel that it's in the future, not the past. And all three aren't just due as players, but will probably be needed if Dallas is to enjoy any impressive success. Now or later? Later works for me, but now would be fine to, I guess.
Felix getting numbers like those backs drafted after him in 07 (how I wanted Chris Johnson with that pick), is key to taking that pressure off Romo and making Dallas a truly dangerous team for anyone. If he doesn't blow up soon, then that draft pick (passing on better, far more productive backs) has really hampered Dallas and needs to be seen as the error it was. I'd like to see him featured a little in Philly. The same game plan they've been rolling out there likely isn't enough. I'm confident Felix will break out soon, too. So if he does and Dallas wins, I'm sure we'll all be pleased with that. What he adds is key to this season. He can change the basic dynamics of the offense by putting a ton of pressure on defenses that currently doesn't exist. The offense is good, but not scary. Felix can make it scary.
Btw, I liked the reverse to Austin for this very reason. He is dynamic, their only explosive productive player, and he should be used to pressure the defense in every imaginable way, until Felix arrives.
That was a freaking awesome hit. I was giddy.Injury talk aside, and I full believe Felix's injuries have just been freakish, and not injury prone type - why the heck isn't Felix the starter?Yesterday he went and averaged 4.9 YPC WITH A FREAKING KNEE BRACE ON!! Barber average 3.8, and while Barber may be hampered by his quad, Felix isn't 100% either, and Felix is clearly the better option.For example, I believe eventually Felix, Witten, and Roy will all get theirs, and it's kind of nice to feel that it's in the future, not the past. And all three aren't just due as players, but will probably be needed if Dallas is to enjoy any impressive success. Now or later? Later works for me, but now would be fine to, I guess.
Felix getting numbers like those backs drafted after him in 07 (how I wanted Chris Johnson with that pick), is key to taking that pressure off Romo and making Dallas a truly dangerous team for anyone. If he doesn't blow up soon, then that draft pick (passing on better, far more productive backs) has really hampered Dallas and needs to be seen as the error it was. I'd like to see him featured a little in Philly. The same game plan they've been rolling out there likely isn't enough. I'm confident Felix will break out soon, too. So if he does and Dallas wins, I'm sure we'll all be pleased with that. What he adds is key to this season. He can change the basic dynamics of the offense by putting a ton of pressure on defenses that currently doesn't exist. The offense is good, but not scary. Felix can make it scary.
Btw, I liked the reverse to Austin for this very reason. He is dynamic, their only explosive productive player, and he should be used to pressure the defense in every imaginable way, until Felix arrives.
Here is a difference I saw yesterday, which I tihnk bodes well for Felix's development. Did you see how he finished the catch and run? I hate when players leave their feet, but Felix launched himself into Lucas, not only that but then he pushed Lucas down, and Lucas was injured. I tihnk Felix is learning to "finish" plays. Would I have rather seen him cut inside and score (which he likely would have)? Yeah. But 6 weeks ago, it was on a similar play that he got hurt, but this time he didn't.
That game he started against Carolina, he had nearly 100 yards in the first half. Even if it was only on 8 or 9 carries, that adds a play option threat that currently none of the other runners do. It's time to give Felix the ball more, I'd like to see 15 carries against Philly. They are a tough defense, so I doubt any of the Boys RBs really explode, but if any of them have a chance, it's Felix with his speed and cutting ability.
I also disagree any back in last year's class has been "better" - more productive? Sure - by being used more. There's no reason Felix couldn't have a game like Chris Johnson had yesterday. And I don't think any of the other backs drafted are close to comparable to Felix.
Check back on the previous page. It was mentioned in a couple of posts but his is one of them.No comments on Barbie going untouched for a sack?
Yes, Tyrone Calico sure looked like the goods. You know, there are a LOT of similarities between him and Austin, now that you mention his name. Both long, very fast, very athletic guys from small schools. Both move with the same gracefulness. I remember that play when he was injured. Roy "Horse Collar" Williams gave him his best effort. Pulled him backwards falling out of bounds and landed on the back of his legs. As you said, Calico never made it back after that. I can only imagine what he'd do to Roy if they met in a dark alley sometime.TO was lucky he only missed a few weeks and a couple playoff games after a RW Horse Collar. Calico lost his career. I'm glad they outlawed that move.Anyone remember the Titan WR Calico? The guy looked like he was on the verge of something special until they played us and he got caught from behind on an end around and tore up both of his knees. He never recovered.
Despsite a gutsy performance in the SB-Owens was still hurting from that tackle. This may have been one of the reasons the Eagles didn't win their first SB. That along with McNabb puking-sorry but I never get tired of bringing that up (pardon the pun).Yes, Tyrone Calico sure looked like the goods. You know, there are a LOT of similarities between him and Austin, now that you mention his name. Both long, very fast, very athletic guys from small schools. Both move with the same gracefulness. I remember that play when he was injured. Roy "Horse Collar" Williams gave him his best effort. Pulled him backwards falling out of bounds and landed on the back of his legs. As you said, Calico never made it back after that. I can only imagine what he'd do to Roy if they met in a dark alley sometime.TO was lucky he only missed a few weeks and a couple playoff games after a RW Horse Collar. Calico lost his career. I'm glad they outlawed that move.Anyone remember the Titan WR Calico? The guy looked like he was on the verge of something special until they played us and he got caught from behind on an end around and tore up both of his knees. He never recovered.
I hate to say this, but I disagree here. Chris Johnson is the goods. And unlike Felix, he can lower the shoulder. My only grip with Felix besides the durability concerns, is how easily he goes down. He's slippery, but gets taken down by some really light hits and arm tackles. Maybe it's because he's running so ridiculously fast, or running too upright. If he can work on that, he has a chance to be better then Chris Johnson, but so far, CJ has the lead as a full time back.Felix Jones
The guy is going to be fine. He has had some injury concerns but that can be the luck of the draw. He is going to rebound in a big way. What better backs were there at the time? Mendenhaul? I haven't been impressed. Chris Johnson? Loved him coming out of college but he wasn't predicted to go in the 1st round and the only reason the Titan's grabbed him there is because Felix was already gone.
CJ has been very impressive but I think Felix's ceiling is higher after seeing them both play.
Something that came to my attention on Sunday was that it appeared that Romo made some changes with his cadence.Until then I think he was trying to do "too" much with it and making his own guys jump. He seemed to have backed off with it, being a little smoother with less abruptiveness. Haven't heard any confirmation on that but an observation nonetheless. It will obviously be tougher at the Linc Sunday night, but something to watch for all the same.The team is picking up steam, I was glad to see us not get a slew of penalties. Let's hope we keep the momentum going, F Philly!
You haven't seen Felix too much have you?2008 highlights - look at the first run, nice stiffarm, look at the run 1:30 where he scores the TDI hate to say this, but I disagree here. Chris Johnson is the goods. And unlike Felix, he can lower the shoulder. My only grip with Felix besides the durability concerns, is how easily he goes down. He's slippery, but gets taken down by some really light hits and arm tackles. Maybe it's because he's running so ridiculously fast, or running too upright. If he can work on that, he has a chance to be better then Chris Johnson, but so far, CJ has the lead as a full time back.Felix Jones
The guy is going to be fine. He has had some injury concerns but that can be the luck of the draw. He is going to rebound in a big way. What better backs were there at the time? Mendenhaul? I haven't been impressed. Chris Johnson? Loved him coming out of college but he wasn't predicted to go in the 1st round and the only reason the Titan's grabbed him there is because Felix was already gone.
CJ has been very impressive but I think Felix's ceiling is higher after seeing them both play.
So he is posting his regular daily articles on his blogspot site now?First of all, I suppose, is that Bob Sturm's Inside Corner at D Magazine is done. Today was his last post, found here- http://insidecorner.dmagazine.com/2009/10/...s-2/#more-18127
The advertising contracts for that portion of the website expire at the end of this month (October). Sturm will continue to blog at another site. I will bring it to you when he gets settled in with it. For now, you can follow him here- http://sturminator.blogspot.com/
Sturm's blogspot site is blocked here at work. I have looked forward to his articles every day...great indepth analysis.I want Jones to be the 2nd best cowboy runner ever, but I'm not seeing the same things you are.In the first clip, sure he put a stiff arm out, but the defender face masked him on the play, he was tackled imediatly, and brought down hard, which to be fair, is typical on a faskmask.switz said:You haven't seen Felix too much have you?2008 highlights - look at the first run, nice stiffarm, look at the run 1:30 where he scores the TDI hate to say this, but I disagree here. Chris Johnson is the goods. And unlike Felix, he can lower the shoulder. My only grip with Felix besides the durability concerns, is how easily he goes down. He's slippery, but gets taken down by some really light hits and arm tackles. Maybe it's because he's running so ridiculously fast, or running too upright. If he can work on that, he has a chance to be better then Chris Johnson, but so far, CJ has the lead as a full time back.Felix Jones
The guy is going to be fine. He has had some injury concerns but that can be the luck of the draw. He is going to rebound in a big way. What better backs were there at the time? Mendenhaul? I haven't been impressed. Chris Johnson? Loved him coming out of college but he wasn't predicted to go in the 1st round and the only reason the Titan's grabbed him there is because Felix was already gone.
CJ has been very impressive but I think Felix's ceiling is higher after seeing them both play.
another video - look how he ends the run 14 seconds in
The only time I see Felix "go down easy" is when someone catches his shoe from behind, and he loses his balance. But "lowering his shoulder" wouldn't help that at all.
I don't know whether it's even worth disagreeing with you on this... he went down immediately????? The defender was on the ground BEFORE Jones was...I want Jones to be the 2nd best cowboy runner ever, but I'm not seeing the same things you are.In the first clip, sure he put a stiff arm out, but the defender face masked him on the play, he was tackled imediately, and brought down hard, which to be fair, is typical on a faskmask.switz said:You haven't seen Felix too much have you?2008 highlights - look at the first run, nice stiffarm, look at the run 1:30 where he scores the TDI hate to say this, but I disagree here. Chris Johnson is the goods. And unlike Felix, he can lower the shoulder. My only grip with Felix besides the durability concerns, is how easily he goes down. He's slippery, but gets taken down by some really light hits and arm tackles. Maybe it's because he's running so ridiculously fast, or running too upright. If he can work on that, he has a chance to be better then Chris Johnson, but so far, CJ has the lead as a full time back.Felix Jones
The guy is going to be fine. He has had some injury concerns but that can be the luck of the draw. He is going to rebound in a big way. What better backs were there at the time? Mendenhaul? I haven't been impressed. Chris Johnson? Loved him coming out of college but he wasn't predicted to go in the 1st round and the only reason the Titan's grabbed him there is because Felix was already gone.
CJ has been very impressive but I think Felix's ceiling is higher after seeing them both play.
another video - look how he ends the run 14 seconds in
The only time I see Felix "go down easy" is when someone catches his shoe from behind, and he loses his balance. But "lowering his shoulder" wouldn't help that at all.
Well, RBs aren't supposed to initiate contact... they aren't tacklers. They're supposed to evade contact. However, I really need to question what you are watching, because there were a few runs there where Felix definitely initiated contact when he had no other option.I dunno... I just wonder what you're looking at...The other two looks weren't even remotely lowering the boom.
He doesn't initiate contact. That OK too. He's a speed back, but the little arm tackles take him down. He gets tripped up a lot. I think he'll improve as he bulks up over the next few years, something that I think he would have already done if not for the two small leg injury's.
I get where you're coming from too, but no way. It's never good to lose a divisional game. The Eagles are already 2-0 in the division, including a win over the Giants. We're 0-1 with a loss to the Giants. Divisional games are far too valuable. That, and the last thing we need is for Philly to think they have our number. As far as that goes, we don't want that idea to begin festering in the back of the minds of the Cowboy players either.Head-to-head is another matter as well. If by chance it comes down to the Cowboys and Eagles for the division or even a home playoff game, I'd much rather bring them to the death star.I get it- but I'll take the win.I'm not sure how to best phrase this. But I almost wonder if Dallas would be better off long-term losing to the Eagles. Obviously, its not a good thing to lose a division/conference game.
But if we win, this team will be sky high. Peaking. In early November. We've seen how that plays out with most teams. And its not been a recepiet for playoff success. In contrast, teams that peak later in the season are the ones that have done the best in the playoffs.
Would losing this week, and staying grounded, better serve this team in the long run? Something to consider.
i'd love to see the Cowboys win the toss, take the ball, and march down the field and score. a slow start in Philly, and it might be a long night.There's no way a loss is ever good and in no way is there ever a good loss to a division foe.....EVER.
This is the biggest game of the year to date for the Cowboys. Winning this game puts them at the head of the division and puts the pressure on Philly being a game back and the threat of us beating them twice and the 2nd game to be played would be at home.
Their running backs aren't squat, and that's including Westbrook. He's not the same back and those backups are average compared to starting running backs around the league at best.
Put pressure on Donovan Mcnabb, that is the key. We pressure him and run the ball we'll win the game. Philly's D is tough when they get the lead, like they did in Washington and the Giants. Dallas needs to score first and keep that D on its heals and not allow them to get blitz happy.
Pound the ball, put pressure on the QB and Dallas will win. Philly is not great, go watch the Oakland and New Orleans games.
Of course, this is false. Anyone who's played on a championship team that didn't go undefeated can tell you key losses were related to ultimate success. I lived it in HS on a bball team that was as good as any in the state. Two early stupid losses 'grounded us', to use Ridgelake's terminology, and we stayed that way, humble, angry, and knowledgeable of the fact that bad things could happen in any game. We didn't lose again. Got it out of our system. Peaked at the right time. Very common well understood ideas in competitive situations. Had we won those games, we would not have been that tough later. No way. Those were good losses. One in a tournament final, and one early in league play to our main rival. I think the Pats could have used a loss a couple years ago. Not having one put added pressure on them. The Giants very close loss to those Pats in that regular season's finale was a good loss for them. It taught them that they could beat the Pats if they were just a little smarter, and it gave them an edge they probably wouldn't have had if they had ended the Pats undefeated season in week 17. Flip that around and think about the Giants spoiling the Pats undefeated season and then facing that beast in the Super Bowl. The loser of that game had an advantage. Giants losses at home to Dallas and Minnesota that year may have been key to them getting dumb mistakes out of the way. That's something I would like Dallas to do this year, and I've said so for three weeks now. I could outline key losses by Pittsburgh and the Colts in their recent championship seasons too.There's no way a loss is ever good and in no way is there ever a good loss to a division foe.....EVER.
As long as it isn't 44-6...Of course, this is false. Anyone who's played on a championship team that didn't go undefeated can tell you key losses were related to ultimate success. I lived it in HS on a bball team that was as good as any in the state. Two early stupid losses 'grounded us', to use Ridgelake's terminology, and we stayed that way, humble, angry, and knowledgeable of the fact that bad things could happen in any game. We didn't lose again. Got it out of our system. Peaked at the right time. Very common well understood ideas in competitive situations. Had we won those games, we would not have been that tough later. No way. Those were good losses. One in a tournament final, and one early in league play to our main rival. I think the Pats could have used a loss a couple years ago. Not having one put added pressure on them. The Giants very close loss to those Pats in that regular season's finale was a good loss for them. It taught them that they could beat the Pats if they were just a little smarter, and it gave them an edge they probably wouldn't have had if they had ended the Pats undefeated season in week 17. Flip that around and think about the Giants spoiling the Pats undefeated season and then facing that beast in the Super Bowl. The loser of that game had an advantage. Giants losses at home to Dallas and Minnesota that year may have been key to them getting dumb mistakes out of the way. That's something I would like Dallas to do this year, and I've said so for three weeks now. I could outline key losses by Pittsburgh and the Colts in their recent championship seasons too.There's no way a loss is ever good and in no way is there ever a good loss to a division foe.....EVER.
I understand this idea is based on the anecdotal and we cannot change past results to quantify a good loss, but I think the concept is pretty clear, widely accepted among coaches and players. You learn from defeat, and often you learn what you need to do to win; or more likely what not to do to avoid losing.
MustangMan touched on something interesting to me: "If you are going to be a championship team you have to be able to handle success. If Dallas can't, well it will not matter what it does in Philly this week." Some teams, for the sake of discussion let's call them Indy, New England, and Pittsburgh, don't benefit from losses much. They can handle success, keep bringing it week in and out, don't have so many lessons to learn, stay humble and confident. They play consistent regardless of wins and losses. Even in their cases losses can make them more dangerous. They've all experienced success and they can handle it. Other teams, I'll go with New Orleans and Minnesota, can peak early, get too high too soon, have letdowns late in the season when laws of average start to mount, believe their own press clippings. Maybe they can handle success, maybe not. Maybe some grounding, humbling good losses are the best long term medicine for those teams. Maybe they're just awesome and the class of the NFC. I have my doubts.
Like I said when I supported Ridgelake's sentiment. I never want Dallas to lose. But I won't be pessimistic if they do this week. There will still be much to be positive about. If they win, I hope the response is extremely humble. They need to stay that way even if their fans struggle to do so. Sorry for rambling, I like the topic.
Fantastic response.Of course, this is false. Anyone who's played on a championship team that didn't go undefeated can tell you key losses were related to ultimate success. I lived it in HS on a bball team that was as good as any in the state. Two early stupid losses 'grounded us', to use Ridgelake's terminology, and we stayed that way, humble, angry, and knowledgeable of the fact that bad things could happen in any game. We didn't lose again. Got it out of our system. Peaked at the right time. Very common well understood ideas in competitive situations. Had we won those games, we would not have been that tough later. No way. Those were good losses. One in a tournament final, and one early in league play to our main rival. I think the Pats could have used a loss a couple years ago. Not having one put added pressure on them. The Giants very close loss to those Pats in that regular season's finale was a good loss for them. It taught them that they could beat the Pats if they were just a little smarter, and it gave them an edge they probably wouldn't have had if they had ended the Pats undefeated season in week 17. Flip that around and think about the Giants spoiling the Pats undefeated season and then facing that beast in the Super Bowl. The loser of that game had an advantage. Giants losses at home to Dallas and Minnesota that year may have been key to them getting dumb mistakes out of the way. That's something I would like Dallas to do this year, and I've said so for three weeks now. I could outline key losses by Pittsburgh and the Colts in their recent championship seasons too.There's no way a loss is ever good and in no way is there ever a good loss to a division foe.....EVER.
I understand this idea is based on the anecdotal and we cannot change past results to quantify a good loss, but I think the concept is pretty clear, widely accepted among coaches and players. You learn from defeat, and often you learn what you need to do to win; or more likely what not to do to avoid losing.
MustangMan touched on something interesting to me: "If you are going to be a championship team you have to be able to handle success. If Dallas can't, well it will not matter what it does in Philly this week." Some teams, for the sake of discussion let's call them Indy, New England, and Pittsburgh, don't benefit from losses much. They can handle success, keep bringing it week in and out, don't have so many lessons to learn, stay humble and confident. They play consistent regardless of wins and losses. Even in their cases losses can make them more dangerous. They've all experienced success and they can handle it. Other teams, I'll go with New Orleans and Minnesota, can peak early, get too high too soon, have letdowns late in the season when laws of average start to mount, believe their own press clippings. Maybe they can handle success, maybe not. Maybe some grounding, humbling good losses are the best long term medicine for those teams. Maybe they're just awesome and the class of the NFC. I have my doubts.
Like I said when I supported Ridgelake's sentiment. I never want Dallas to lose. But I won't be pessimistic if they do this week. There will still be much to be positive about. If they win, I hope the response is extremely humble. They need to stay that way even if their fans struggle to do so. Sorry for rambling, I like the topic.
I agree with the bolded. I just disagree with HOW Dallas is using them right now.I'm tired of seeing a guy who is a game breaker be used in spot duty, when the starter is barely plodding along at 3.0, and the healthier "bruising" RB sits on the bench or comes in to block on third down.Mustang Man said:What is up with Switz and Felix? What does he have the guy in some big money fantasy league or something. GEEZ. I mean all 3 of these back are real good and Dallas needs to use all of them.
Just saw this on SportsCenter! Shut up Roy! Although he may have a point, be a team player and move forward!Roy E. Williams admits that he is not on the same page with Tony Romo."(Miles Austin) gets the ball thrown correctly his way," he said. "I'm stretching and falling and doing everything. Everybody [else] who's been here's balls are there. Our footballs (from Romo to Williams) are everywhere right now." Williams is averaging just 41.5 receiving yards per game this season, and the Cowboys don't seem to be in any rush to get him the ball more.Source: Profootballtalk on NBC Sports Oh my don't start this crap Roy. Don't start crying just keep working at it.
We all have to understand that there is no shame in losing this coming game. A blow-out would hurt this team's confidence. We need to give a good effort for 60 minutes. It's so cliche-but that's what I want to see. How we finish will be much more important then winning or losing this game.The weather forecast in Philly for Sunday night's game calls for temperatures in the 60's during the day and in the 50's for the evening.I'll take it.Liked your post Chaos. I fully understand where you're coming from and I couldn't agree more.However, a division rival like Philly is not an ideal place for that kind of outcome to transpire.The following week at Green Bay would be far more acceptable and easier to digest.On the other hand, looking back they may have very well learned such lessons with their losses to both Denver and the Giants.Games they very well could have won barring mistakes and poor execution. Since the bye, mistakes have been fewer while execution has improved.And I think they've learned some things along the way. Team chemistry and growing together is on the rise.
maybe the staff are concerned about Felix's ability to stay healthy. i think he will get an increase in touches over time. but, he has to show he can get more than a handful of carries and not get hurt.I agree with the bolded. I just disagree with HOW Dallas is using them right now.I'm tired of seeing a guy who is a game breaker be used in spot duty, when the starter is barely plodding along at 3.0, and the healthier "bruising" RB sits on the bench or comes in to block on third down.What is up with Switz and Felix? What does he have the guy in some big money fantasy league or something. GEEZ. I mean all 3 of these back are real good and Dallas needs to use all of them.
I just think a) Felix is the most talented of the three b) Barber is too injured to carry the load even at 15 touches c) Choice needs to be involved more.
Ideally I'd like to see Felix with 20 touches (15 carries, 5 catches)
Choice come in on third down, and a handful of 1st downs (8-10 touches)
Barber saved for closing out games, and preserved for the playoffs.
They said they don't think he is injury prone at all... both Jerry and Wade have said that, so I don't think that's it.Anyway, whatever they do, if it gets them a win, they won't change, and that's fine. When Barber's paltry 3.x YPC starts hurting the team, they're going to need to make a change.maybe the staff are concerned about Felix's ability to stay healthy. i think he will get an increase in touches over time. but, he has to show he can get more than a handful of carries and not get hurt.
I love verbal response given by Tony Romon and Roy Williams to this.Just saw this on SportsCenter! Shut up Roy! Although he may have a point, be a team player and move forward!Roy E. Williams admits that he is not on the same page with Tony Romo.
"(Miles Austin) gets the ball thrown correctly his way," he said. "I'm stretching and falling and doing everything. Everybody [else] who's been here's balls are there. Our footballs (from Romo to Williams) are everywhere right now." Williams is averaging just 41.5 receiving yards per game this season, and the Cowboys don't seem to be in any rush to get him the ball more.
Source: Profootballtalk on NBC Sports
Oh my don't start this crap Roy. Don't start crying just keep working at it.
now he just pissed off TO.Roy Williams
"I'm not saying it can't be fixed," Williams said. "That's what we're doing. I'm not a T.O. I'm not trying to be a T.O. I'm happy to win. I've said that a hundred times. I don't understand why people don't say, 'OK.' I'm a football player, and I'm trying to get this thing working."

lol..Roy needs to shut up but he does have a point...but he needs to shut up about that point ya dig? Keep practicing and working on it because we will need all cylinders firing here in a few short weeks.now he just pissed off TO.Roy Williams
"I'm not saying it can't be fixed," Williams said. "That's what we're doing. I'm not a T.O. I'm not trying to be a T.O. I'm happy to win. I've said that a hundred times. I don't understand why people don't say, 'OK.' I'm a football player, and I'm trying to get this thing working."![]()
I've tried to stay out of it but I can't any longer. I absolutely love the skills that Jones brings as a change of pace back. I think many others have tried to get this through to you but how do you defend this statement:"The numbers: Barber had 32 carries for 203 yards (6.3 average) before he suffered the injury in the second half of the team's loss to the New York Giants. He has 54 carries for 194 yards (3.6 average) in the four games he has played since."This is an injury that continues to heal with time, of course dependent on not doing more damage.As a Cowboys fan, I like what both bring to the table but trust the ball in Marion's hands 200% more.They said they don't think he is injury prone at all... both Jerry and Wade have said that, so I don't think that's it.Anyway, whatever they do, if it gets them a win, they won't change, and that's fine. When Barber's paltry 3.x YPC starts hurting the team, they're going to need to make a change.maybe the staff are concerned about Felix's ability to stay healthy. i think he will get an increase in touches over time. but, he has to show he can get more than a handful of carries and not get hurt.
Dallas is not undefeated, they have two narrow losses already, I fail to see how losing this game in Philly can be a good thing, it's absolutely crazy talk to think that in week 9, losing in Philly when both teams are tied for the division lead that this could be a good loss, I'm floored at the mentality.We'll just agree to disagree. In my mind, Dallas has had enough time, enough tough losses to somehow handle the successs if they were to win this game. You don't have to be pessimistic if they lose, you don't have to act like the sky is falling, but you also don't have to act like losing is a good thing to cover your bases just in case you lose. I don't think losing is a good thing, if it were, everyone in the league would try and do it on purpose at times, especially early on in the season.Of course, this is false. Anyone who's played on a championship team that didn't go undefeated can tell you key losses were related to ultimate success. I lived it in HS on a bball team that was as good as any in the state. Two early stupid losses 'grounded us', to use Ridgelake's terminology, and we stayed that way, humble, angry, and knowledgeable of the fact that bad things could happen in any game. We didn't lose again. Got it out of our system. Peaked at the right time. Very common well understood ideas in competitive situations. Had we won those games, we would not have been that tough later. No way. Those were good losses. One in a tournament final, and one early in league play to our main rival. I think the Pats could have used a loss a couple years ago. Not having one put added pressure on them. The Giants very close loss to those Pats in that regular season's finale was a good loss for them. It taught them that they could beat the Pats if they were just a little smarter, and it gave them an edge they probably wouldn't have had if they had ended the Pats undefeated season in week 17. Flip that around and think about the Giants spoiling the Pats undefeated season and then facing that beast in the Super Bowl. The loser of that game had an advantage. Giants losses at home to Dallas and Minnesota that year may have been key to them getting dumb mistakes out of the way. That's something I would like Dallas to do this year, and I've said so for three weeks now. I could outline key losses by Pittsburgh and the Colts in their recent championship seasons too.There's no way a loss is ever good and in no way is there ever a good loss to a division foe.....EVER.
I understand this idea is based on the anecdotal and we cannot change past results to quantify a good loss, but I think the concept is pretty clear, widely accepted among coaches and players. You learn from defeat, and often you learn what you need to do to win; or more likely what not to do to avoid losing.
MustangMan touched on something interesting to me: "If you are going to be a championship team you have to be able to handle success. If Dallas can't, well it will not matter what it does in Philly this week." Some teams, for the sake of discussion let's call them Indy, New England, and Pittsburgh, don't benefit from losses much. They can handle success, keep bringing it week in and out, don't have so many lessons to learn, stay humble and confident. They play consistent regardless of wins and losses. Even in their cases losses can make them more dangerous. They've all experienced success and they can handle it. Other teams, I'll go with New Orleans and Minnesota, can peak early, get too high too soon, have letdowns late in the season when laws of average start to mount, believe their own press clippings. Maybe they can handle success, maybe not. Maybe some grounding, humbling good losses are the best long term medicine for those teams. Maybe they're just awesome and the class of the NFC. I have my doubts.
Like I said when I supported Ridgelake's sentiment. I never want Dallas to lose. But I won't be pessimistic if they do this week. There will still be much to be positive about. If they win, I hope the response is extremely humble. They need to stay that way even if their fans struggle to do so. Sorry for rambling, I like the topic.
This team is in serous trouble. There's no possible way you can win with this group of idiots running the team. Jason Garret had a good stretch for like 6 games a couple years ago, now he's a friggin joke, and bum phillips has allways been a joke. Why were they not all fired this off season, cant believe we in for another season of disappointment before these losers are fired.
Team is stacked dudes. Romo is a winner. Son of Bum is a defensive genious, and Garret is an offensive genious. Run game is awesome, and Austin is a total raker. Superbowl here we come. I told you dudes to not get down after the Denver and KC games. Told you dudes.
or 
Okay, so other than the Giants game, Romo has only thrown one interception all year. So you can deduce that he is working on not throwing interceptions. One of the ways you can do this, I have learned from watching McNabb for 10 years, is to throw the ball to a spot where only the receiver can catch it and not the defender. If the receiver is well covered that means the QB has to put it in a spot that's going to be a tough catch for the receiver. Since the complaints I have heard about Roy Williams are that he is slow and doesn't run good routes, could the lack of accuracy between him and Romo have more to do with Roy not getting open or not being in the right place for the throw, than Romo throwing it poorly?If I were an agent in the NFL I would hire someone for my clients to vent to, so they didn't feel obligated to vent to the media. Roy's comments acheive nothing for himself other than making him look like a whiner.I love verbal response given by Tony Romon and Roy Williams to this.Just saw this on SportsCenter! Shut up Roy! Although he may have a point, be a team player and move forward!Roy E. Williams admits that he is not on the same page with Tony Romo.
"(Miles Austin) gets the ball thrown correctly his way," he said. "I'm stretching and falling and doing everything. Everybody [else] who's been here's balls are there. Our footballs (from Romo to Williams) are everywhere right now." Williams is averaging just 41.5 receiving yards per game this season, and the Cowboys don't seem to be in any rush to get him the ball more.
Source: Profootballtalk on NBC Sports
Oh my don't start this crap Roy. Don't start crying just keep working at it.
Romo
I don't look at the numbers,'' Romo said. "I don't know what would be good numbers and what wouldn't be.
"You know, we've been through this before with people trying to intersect and divide us as a football team. This team is too strong from the core.
"I know the media is going to make certain things appear what they may not have actually been or things of that nature. This team is too committed to winning and too committed to improving to let anything like that or anything you guys may present to us divide this team.
"We're just going to keep improving and getting better and we'll be ready to go this weekend.''
Roy Williams
"I'm not saying it can't be fixed," Williams said. "That's what we're doing. I'm not a T.O. I'm not trying to be a T.O. I'm happy to win. I've said that a hundred times. I don't understand why people don't say, 'OK.' I'm a football player, and I'm trying to get this thing working."
And more importantly I love their actions.
"We worked extra after practice yesterday and we're going to do the same thing today," Williams said. "That'll be our trend for the rest of the year until that light switches over."
This team is in serous trouble. There's no possible way you can win with this group of idiots running the team. Jason Garret had a good stretch for like 6 games a couple years ago, now he's a friggin joke, and bum phillips has allways been a joke. Why were they not all fired this off season, cant believe we in for another season of disappointment before these losers are fired.Team is stacked dudes. Romo is a winner. Son of Bum is a defensive genious, and Garret is an offensive genious. Run game is awesome, and Austin is a total raker. Superbowl here we come. I told you dudes to not get down after the Denver and KC games. Told you dudes.or
![]()

Romo has thrown some terrible balls at Roy for no apparent reason that I can see other than he just misfired. I can think of a couple hitting the ground well in front of him. The kind that are literally impossible to get to. I can think of a couple more that were awful throws. Without counting or studying the games, I also have a sense that these bad balls have been directed towards Roy at a higher rate than any other receiver. Roy has a couple inexcusable drops and maybe one or two that were understandable. There is some validation to what Roy was saying despite it being foolish for him to take it to the media. Espececially because there's two sides to the coin. There's several plays where Romo has delivered the ball downfield well before Roy is finishing whatever route he was running. He wastes a lot of motion and uncovers too slowly if at all. If Romo is under any pressure, Williams is not helping him. He is very slow out of his breaks and that's probably the larger part of the problem that both explains some other 'bad' passes, not the ones I mentioned above, that probably were Roy's fault more than Romo's. The expression 'they're not on the same page' looks pretty accurate, but even more accurate may be that Roy just isn't a very good receiver. I thought he was great at Texas, and I figured he was a stud in the making going to a much better offense, but really watching him closely has been disappointing for me. He's not who I thought he was. But I still think he will be a key contributor going forward, but then I have silver and blue shades blurring my vision.Since the complaints I have heard about Roy Williams are that he is slow and doesn't run good routes, could the lack of accuracy between him and Romo have more to do with Roy not getting open or not being in the right place for the throw, than Romo throwing it poorly?
One of the things with Roy is that he is a long strider and is deceptively fast. Kitna has said in the past that Roy covers more ground than you expect so you have to take this into account when you choose where to throw the ball. I haven't run a count or anything but my impression from watching the games are that Romo throws the ball behind him quite a bit. (Nothing new here btw because Romo has thrown behind the other guys as well this season. He and Austin seem to be the closest to insync but Austin also anticipate where the ball is going to be.)That last TD catch for Austin against Seatle was thrown behind him but it was almost like he expected it or just had a really quick reaction to it.My point is that it is a fixable problem and eventually the timing is going to get down and they will work it out. Roy is going to make some big plays for us.Romo has thrown some terrible balls at Roy for no apparent reason that I can see other than he just misfired. I can think of a couple hitting the ground well in front of him. The kind that are literally impossible to get to. I can think of a couple more that were awful throws. Without counting or studying the games, I also have a sense that these bad balls have been directed towards Roy at a higher rate than any other receiver. Roy has a couple inexcusable drops and maybe one or two that were understandable. There is some validation to what Roy was saying despite it being foolish for him to take it to the media. Espececially because there's two sides to the coin. There's several plays where Romo has delivered the ball downfield well before Roy is finishing whatever route he was running. He wastes a lot of motion and uncovers too slowly if at all. If Romo is under any pressure, Williams is not helping him. He is very slow out of his breaks and that's probably the larger part of the problem that both explains some other 'bad' passes, not the ones I mentioned above, that probably were Roy's fault more than Romo's. The expression 'they're not on the same page' looks pretty accurate, but even more accurate may be that Roy just isn't a very good receiver. I thought he was great at Texas, and I figured he was a stud in the making going to a much better offense, but really watching him closely has been disappointing for me. He's not who I thought he was. But I still think he will be a key contributor going forward, but then I have silver and blue shades blurring my vision.Since the complaints I have heard about Roy Williams are that he is slow and doesn't run good routes, could the lack of accuracy between him and Romo have more to do with Roy not getting open or not being in the right place for the throw, than Romo throwing it poorly?