Jump to content

Dallas Cowboys 2019 Season Thread -- Aaaah Zeke Out?


Patrick Bateman

Recommended Posts

It seems twice now that I've read about the "defer" instruction being fucked up. How about this for a rule. The team that wins the coin flip chooses to kick or receive. If you kick, you receive in the second half. If you receive, you kick in the second half. In the history of the coin flip, when the winning team defers, has the losing team ever chosen to kick first, or the defering team chose to kick in the second half? Of course not. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, 'stache said:

It seems twice now that I've read about the "defer" instruction being fucked up. How about this for a rule. The team that wins the coin flip chooses to kick or receive. If you kick, you receive in the second half. If you receive, you kick in the second half. In the history of the coin flip, when the winning team defers, has the losing team ever chosen to kick first, or the defering team chose to kick in the second half? Of course not. 

you know who else messed this up?  charlie strong.  not kidding.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, gsoda3 said:

you know who else messed this up?  charlie strong.  not kidding.  

That's probably what I remember, my point stands that as easy as it is to avoid, why is defer the option? Kick or receive, each team kicks one half and receive another. The coin flip just decides which happens first, and there is at least some strategy involved in that one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, 'stache said:

That's probably what I remember, my point stands that as easy as it is to avoid, why is defer the option? Kick or receive, each team kicks one half and receive another. The coin flip just decides which happens first, and there is at least some strategy involved in that one.

well it could be a strategy to kick off both halves if your defense is stout, the weather's bad, and you're playing for field position.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, 'stache said:

It seems twice now that I've read about the "defer" instruction being fucked up. How about this for a rule. The team that wins the coin flip chooses to kick or receive. If you kick, you receive in the second half. If you receive, you kick in the second half. In the history of the coin flip, when the winning team defers, has the losing team ever chosen to kick first, or the defering team chose to kick in the second half? Of course not. 

It really is pretty simple. Forget this defer shit. You take the ball or kick it or you pick a side of the field to defend. Pretty sure Mackovic wound up kicking off into a heavy wind in Lubbock one year when he got steam-rolled by the Red Raiders. Also, heard on the radio that the last time a team kicked off both halves in NFL game was 2004 game in Buffalo. Apparently, the conditions were uber-shitty that day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like the Buffalo game in question was played against the Jets at Rich Stadium on Nov. 7, 2004. Herm Edwards decided to kick off to start the game and the second half. The temp was 55 degrees but there were 25 mph winds. The Jets surrendered a long TD drive to start the third quarter and lost 22-17.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/200411070buf.htm#all_pbp

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Gene Parmesan said:

Yeah I don't think it has a place in today's era of football.  Yeah I can understand the strategy in the 3 yards and a cloud of dust days if the weather was bad, but any coach that purposefully kicked off both halves today would be ridiculed regardless of conditions.

Still makes no sense to me. Is the theory that a kickoff goes longer than a punt? What is lost if you take the ball, go three and out, then punt? Alternatively, you might actually move the ball and get into scoring position. And what type of arrogance does it take to expect your defense to three and out the opponent? Looks like Buffalo drove and scored in that opening third quarter drive. How was he not roasted for that decision even then?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, 'stache said:

Still makes no sense to me. Is the theory that a kickoff goes longer than a punt? What is lost if you take the ball, go three and out, then punt? Alternatively, you might actually move the ball and get into scoring position. And what type of arrogance does it take to expect your defense to three and out the opponent? Looks like Buffalo drove and scored in that opening third quarter drive. How was he not roasted for that decision even then?

He likely was.  Herman Edwards NFL tenure was not short on roastings.  My assumption would be this was used in an era of football where offenses were seen as liabilities.  Kind of like the old adage of when you throw the ball only 3 things can happen and 2 of them are bad.  Certainly has no place today for sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Pato del Muerto said:

Since they explain the coin, heads and tails, every coin toss, do they explain kick, receive, or defer every time as well?  I don’t recall hearing it but if you are going to explain that there are two sides to a coin each time, why not explain the choices as well?

They aren't flipping quarters out there so if they are using commemorative coins you have to explain which side is head vs tails, but beyond that I don't think they do anything else.  The rule seems pointless, but it also says something if you have to dumb down an already simple rule that has basically only affected Longhorn fans and now Cowboy fans in the history of football.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Pato del Muerto said:

Since they explain the coin, heads and tails, every coin toss, do they explain kick, receive, or defer every time as well?  I don’t recall hearing it but if you are going to explain that there are two sides to a coin each time, why not explain the choices as well?

good point,  how about something like"Captain Dak(insert any team captain name here), you can receive, aka get the ball first, defer aka chose after halftime, or if you are a complete moron, you may, again if you want to be ridiculed by ESPN for 24 hours, kick.  please chose an option"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

good point,  how about something like"Captain Dak(insert any team captain name here), you can receive, aka get the ball first, defer aka chose after halftime, or if you are a complete moron, you may, again if you want to be ridiculed by ESPN for 24 hours, kick.  please chose an option"

Yes, exactly like that. You won the coin toss, you may kick if you are stupid or in the highly unlikely event that going one direction is the most important thing for some reason , receive or defer. 
 

Or they can take the stupid “strategy” out of it and go to kick or receive. 

Edited by Pato del Muerto
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

good point,  how about something like"Captain Dak(insert any team captain name here), you can receive, aka get the ball first, defer aka chose after halftime, or if you are a complete moron, you may, again if you want to be ridiculed by ESPN for 24 hours, kick.  please chose an option"

Or since it's meatheads we're dealing with here all the ref has to do is face whoever wins the coin toss and ask "Do you want the ball?"

simple yes or no and nobody can fuck it up because even if you say the wrong yes or no you're still going to get the ball one way or the other

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Gene Parmesan said:

They aren't flipping quarters out there so if they are using commemorative coins you have to explain which side is head vs tails, but beyond that I don't think they do anything else.  The rule seems pointless, but it also says something if you have to dumb down an already simple rule that has basically only affected Longhorn fans and now Cowboy fans in the history of football.

And the Dallas Texans (see Haynes, Abner)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, C-Man said:

And the Dallas Texans (see Haynes, Abner)

the Abner haynes thing is interesting. It was OT not the start of the game, so theoretically there is no change of  ends unless no one scores in 1st OT.  his coach(Stram) wanted the strong wind because in those days a FG would end the game.  Haynes said we will "kick to the clock" theoretically he was saying "we want to defend this end" and knows he will have to kick.  by saying kick(which is a choice you can make) the other team could say we want this end and therefore get the wind and receive, which they(Oilers) did. Stram told him we want to kick to the clock which Haynes repeated. the ref tried to help him by saying you can defend or received and he said we will kick. All the ref had to do was say "so you want to defend this end?"

there was no defer option at that time in professional football.

you never ever utter the word kick at the coin toss. 1st thing my middle school coach told me.

you could defer and the other team could screw up by a)choosing an end or b)saying we will kick

This choice to defend an end is old school when "defense wins championships" and "you get a seal here and a seal here and you run right through the alley!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bone3421 said:
4 hours ago, Tommy Shelby said:
Snubbed? I think winning games is important, the Cowboys don't even have a 0.500 record. 

Winning games isnt important when measuring individuals.....but the pro bowl voting is crap anyways so it dont make a shit.

So I assume you'd replace Russell Wilson? I see them both as pretty much the same QB, but Wilson is actually playing in a tough division and winning. Sure the Dak wins the stat game, but you could put that on a better O-Line and having Zeke in the backfield (both of which are in the Pro Bowl)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I assume you'd replace Russell Wilson? I see them both as pretty much the same QB, but Wilson is actually playing in a tough division and winning. Sure the Dak wins the stat game, but you could put that on a better O-Line and having Zeke in the backfield (both of which are in the Pro Bowl)
Rodgers is who should be replaced....or brees who missed what 6 games?
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Tommy Shelby said:

So I assume you'd replace Russell Wilson? I see them both as pretty much the same QB, but Wilson is actually playing in a tough division and winning. Sure the Dak wins the stat game, but you could put that on a better O-Line and having Zeke in the backfield (both of which are in the Pro Bowl)

Dak Prescott can't sniff Russell Wilson's jock.  If you switched QB's to the other team, Dallas would be fighting for the #1 seed and Seattle would be missing the playoffs.  They aren't even close to the same player. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Sgt Hulk said:

Dak with the finger, and an MRI on the shoulder.  anyone know about the shoulder?  is this a building storyline for the impending doom on the nfc east title game this weekend?

Shoulder is news to me, but he did land hard on his right shoulder on a qb run when Matthews chased him down. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Sgt Hulk said:

Dak with the finger, and an MRI on the shoulder.  anyone know about the shoulder?  is this a building storyline for the impending doom on the nfc east title game this weekend?

It'll be the excuse Jerry uses to keep the Ginger around.  I mean, you cant fault a coach who had an unhealthy QB can you?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Hate said:

Dak Prescott can't sniff Russell Wilson's jock.  If you switched QB's to the other team, Dallas would be fighting for the #1 seed and Seattle would be missing the playoffs.  They aren't even close to the same player. 

This is a seriously dumbass take. Yes, Wilson is better than Dak, that's not really in dispute. But you put Wilson on this team with these bumblefuck coaches and managers, and he'd be a monster QB averaging 8-8 every year. Maybe he could get that average to 9-7. Ginger would waste his abilities like he has Dak and Romo before him. Because he is a bad, terrible, ridiculously awful coach.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Hate said:

Dak Prescott can't sniff Russell Wilson's jock.  If you switched QB's to the other team, Dallas would be fighting for the #1 seed and Seattle would be missing the playoffs.  They aren't even close to the same player. 

I mean, I like Dak, but Russ is probably Hall of Fame already. He’s just adding to his legacy at this point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, 'stache said:

This is a seriously dumbass take. Yes, Wilson is better than Dak, that's not really in dispute. But you put Wilson on this team with these bumblefuck coaches and managers, and he'd be a monster QB averaging 8-8 every year. Maybe he could get that average to 9-7. Ginger would waste his abilities like he has Dak and Romo before him. Because he is a bad, terrible, ridiculously awful coach.

I honestly don’t know if I agree with that. Russ might be in the conversation for GOAT in terms of making plays off script. That has nothing to do with Pete Carroll, or any HC. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, A’Dam Psycho said:

There’s absolutely no reason Drew Brees should be on this team over Dak. He played 7 games so far this season. It’s all because of name.

Brees has 21 tds and 4 ints in 7 games. Dak has 26 tds and 11 ints in 14 games. I don’t completely disagree with you, but it’s hard to make that much of an argument. When brees has been on the field, he’s clearly been the better qb, and it isn’t even close. When he’s been on the field. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Hate said:

Dak Prescott can't sniff Russell Wilson's jock.  If you switched QB's to the other team, Dallas would be fighting for the #1 seed and Seattle would be missing the playoffs.  They aren't even close to the same player. 

While Russ is clearly better, that's an absolute Shit take.  This team, with Garrett as coach, and all the issues would NOT be fighting for the 1 seed regardless of Wilson or not.  Just too inconsistent.

3 hours ago, Wally Pryor said:

Correct, over and over. 

Not really, even as good as Russ is, he wouldn't have this team with more than 8 wins.  Not with this coaching and Defense.  QB isn't the issue.

2 hours ago, Dr. Beeper said:

Wilson is far and away the better player. Dak wasn’t snubbed. He’s 4th best this year. 

Probably, Cousins got snubbed more than Dak.  Rodgers and Brees really shouldn't be on the team.

2 hours ago, EvilCaseMcCoy said:

Dak was better than Rogers 

Yep, so was Cousins.

  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, youdunnf'dup said:

I honestly don’t know if I agree with that. Russ might be in the conversation for GOAT in terms of making plays off script. That has nothing to do with Pete Carroll, or any HC. 

Yeah but let's not pretend that he hasn't had great talent around him. Like, literal hall of fame talent on defense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Pam Cummings said:

Yeah but let's not pretend that he hasn't had great talent around him. Like, literal hall of fame talent on defense.

I’m not even talking about him early on in his career. I’m talking about now that all of those guys are gone. But you could see the flashes early on of what Russ could become. Dak has shown flashes of being a really good qb. He hasn’t shown that type of flash. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...