From: floydg@oakhill.sps.mot.com (Floyd Goodrich)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: You've Got to Be Kidding Me...
Date: 5 Nov 92 15:35:26 GMT
Article-I.D.: oakhill.1992Nov5.153526.1866
Organization: Motorola Inc., Austin Tx.

In article <Bx7MMs.638@acsu.buffalo.edu> v073pzuy@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Damned for all time...) writes:
>In article <1992Nov4.152148.27991@oakhill.sps.mot.com>, floydg@oakhill.sps.mot.com (Floyd Goodrich) writes...
>>In article <Bx5t5L.JJA@acsu.buffalo.edu> v073pzuy@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Damned for all time...) writes:
>>>In article <1992Nov3.165359.24328@oakhill.sps.mot.com>, 
>>>	floydg@oakhill.sps.mot.com (Floyd Goodrich) writes...
>>>>>	--The Eagles' D should take a crash course in tackling!  Kelvin Martin's
>>>>>	TD was absolutely atrocious.  The TD by FB Johnston was abyssmal as 
>>>>>	well.  Why was that last Eagle defender (the one who flipped Johnston
>>>>>	into the end zone) still covering the WR and not moving out of the
>>>>>	end zone to tackle Johnston?

>Watch the game tape.  The Eagles blew a *lot* of tackles they should have made.
>Additionally, they stood around after other Cowboys got the ball (Martin, 
>Johnston.)

I've watched it.  Martin faked out 2 (or 3) Eagles defenders.  They can't
tackle him if they don't touch him.  Johnston stiff-armed an off-balance 
defender and got by him.  I will agree the Eagles missed tackles during the
game, many more than they usually do.  But these were good plays by the
Cowboys.  The fact that the tackles weren't made in the only 2 examples you
cared to cite are IMO more to Dallas' credit than the Eagles' inability to
tackle.

>>>Shows just how much the "big play" means to a team, or an individual.  Emmitt
>>>popped the big one.  Before that, he was *stuffed*.
>
>>But on the Cowboys' TD drive in the 4th, Smith was getting 8-12 yards a pop.
>>Easy.  I think it was the Eagles' being worn down from Dallas/Smith's ball
>>control running attack earlier in the game.  Consistent running like he did on
>>that drive came from wearing out the Philly defense instead of Dallas' being
>>fired up just because Emmitt had had a 51 yarder earlier in the game.
>
>How come he didn't start running like that until *after* the big play, then?
>The botched call by the official on Walker that left the score tied, combined
>with the big spring for Emmitt, juiced the Cowboys.  Watch the tape.  You'll
>see the change.

Yep, I see an Eagles defense that is too tired to execute.  I don't see
a Cowboys team reminiscing about a 51-yard run on a previous possession.  It
wasn't until after Johnston's TD that I saw realization dawn on the Eagles
that they were going to lose their 3rd of 4 games.

>>>Still, if I recall correctly, Smith had 163 yards on 30 carries.  
>>>Now, subtract the 51-yard run, and you are left with...29 for 112.  Not four
>>>yards a pop (this is directed to Cowboy fans who continually complain about
>>>Herschel Walker only getting one big run a game to pad his average yards-per-
>>>carry.)
>
>>Show me a back in the NFL who would not be happy with 100+ yards against the
>>eagles even if it took 40 carries.
>>Anyway, the name of the game is to play consistently throughout the game.
>>No big plays and win each play or limit the damage.  We all remember the 
>>Denver-Buffalo game from 2-3 years ago:  the Broncos won 58:30 of the game 
>>but gave up 21 points in something ridiculous like 1:30.  And those were
>>on even freakier plays than an off-tackle run.
>
>77 seconds, 20 points.  I was there, and WHAT A RUSH!!!  It was a testament to
>the unbeleivable talent of guys like Bennett, and the emphasis the Bills place
>on special teams.
>
>Bennett returns blocked FG.  Talley picks off pass and returns it for TD.  
>Denver C can't hear Elway, snaps ball early, Bills recover on Denver 6, score
>on next play...
>
>Great crowd we got here, too...set the top 3 or 4 attendance records in the NFL,
>ya know...:)!!!
>
>>>Exactly.  For all the "dominating" the Cowboy fans would have you believe 
>>>their team did, they were only ahead 3-0 at half; should have been down 14-10
>>>after a horrible turnover; in short, they played *well*, but not *that* well.
>
>>They dominated the first half.  Philly had 30 yards.  How many first downs?
>>How many times did they go 3 and out compared to Dallas.  Philly's been
>>living by their D so long, maybe the offense has forgotten how to drive.
>>And it hasn't just been Dallas.  Philly has lost 3 out of their last 4 with
>>the lone win being a 7-3 extravaganza over 2-6 Phoenix.
>
>How many times did they score?  A single FG.  Granted, they had two more 
>opportunities.  Given the fact that the Cowboys got nearly 400 yards??? on the
>Eagles--why couldn't they put the ball in the end zone?

Dallas outgained the Eagles by only 200 yards in the game (more or less).
I would say they "controlled" the first half.  If you don't call what you
saw "domination" because the score was only 3-0, that's OK with me.  But 
did you see any life at all in the Eagle offense?  Did you see their defense
control Dallas in any way?  Despite the score (which IS the name of the game,
of course), Dallas controlled the entire first half and (except for the first
drive) most of the second half, too.  

>First, the Eagles aren't "my team."  Nor am I attacking the Cowboys.  Cowboy
>fans on the net have echoed my sentiment that the Cowboys did *not* put this
>game away.  It wasn't for lack of trying, I'm sure.  Lack of a viable kicking
>game may have had more to do with it, though...

I know, you're a Bills fan.  Dallas never did put the game away, you're 
entirely correct.  But it really gets me how many netters say, "Oh, well
if we wouldn't have made so many dumb plays/penalties/drops and you HAD, we 
would have won."  All I'm saying is you can't assume a best-case scenario 
for one team and a worst-case scenario for the other one.

Credit DOES go to the Eagles defense in the first half for stiffening and
forcing Dallas to settle for FGs.  Or FG attempts, that is.

>>Sometimes that happens, but it's seldom.  If you want to count Walker's 
>>"TD," then ask what would have happened if Elliot had hit the FGs or
>>Aikman hadn't thrown a stupid interception or Holt wouldn't have gotten
>>a questionable "unsportsmanlike conduct" after 3rd and goal.  It goes
>>both ways, not just one.
>
>A botched call wasn't the reason Elliot missed the FGs.  It's because he lacks
>consistency, the single-most important factor in molding the ability of a 
>kicker.  The Eagles, however, were in this game, and should have been leading.

I thought the call was blown, too, at first.  But I read the ref's assessment
of the play, and he said Walker's forward motion was stopped so he blew the
whistle.  Walker DID go backwards before he scored, so the call wasn't 
horrible even though it's not usually called that way.  Since the whistle
blew, Walker's crossing the goal line never happened, so no TD.

>Which backs my original point--the game was *not* a Cowboy domination of the
>Eagles. In some aspects, yes--they had control and advantage. But it certainly
>wasn't woof-able.

I wan't woofing.  Was I?  Philly was in the game ONLY because Dallas had not
scored on their many opportunities.  Philly mustered no offense, and their 
defense got too worn down as a result.  Dallas controlled the game, even if
they didn't light up the score board.


Floyd Goodrich
floydg@oakhill.sps.mot.com