Before I begin my assessment of Dallas' draft, I want to pay tribute to a player that I liked a lot during his stay in Big D. Akin Ayodele was a solid starter and a great free agent signing. Tuna signed him after his rookie contract with Jacksonville expired, and he has started 32 games. In his 6-year NFL career, he has started 96 straight games. He is tough against the run, and is decent in coverage. I am sad to see him go.
Apparently, my prognostication powers are not what I thought they were. Despite my complete amazement at the Felix Jones pick, my sadness over the aforementioned Ayodele trade, and my perplexity over Erin Henderson being undrafted, overall, I'm pleased with the draft. I love the Jenkins and Choice selections and when JJ is in wheelin'-dealin' mode. If the gamble on Pacman pays off, then we got a lot better. If not, then we got better. I can live with that. We added another offensive weapon, depth at RB & CB, and soildified our return game. Not too shabby.
And we really needed to address our secondary, what with Mario Manningham, Devin Thomas, and Malcolm Kelly all joining our division. The NFC East is back to the level of competitiveness of the 80's. All four teams are legitimate playoff contenders, and the division race is wide open. This season is gonna be fun!
27 April 2008
23 April 2008
TO, Tank, Throw me the damn...Pacman?
JJ is willing to give anyone a second (or 11th) chance in hopes that a troubled 20-something can turn his life around and fulfill his potential. I like that about him. I have always looked on JJ with an ascance eye, and have often been critical of the way he handled the team. I had no respect for a man who fired Coach Landry. Now, maybe Landry wouldn't resign and JJ had to fire him to get him out. I don't know. It still made me angry as a fan of the Cowboys and of the game.
I think JJ has benefited greatly from his experience with the Tuna. Or at least I hope so. If nothing else, Tuna left a very full cupboard. While JJ is never afraid to shell out the dinero, he learned to be smart with where that money went, and to be smart with that money. Look at the contracts he signed with all three of the lastest reclamation programs. TO- a series of 5, 1-year contracts that would allow Dallas to cut the player with few cap ramifications. Tank (shouldn't he be renamed "Arsenal", or is it now that he has the firepower of a tank?)- a 2-year, vet minimum deal with no guaranteed money. Pacman- a 4-year deal with no guaranteed money. Talk about minimizing risk...
As a final note, the chance of Dallas selecting Felix Jones in the draft, if slight before, is now nil. The only rational argument put forth by those who advocate that pick is Jones' return ability. Pacman is now the return guy. Yes, I realize that he may not ever play, but assuming he does (and stays out of titty bars), Pacman is a far better return man than anyone on the roster. And if he "makes it rain" in the endzone, I'm all for it.
I think JJ has benefited greatly from his experience with the Tuna. Or at least I hope so. If nothing else, Tuna left a very full cupboard. While JJ is never afraid to shell out the dinero, he learned to be smart with where that money went, and to be smart with that money. Look at the contracts he signed with all three of the lastest reclamation programs. TO- a series of 5, 1-year contracts that would allow Dallas to cut the player with few cap ramifications. Tank (shouldn't he be renamed "Arsenal", or is it now that he has the firepower of a tank?)- a 2-year, vet minimum deal with no guaranteed money. Pacman- a 4-year deal with no guaranteed money. Talk about minimizing risk...
As a final note, the chance of Dallas selecting Felix Jones in the draft, if slight before, is now nil. The only rational argument put forth by those who advocate that pick is Jones' return ability. Pacman is now the return guy. Yes, I realize that he may not ever play, but assuming he does (and stays out of titty bars), Pacman is a far better return man than anyone on the roster. And if he "makes it rain" in the endzone, I'm all for it.
Dallas Draft
So I thought I'd interrupt the world of politics for a moment to delve into my favorite weekend in late April: the NFL Draft.
Obviously, I am much more attuned to what the Cowboys' needs are than to the rest of the league, so I will limit my comments to Dallas with one exception: Darren McFadden (aka Run DMC) is the most explosive, versatile back I've seen since Marshall Faulk. If he falls out of the top 10 due to "character issues," I guarantee that he will make it his mission to destroy all the teams that passed on him. The personal slight, real or perceived, is a powerful motivator in professional athletics. In the NFL, Randy "Straight Cash, Homey"Moss and Warren Sapp are the best examples of guys who fell and took it personally. Moss has focused his energies on one team, in particular: the Dallas Cowboys. Yeah. Moving on...
Dallas' top needs are CB, WR, RB, and the Hog maulies up front on both sides. I would be SHOCKED if Jerry Jones took a RB in round one (in which we have 2 picks). There is so much talent available at that position, I just can't fathom why JJ would spend 1st round $$ on a guy that will be a backup/complimentary back to MBIII (who JJ is trying to sign to a long-term deal). So much of draft strategy now is dependant on the salary cap. You can't spend all your money at one position.
With that in mind, I would like to see the following scenario:
Obviously, I am much more attuned to what the Cowboys' needs are than to the rest of the league, so I will limit my comments to Dallas with one exception: Darren McFadden (aka Run DMC) is the most explosive, versatile back I've seen since Marshall Faulk. If he falls out of the top 10 due to "character issues," I guarantee that he will make it his mission to destroy all the teams that passed on him. The personal slight, real or perceived, is a powerful motivator in professional athletics. In the NFL, Randy "Straight Cash, Homey"Moss and Warren Sapp are the best examples of guys who fell and took it personally. Moss has focused his energies on one team, in particular: the Dallas Cowboys. Yeah. Moving on...
Dallas' top needs are CB, WR, RB, and the Hog maulies up front on both sides. I would be SHOCKED if Jerry Jones took a RB in round one (in which we have 2 picks). There is so much talent available at that position, I just can't fathom why JJ would spend 1st round $$ on a guy that will be a backup/complimentary back to MBIII (who JJ is trying to sign to a long-term deal). So much of draft strategy now is dependant on the salary cap. You can't spend all your money at one position.
With that in mind, I would like to see the following scenario:
- Trade #22 and #28 to Detroit for Roy "the Other" Williams and the #15,
- Draft the highest rated CB on the board with the #15 pick (Domonique Rodgers-Cromartie, Leodis McKelvin, Mike Jenkins, or Aqib Talib),
- Take BPA for the rest of the draft
- Skip merrily to training camp.
Without a trade up, I would like to take any combination of WR Limas Sweed, CB Brandon Flowers, LB Jerod Mayo, DT Kentwan Balmer, or DE Philip Merling.
17 April 2008
More Debate
I had the opportunity to listen to some post-debate talking heads, and I'd like to expand my comments about Obama v Establishment.
First, I should mention that I listen to about nine different political podcasts these days, so I get a wide range of views. If you are interested, I would recommend the Post Politics Podcast (P3), the Atlantic: American Ideas, the New Yorker: Campaign Trail, and the Economist: Democracy in America. I also recommend Counterspin for an analysis of how Big Media cover the news in general, and The Bugle (for a laugh. The Bugle will get its own post soon).
Wednesday night, Obama answered one of Stephanopolis' innane questions by putting forth the idea that he misspoke, would misspeak again, and the old politics was going to jump all over it. He then proceeded to give an example of Hillary's comments in 1992 about how she wouldn't assume the backseat role most First Ladies were expected to take. She was attacked in the press for her comments, and Obama then stated that she had learned the long lesson since she has now adopted those tactics. I thought it was the most poignant moment of the debate, yet none of the nine podcasts mentioned this exchange at all. Great analysis. The whole premise of Obama's campaign is being ignored by Democrats, Republicans, and the press. It'll be an uphill climb for the most dynamic politician we've seen in a generation.
First, I should mention that I listen to about nine different political podcasts these days, so I get a wide range of views. If you are interested, I would recommend the Post Politics Podcast (P3), the Atlantic: American Ideas, the New Yorker: Campaign Trail, and the Economist: Democracy in America. I also recommend Counterspin for an analysis of how Big Media cover the news in general, and The Bugle (for a laugh. The Bugle will get its own post soon).
Wednesday night, Obama answered one of Stephanopolis' innane questions by putting forth the idea that he misspoke, would misspeak again, and the old politics was going to jump all over it. He then proceeded to give an example of Hillary's comments in 1992 about how she wouldn't assume the backseat role most First Ladies were expected to take. She was attacked in the press for her comments, and Obama then stated that she had learned the long lesson since she has now adopted those tactics. I thought it was the most poignant moment of the debate, yet none of the nine podcasts mentioned this exchange at all. Great analysis. The whole premise of Obama's campaign is being ignored by Democrats, Republicans, and the press. It'll be an uphill climb for the most dynamic politician we've seen in a generation.
16 April 2008
Debate
After watching the Democratic debate tonight, I am left with a few thoughts:
- Obama is constantly battling not only his opponent in the Democratic race, not only the Republican presumptive nominee, but also the establishment machine. At every turn, when he tries to elevate the discussion, he is pulled back into the morass. For example, when Obama tried to elevate the discussion on Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Stephanopolis asked follow up questions that completely missed Obama's point. Clinton chimed in on the discussion about the "cling" comments, completely missing the substance of what Obama was saying. Are they being willfully ignorant?
- Clinton tries to have things two ways. First, she wants to be judged separately from her husband and be vetted according to her own record. Then, she wants to take the credit for the policies that worked during her husband's administration. To top it off, she (and her daughter) act thoroughly offended when the questions about her role in her husband's indiscretions is mentioned. What? I am convinced that the election of Clinton will do nothing to change the course of U.S. policies that have been in place since Ronald Reagan.
- Why does criticism of American policies equate to lack of patriotism? Speak out against the war, you're unpatriotic. Speak about failed policies in the Middle East, you're unpatriotic. make the claim that American policy has caused harm to other parts of the world, you're unpatriotic. Bullshit. The blind faith that is put in the government's policies is dangerous. Is it really that controversial to suggest that American foreign policy in the Middle East resulted in the attacks of 9/11? I despise this "America can do no wrong" attitude. Look, the reality is that, while the language may have been extreme, the gist of Rev. Wright's comments were TRUE! The U.S. has deposed democratically elected governments in favor of friendlier dictatorships. The U.S. ignores democratically elected governments if they don't believe in what the U.S. thinks they should believe in (see Hamas). The idea that we can gloss over these failures to claim "America's moral authority in the world" is asinine. At this point, we have no moral authority. We are a country that invades other countries without provocation, we torture enemies, ignore the rule of law when it doesn't suit us, spy on our own citizens, and cannot fathom why other peoples would dislike us. Ludicrous.
11 April 2008
John Adams
Sorry for the long pause as I was trying to figure out just what in the hell I was going to write about. This will be the first in an occasional series about my current obsessions- giving reason for said obsession, and encouraging others to partake. Hmm...that sounds a lot like a pusher, so I'll just move on.
John Adams on HBO has been a spring surprise. In a TV season marred by a 4 month writer's strike, JA came as a refreshing change of pace. Of course, those of you that know me will also know my connections with Colonial and early Federalist American history, and it will come as no surprise that I am watching. For those of you who are not aware, most of the filming for the mini-series was done here in the Old Dominion. The Adams family farm is actually in the middle of nowhere in King and Queen County and Petersburg serves as some of the Boston scenes, but the Colonial Williamsburg Foundation was the host for a great number of shots, including the gaol (that's jail to all you 21st century folk), the Public Hospital, and the Wythe House (which served as the executive mansion, internal and external, in Philadelphia. So there is the added value of seeing buildings I see all the time on TV (with massive CGI), much like watching the Wire, Homicide: Life on the Street, or any movie set in D.C.
Historically, the series is based on David McCullough's brilliant biography of the Founding Father that no one likes. The book itself is a bit dense and lengthy, but McCullough is a talented writer who has a flair for narrative. (Check out his book on the Johnstown Flood as a primer, then move on to Mornings On Horseback before delving into JA). The writers have done a good job limiting historical inaccuracies in the telling of the story.
One of the greatest pleasures for me is the portrayal of George Washington by David Morse. In the few scenes that he is in, Morse does a brilliant job of conveying the quirks of the General's personality without reducing him to a caricature. My favorite was his inauguration- Washington had a horrible speaking voice, and witness accounts have him barely whispering the oath until he ad-libbed the "So help me God" line. Just an excellent scene.
I would like to have seen more development of the relationship between Adams and Jefferson proir to and during the Revolution to set up the schism that would make them not speak to each other until they were both old men.
All in all, I think the series is outstanding. Get HBO and watch.
John Adams on HBO has been a spring surprise. In a TV season marred by a 4 month writer's strike, JA came as a refreshing change of pace. Of course, those of you that know me will also know my connections with Colonial and early Federalist American history, and it will come as no surprise that I am watching. For those of you who are not aware, most of the filming for the mini-series was done here in the Old Dominion. The Adams family farm is actually in the middle of nowhere in King and Queen County and Petersburg serves as some of the Boston scenes, but the Colonial Williamsburg Foundation was the host for a great number of shots, including the gaol (that's jail to all you 21st century folk), the Public Hospital, and the Wythe House (which served as the executive mansion, internal and external, in Philadelphia. So there is the added value of seeing buildings I see all the time on TV (with massive CGI), much like watching the Wire, Homicide: Life on the Street, or any movie set in D.C.
Historically, the series is based on David McCullough's brilliant biography of the Founding Father that no one likes. The book itself is a bit dense and lengthy, but McCullough is a talented writer who has a flair for narrative. (Check out his book on the Johnstown Flood as a primer, then move on to Mornings On Horseback before delving into JA). The writers have done a good job limiting historical inaccuracies in the telling of the story.
One of the greatest pleasures for me is the portrayal of George Washington by David Morse. In the few scenes that he is in, Morse does a brilliant job of conveying the quirks of the General's personality without reducing him to a caricature. My favorite was his inauguration- Washington had a horrible speaking voice, and witness accounts have him barely whispering the oath until he ad-libbed the "So help me God" line. Just an excellent scene.
I would like to have seen more development of the relationship between Adams and Jefferson proir to and during the Revolution to set up the schism that would make them not speak to each other until they were both old men.
All in all, I think the series is outstanding. Get HBO and watch.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
