It's Deja Screw Again For The Mavericks

It's Deja Screw Again For The Mavericks

7/9/15



July 8, 2015 will be a day people in Los Angeles and Dallas (especially Dallas) won't forget anytime soon. That was the day DeAndre Jordan backed out of his commitment to the Dallas Mavericks at the last minute. Players have changed their minds and backed out of deals before, but none of those deal reversals have had ramifications as destructive or dramatic as this one did. As for the Mavericks, this is not their first time being burned.

In 2012 Jason Kidd agreed to a 3-year, $9 million contract to stay in Dallas and retire as a Maverick. The same day he committed to the Mavericks, J. Kidd switched it up on them and agreed to a similar contract with the Knicks, where he finished out his playing career. I remember Mark Cuban being highly upset about that, so much so that he went on the radio and said that he wouldn't be putting J. Kidd's jersey number in the rafters. The Mavericks went on to have a revolving door at the point guard position in 2012-13.

The DeAndre Jordan snub hurt the Mavericks much worse because their whole offseason was built on getting DJ. They completely sold out to get him in Dallas. With the Mavericks under the assumption that they had DJ, they let Tyson Chandler sign with the Phoenix Suns. They also didn't make offers to the next best centers available, and all of them got snatched up. Even the Lakers managed to get Roy Hibbert in a trade from the Pacers. The Mavericks' big signing was Wes Matthews, who was supposed to be a complimentary piece for a team built around DJ. Now the Mavericks are screwed, having a bunch of cap space, but nobody to spend the money on. All they did was operate like they had a done deal, like it was set in stone, which happens to be standard practice for deals agreed to during the free agency moratorium. There is no Plan B when Plan A pulls the rug out from under you at the last minute.

Why exactly did the Mavericks want DeAndre Jordan so badly? To them, he was a bridge to the post-Dirk era, their next franchise player. He's a 7-footer that dominates the glass (led the NBA in rebounding last season), an elite rim protector, and he never takes nights off and gets better every year. Players with his abilities don't grow on trees. DJ claimed that he wanted a bigger role than he was getting with the Clippers, and the Mavericks would have given him that. Dirk Nowitzki is a selfless player that puts his team's needs first, and he would have been glad to let DJ have all the shine he wanted. That won't ever happen with the Clippers as long as Chris Paul and Blake Griffin are on the team. DJ could have been the focal point in Dallas, but maybe deep down he was more comfortable being 3rd in the Clippers pecking order. Whether fair or unfair, instead of being the team's next star, in Dallas DeAndre Jordan will always be seen as the man who destroyed the Mavericks.

With DJ, I believe the Mavericks would have been in a good situation. Along with him, Dirk, Chandler Parsons, and Wes Matthews they would have been a solid playoff team, and then next year they would go into the offseason with max cap space to pursue Kevin Durant. If not KD, then Al Horford (as Dirk's successor) or Mike Conley would be nice fallback options. But as of right now, the teams is in the worst situation it could find itself in, with no assets worth mentioning and nobody to spend their money on. All that's left for the Mavericks to do now is to rebuild. If they want to keep their 1st round pick next year, the best way to do that is to lose about 60 games. Because of the Rajon Rondo trade, the Celtics get the Mavericks' draft pick unless it's in the top 7. By that logic, the Mavericks would have to be as bad as possible to get the highest draft pick possible. With that being said, I just don't see them tanking the season, especially with Dirk Nowitzki still on the team.

With all of that being said, I'm still in shock with how many people are defending DeAndre Jordan for the way he screwed the Mavericks over, especially from the media. The justification for this move is just plain ridiculous. To me, this is INDEFENSIBLE!! This whole situation is bad business, just plain UNETHICAL, and won't end well for the Clippers. Yes, DJ had every right to change his mind, but he handled it like a coward. He refused to answer phone calls from the Mavericks front office and from his good friend Chandler Parsons. He also didn't respond to text messages from Mark Cuban or have the guts to tell him face-to-face that he changed his mind. If DJ had held out until he was sure about his decision, the Mavericks could have put together a backup plan. Instead, he dragged this whole process out until there were no viable options left. He put the Mavericks organization in a huge bind by being dishonest with them, and that WAS NOT cool.

Let me put it another way: The indecision itself is not the issue. Nobody is saying that DJ wasn't allowed to backtrack. The timing and his decision making process is what had everybody looking at him sideways. Did you notice that DJ was the ONLY free agent that backed out of the deal he agreed to? Again, I can't see how this whole thing is being defended. You can support DJ and the Clippers all you want, but it still doesn't change the fact that all he had to do was wait until he knew what he wanted to do. At the end of the day, the Mavericks got screwed by missing out on other players they might have gone after.

The reason this whole mess happened in the first place was because of shoddy rule-making. NBA free agency operates from a set of unwritten rules. The league allows teams to start negotiating with free agents on July 1. For the next 8 days there is a moratorium on signing players. The NBA's fiscal year ends on June 30, and during those 8 days the NBA's accountants are auditing the league's finances and determining the next year's salary cap. July 9 is the day that players can officially sign the deals they agreed to during the moratorium. There is an obvious loophole in this situation: The deals negotiated in that 8-day window are not binding, but the NBA treats them that way. In other words, when a player makes a verbal commitment to a team during the moratorium, the rest of the league leaves him alone. There is an unwritten rule that once a player commits to a team they are off-limits. 

DeAndre Jordan's decision appeared to be a genuine change of heart, but because of the rules in place, it also could have easily been a malicious way to sabotage the Mavericks' offseason. If that was the case, DJ and the Clippers could have gotten away with it and there wouldn't have been anything anybody could do about it. This is also why I believe there will be some implications for the whole league. Teams can use this situation as a reference point to start doing free agent espionage - have your best free agent players commit to sign with another team, especially a rival, and then back out at the last minute and re-sign with you, effectively sabotaging your rival.

As for the Clippers' role in this mess, they would be the first ones to point out the DJ started it when he called Doc Rivers and teammates saying that he was having second thoughts. Once they saw that they had a chance to get DJ back, they jumped on it. They didn't take any chances either. As a matter of fact, if Doc built a moat around DJ's house that day, I wouldn't have been shocked. The fact that they froze DJ's agent out of the whole process spoke volumes to me. Also, people are more likely to bend or ignore rules when more is on the line. In the Clippers' case, their status as a contender was on the line.


Here is the question I have about this situation:

If you have to barricade a player's house and basically hold him hostage until he signs a contract, do you really want that player on your team?


Here are 2 points I came up with after it all went down that I haven't heard being mentioned:

1.) Chris Paul is the president of the NBA Players Association. With him holding that position, participating in these shenanigans is not a good look for him. I wonder why nobody mentioned his role in the NBPA's statement about DeAndre Jordan. Would the union be as kind and conciliatory if the player in question wasn't Chris Paul's teammate? I don't know about that. It's true that the NBPA exists to support the right of players over owners, but I have always wondered exactly how much all players actually benefit from the NBPA when one team and one owner have gained a lot from having their player be its leader.

2.) DeAndre Jordan not only screwed the Mavericks, but when you back out of a deal like that, you could be possibly screwing over your agent, and even possibly your own team. Once teams find out about an incident like this, they could lose trust in that particular agent and decide not to do business with him ever again. Once that happens, that agent's other clients would fire him and find themselves a new agent. A lot of free agency moves would go differently if he committed to the Clippers in the first place. But now that this mess has happened, the Clippers might have a hard time doing business with other teams in the future. There might not be a lot of incentive to help them out if they are interfering with other front offices like that.


I also have to question DeAndre Jordan's thought process in making this decision. His biggest gripe was that Doc Rivers and his teammates didn't treat him like a player who grew up and evolved from the 2nd round pick that he was. He also supposedly doesn't get along with Chris Paul. How can somebody with those issues with that coach and those players be OK with them coming to his house and stay all night, keeping him from talking to other people? He also said that he wanted a bigger role on offense, and that won't happen in L.A. At the end of the day, DJ is going back to the same exact thing he said he wanted to leave. For what DJ claimed to want and what he was saying throughout the whole courting process with the Mavericks, that's not an option for him with the Clippers. I believe he's content in L.A., and that he thought it would be easier to just stay there and be the 3rd wheel on a perennially underachieving team than to make a decision to branch off and take the next step in his career. To me, this further proves that DJ is not ready to be a franchise player, satisfied with being in the shadows of Blake Griffin and Chris Paul.

Did the Clippers really win by stealing DeAndre Jordan out from under the Mavericks? I don't think so. When it's all said and done, they still have a team where the star players don't like each other. The problems between the center and the point guard didn't fix themselves, and I don't see a resolution anytime soon. I believe DJ was lied to by the Clippers. In the beginning, they will give him more touches on offense, but as the season goes on things will go back to normal and he'll be back to being an afterthought. Then when he complains about it, they'll tell him to be quiet and "know his role". At that point, he'll remember why he even considered leaving in the first place and wish he was in Dallas, regretting his decision to stay.

One more time, nobody is saying that DJ didn't have the right to change his mind. The problem is that he said one thing and did another. When a man gives an organization his word, especially when that organization put so much effort into building a team around him, putting all their eggs into his basket and making everything they do all about him, to not have the decency to let them know he wasn't coming was as wrong as 2 left shoes. I understand having second thoughts or getting cold feet, but you back out of a commitment THAT BIG that late in the game, leaving the Mavericks high and dry. That's very unethical and disrespectful.

Like I said earlier, this situation should show the NBA office, owners, and players how this moratorium loophole can be exploited to weaken other contenders and division rivals. If not close the loophole altogether, there should at least be some alterations made to it. I know it's unlikely, but I believe the Mavericks should challenge this transaction. I know they probably won't win, but I still think it's a fight worth fighting. I think this was the most classless, and sleaziest conduct I have ever seen by a professional sports team. It's bad enough that the rules allow these things to happen. But if anybody knows how immoral and unjust it is to require an organization to count on the word of a player, to the franchise's detriment, and then have another franchise come in and tortiously interfere with that advantangeous business relationship after all the rest of the major free agents are off the market, it would be another professional sports organization.  

I bet if you dig deep enough, you would find all kinds of dirt in this situation. In my opinion, the fact that Clippers owner Steve Ballmer and Doc Rivers met with DeAndre Jordan speaks volumes. Not only is Doc the team's head coach, he's also the president of basketball operations. It's one thing to have a player unilaterally change his own mind or even be swayed by a former teammate to reverse his decision, but this situation is completely different. What you have here is an owner and president of an NBA team aware that a player has made a commitment to a competitor, making one last push to bring that player back. Since there was technically no contract in place, Mark Cuban likely wouldn't be successful in filing a claim against the Clippers for tortious interference with a contractual relationship, but he could still make a bold statement by filing for tortious interference with business expectancy. I also heard that a case could also be made for intentional interference with prospective economic relations. It's been publicized that the Clippers' pursuit of DJ bordered on badgering.

Once again, I don't think this should go unchallenged - win, lose, or draw. If Mark Cuban does decide to take a stand, it could set and change the tone on how free agent negotiations are done in the future. I'm not a Mavericks fan, but I hated seeing them get screwed like that. All I know, is that karma doesn't have an expiration date. The Clippers and DeAndre Jordan might not reap what they sowed right away, but they WILL eventually reap their harvest. This whole thing won't end well for DJ and the Clippers at all.

LeBron Luther King - I Have A Dream

LeBron Luther King - I Have A Dream

4/10/15


Disclaimer: I am WELL AWARE and deeply appreciative of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s efforts to make this country a better place to live in. By no means is this piece meant to be disrespectful to him in any way. While I also realize that LeBron James is the face of the NBA, I also know that the media  puts him on a ridiculously high pedestal and shoves him down our throats every chance they get. This is why the first day of the 2014 NBA Free Agency was billed as LeBron Luther King Day. I respect the man and his game, but I'm sure I'm not the only one that's tired of him being treated like a demigod. That's my biggest motivation for writing this piece.

**This is LeBron speaking in 3rd person.


I am happy to join with you today in what will not go down in history as the greatest demonstration of dominant basketball in the history of our nation.

One half score and two years ago, a local high school basketball prodigy, in whose gargantuan shadow the league stands today, signed his first NBA contract. This "momentous decree" came as a great beacon light of hope to fans all over Northeast Ohio...fans who had been suffering in the curse of never-ending mediocrity . It came as a breath of fresh air and with a lot of hope of ending a long period of futility.

But seven years later, a title still had not been won. Seven years later, the city of Cleveland is still strapped in the straitjacket of mediocrity and bound by the chains of futility. Seven years later, LeBron is weighed down by all of his futile attempts at a title after carrying a team and a city on his back. Seven years later, LeBron is still languished in the failures of his team and his broken promise to the city. So he came to the decision that he wanted to take his talents to South Beach, only to find himself exiled from his own land.

In a sense LeBron went to Miami to cash a check. When the architects of the Heat organization worked the system to put together that super team, they were signing a promissory note to which every team in the NBA would fall prey. This note was a promise of not 2.....not 3.....not 4.....not 5.....not 6.....not 7 titles would be guaranteed to the city, along with the unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

There was a prevailing sense flowing through the city of Miami that the decade belonged to them, so much so, that Flo-Rida released a theme song for them called We Already Won.

It is obvious today that LeBron has defaulted on this promissory note insofar as his teammates are concerned. Instead of honoring this sacred obligation, LeBron has given the people of South Beach a bad check; a check which has come back marked "insufficient funds."

But the media refuses to believe the bank of justice is bankrupt and that the system is broken. They refuse to believe that there are insufficient funds for LeBron in the great vaults of opportunity in the NBA. So King James goes back to Cleveland to cash this check- a check that is believed will give them upon demand an excess of trophies and a long reign as a champion.

We have also come to this hallowed spot to remind the media and America of the fierce urgency of now. This is no time to engage in the luxury of cooling off or to take the tranquilizing drug of instant gratification.

Now is the time to make real the promises of a championship. Now is the time for LeBron to lift his team up from the dark and desolate valley of mediocrity to the sunlit path of becoming a champion. Now is the time for LeBron to lift his city from the quicksands of sports futility to the solid rock of sports history. But now will not be the time this is made a reality for all of Cleveland's citizens.

It would be fatal for the NBA and the media to overlook the current champions and guarantee a title for the Cavaliers. This long-suffering by the city of Cleveland will not pass until there is an enormous amount of humbling as well as certain sacrifices being made. Two thousand fourteen was not a new beginning, but a continuation. Those who hoped that LeBron needed to blow off steam and will now be content will have a rude awakening if the Cavaliers return to business as usual. There will be neither rest nor tranquility in Cleveland until the city is granted its championship trophy. The whirlwinds of revolt will continue to shake the foundations of the city until the bright day of justice emerges.

I say to you today, my friends, so even though we face the difficulties of a tacked Western Conference, I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the city's championship dreams.

I have a dream that one day my teammates will rise up and show everybody what it is to have the heart of a champion and prove this mantra to be true: "We hold these truths to be self-evident; that this team was not created equal."

I have a dream that one day on the lakefront of Cleveland the families of the players, former players and the families of current and former Cavalier executives will be able to sit down together at the table of championhood. I have a dream that one day even the city of Cleveland, a city sweltering with the heat of an empty trophy case, sweltering with the heat of oppression from the West, will be transformed into an oasis of trophies and parades.

I have a dream that my teammates will one day live in a city where they will not be judged by their failures on the court but by the clutchness of their games.

I have a dream today.

I have a dream that one day down on the lakefront in Cleveland, with our sports curse lifted, with our fans having been starved for a championship, that one day we would be united as one in the city and celebrate this monumental breakthrough.

I have a dream today.

I have a dream that one day every Cavaliers player shall be exhalted, every coach and every executive shall be held in high esteem, the city will be made billions of dollars, and the economy will be made thriving, and the glory of LeBron will result in me becoming a billionaire athlete, and all flesh shall see it together.

This is my hope. This is the faith that I came back to Cleveland with. With this faith we will be able to hew out of the mountain of despair a stone of hope. With this faith we will be able to transform the ongoing futility of our franchise into an organization with a storied history.

With this faith we should be able to work together, to play together, to win together, to be on parade floats together, knowing that we will be champions multiple times over one day. And if Cleveland is to be a great city, this must come true. Let the ring bling from every ring finger on every hand in our organization. All day every day, let the ring bling.

And when this happens, after we have skull-drugged whoever came out of the West and I rack up another Finals MVP, we let it bling from every alley and every block, from every neighborhood in Northeast Ohio, we will be able to speed up that day when me, Uncle Drew, K-Love, J.R., and the rest of the squad, even Coach Blatt will be able to join hands at the end and sing We Are The Champions.

Ring at last?? Ring at last?? Will LeBron Almighty finally win them a ring at last?

The Great Non-Call

The Great Non-Call

1/8/15


This is the story in the sports world that just won't go away. Sadly, this one incident is completely overshadowing the job the Cowboys did in overcoming lots of adversity in their comeback win over the Lions. By making it about that one play, you actually discredit the whole game. If the Lions had won the game, this non-call would be an afterthought. After having this incident thrown back in my face over and over by a few Lions fans and seeing the replay of it from several different angles, I decided to put my 2 cents in.

Here's my take on the (non) pass interference call:

My opinion is not popular, but I don't think the flag should have ever been thrown in the first place. First of all, here's what people don't want to talk about: Matt Stafford made a terrible throw. The ball hit the linebacker in the middle of the back, in the numbers, so it was never going to be caught. Why didn't he lead his tight end? Why didn't he look at the defender's backside and throw it there? I'll tell you why: his other receivers were covered and he didn't have anywhere else to go, and he figured that if he threw it at the defender, he could draw a pass interference call. In other words, he was looking to get bailed out by the refs for a bad throw. The refs are there to manage the game, keeping it fair and honest, not to bail QBs out for bad throws. The non call wouldn't have even been in play if the QB threw a better ball. Instead of throwing it at the defender's back, he should have threw it farther and over him.

The bad throw was the first issue. The 2nd issue with the non call was that tight end Brandon Pettigrew actually pushed off twice. I heard a few analysts say that defensive holding should have been called too, but what about the defender having his face mask grabbed? They also said that linebacker Anthony Hitchens didn't locate the ball, but made contact with the receiver who was looking back and playing the ball. If you look at the play from all angles, you see that there was very little contact, and that the TE engaged the contact first. The majority of the contact from the LB was him trying to get the TE's hand off of his face mask. Their bodies don't necessarily collide, and for everybody that said Anthony Hitchens was face guarding.......there is no such thing in the NFL. There were a few things that could have been called on that play, but if defensive pass interference was called, all the refs would have been doing is bailing the Lions out on a bad throw-a pass that never even had a chance of being caught.

I have also heard just as many gripes about Dez Bryant not getting flagged for going on the field without a helmet. I'm here to tell you that it was a dead ball, which means it not an automatic penalty for players stepping on the field in that situation. People are getting it confused with this:

Rule 12, Section 3, Article 1 (j) prohibits "removal of a helmet by a player in the field of play or the end zone during a celebration or demonstration or during a confrontation with a game official or any other player."


This is the rule that's in question, but it defines an infraction as a player in the field of play, as in "involved in the play". Players and coaches go on the field from the sidelines in every game, referees ask them to step back, and if the player or coach doesn't leave the field in a timely manner, then they can be flagged. When Dez went out on the field, a ref asked him to leave, and he did. It's a judgement call that's left up to the refs, and they felt that because Dez obeyed when he was told to go back to the sideline, it didn't warrant a flag. If they automatically flagged everybody that crossed the white line during a dead ball, they would be throwing flags all day long just for that.

Since we want to talk about "home cooking" for the Cowboys and all the missed calls they got away with, what about all the calls the refs missed against the Lions? 

For example:

1.) The Cowboys got flagged for offensive pass interference when our receiver was PUSHED into another defender.

2.) Tony Romo's helmet got slapped more than once.

3.) Dez Bryant got pushed down in their red zone after he beat his man, and if he doesn't trip, it would have been a touchdown.

4.) The Lions got away with running into Chris Jones, the Cowboys' punter.

5.) Jason Witten got mugged on one route and never got a flag for it. As a matter of fact, the ref pulled it out and started to throw it, then put it back in his pants.

6.) The Lions even had a receiver setting an illegal pick and get away with it.


At the end of the day, the entire game was horribly officiated for both teams. There were a lot of blatant missed holds as well as other things for both teams. As a matter of fact, there has never been, or ever will be a game that is perfectly officiated. It's obvious that the refs screwed up on The Great Non-Call, and at best there was a mechanics breakdown. In other words, the call should have never been announced and then overturned. I already gave my opinion on the call, but I'll leave it up to the "experts" and the NFL to determine whether they ultimately got the call right or wrong. One thing I do want to make clear is this:

That screw-up by the refs DID NOT determine the outcome of the game.


The players and coaches determined the outcome on their own. Lions fans (and non-Cowboys fans) want to blame the 3rd team on the field, the referees, for another Lions playoff loss. They would be wrong in doing that. The refs didn't have a perfect game, but neither did the Detroit Lions, which brings me to my next point:

Too many people believe that The Great Non-Call was outcome-determinative for the game as a whole. Let's ignore the fact that Tony Romo was clutch down the stretch, the Cowboys were more aggressive, and had better adjustments in the 2nd half. Let's also ignore the fact that the Lions coaching staff froze like a deer in headlights......but the pass interference no-call was the difference in the game? C'mon man!! The Lions had 67 plays on offense, and they controlled 66 of them, and that ONE play end the game? So, you mean to tell me that the Lions didn't have a single play after that? After that play it was 4th and 1 at the Cowboys' 46 yard line.  You had Matt Stafford, Calvin Johnson, Reggie Bush, and Brandon Pettigrew.....some of the best players in the game.....4th and 1!! You don't have a play in your playbook that can get a yard?  C'mon man!! At that time the Lions led the game 20-17 with over 8 minutes left.....and decided not to go for it??? I can't imagine the Patriots punting in that same situation. If the Lions went for it and got that yard, and picked up 2 more first downs, more than likely they win the game.

The Lions had all the momentum, going up 14-0 in the first quarter, and even got their lead up to 20-7. They were dominating the game, only to give the momentum to the Cowboys in the 2nd half. The Lions only had 130 total yards in the 2nd half. People want to blame the refs, but what about the 3 turnovers, 8 penalties, and going 4-11 on 3rd down conversions? Call it what you want to, but the Lions still had control of the game. One more time.....4th and 1 at the Cowboys' 46, and instead of trying to get that yard they gave the ball back to that explosive Cowboys offense. Not only did they not go for it, but they even took a delay of game penalty to get a better spot for their punter. It turns out that the spot didn't matter, because the punt only went 10 yards. In other words, HE SHANKED IT!! What it all comes down to is that the Lions didn't trust their offense, that's why they didn't go for it.

Now let's give the Cowboys some credit for what they did to win the game. They won the battle of coaching adjustments, they converted several huge 3rd downs and an enormous 4th down. Speaking of that 4th down, I have to give some MAJOR props to Tony Romo and Jason Witten for the adjustments they had to make on that play.....to Witten for making the adjustment to get open and to Romo for waiting on him to get open and not forcing it. The Lions defender undercut the route to take it away, and Witten had to make the adjustment to come back on the route. If he ran the route the way he normally runs it, he wouldn't have been open. I also have to give some credit to Jason Garrett for trusting his offense in that situation and having the courage to make that call. The Cowboys also outscored the Lions 17-3 in the 2nd half and held them to 130 yards of total offense.


Out of 67 plays, everybody wants to look at that ONE play and say the game was fixed, a conspiracy. This conspiracy stuff is just ludicrous. Why did the NFL "allow" the Cowboys to lose 3 straight win-or-go-home Week 17 games in a row if they wanted the Cowboys in the playoffs for ratings? Why would the refs use that one call to fix the game? Wouldn't they take points away from the Lions or give points to the Cowboys on a non-call or a bad call? While we're at it, if this game was really fixed why would the NFL suspend Ndamukong Suh, who is the Lions' best player on defense, and then turn around and let him play? Lions fans can go ahead and kid themselves that the refs took the game away from them, but the truth beyond that one play that's in question, is that the Lions came up short when they had chances to put the game away, while the Cowboys succeeded. That's the margin between victory and defeat.

Let me put it to you another way:

-The refs DID NOT cause the Lions to fold in the 2nd half.

-The refs DID NOT cause Jim Caldwell to punt instead of choosing to go for it on 4th down with the lead in Cowboys territory.

-The refs DID NOT cause that shankopotamus. (Shank you very much Sam Martin!!)

-The refs DID NOT cause Jason Witten to get open on 4th and 6.

-The refs DID NOT buy extra time for Tony Romo and Terrence Williams on that last TD pass.

-The refs DID NOT cause Matt Stafford to fumble TWICE on his final drive.



At the end of the day, one team overcame bad officiating and the other team didn't. The bottom line is that the Cowboys still had to make plays and the Lions still had to collapse. By not trusting their offense and choosing to punt in Cowboys territory, where a TD would have iced the game, they were playing not to lose. Given the whole situation, there was every reason in the world for them to try to get that one yard. The Lions converted 10 4th down conversions in the regular season, which was tied for 2nd most in the NFL. Their chances of winning the game skyrocket if you get that yard, and if not you have the #2 defense in the league, which is more than capable of getting a stop. Besides, you are on the road against a heavy favorite, so you have to take some chances if you want to win the game. The non-call has nothing to do with that.

Even if non-Cowboys fans are 100% right and all those calls went against the Lions, it wouldn't have mattered if they had the ability to hold on to that double-digit lead. The Lions fell off a 14-story building, but instead of anybody talking about how it happened, everybody is complaining that maybe things would be different if the building had been 12 stories. The Lions had plenty of chances to make that controversial non-call irrelevant. One more thing, the Lions would have had a bye this past week and hosted a Wild Card winner if they would have won their regular season finale against the Packers. This might be a stretch, but when you go on the road in the playoffs in any sport, you should expect a little bit more adversity. The Lions could have avoided all of that. 

I'm not trying to come across as an arrogant or biased Cowboys fan, but that's just how I see it. The controversy of The Great Non-Call will last a long time, and it will overshadow what was otherwise a good game. It will eat away with the Lions and their fans, but it definitely wasn't the entire reason for the outcome of the game.

The Underrated Greatness Of Emmitt Smith - Part 7

The Underrated Greatness Of Emmitt Smith - Part 7

For the final part of this series, I will be covering the 1993 season, which defined the player Emmitt Smith was and the legend he is today. Before I go into that, I want to set it up by talking about Emmitt's holdout, which defined how the Cowboys operated at that time. The holdout in 1993 was actually Emmitt's 2nd holdout, and it was even longer and more dragged out than the one in 1990, and neither of them had to be that way. Emmitt became a restricted free agent after his 3-year contract expired after the 1992 season, meaning the Cowboys could match any offer he got from another team.

Here is how the holdout started:

To make a long story short, Jerry Jones tried to pull a fast one and lowball Emmitt on a contract offer, and then Emmitt got angry and started looking at other options. For Emmitt's first move, he and his agent Richard Howell set up a meeting with the Miami Dolphins, but head coach Don Shula was convinced that the meeting was a ploy to force the Cowboys' hand, so he cancelled the meeting. After that, Emmitt and his agent contacted every other team in the league, offering them the chance to sign a 24-year old running back going into his prime, and nobody bit. There was a feeling around the league that Jerry would make Emmitt the franchise player and match the offer, so there were no offers. One GM even told Richard Howell that they would offer Emmitt $4 million a year, but there was no point because he knew Jerry Jones would match the offer. I remember Richard Howell saying back then that if Emmitt didn't get signed by the 3rd game of the season, that it wouldn't  get done. He also said that he thought Emmitt would sit out the whole season and then things would open up in 1994, and then some other teams would come around.

On May 14, 1993 Jerry Jones made Emmitt what he said was his "final take-it-or-leave-it offer", which was a ridiculously insulting contract WITHOUT a signing bonus and incentives that had annual salaries of $2 million, $2.2 million, $2.2 million, and $2.5 million. Then Jerry told Richard Howell "That's all you'll get, not a penny more." When Emmitt turned down the offer, Jerry Jones took offense to it and called Richard Howell a greed-obsessed agent out to take advantage of a client, which was hypocrisy in its highest form. How could Jerry Jones call somebody else greedy when he had just raised ticket prices for the upcoming season by 23%, then a few weeks later arranged an under-the-table deal that would give him 20% of every piece of Apex One-produced Cowboys apparel sold by JCPenny. That agreement went squarely against the NFL's CBA, and was rooted in greed.

The more the holdout progressed, the more arrogant Jerry got and the more determined he was to handle this situation on his terms. Here are a couple of quotes from Jerry to support that:

"I'd walk across Texas for five dollars."

"Emmitt Smith is a luxury, not a necessity for the Cowboys."


Let me attempt to put this in perspective:

In 3 years Emmitt Smith was instrumental in turning the Cowboys into a Super Bowl champion from a 1-15 team. How much is that worth? He also made 3 Pro Bowls, won consecutive rushing titles, and became the first running back to lead the NFL in rushing and win the Super Bowl in the same season. How much is that worth? Emmitt Smith was the dominant player on the field at EVERY level he played on. How much was that worth? The dominant player on the field wanted to be paid like the dominant player on the field, or else he wouldn't be on the field. It's one thing for a player to not perform to the standards of his contract, but it was the exact opposite for Emmitt in 1993.....he outplayed his contract. He was supposed to earn a base salary of around $500,000 in 1993, but realistically how could you expect a man that was the workhorse on a Super Bowl-winning team and leading the NFL in rushing 2 years in a row to settle for a salary that doesn't line up with his impact on the field and worth to the team?

In the 1993 NFL draft, the Cowboys selected Derrick Lassic in the 4th round as an insurance policy and to be Emmitt's backup. He didn't have a lot of expectations put on him, but as the preseason went on and Emmitt's holdout no closer to ending, he became the starting running back for the Cowboys. It was also a long season for Lassic, who spent most of it as Jimmy Johnson's target, and he came to strongly resent the head coach. The local media was hard on him as well.

Check out what Ed Werder wrote in the August 20, 1993 edition of the Dallas Morning News:

This is what Derrick Lassic is not:

He is not the first running back to win the league rushing title and the Super Bowl championship in the same season. He is not the Cowboys' running back with the chance to win three successive NFL rushing crowns. He is not the player who set Cowboys records for yards and touchdowns in a season last year. He is not the player who is missing training camp for the second time in four seasons.

Derrick Lassic is not Emmitt Smith.


Derrick Lassic was innocent in this whole situation, but he paid a significant price. In his first game as a pro (against the Redskins), he actually played well, gaining 75 yards on 16 carries against one of the league's better defenses. He blocked adequately for Troy Aikman, ran precise routes, and did what he was told. But the Cowboys' offensive line wasn't blocking with the intensity or the efficiency as the year before. The whole situation was unfair to Derrick Lassic.

On September 4, Richard Howell called Jerry Jones to ask for a trade to a team that would pay Emmitt what he wanted, and Jerry told him that it was totally out of the question. Two days later, the Cowboys lost 35-16 to the Redskins on opening day, and that's when things got real. At first glance, it looked like the Cowboys without Emmitt were just a mediocre team, but the truth was much deeper than that. The real underlying issue was the shattered team morale. While Emmitt stayed away, Jerry spoke openly and eagerly about renegotiating Troy Aikman's contract, which still had 2 years left on it, as well as a couple of other key players.

After being manhandled by the Redskins on opening day, the bottom fell out in Week 2, when the Buffalo Bills beat the Cowboys 13-10 in a rematch of Super Bowl XXVII, thanks to a game-saving interception by Matt Darby. It also didn't help that Lin Elliott missed 2 field goals (he was cut 2 days later), and Derrick Lassic gained 52 yards on 19 carries and fumbled twice. Even the fans were agitated at that point, which was obvious by the signs they were holding up across the stadium, urging Jerry to sign Emmitt. The other memorable moment from that day was Charles Haley storming into the locker room after the game and screaming "We'll never win with this rookie!!", then slamming his helmet into the wall. It wasn't Derrick Lassic's fault that Emmitt was still unsigned, but to him it felt that way. It's one thing for the fans not to show class, but it had to cut him to the core to hear a teammate say something like that. He only heard it from person, but he couldn't help but wonder what everybody else was thinking. 

I remember Mike Ditka, who was a part of the NBC crew at that time, being Emmitt's biggest supporter from the media. He was adamant on the NBC Postgame show that day about the Cowboys signing Emmitt. I still  remember this exact quote from him, "If the Cowboys don't want to go back to the Super Bowl, don't pay Emmitt Smith." That loss to Buffalo meant everything to the Cowboys, and I believe that was the only way they would get their whole team back. If they didn't lose that game, I don't think Emmitt would have been signed. On September 16, Jerry Jones broke down and signed Emmitt to a 4-year, $13.6 million contract, making him the highest paid running back in the NFL at that time. It made my day when I found out that Emmitt had signed the contract. I remember telling a few of my 8th grade classmates at school the next day, "It's on now, the Cowboys are going back to the Super Bowl!!" The Cowboys beat the Cardinals 17-10 in Emmitt's first game back. Even though he was a non factor (8 carries for 45 yards) in that game, with his return came hope, as well as a huge emotional lift that would carry the Cowboys for the rest of the season. Even though the Cowboys lost a few free agents from the year before, the only striking difference from the Super Bowl champion and 0-2 Cowboys was Emmitt.

I don't even want to imagine how the 1993 season would have turned out if Emmitt would have sat out the whole year like he threatened to. Him being out proved that he was the most important player on the team, and probably in the league. As much as Emmitt is penalized for the supporting cast he had, he was the key to the offense and to the team. He was the most indispensable out of The Triplets. The Cowboys won games without Troy Aikman, and he was as good as it gets at QB, and a perfect fit for the team. But Steve Beuerlein got them to the playoffs in 1991. Bernie Kosar won some games for them, and even finished off the 1993 NFC Championship after Troy left early with a concussion. Rodney Peete and Jason Garrett have even stepped in and carried the load at QB and the Cowboys won. They even won without Michael Irvin to stretch the defense, but they couldn't win without Emmitt, especially in 1993. The offensive line had some maulers on it - players who could flat out dominate a defense, but it takes a great running back to set up good blocks and take an offense to the next level. Once the Cowboys got Emmitt back, they were dangerous again. It took him much longer than it should have to get his new contract. Jerry Jones learned the hard way that you don't mess with your superstars. You might be able to cut a couple of corners, but that's not one of them. That was evident by the Cowboys starting the season 0-2, then signing Emmitt and never looking back. They won 7 straight before losing 2 in a row when Emmitt got injured and wasn't 100% for either game.

Once again, 1993 was Emmitt's best season because just about everything that made him who he is happened that year. That season defined the player he was and the legend he is today, as well as proving his value to the Cowboys. Here is the best way to sum it all up:

Before 1993, no team had ever lost the first 2 games of the season and went on to win a Super Bowl. After Emmitt ended his holdout, he was an every-week constant for the Cowboys. He gained more than 100 yards in total offense in 10 of his 13 starts. He touched the ball 355 times and only fumbled twice. He ran for 1,486 yards, becoming only the 4th player in NFL history to win 3 straight rushing titles, and the first player to win a rushing title after missing the first 2 games. He averaged 114.2 yards in his last 12 games of 1993. A full season with that average would have put him at 1,827 yards. 

The Cowboys' staff worried sometimes that they were using Emmitt too much. Every time they made plans to rest him, a situation came up where they needed him. The was the case throughout his entire prime, not just 1993. The Cowboys finished the season with a 12-4 record. The reason they didn't finish 11-5 was because of Emmitt, who willed the team to a 16-13 overtime win in the season finale against the Giants after separating his shoulder in the 2nd quarter. Emmitt fought through obvious pain to run for 168 yards on 32 carries, and 10 catches for 61 yards and scored the Cowboys' only TD. He was the Cowboys' workhorse in overtime, leading to a game-winning field goal. In my opinion, this was the game that showed everybody that Emmitt was the most important player in the NFL. That was a game the Cowboys had to have because the outcome of that game meant the division title, a first round bye, and home field advantage throughout the playoffs. How much harder would it be to get to the Super Bowl on the road? The Cowboys went on to win their 2nd straight Super Bowl, and Emmitt became the first running back to win the rushing title, NFL MVP, and Super Bowl all in the same season.

Emmitt could have broke the rushing record much earlier than he did. The biggest obstacles in his career, especially in his early years, were Jerry Jones the contract negotiator and David Shula the play-caller. Both of Emmitt's holdouts cost him hundreds, if not a couple thousand yards, or at least enough yards for him to have the record 2 years earlier. During Emmitt's rookie year David Shula had a hard time trying to fit him into the offense. He only had 8 carries in his first 2 games, and didn't get his first 20-carry or 100-yard game until Week 5 against the Bucs. In 1990, they didn't give Emmitt the ball until halfway through the season because they didn't know what they had. In 1993, Emmitt spent his first 2 games trying to get in shape. He got his rhythm in his 3rd game. After that, he and the Cowboys never looked back. Emmitt had other great years, but none like the one he had in 1993. That year was all about him.

The Underrated Greatness Of Emmitt Smith - Part 6

The Underrated Greatness Of Emmitt Smith - Part 6


To me, it's mind-blowing that a running back of Emmitt Smith's caliber can be so underrated. It's almost impossible to have one of the greatest records in all of sports and all of the other accomplishments that Emmitt piled up and still be underrated, but that's exactly what he is. In my opinion, Emmitt is undoubtedly a top 3 all-time running back, and a case can be made for him as the greatest of all-time. What makes Emmitt underrated his that most "experts" have a hard time putting him in their top 3 and possibly top 5 all-time running backs list. 

It just blows me away that for whatever the reason is, Emmitt seems to be the only all-time great that gets penalized for the teammates he had. All great teams have MORE THAN ONE great player. You don't hear much of anything about wins coming so easily for Jim Brown, Joe Montana, or Jerry Rice because of the talent surrounding them.

The stigma is attached to Emmitt because:

1.) He is a Dallas Cowboy.
2.) He was always compared to Barry Sanders, and everybody falsely proclaimed that Barry was doing it all on his own.


All of the evidence proves the opposite, and Emmitt Smith is the only case you can say that about. Jerry Rice's team won the Super Bowl the year before he got there, and every year he was dominant he had a Hall Of Fame QB (see Joe Montana, Steve Young) throwing to him. Jim Brown's teams were always dominant, and he always had at least 3 Pro Bowl/Hall Of Fame linemen blocking for him.

Here is the evidence on Emmitt:

1.) Made The Cowboys A Winner

The Cowboys were the worst team in football in 1989 with a 1-15 record, then had a 6-game turnaround in 1990. The team wasn't a winner before him and haven't been without him.

2.) Made Everybody Around Him Better

The best example of this, is the fact that most of his offensive linemen were there years before he got there, even blocked for a prime Herschel Walker- still no Pro Bowl. Also, Troy Aikman and Michael Irvin would be the first to tell you that their careers didn't take off until Emmitt became their teammate.

3.) Most Important And Talented Player On One Of the GOAT Teams

The Cowboys won games without Troy Aikman or Michael Irvin, but not without Emmitt.

4.) Most Successful Running Back Of All-Time (Stats/Rings)

Emmitt was the most consistent and successful running back ever at every level. He is the only running back in the history of football to break the state rushing record in high school, the school record in college, and the NFL all-time rushing record.

5.) Enduring Greatness

After the Super Bowl years and Emmitt had slowed down, he had a bad line, the Cowboys had no other weapons on offense, defenses still sold out to stop him, and he still had the greatest post-30 football career of any running back in NFL history, not to mention his 2 years with the Cardinals.


Judging from the impact he had on his team, I don't know if there has ever been another running back in the history of the NFL that made as big a difference to his team's success as Emmitt Smith. In his 15 seasons in the NFL, he made an impact that few players can match at any position or any era. His impact was obvious even in high school. Before Emmitt got to Escambia High, the Gators had one winning season in the previous 18 years. Head coach Dwight Thomas, who got there the same year Emmitt did (1983), called the program "the most negative, apathetic, losing environment I've ever been in, ever." As soon as Emmitt got there, all of that changed. The Escambia Gators went 42-7 during Emmitt's 4 years at the school, winning the state championship in 1984 and 1985. Emmitt ran for over 100 yards in 45 out of his 49 games (still a national record), and left high school as the #2 all-time rusher in high school history with 8,804 yards and 106 touchdowns. Even today the yardage and touchdown totals are the third highest in national high school history. Emmitt also averaged 7.8 yards per carry and only fumbled 6 times.

Coach Dwight Thomas described his game plan that he had for Emmitt back then, "For four years we did 3 things, and won 2 state championships doing them. Hand the ball to Emmitt, pitch the ball to Emmitt, throw the ball to Emmitt". Also, if the offensive line was the reason for his success, how do you explain the fact that Emmitt had 45 100-yard games in high school? He was named the High School Player Of The Century in the state of Florida, ahead of several players who are already in the Pro Football Hall Of Fame. Not to sound ignorant or disrespectful, but how many HOFers did Emmitt have on high high school line? Unless I just wasn't paying attention, I never once heard anything about any of Emmitt's high school linemen even making it to the NFL, let alone the HOF.

After high school, Emmitt went on to conquer college football at the University Of Florida the same way he did in high school. He was all Florida had going for them when he was there, almost single-handedly keeping the football program afloat after all of the trouble the school was in from those NCAA violations in the early 80's. The Gators had a lot of gambling scandals, NCAA investigations, and crippling scholarship sanctions. They went to 3 bowl games in Emmitt's 3 years (Aloha, All-American, Freedom), and all 3 of those particular bowls are now defunct. Without Emmitt, Florida wouldn't have even been to THOSE bowl games. They only reason they even got invited was because Emmitt was a national draw. The Gators' whole game plan was to try to keep the game close with defense and hope Emmitt got hot. In 1987, an undermanned Florida team went 6-6, and in the following NFL draft, no Florida player got drafted in the first 5 rounds.

In his very first game as a Florida freshman against Alabama, Emmitt ran for 224 yards on 39 carries, a single-game rushing record for Florida that had stood for 40 years. He finsished the 1987 season with 1,341 yards and 13 touchdowns, and was voted SEC Freshman Of The Year and National Freshman Of The Year. Emmitt also finished 9th in the Heisman Trophy balloting, which is almost unheard of for a freshman. It was only the 2nd time that a freshman had made the top 10.

In 1988, Lynn Amedee took over as offensive coordinator at Florida, and inherited Emmitt and 2 unproven quarterbacks. With disasterous results, he tried to install a passing offense. At the time, UF had just signed Willie McClendon, a promising freshman RB out of Jacksonville. Coach Amedee told the Florida press that McClendon was bigger and faster, and would make fans forget about Emmitt. That's not quite how it worked out. Emmitt started the 1988 season strong until his knee injury against Memphis State. The Gators started the season 5-0 with Emmitt leading them, lost the game he got injured in, as well as the next 3 he wasn't able to play in. 

Emmitt managed to stay healthy for his junior year, finishing with 1,599 yards and 14 touchdowns. He even shattered his own previous single-game rushing record he set during his freshman year with a 316-yard game against New Mexico. Emmitt finished the 1989 season in 7th place in the Heisman Trophy balloting. He finished his college career with 3,928 yards and 36 touchdownd, along with 58 school records in just 3 seasons. He was also named All-American and All-SEC 3 times. Emmitt skipped his senior year to enter the 1990 NFL Draft, mainly because of concern about his role in new Florida coach Steve Spurrier's reportedly pass-first offense. Emmitt was inducted into both the Gator Football Ring Of Honor and the College Football Hall Of Fame in 2006.


In Emmitt's 3 years at Florida, 7 of his offensive teammates were drafted:

-David Williams (1)

-Ernie Mills (3)
-Stacey Simmons (4)
-Cedric Smith (5)
-Bob Sims (6)
-Kerwin Bell (7)
-Tony Lomack (9)

As for Emmitt's offensive line in college, 2 of his linemen were drafted, but only one of them made it, and that was David Williams. He played 9 years with the Oilers and Jets. No Florida player did more with less than Emmitt Smith.


Emmitt has had a few coaches along the way who have failed to recognize his greatness. Coming out of college he was projected as a change of pace running back who, after some seasoning, could get maybe 15 carries a game. He didn't compare (in the scouts' eyes) to Penn State running back Blair Thomas (bigger, faster, stronger), who was drafted 2nd overall by the Jets. Jimmy Johnson actually wanted defense, but scout Walt Yarowski and running backs coach Joe Brodsky were able to convince him to draft Emmitt. The Cowboys were 1-15 the year before he got there. Jimmy Johnson was the butt of a lot of jokes and viewed as a college coach out of his element, Troy Aikman was a tackling dummy behind an offensive line that gave him no protection, and Michael Irvin missed a chunk of the season with a serious knee injury.

Before Emmitt was drafted, Terrence Flagler was traded to the Cowboys from the 49ers a few days before the draft. He was cut at the end of camp, around the time Emmitt got there after ending his holdout. With Emmitt holding out in 1990, the Cowboys' top running back in camp was Timmy Smith, the same running back that ran for 204 yards in Super Bowl XXII playing for the Redskins. With Timmy Smith not working out for them, the Cowboys eventually got desperate and sent 2 draft picks to the Oilers for fullback Alonzo Highsmith, who played for Jimmy Johnson in college. He wasn't the same after 2 arthroscopic knee surgeries.

Once Emmitt ended his holdout, he instantly bolstered the Cowboys' running game, giving them the threat they lacked after trading Herschel Walker. Troy Aikman was starting to come around, but was still raw, as evidenced by his 66.6 QB rating. Michael Irvin caught 20 passes after coming back from knee surgery. Back then, nobody was talking about Emmitt being on a stacked team full of Hall Of Fame players and All-Pro linemen. The Cowboys finished the 1990 season with a 7-9 record, with Emmitt being their only Pro Bowler. 

As far as which running back made the biggest impact in the NFL in his career, I would definitely have to choose Emmitt. There is more to the story than what stats alone could possibly tell, especially since they don't always reflect the contribution or value of a player to his team, but at the same time numbers don't lie. In my opinion, Emmitt Smith is the most productive and most important running back in NFL history. No running back has ever contributed to the success of their team like Emmitt did. No franchise rode a back harder, longer, or to as many championships as the Cowboys did with Emmitt. No running back has accomplished more. That's why a case can be made for Emmitt as the best running back of all-time. Let the "experts" tell it, a 5'9" running back that runs a 4.5 in the 40 is not supposed to be an NFL star, but now Emmitt has the most prestigious record in football. One other thing I want to point out is that the rushing record is the hardest to get because a running back has to go through a lot of defenses selling out to stop him, along with staying healthy. To me, that's pretty convincing. I was lucky enough to grow up watching Emmitt Smith and Barry Sanders, and even though I'm not old enough to have seen Jim Brown play, I have seen a bunch of his highlights and heard personal accounts from several people at NFL Films who all have basically said that he was a monster. I would easily have Emmitt Smith, Barry Sanders, Jim Brown, and Walter Payton as the top 4 running backs ever, and not necessarily in that order. A case can be made for all of them as the best ever.

Emmitt Smith was everything you want in a running back. He was the epitome of a complete running back. He was tough as nails, a warrior (with durability only matched by Walter Payton and Jim Brown), a ferocious blocker, a lethal receiver out of the backfield, and if he had an open lane, most likely he would be adding another football to the collection in his storage room. He was also the Cowboys' best 3rd down back, best goal line back, and best pass protector.....in the good and bad years. Emmitt was also one of those runners who had that something special that you can't really explain. Even though Emmitt played on stacked teams full of Pro Bowlers, his accomplishments should not be diminished. I never heard of anybody penalizing Joe Montana or Jerry Rice for playing on stacked teams. Also, that Bill Walsh-inspired West Coast offense they played in transformed Steve Young into a Hall Of Famer from a backup quarterback. 

So many people have a hard time acknowledging that Emmitt was a very special running back. He made it look easy, and so many people took it for granted. There is a reason the Cowboys could never win without him in the '90s. I'm not taking anything away from Troy Aikman or Michael Irvin, or anybody else from Emmitt's supporting cast, but the offense was completely different without Emmitt. He was the key to the offense running so smoothly. Nobody knows for sure what Emmitt's prime would have looked like without that supporting cast. I won't argue that he would still be the NFL all-time leading rusher if he had switched places with Walter Payton or Barry Sanders. I also won't deny that he benefited from some good fortune......which ALL record holders do. All I'm saying is that Emmitt is one of the very best running backs in the history of not just the NFL, but football period.

Emmitt had arguably the greatest 5-year run of any player, regardless if position, in NFL history from '91 to '95. He won 4 rushing titles, becoming the first player to post 5 consecutive seasons of more than 1,400 yards rushing. The Cowboys won a record 3 Super Bowls in 4 seasons, and Emmitt became the first rushing champion to be on a Super Bowl-winning team. He was the league MVP and Super Bowl MVP in 1993. At that point, he was just starting a streak that would make him the first player in NFL history to rush for 1,000 yards in 11 straight seasons and the first to pass 1,000 yards that many times in his career.

The fact that Emmitt Smith's resume is full of the words first, most, greatest, and record-breaking still doesn't impress a whole lot of these "experts" who crave flashier and more dynamic players. Just to show how important Emmitt was to his team's success, I want to share these numbers:

-The Cowboys/Cardinals were 65-18 in the regular season when Emmitt rushed for over 100 yards.

-The Cowboys/Cardinals were 101-26 when Emmitt had at least 20 carries.

-The Cowboys were 5-0 in the postseason when Emmitt rushed for over 100 yards, and 8-2 when he had at least 20 carries.


Once again, Emmitt Smith has a compelling case for being the greatest running back of all-time, and is easily top 3 all-time. For the final part of this series, I will be covering the 1993 season, which defined the player he was and the legend he is today.

The Underrated Greatness Of Emmitt Smith - Part 5

The Underrated Greatness Of Emmitt Smith - Part 5


In Part 5 of this series, I'll be covering 2002, the year Emmitt broke the NFL all-time rushing record, and in my opinion his toughest year as a Cowboy - for many reasons that have nothing to do with production. I'll also even talk a little bit about his 2 years with the Cardinals.


Before the season even started, Emmitt had to deal with the stories hanging over his head about being his last year as a Cowboy, no matter how many yards he got, that he was too old and expensive to keep in 2003. There was also the story of Emmitt's playing time decreasing after he broke the NFL all-time rushing record. With him being so close to an unparalleled achievement, having yet to gain a single yard, the timing of these stories couldn't have been worse. The worst part about it was that those stories picked up momentum after nobody from the front office came out and denied them, which left a dark cloud over the pursuit of the record. Cowboys fans everywhere, especially people in Dallas, should not only have been proud of Emmitt, but also supportive without hesitation, because he was the only real thing the Cowboys and their fans had to cheer for that year. That wasn't the case because people were too busy trying to put Emmitt out to pasture to treasure what they witnessed. Him still being a Cowboy after all those years had to count for something. That was the thanks Emmitt got after after all he did for the Cowboys. 

Emmitt carried much more than the football in 2002. He was still carrying the team on his back, but now he was also carrying the team's marketing campaign, which was built around him breaking the record. The record chase came at a good time for the Cowboys because it was tough to sell tickets for any kind of entertainment, let alone a football game, in a bad economy. It also didn't help that the Cowboys hadn't been a playoff team for a few years. The season ticket campaign focused on Emmitt. Letters and brochures emphasized the "once in a lifetime opportunity to witness NFL history", and the season tickets had a different picture of Emmitt every week.

The media relations department's thinking was that they wanted to remind people that they had a chance to witness a significant piece of history. The NFL all-time rushing record was/is a milestone worthy of a season-long celebration, a celebration of Emmitt's career up to that point. It wasn't about when he broke the record, the team he broke it against, or if he broke it at all. It's dangerous to build your whole marketing campaign around one player, but at the same time, the pursuit of the rushing record was too big to ignore. That's a big part of why the team was encouraging fans to be at the games that season, even if they didn't go to the game when Emmitt broke the record. The St. Louis Cardinals did the same thing in 1998 when Mark McGwire broke the single season home run record. The Cardinals set attendance records that season, a year they didn't make the playoffs. The team wasn't good, but the fans still wanted to be there. They knew it was a good chance that they wouldn't be there for the record-breaking home run, but they could still say, "I was there for #23." or "I saw his first home run of the season." People like to keep track of things like that.



2002 - Emmitt's Toughest Season As A Cowboy

Carrying a team and its whole marketing campaign on your back is plenty hard enough, but when the team is as bad as the 2002 Cowboys were, it's even more of an uphill battle if you are the team's most dependable weapon. Just to put this in perspective, let me paint a picture for you.

Here is a defensive coordinator's mindset going against the Cowboys in 2002:

Neither of their quarterbacks worry me. Quincy Carter is erratic. Chad Hutchinson is greener than a cucumber. There is no hint whatsoever of a receiving threat at tight end.

The receivers are not much better. They have a rookie (Antonio Bryant) that's talented, but undisciplined with a selfish streak. Joey Galloway has no stomach for routes over the middle, and the rest of them are forgettable. They all run undependable pass routes.

The offensive line is pitiful, the fullback is horrible, and the kicking game is a disaster. What's left? Their only proven source of ball movement and most dependable weapon is Emmitt Smith. I'll design my defense to stop him. At the first sign of trouble, their play caller gives up on Emmitt. That plays right into my strategy since the Cowboys can't beat me passing. Stop Emmitt, and the game is ours.


That same strategy could have also been used in 2000 and 2001 to beat the Cowboys. The biggest difference in 2002 from the 2 previous seasons, is that the Cowboys replaced Jack Reilly with Bruce Coslet at offensive coordinator. Even with that change, a lot of the reasons I listed in Part 4 for the running game struggles were the same.

Here are the reasons the Cowboys' running game struggled in 2002:

1.) New Offense
2.) New Blocking Scheme
3.) No Respect For The Passing Game
4.) Too Many 8-Man Fronts
5.) Too Many Mental Mistakes
6.) Terrible Blocking
7.) Injuries
8.) Constant Shuffling Of The Offensive Line (a result of injuries)
9.) Defenses used run blitzes and stunts to plug up the middle and force Emmitt to the outside.
10.) There seemed to be more emphasis on evaluating players than winning games.
11.) Reluctance At Times To Use The Running Game

Once again, Emmitt had nowhere to run in 2002. Physically, I thought he looked as good as he did 10 years earlier, it was the offensive line that wasn't getting it done, which was the biggest reason for Emmitt's struggles. The line didn't play well as a unit, even when it was healthy, and there were some noticeable individual flaws with them: Flozell Adams (LT) was playing too high, Larry Allen (LG) wasn't finishing people off the way he used to, rookie center Andre Gurode looked lost in the middle, and Kelvin Garmon (RG) and Solomon Page (RT) were repeatedly getting beat on stunts that they should have been able to handle with no problem. By the 3rd game of the season, which was a loss in Philadelphia, things went from bad to worse. Larry Allen missed the game with a bad ankle, Kelvin Garmon left the game with a leg injury, Solomon Page moved over to RG, and Javiar Collins, who was a converted defensive lineman, moved to RT, giving the Cowboys a patchwork offensive line. Emmitt still managed to get 4.7 yards on 11 carries. The Cowboys went through one 4-game stretch where they didn't use the same 5 starters at the same position on the offensive line. At that time, Flozell Adams was the only lineman on the field who went into training camp as a starter. They used a total of 9 different starting combinations in 11 games. Emmitt had to get a lot of his yards on his own, making it that much more impressive that he averaged 3.8 yards per carry in 2002.

Even in his 13th season, Emmitt still had that burst that allowed him to glide through the hole and make defenders miss. If it was nothing there, he stuck his head into the line and carried people, it still took more than one man to bring him down, and he was still a strong pass protector. Even at 33, Emmitt should have still been dominating and routinely putting up 100-yard games, but there was a breakdown that kept him from breaking loose on almost every play. A big part of that was the offensive line (when it was healthy) underachieving. Emmitt also had to change his running style the last couple of years he was a Cowboy. His strength was running between the tackles, but because of the struggles in the middle of the offensive line, he had to change his style and develop himself as an outside runner......not a burner, but being more patient and waiting for the line to establish their blocks.

As far back as 2000, defenses were stacking the line against Emmitt because the receivers were hopeless, and he still got 1,203 yards. In 2001, there was still only Emmitt, because the quarterbacks were a mess and the passing game was a disaster. He still got 1,021 yards, even though he missed 2 games, against a stacked deck for the season. Even in 2002, Emmitt wasn't exactly running on fumes. He was much better than he was able to show, but the lack of a passing game made it hard to get a credible evaluation of how much he had left in the tank. His numbers were down, and he didn't get 1,000 yards, but look at the team around him. Like I said earlier, he played with 2 inexperienced quarterbacks, a bad offensive line, and another new offense. He never complained or pointed fingers at anybody. Emmitt was still an All-Pro running back capable of carrying a team to the playoffs with all the elements around him. He would have been a clear upgrade over the starting running back for at least 11 teams that year. The problem was that the salary cap kept most teams from surrounding their running backs with Pro Bowl-caliber linemen, quarterbacks, and receivers. Teams needed a running back who could create big plays without great blocking.

Emmitt was an exceptional talent on an ordinary team, which is the biggest reason those last few hundred yards to break the rushing record were so hard to come by. Running backs don't break records like that on their own. They need an effective offensive line to open holes for them and an effective quarterback to keep the defense from keying on them. Emmitt had neither of those, and that's why it took so long for him to break the record. At 33 years old and after everything he had accomplished, there had to be a willingness other than records to keep Emmitt going. The first thing to go because of age is not your legs or physical agility, it's your willingness to take the hit to gain yards, hit the hole hard, knowing you might only get 3 yards, but have to pay a price to get those yards. Of course, Emmitt still had that willingness. And let's not forget that running back is the hardest position in football to stay healthy, especially in the NFL.

Emmitt would have been better off playing for a team that was built to get the most from his talent. He deserved to build on his record with a team that could give him a chance to play for another Super Bowl ring. He was still a long way from being washed up. It was the lack of talent around Emmitt that put too much of a strain on him at that point in his career. The fact that he had gotten older and had played a significant amount of football emphasized the fact that he needed more help around him than before. He might not have been putting up MVP numbers, but he was still more than productive enough to prove that he wasn't just holding on for the rushing record. A lot of people have claimed to have evidence of Emmitt's decline with his yards totals going down, but his carries and touchdowns also went down. You can't use his individual numbers to try to gauge his impact. You have to look at all the elements of the situation.

In Emmitt's 13 years with the Cowboys, he played for 4 head coaches, 6 offensive coordinators, and played in 5 different offensive schemes (3 after Norv Turner left). He was the only constant. In his last year as a Cowboy, the team made the switch to Bruce Coslet, whose offense was a West Coast-style offense that had a running game built on off-tackle plays that establish the outside running game. Bruce Coslet should have lasted nowhere near as long as he did, and the 2002 season alone proved that he wasn't capable of putting together a game plan to highlight the running game. He only used it reluctantly. Here is an example: In the game against the Colts, who were ranked 31st in the NFL against the run, the running backs only had 15 carries for 64 yards (Emmitt 8-22, T-Ham 7-42). The Cowboys had a capable running game and an inexperienced quarterback. Coslet didn't stick with either running back once they got going. The game was still 6-3 early in the 4th quarter, and they ended up losing 20-3. Instead of questioning the play calling, Dave Campo just took the easy way out by saying they couldn't get the running game going.

Not only was Bruce Coslet hesitant with the running game, his system operated by rotating running backs. He believed that running backs didn't need to get into the rhythm of the game to be effective, which was his reason for rotating his backs. He would use one running back for 1st and 2nd downs, another one for 3rd down, another one for short yardage, and another one for goal line situations. I believe running backs do need touches to get into a rhythm and get stronger as the game goes on, which is hard for them to do with going in and out of the game and with limited carries. This is why I believe that Blair Thomas, the No. 2 overall pick in the 1990 draft, might not have been as big of a bust with the Jets as he appeared to be. It was more like his potential was drained by the Jets' offensive system. He was one of those backs that liked to get into the rhythm of the game. He said one year that he would need 250 carries to get 1,000 yards, but in the Jets' system under Bruce Coslet, there was no way a single running back would ever get 250 carries. 

If you want to make a case for Blair Thomas's struggles being a systematic problem, consider that 4 of the running backs picked in the 1990 draft after him (Emmitt Smith, Barry Foster, Rodney Hampton, Harold Green) had 1,000-yard or better seasons, and they all made the Pro Bowl in 1992. It's fair to say that those backs wouldn't have had the same success playing in Bruce Coslet's system. I think Blair Thomas was victimized most by untimely and nagging injuries, along with low confidence by constantly seeing himself referred to as a bust. The exception to the rule in Coslet's system was Corey Dillion, who emerged as the Bengals' best player when he took over for Ki-Jana Carter. Here's another damning fact about Bruce Coslet's track record: In 2002, the Cowboys failed to score more than 21 points in their first 10 games, and they were the NFL's lowest scoring offense.

Having to overcome all those elements and never complain or quit on the team says a lot about Emmitt's character. He had the burden of carrying a mediocre team for a city and franchise that are only happy with supremacy, carrying the team's marketing campaign, and people trying to run him out of town. Emmitt was in that paradox that so many great athletes have to deal with toward the end of their careers: Even as he was being celebrated for his run into history, he had teammates and coaches saying he wasn't the force he used to be, commentators wondered out loud if he was hurting the team, and fans thought his backup was better. As I pointed out in Part 4, even Emmitt's backup thought he was better than Emmitt. In other words, Troy Hambrick wanted Emmitt's job and said so out loud by saying that Emmitt should step aside. There have been feuds between teammates for as long as sports have been around, and there is added drama and hostility when you have 2 players competing for the same position. But when you have a 26-year old journeyman disrespecting a Hall Of Famer with 3 Super Bowl rings........that broke new ground. Emmitt's role changed after he broke the rushing record because the Cowboys wanted to evaluate Troy Hambrick. 

In Emmitt's last home game as a Cowboy, a late December game against the Eagles, he only had 8 carries for 30 yards. The team only finished with 146 total yards on offense that night. The real head-scratcher was when the Cowboys squandered their best chance to get in the end zone. They had a 1st and goal from the 9 - Emmitt got 6 yards on a carry, only for them to call 3 straight passing plays call after that, leading to a turnover on downs. The Cowboys made a HUGE mistake in not getting Emmitt his 1,000 yards in that game. Andy Reid didn't care about stopping Emmitt from getting his milestone, but Cowboys decided to keep throwing the ball against a team they knew they couldn't beat, for reasons nobody will ever know. In the season finale, the Redskins KNEW that the Cowboys would try to get Emmitt his 1,000 yards, and they were waiting for it. The coaches cost Emmitt his milestone and streak in another testament to stupidity. It was all VERY predictible. The coaching staff shot itself in the foot again, in a sorry end to a sorry season.

The Cowboys made a mistake by not bringing Emmitt back for the 2003 season. He was valuable to the chemistry and attitude of the team, and because of the leadership role that he played. Troy Hambrick was just a player that fit in, and that's about it. The Cowboys didn't have anybody on the team that could take Emmitt's place. The money could have been worked out, and he could still contribute. Emmitt could still hit the holes, and if they didn't feel like he was the breakaway threat he used to be, they should have found somebody to compliment him. It would be different if Emmitt couldn't play. He took care of himself, was in good shape, and he was better than what the Cowboys already had. It's not like Emmitt was getting shut down, he was limited by the Cowboys' play calling. 

I honestly thought Emmitt would be brought back at a reduced salary, allowing him to be the bridge to the future, but all of that changed the day Bill Parcells was hired. Emmtt was a big part of the shine returning to the Cowboys star, and he was cut to make way for a younger, cheaper running back. He had said since the 2001 season ended that he wanted to finish his career as a Cowboy and that he was willing to take a paycut to stay. Besides a paycut, Emmitt was told that he would have to come back as a backup. You can take money away from a great athlete and he might be cool with it, but not allowing him the chance to compete for his starting job is not acceptable. With all of Emmitt's credentials, there was no way his pride would allow him to accept sitting behind a player of inferior talent. I believe Jerry Jones was completely wrong with the way he treated Emmitt. Leaving Dallas was the last thing Emmitt wanted to do. Yes, he was 34 years old and his production wasn't what it was when he was the workhorse on the Super Bowl teams, but what about loyalty? What about the Cowboys pride and tradition that Jerry liked to brag about? Emmitt Smith practically gave his life to help the Cowboys win games for 13 years.

I felt like the Chiefs would have been a good fit for Emmitt since he wouldn't be back with the Cowboys. He would have been an insurance policy for them with Priest Holmes still recovering from his hip surgery, and he was threatening to hold out for a new contract. It would have been an easy transition for Emmitt since the Chiefs offense came from the old Don Coryell system, using a lot of the same language, terminology, and philosophy of Norv Turner's offense for the Cowboys. The Chiefs also had the best offensive line in the NFL at that time, and they played on grass.

The Cardinals were the best fit for what Emmitt wanted: "feature back" status, a healthy dose of carries, a chance to reach 20,000 yards. For what the Cardinals wanted, Emmitt was perfect. They signed him for more than what he could do on the field. Emmitt was signed by the Cardinals to be a mentor to the younger players, to help teach them how to win and help change the organization's losing culture, and to help sell tickets. Like I mentioned earlier, Emmitt's decline had more to do with the team's incompetence than his declining skills. Despite not having a passing attack to open up some running room for him, playing with the 3rd worst pass offense in 2002, Emmitt still managed to average 4.2 yards per carry. Apparently Dave McGinnis and running backs coach Johnny Roland felt the same way I did when they studied film of Emmitt from 2002 before the Cardinals signed him. They both saw the same thing I saw, a running back that was repeatedly stuck in traffic.

Here is a quote from Johnny Roland:

"When Dave asked me if we should sign Emmitt, I told him 'He gained 975 yards behind a terrible line, with no quarterback, and with defenses playing eight-man fronts all the time. Of course we should.'"

In all honesty, I don't think Emmitt did too bad of a job playing for the Cardinals either, especially given that situation and what he had to work with. Out of the top 15 all-time rushers at that time, 5 of them ended up with new teams, and every ending was ugly. O.J. Simpson spent 2 injury-riddled seasons with the 49ers in 1978 and 1979. Franco Harris had 68 forgettable carries for the Seahawks in 1984. Tony Dorsett, who like Emmitt was 34 when he left the Cowboys, had the best season out of the 5 running backs when he went to the Broncos in 1988 and had a 703-yard season. Eric Dickerson, playing for the Raiders in 1992 and the Falcons in 1993, rushed for only 820 yards over those 2 years. Thurman Thomas had 28 carries for the Dolphins in 2000 before blowing out his knee and retiring. In 2003 it looked like Emmitt was headed down that same path. He was having a so-so year until he got injured against the Cowboys and had to miss 6 games before coming back as a backup. In 2004, Emmitt's last season in the NFL, Dennis Green took over as head coach and put Emmitt back in the starting lineup. He responded with 937 yards rushing and 9 touchdowns, easily the most successful out of those star running backs who switched teams at the end of their career. Not bad for a 35-year old running back, and being part of an offense that was ranked 26th in the NFL.



I'll pick up Part 6 with the impact that Emmitt had with his teams on every level he played at.