Dallas 6, Philadelphia 44

In many ways, to me, this seems like a fitting end to this season. I mean, if you were going to break down this season into parts-how would you do so? My guess is part 1: offense carries an underperforming defense to wins, part 2: the purgatory period without romo ending with the defense stepping up, and then part 3: defense carries an underperforming offense. It should be noted that a woeful special teams was the one consistent through all three parts of the season (an entire season without a kick-off touchback?) So why then was this abortion of a game so fitting? Because we saw that woeful defense from the first part of the season paired with the woeful offense from the end combine to show you just how terrible this team can be when they are unmotivated, outcoached, undisciplined (though ironically, this may have been their least penalized game of the season), and reading their own headlines. This year's Dallas Cowboys have been what one would call a schizophrenic team.

If you will allow me to digress for a minute, when handicapping football games what I always look for is consistency. It doesn't matter if you're consistently good (see: '07 Pats) or consistently bad (see: '08 Raiders), as long as you're relatively consistent you're easy to wager on. If you're not consistent, you're what I consider a schizophrenic team-and that generally means its a team to avoid betting on. This season's Chiefs are a prime example, they were a bad team that every few weeks would rise up and win a game they had no business winning, and those are teams you don't want to touch (this season's Broncos are another good example, as were the Bills). Likewise in football beyond gambling, what you want to be is a consistent team. Consistently bad is ok, that means you know what to improve and will have the draft picks to do so, likewise consistently good is great, you will still lose some games, but if you're performing at a high level consistently then you know what you need to address. What you don't want to be is an inconsistent "schizophrenic" team that is constantly giving false signals as to what is good and what is bad, as it gives you no real feel for what is right and what is wrong with the team. Being schizophrenic is how you end up being mired in decades of mediocrity like Cleveland and Cincinnati. Much like a game of whack-a-mole your weaknesses rise and fall and you can't get a grasp on what is a strength and what is a weakness, and your mediocrity breeds a draft position that makes you unable to address them even if you could identify them.

It is in that vein, that I present to you the Dallas Cowboys off-season (buck up, it's only 4mos to the draft, 7mos to training camp, and 9mos to next season). What is wrong with this team? What is right with this team? Can anyone honestly tell me?

On paper the defense is solid, and we've got about 5 out of 16 games suggesting that it is an amazing unit-what what of those other games? We know Demarcus Ware is a stud, we know that Bradie James is a good player, and we've seen flashes from Orlando Scandrick-but what about the other eight starters? What about their backups? There's obviously a problem with this defense, but what is it? It can't just be coaching, because it was the same coaching that gave us those stout defensive performances. Inconsistency makes it near impossible to peg what the problem is, or how to fix it-and it leaves you making decisions based on suppositions that could easily be incorrect.

Likewise the offense should be unstoppable, again on paper. You've got one of the best OL's in the NFL, you've got the triple-threat of Owens, Roy Williams, and Witten paired with a ferocious back in Barber and contributing backups in Felix Jones and Tashard Choice. Or do you have an underperforming OL, a "star" quarterback that is mistake prone and has been figured out by NFL defenses (duck and roll right under pressure anyone?), a prima-donna WR, and injuries waiting to happen at RB? Well, which is it-what do you have? Because if you're convinced you know, you're probably delusional. The body of work that has been the 2008 Dallas Cowboys season gives you ample evidence for both arguments, and again, that's the problem. What do you change?

At this point, most people are going to be clamoring for a coaching change, and insisting that that is the answer. And while it might be-again, that's the point of this entire exercise, we don't know the problem so it's tough to find the solution-it might also solve absolutely nothing. Is Garrett the OC that called the gameplans against Green Bay and Philadelphia early in the season? Or is he the OC that called the gameplans against Arizona and Philadelphia the second time around? Is Wade Phillips the mastermind behind the defense against Tampa and New York the second time around? Or is he the goat behind New York the first time and the end of the Baltimore game? And furthermore, is there a replacement that's any better?

Stop mentioning Bill Cowher, he's not coming here. Likewise for Mike Holmgren, Jimmy Johnson, and the ghost of Tom Landry. Stop deluding yourself into believing there is a white knight standing on the corner with an "out of work" sign just begging to come to Valley Ranch and save this team. Oh, and deal with the circus that is this roster and it's Owner/GM.

That said, the offseason for your Dallas Cowboys has commenced. Now we've got nine months (and its an agonizing 9mos here in Texas Rangers/Dallas Mavericks country) to get this thing sorted out before opening day 2009.