« Tuesday's Pick 6 | Main | Practice makes it closer to perfect »

May 25, 2010

Less catches equals more offense?

Cowboys executives are not the only ones excited about the possibilities that new receiver Dez Bryant will create. After getting a look at Bryant in practice, the players are equally optimistic that Bryant will add punch to an already-potent offense.

Adding something often results in taking away something else and the players understand that their individual opportunities may be reduced, but it will add to the team production.

“I think we’re a more mature team now,” tight end Jason Witten said. “All that matters is winning. If some guys have to sacrifice statistics, that’s no problem. We’re all willing to do whatever it takes to win.”

Witten could be affected as much as anyone. He has led the Cowboys in receptions the last three years, averaging 90.3 catches per season. Witten knows those numbers could be going down.

“Absolutely,” Witten said. “Especially with the weapons we have. No question it’s an effect. How many plays you run in a game. But that’s ok. No problem at all.”

The Cowboys had a prolific offense last season. They averaged 399.4 points a game, which was second in the NFL behind the Saints’ 403.8.

But New Orleans had 64 touchdowns while the Cowboys had only 43.

Witten led the Cowboys with 94 receptions and Miles Austin had 81. But Roy Williams was third with 38 receptions and six Saints had more than that.

The Cowboys are hoping to spread the offensive wealth around much more in 2010 and get more payoffs in the end zone and win column.

-- Jan Hubbard

 

 

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00e54f7fc4c588330133ee711de5970b

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Less catches equals more offense?:

Comments

WOW: "The Cowboys had a prolific offense last season. They averaged 399.4 points a game..."

That IS a prolific offense. I don't recall scoring nearly 400 points a game, that would be pretty exciting.

"Yards" maybe?

The comments to this entry are closed.