Moving on...to the Cowboys new offense
Enough Bill Parcells. I’ll now stop being a hypocritical blogger and quit talking about Bill Parcells as I’ve admonished others to do. It’s called listening to your own advice. Besides, I was starting to cross over from reasoned argument into bitterness! Never a good place to be.
So let’s move on and talk about something else – like the offense. More specifically, let’s talk about rookie offensive coordinator Jason Garrett.
It’s hard to know exactly what kind of offense he’ll run, we haven’t even made it to his first training camp yet. But it’s a good bet it will be some variant of the timing offense that was once employed in Dallas under Norv Turner and Ernie Zampese. I call it the timing offense because that was the term used a lot when the Cowboys ran the offense in the 90’s. But it could just as well be called the real West Coast offense.
It all started with Sid Gillman and the San Diego Chargers in the old AFL. Well, I’m sure he borrowed from an earlier coach, but he’s generally credited as the father of this particular offensive philosophy. His disciples were Don Coryell and Ernie Zampese who worked together in San Diego when Coryell assumed the Chargers head coaching position. Zampese then went on to the Rams where he tutored a young WR’s coach in the philosophy, Norv Turner. While Turner was the offensive coordinator in Dallas, followed by Zampese, Jason Garrett was the backup QB and Troy Aikman’s sounding board.
The assumption was that Garrett would lean on the philosophy as the Cowboys offensive coordinator and that appears to be the case. But to make that connection, we need to understand the timing offense. The timing of the offense refers to the precision routes it requires from the receivers, and the timing of a QB’s drop back and the release of the ball. These elements are tightly choreographed and need precision timing to work properly. But the offense itself is more than that, it’s a philosophy that emphasizes two concepts, the vertical passing game and the power running game, and makes a defense choose to defend one or the other. If they bring players up, you carve them up with intermediate and deep patterns. If they fall back to protect deep, you pound the ball behind a big offensive line.
To run it, you need a QB and can drop back in the pocket with good footwork and the ability to throw the deep ball with accuracy and zip. You need receivers who can stretch the field and an offensive line that allows the time for deep passes to unfold and beats down a defense in the running game. To help with the power running game, you want a battering-ram fullback who can also catch the ball.
All of that certainly sounded like what we heard coming out of minicamp. Tony Romo has called the offense a return to the 90’s Cowboys, and has remarked on the need for receivers to run precise routes and for him to be able to count on them being in the right place on every play. Reporters also told us the Cowboys were challenging the secondary vertically a lot more often in the minicamp. They also noted the use of the backs in the passing game and the return to prominence of the fullback position. That certainly sounds like Garrett is running some version of the Norv Turner/Ernie Zampese offense.
But there are some other aspects of the offense, too. Norv Turner added elements of deception in the form of motion and shifting. Joe Gibbs, another disciple of the offense, was a great practitioner of the three wide receiver sets and he also used the two tight end sets for maximum protection. Mike Martz, who learned under Turner, took the offense to the pass-happy extreme with his Rams teams.
Here’s what Dr. Z reported about a conversation he had with a QB who had been in the Cowboys camp with Turner.
Once, in 1993, I talked to a backup Miami quarterback named Hugh Millen, who'd been in the Dallas camp earlier that season.
"I can't believe the things the receivers get away with here," he said, "the sloppy way they run their routes. They'd never get away with it under Norv. If he told them to run their break at seven yards, that was it, not a foot more or less, because that's where the ball was going to be. And if they wouldn't, he'd get somebody who would."
Mike Martz backed that up.
"It's such a timing-oriented system. You want to get the ball downfield, yes, but you want to get it out quickly, and the timing portion is critical. There are no shades of gray. You've got to run in and out of your breaks -- boom, like that -- and you've got to be exactly where you're supposed to be."
Martz also says this about the power running game.
"That's another thing that's critical to the system," Martz says. "Power running. You've got to be able to run the ball when you go to a three-wide receiver set, and you've got to run with power. By that I mean behind zone blocking, which is a big departure from the San Francisco system. Theirs was man-blocking, with a lot of cut-blocks and misdirection. Ours is straight power."
In the beginning of this article I said this offense could be considered the real West Coast offense. But it’s not the same offense that came to be known as the West Coast offense of Bill Walsh fame. Here’s what happened. Bill Walsh went to Cincinnati as an assistant after learning the Sid Gillman offense from another devotee, Al Davis in Oakland. Walsh brought the offense to Cincinnati and it worked wonderfully while they had a strong-armed QB named Greg Cook. But he got hurt, and Walsh had to adapt his offense to a QB who was more quick and agile with a so-so arm. So he developed the short-pass offense that is more horizontally oriented as opposed to the vertical offense it was originally intended to be, all to fit that QB. Otherwise, he would have stuck with the original vertical passing game of the real West Coast offense.
So how did that get to be the West Coast offense?
From Bernie Kosar, when he was a backup quarterback with Dallas in '93. I [Dr. Z.] was doing a piece on the Cowboys. I asked him what the offense was like.
"Oh, you know, the West Coast Offense," he said. "Turner and Zampese and Don Coryell and Sid Gillman. That thing." (Bernie obviously had a good knowledge of NFL history).
I used the quote. It was picked up by a West Coast wire reporter, except that he got it screwed up and he attached it to the San Francisco attack that Bill Walsh had used in San Francisco's Super Bowl run of the '80s. What the hell -- San Diego, L.A., San Francisco -- it's all West Coast, isn't it? And that's where it stuck.
I borrowed liberally from a Dr.Z article and a couple of other articles for this post and make no claims to much original content of my own. But I wanted to gather it together in one place for you guys to read.
0 recs |
30 comments
Comments
Times have changed
A few years ago when DB's were allowed to grab and hand check the timing offenses seemed mostly outmoded. With the rule change now this offense should be effective once again. The critical factor is receivers doing the right thing every time in the right timing.
This is a good synopsis of the offense and I appreciate your bringing it together. I wonder how many other teams have abandoned an offense after scoring 425 points the previous year with mostly the same skill players returning?
by lee3022 on May 21, 2007 12:23 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Good point
But I wonder are we abandoning it or modifying it? And I don't mean this rhetorically. I am curious just how different this is going to be, because I really don't want to see the problems the Skins had with their "million play" scheme visited on the Boys...
More vertical is always helpful in spreading out the defense, but of course you have to have the receivers to run those precise routes. The Cowboys had Irvin, who was an excellent route runner. I think Glenn is solid, although it's just an impression, but what about Owens?
by dunkman on May 21, 2007 7:00 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Someone who could really benefit
is Sam Hurd. All I hear about him is that he runs great routes. I think he could make a strong showing in training camp.
by Burt D on May 21, 2007 11:11 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think, Crayton, Hurd, Austin and Stanback
are the future at WR.
by Terry on May 21, 2007 12:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
WR
One of our first round picks next year will be a WR. I'm hoping for Manningham, but he'll be long gone by our 2nd pick (assuming RB or OL with Cleveland's pick).
by mhuff13 on May 21, 2007 12:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I highly doubt that
First of all, our 2nd pick in the first rd will probably have to be used in a trade up to get the player we will target next season.
Secondly, I think the Cowboys are very happy with the foursome I mentioned above and would use the first rd picks next season on other ares of need.
by Terry on May 21, 2007 1:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Right
as we sit here now (because things change), you'd think RB would be the top "need" and to get someone like McFadden, you'd have to be drafting at one or two. Of course, if Tony tanked (not that he will) or got hurt, JJ went to the PB as FreeBack instead of RoboBack, then who knows...
by dunkman on May 21, 2007 1:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
we won't know what are needs will be
for draft purposes until March 2008. Stating what are needs will be now is way too premature.
by Terry on May 21, 2007 2:15 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It may be premature
but based on all the posts, I'd say it's also interesting!
by dunkman on May 21, 2007 4:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
2008
I just don't know about trading up to the top 2 for a player. If we're at like 4-5 why move up? Just stay there and draft a OL or the stud DT that will be coming out.
Sure McFadden would be nice, but then again who knows if he'll even repeat his performance from last year. Most likely, but not a guarantee.
by mhuff13 on May 21, 2007 2:15 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
because players like McFadden
are very rare and don't come along too often. The last guy that was that good was drafted back in 2002 and now wears a "S" under his Charger uniform.
The top OL or DT available next year won't have special written all them like McFadden. If we're going to go back to the '90's style of offense we need a stud back for the power running attack. Could Jones be that stud back? We'll see this year, its put up or shut for old JJ.
by Terry on May 21, 2007 2:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Marion Barber can be a stud back
remember Emmitt Smith was even slower than MB3.
And DT Glenn Dorsey comes out this year. I think that kid could be special. I forsee a big year for him.
by Burt D on May 21, 2007 2:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
MB3 will never be special
He's a good, tough, hard nosed player who I really like, but to compare him with the great Emmitt Smith is absurd.
by Terry on May 21, 2007 3:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You will live to regret those words Terry
by Burt D on May 21, 2007 4:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
McFadden
Jake Long at tackle and Glenn Dorsey at DT could be special players as well.
by mhuff13 on May 21, 2007 3:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
well, name me a back then
in college football who has been truly great over the last several years. Adrian Peterson could have been but he got injured too often. Like I said, the last guy that fits the "special" definition was LT.
McFadden has AP's talent but doesn't get hurt and he's a good receiver.
by Terry on May 21, 2007 3:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Deangelo Williams
- 1400+ yards, 10 TD
- 1900+ yards, 22 TD
- 1900+ yards, 18 TD
Those are LT type numbers in college. He was top-5 every year.
Now where is Deangelo Williams? He's hurt all the time and is nowhere near LT.
So please don't use LT in college as the benchmark for how RB will do. Nobody thought LT would be as good as he is. If you say you did know, go into the lottery business and never work another day in your life.
by mhuff13 on May 21, 2007 4:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Williams got hurt once last year
because a 300 pound lineman fell on his foot. And towards the end of the season he started to come into his own. Also last year the Panthers offensive line was terrible.
by Burt D on May 21, 2007 4:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Williams was never special
he was a productive college back, but nothing special like Peterson or McFadden.
by Terry on May 21, 2007 9:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
McFadden
may be great but has two questions to be answered this year:
- Can he catch passes. For his career he has 29 catches for 201 yards and 1 TD. Not part of his staple offense.
- Can he step up in big games against good teams? Last year he failed to get 100 yards per game against (per carry against/season average against) Southern Cal (4.7/3.0), Southeast Missouri State (11.8/??), Vanderbilt (3.7/4.1), Mississippi (3.8/4.15), Florida (3.5/2.7) and Wisconsin (4.7/3.9). He had monster games (over 180 yards) against Utah State(9.2/5.05), South Carolina (8.8/4.1), Tennessee (6.0/4.1) and LSU (8.7/3.2). Given the per-carry averages, even in low yardage games, he did well last year (Florida and USC were both in the top 10 last year in rush defense).
So we can root for McFadden to catch lots of passes this year and to not get hurt!
by lee3022 on May 21, 2007 4:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
There are a couple of DT
next year that may be too good to pass.
Specifically Glenn Dorsey of LSU, Frank Odum of Texas, and Ellis Sedrick of USC are all 1st round talent and Dorsey or Odum may be top 5. Fergie is in his 11th year and unless there is a free agent we can target next year we will need to address this. The 2nd of our 2 1st round picks may be used for a CB.
I know everyone is wanting McFadden but remember the running back needs to be versatile in the timing offenses to both blitz block and catch passes. That back may be available later if needed but the guys we have may be enough. My guess is Julius Jones has a great year re-signs with the Cowboys - and we do not draft a RB.
As far as a WR - this is certainly a show-me year for Sam Hurd and Miles Austin. Should they come on (or one of the other WRs competing) this year there will be no urgency to draft a WR.
by lee3022 on May 21, 2007 3:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Julius is terrible and whines like a little girl
I would be shocked if he beats MB3 in training camp
by Burt D on May 21, 2007 4:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
considering he is much more tlaneted
than MB3, I'd be shocked if JJ is not the starting tailback opening day.
by Terry on May 21, 2007 9:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
the good old days
back to the offenses of the '90's, now they were really fun to watch. Granted, those offenses had more talent, but I think the 2007 edition has more than enough of the same to make this offense run effeciently.
BTW, the west coast offense (Bill Walsh's) is another great example of how important scheme is in today's game. Guys like Joe Montana and Jeff Garcia wouldn't have been the players they were in other systems.
by Terry on May 21, 2007 7:52 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Good point Terry
Since Terrell Owens played in SF and Philly under Bill Walsh's system and became frustrated with the QB in both offenses we can hope that this offense is tweaked enough to get plenty of touches for Owens where he wants them.
by lee3022 on May 21, 2007 3:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Touches! I wouldn't use that word to descibe T.O
He had plenty of those last year, but dropped them, lead the league in drops. You dont base your whole offense around one player, and since T.O. has a history of poor route running, his so-called touches may be down this year, its a timing offense that requires a receiver to run a precise route, T.O. has never run precise routes.
by Deke on May 21, 2007 3:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That is largely my concern
that Terrell Owens will not be the #1 receiver in this offense. My bet is that the offense will adapt to Owens and he will have an even better year than last (no coincidence that 425 points were scored the first year with Owens). The question rests on Jason Garrett and not on Owens.
I don't know that Terrell does not run precise routes. He certainly had success in SF and Philly. So even if he does, he can be discontent with opportunities. The subject of drops is an ESPN one and bogus. The statistic does not exist since it requires a subjective independent judgment and that varies viewer to viewer as to the catch-ability of any ball. What speaks loudly to me is receptions (85) and TDs (13). No receiver caught more TDs so the 425 points had to be strongly influenced by Owens. I am not ready to throw him under the bus.
by lee3022 on May 21, 2007 4:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

by 















