Jason Garrett has some 'splainin' to do...

by Cowboy88 on Oct 8, 2009 1:26 AM CDT Comment 26 comments

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/spt/stories/100809dnspocowinsider.3df287b.html

From the David Moore column: Jason Garrett talks about Denver

"The two slants to Sam Hurd to end the game? Garrett calls both good plays. He ran Marion Barber only once in the second half because he has confidence in Tashard Choice and didn't want to put Barber at risk in his first game back from a quad injury."

"We had no intention of going at Champ Bailey and no intention of shying away from him," Garrett said. "The way he plays gives you opportunities. He takes away some things but allows you to complete some passes, too.

"He's an awfully good football player. We made some plays on him and he made some plays on us."

The timing was off between Romo and receiver Miles Austin on the play, and Bailey capitalized.

Then came back-to-back slants to Hurd in the final nine seconds as the Cowboys desperately tried to tie the score. Bailey won both battles.

"It was an all-out blitz twice," Garrett said. "That gave us a chance to block it up and have one-on-one coverage across the board.

"You work the ones [plays] you like the best. Sam did a good job. Tony ripped it in there twice. Champ made two good plays."

Garrett concedes there were other viable options, but he made the decision to go with the slants. And what about the decision to keep tight end Jason Witten back in pass protection rather than send him out in the pattern?

"We got eight-man blitzes," Garrett said. "That's what we anticipated. That gave us a chance to get the ball out and go one-on-one."

_____________

I seriously question his decision about "not wanting to put Barber at risk". He looked awfully healthy to me bulldozing into the endzone for the only touchdown.

Another user-created commentary provided by a BTB reader.

0 recs | Comment 26 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Our run game was not really doing...

…all that great in the Denver game.

In the first quarter, we ran 8 times up the middle for a total of 8 yards. At only an average of 1 yard per run up the middle, Garrett abandoned that idea early on, and for good reason.

Running left wasn’t much better. Including all 4 quarters, we ran left 3 times for a total of 10 yards (3.3 avg.)

Running to the right was a little better (away from Dumervil) but got worse throughout the game.
1st quarter running right we averaged 6.3 yards per carry on 3 attempts.
2nd quarter running right we averaged 4.3 yards per carry on 3 attempts.
3rd quarter running right we averaged 2.5 yards per carry on 2 attempts.

Running got tougher with each quarter of game play. No wonder Garrett focused more on the pass later in the game.

by BishopWest on Oct 8, 2009 1:57 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

4th quarter?

If the team was considerably more effective in the passing game I would have been satisfied with RHG moving towards the pass. But when the passing game is struggling I’m not sure why he was so quick to abandon the run and allow Denver to pin it’s ears back and come after Romo.

Wade Phillips has never won a playoff game as a head coach..he has lost 4 home playoff games.
His longest tenure as head coach was 3 years. His second year with a team only once saw an improved record (by 1 game)

Wade Phillips for DC

by SDTrueblue on Oct 8, 2009 4:29 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Here is the comparison

1st Q
Run 36 yards
Pass 88 yards (more than double)

2nd Q
Run 19 yards
Pass 40 yards (about double)

3rd Q
Run 7 yards
Pass 17 yards (more the double)

4th Q
Run 8 yards
Pass 96 yards

The pass was gaining double or more yards than the run in quarters 1 through 3. Garrett thought it best to pass mostly in the fourth quarter.

by BishopWest on Oct 8, 2009 8:29 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Still question why you get away from the run..

It’s obvious that when the run was working better..so was the pass. A la the first quarter.

In 2nd and 3rd quarter 40 yards and 17yards are hardly showing enough to warrant unbalanced playbook.

4th quarter.. 45+ yards was the 4th and 3 play that was more fluky play-making by Romo than game changing play call. So really it wasn’t exactly storming the gates down in the 4th either.

You’re supposed to get more yards in the passing game for obvious reasons and I never saw the reason to allow for Denver to scheme against the pass so much easier by unbalancing the playbook.

Wade Phillips for DC

by SDTrueblue on Oct 8, 2009 4:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well...

“We had no intention of going at Champ Bailey and no intention of shying away from him,” Garrett said

You go after Champ 17 times and the other CB who is basically a no-name player you go after twice….Really Garrett, Really….you weren’t going after Champ….idot!….how about this…after the failed slant to Hurd do something else the next time…..is it that hard to figure out.. You think maybe someone upstairs could’ve yelled down and said Austin was open on the play and try him….

by Boyzfan94 on Oct 8, 2009 10:26 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Romo had choices and didn't have to throw towards Bailey

When Garrett calls for a pass, I’m pretty sure that Romo still has the prerogative to throw the ball to which ever receiver he chooses.

by BishopWest on Oct 8, 2009 2:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

He might have chose...

…Witten if a play had been called that used him.

The 2009 Dallas Cowboys: Talk to me in December.
The NFC East has won 11 Super Bowls; oddly none of those have come courtesy of the Eagles.

by gee-roj on Oct 8, 2009 2:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I agree

by BishopWest on Oct 8, 2009 2:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

The argument is moot...

He’s gonna do what he (Garrett) feels is right no matter what any of us think. You would thnk that with Witten and Tashard being our most consistent first down producers, that you would use one of those two guys for a consistent offense and put it in the end zone using one of them. With the game on the lne, plays are not being revolved around them. That is what should be done, since it’s those two who have been consistently productive on offense in every game. Everybody else isn’t even close.

What does a fan have to do to get Garrett’s attention to the fact that this offense should be revolved around screens, run, and short passing to TE’s? Success in those aspects of the offense will translate to open recievers and more passing opportunities down the field. It wasn’t me that was looking to belittle Garrett by always saying he wasn’t a good fit with Romo. How did I put it in that post Bish? I’ll try to remember and word it:

“Mixing Garrett’s pass-happy offensive playcalling, along with Romo’s gunslinger mentality, and you have a bad cocktail my friend.”

How do I call it a bad cocktail? Easy as pie! just thinking of what Tony needs to be doing versus what his coaching has showed him, considering what he’s learned and played like during the last three years, and you have your answer. 5Blings is “distraught” over the lack of coaching for Tony. It’s one thing to call alot of passing plays, and another thing to coach passing plays.

This offensive coordinator thinks the answer to Tony’s problem is to get confidence by going down the field and completing passes. Did it ever occur to him that it was more important to accept the offenses shortcomings (poor pass blocking) and adjust the game plan for him to manage and win the game? Kinda curtail him a little bit from making all the risky throws? The Bailey Interception was just not necessary. That is where the Denver game was lost.

That is why I have always advocated we play Tashard. If he is successful out there, it seems to me everyone else gets into a groove to. It’s kinda like what Emmitt used to do for the team. Tashard did that in the Carolina game.There is confidence in all those screens and short 5-yd runs that you don’t get with all the pass plays down the field. It tells your opponent that we are not gonna give you a interception. We are gonna dink and dunk you to death, then catch you offgaurd for the big play (play action- where is that Garrett?). The confidence that the team is going down the field productively with short passes and runs is contagious. Isn’t that what this offense is lacking, Confidence?

At the rate we are going, we’ll be lucky to see Barber complete the season, and hopefully Felix doesn’t get injured again. Since we didn’t draft any recievers (Ogletree I want you to succeed!) and our recievers can’t get seperation, we more than ever have to use Tashard out of the backfield for screens & whatever.
Tashard is one of our top productive players, and like it or not, Garrett has to accept the strength of the offense on our team is at the RB position. If he doesn’t see that, no one can help him.

"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"

by DallasPalace on Oct 9, 2009 3:49 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

The only game when Garrett / Romo went "pass happy"

was last week.

The first three weeks they ran an absolutely balanced offense.

by BishopWest on Oct 9, 2009 1:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

You mean to tell me Bishop that...

against the Giants wasn’t pass happy? Your just looking at the percentage stats, not the playcalls at critical times in the game with the game on the line. If 2 or 3 of those passes are changed to runs in that Giants game, we win. Pass-happy isn’t just the run-pass ratio.

"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"

by DallasPalace on Oct 9, 2009 2:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

In the NYG game

DAL ran the ball 29 times and passed the ball 29 times

No one can call that “pass-happy” under any circumstances.

by BishopWest on Oct 9, 2009 4:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Garrett's go-to plays

have always been passes. If that isn’t “pass happy” by definition, i don’t know what is. Again Bishop, in all the posts I’ve written to you, must you still deny the fact that the run is an afterthought in this coordinators mind? Revolving the offense around the run and short passing game is the issue. The only game I can remember where he proved me wrong and ran the ball was a game I thought we were going to loose- the 2nd Redskins game from last year. By the way Bishop, we won that game. Funny, isn’t it? a game where we limited our turnovers, and thus limited THIER opportunities with the ball, as horrible an offensive game we had, we still won the game. The passing game was almost totally taken out of the equation.

I will go so far as to say that until we look to hammer a team like that again (with the run specifically) as well as the screens/short passes, defenses will not react. Safeties deep looking for the pick is what Garrett should expect. For him to keep letting Romo just keep going downfield with it is more than foolish- it’s gonna cost him his job unfortunately. He should have taken the Baltimore job when he had the chance I fear. How many more picks by Romo is it going to take before you kind of admit that this type of offensive gameplan is not good with the type of personnel we have on the team right now. If Garrett doesn’t see it soon, We will be forced into watching a coaching change by Jerry in mid season. It won’t be right, but it may be forced into happenning.

"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"

by DallasPalace on Oct 9, 2009 6:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Are you watching the same game that I watched?

I don’t understand this line of thinking….

will go so far as to say that until we look to hammer a team like that again (with the run specifically) as well as the screens/short passes, defenses will not react. Safeties deep looking for the pick is what Garrett should expect. For him to keep letting Romo just keep going downfield with it is more than foolish

….When in the DEN game, Garrett’s first 53 plays were either runs or short passes.

That’s right – according to the NFL Gamebook which records all the plays of the game – Romo’s first pass that was NOT a short pass was the 54th play from scrimmage for Dallas and there was only 10 minutes left in the whole game.

It sounds like Garrett is already using the strategy that you suggest.

by BishopWest on Oct 9, 2009 11:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Pat Kirwin and Jim Miller were talking about this today....

Romo shoudl’ve recognized that Austin was the better option, not Hurd…..

by Boyzfan94 on Oct 8, 2009 4:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

On the Troy Aikkman show today on KTCK

He had a different opinion. He went back and reviewed both 3rd and 4th down plays and he said Champ Bailey was playing a technigue where he was playing off Hurd more than the other CB was playing off Austin. A quarterback should recognize that at the line of scrimmage and if he thinks blitz (which they were) he has to decide before the snap what pass option he wants, and he has to take it as quickly as possible after the snap. It’s a bam bam play, no time to read and go to second option. Bottom line was Hurd was open for split second and could have made the play,

Frankly i respect the opinion of a three time super bowl quarterback more that a couple of scribes.

Everyone wants to blame Garrett, Tony or some one on the Cowboys, but sometimes the other team just makes a better play.

Time to suck it up and get ready for KC.

by thepainster on Oct 8, 2009 6:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

NO....

everyone wants to blame Romo for the most part. Garrett is the one that puts Tony on the hotseat, and it is more than flagrantly obvious. When you see Romo being coached by a better coach, and his production skyrocket in the passing game, I hope you remember this post. Face reality- since Parcells left, Cowboys coaching has been horrible.

"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"

by DallasPalace on Oct 9, 2009 6:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Austin was open on the play...

but the one that hurt was the second play where he was open AGAIN and they didn’t go to him. What kind of coaching reaction is that, at least if you were going to pass? You tell me? Is there no-one with any experience or offensive brilliance to vary the play? That play wasn’t the game, It’s the symptom of a dysfunctional offense. The game was lost when we let Denver hang around by passing the interception, rather than score.

Ahhh, Jason, you live by the pass, you die by the pass. If you had Earl Campbell, Eric Dickerson, and Emmitt Smith as your running backs, i fear it still would not matter.

"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"

by DallasPalace on Oct 9, 2009 6:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I still have problems with the play-calling but....

If Sam Hurd had caught the ball, would any of us be talking about this?

by Cowboy88 on Oct 8, 2009 3:42 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Probably not..

But again…

IF..

Too often we’re talking about IF this..then we COULD have with this team.

Unfortunately right now (and seemingly for a while) they haven’t been making those plays and it leads to this sorta frustration.

Wade Phillips for DC

by SDTrueblue on Oct 8, 2009 4:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

depends

would the team have done enough to win in OT?

by mdlusk on Oct 9, 2009 1:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

The problem is Cowboy88...

That he didn’t catch the ball, just like Terry Glenn didn’t catch the ball in the playoff game against the Giants 2 years ago. It did’t work then, it won’t work now, and it is Garrett’s fault. I can’t even believe that anyone would question that it’s his fault. He’s so blind about his playcalling that he can’t believe that it won’t work. It’s probably hard for him to accept that defenses are good enough to scheme him ineffective. What he doesn’t realize possibly is that incomplete passes sap the will and the confidence of the team so much (even on defense), that even when you complete a pass finally, it’s little solace.

Meanwhile, you’ve got what could amount to be possibly the best trio of backs ever assembled on one team, and one mean and nasty run blocking team. There is no reason to not rotate offensive lineman occasionally. Get Montrae Holland, and Duke Preston in there in the 3rd quarter when you have the lead. Keep the line strong and working the run block. Try the different backs in different formations. Put felix out as a WR. Don’t you think that is gonna effect the defensive backfield? They used to do that with Deion Sanders, remember? There is alot you can do with this offense. I just believe that Garrett is average/below average when it comes to scheming a run offense. he’s just not comfortable sticking to the run and playing it safe, because at his most convenient opportunity, he throws the dice. He doesn’t even think “hey, I could be throwing this game away”, and it’s already happened too many times for me to believe he doesn’t need help. Success with the run offense doesn’t really only have to do with run production and stats. I believe our run production has to do with the talent we have at the RB position, moreso than the scheme. What the real goal of running/short passing should be is to set up the deep pass to a WR in single coverage. Once you show a defense you can do it all (not just try to force passes down the field), they will not know what to expect. Other defenses will then have the same problem.

"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"

by DallasPalace on Oct 9, 2009 6:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I agree DallasPalace...

but what it ALL comes down to is this:

Executing the plays
and
Consistently executing those plays to win games.

Jason Garrett as an OC has room to grow no doubt. His bizarre play calling the last few weeks has put the microscope of criticism on his preparation and his competency as a future head coach.

If this team can wake up it’s three headed monster (albeit a healthy one) then opposing defenses will have to respect our run game and try to keep eight in the box. That should spark the passing game back to life with Jason Witten, etc… The Running game is the key.

I know it sounds simplistic but it comes down to fundamentals. WP and JG should be preaching fundamentals every day until it becomes second nature to the entire roster. Stupid penalties at the most inconvenient times show a very undisciplined team.

by Cowboy88 on Oct 9, 2009 7:19 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I have just one question.

The bottom line is simple if WP and JG dont get thier act together the only question to be answered in the offseason is JJ hiring Cowher or Shanahan [sp on both?] cause if the team finishes like it did last year or worse you can bet both are 2 more names to be added to the growing list of former cowboy coaches that have failed after Landry and Jimmy, Note: Switzer was not mention simply because in reality all he did was sit back and let that which jimmy had built run its course. But back to the now and the future, Shanahan has already stated clearly he wants to coach again, Cowher might be talked back into coaching with the right team and deal and Dallas is a pretty nice place.

Shanahan or Cowher?

by cowboy70 on Oct 9, 2009 9:28 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

New and Old

Hey, I’m new to this blogging bizness but i’m old to da game! A fan of da’ boyz for 36 yrz, not bout to stop, but i must say that i’m truly disappointed at a lot of things i see from bad play calling to poor tackling to quarterbacking and the main issue is those dbacks letting someone just walk down the field on us! Everyone in the league knows our dbacks are suspect, can’t cover plus afraid to tackle equals pure “garbage”. Hate call out players but B.Carpenter, T.Newman mucks up too much to be pros as well as p.b..As for as play cay calling,J.Garrett is he trying to get W.Phillip job? He knows he next in line, what’s up, it just don’ make any sense! Now, T.Romo, his confidence is steady declining because of his bad play, take him out and let him think about it, readjust his whole attitude because right now he sucks, but at least he keeps us within a chance! If this is affecting me as a fan can you imagine how it must be affecting someone who invested Billions of Dollars……..hmmmm!

RL Dixon Jr

by cboyfolife on Oct 10, 2009 7:16 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs