To run, or not to run... That's Redball's dilemma
by Chandus on Nov 17, 2009 5:22 PM CST
Email
PrintJason Garrett is the goat of the week.
The run was working! He doesn't seem to understand how Football works!
He should return to Football 101.
The sky is falling!
Romo's guilty! He always is! The best QB never to win a Playoff game (this one was too easy).
Finding scapegoats is easy.
Garrett quitted on the run even when it was working. Really? looking at the numbers, it's hard to agree...
Barber 13 yards in an off tackle run. Choice 11 yards in a direct snap. That's 24 yards of the total. The rest of the carries (9) went for a total of 21 yards. Feast or famine, with feast being the bullet in a single bullet Russian roulette...
Looking around the League, the teams that limit their opponents running games to a couple of good plays and mostly famine are the ones that rule the League stats. That's what the Cowboys have been doing.
Grant having a couple of good carries but his average was bellow 4 yards per.
McCoy had a 17 yarder, other than that he had 37 yards in 12 carries.
Etcetera.
The Packer wanted to stop the run and rush Romo along the way by clogging and shoothing through gaps in a 6 or 7 man line.
The Cowboys need a focused OLine.
The Cowboys continue to have problems with speed, if a team has a good pass rusher in the middle as an opposing Defensive Coordinator I would have him shooting through any inside gap between Flo and Colombo/Free... That's how bad the Cowboys have been, against the run and against the pass. Leonard Davis or Gurode against a 250 pounder LB shouldn't be that hard of a matchup, but it is...
Barnett (2 sacks). The Eagles lack a decent pass rushing LB but they had both DE shooting inside and they blitzed their safeties. Hawthorne (2 sacks). Nicholas and DeCoud (2 sacks).
If you have a team as sold to attack your gaps, you have to hit them in their mouths and that's through the air, beating the couple of players (or more) in single coverage, the Cowboys couldn't due to poor execution, bad hands, eyes (yeah, Roy, that's you) or whatever else...
The Cowboys have a problem that they need to fix, and running more isn't a solution, because they're seeing a lot of famine and it all starts up front.
Another user-created commentary provided by a BTB reader.
59 comments
|
2 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
And they were playing their nickel package all game
yet we ran a grand total of 14 times. That is just sorry.
Is that the solution?
The OLine was inconsistent with Sparano and Payton, too. Look at them with the Saints and Dolphins…
I have a problem with scapegoats, especially when we’re talking about Football, where if things go wrong is because many things are wrong…
Is Garrett at fault when a LB shoots through Gurode and Davis gap and hits Jones like 2 or 3 yards before the LOS? The sacks are Garrett’s fault? Almost all of those sacks meant that the team wouldn’t run the ball… Williams fumble? Drop? Romo’s accuracy in a couple of throws? The injuries?
Garrett, Garrett, Garrett. Yeah, I kind of got that.
BTW, I find this interesting, even if the running game was as much a feast or famine thing as it was in the Green Bay, people still wanted to see the RBs carry the ball more… Makes me think of Julius Jones and how much of a feast or famine show he used to be, and still is… And how most of the Cowboys Nation couldn’t wait to see him off teh field and off the team… It’s a truely an interesting case… Cowboys nation needs a shrink.
Viva México! Go Cowboys!
Garrett is to blame when you only run 14 times in a game
and MB3 had 7 yards a carry, and it is not like the passing game was making any headway. Furthermore the game was close for 3 quarters, there is no excuse for abandoning it for a nonexistent passing game.
This is like the gajillionth time he gave up on the run this year. If our offense does well it is despite Garrett, not because him.
You should also take it as a complement to your boy Romo
Romo makes and has made Red Headed Genius look better than he actually is.
Rafael made a post with his reasoning
I’m also adding my opinion on how ineffective the running game was, too.
MB3 was running 7 yards a carry? Untrue. His average at the end of the game was 5.2. Which is pretty high, but his first 2 carries almost add to his total.
The running game was effective? Really? 3 carries for 0 or negative yards is effective in your world? That’s almost 30%! That’s as awful as an OLine can play.
6 carries for 3 yards or less? That’s more than 50% of the carries for bellow average yardage…
I’m sure that you were happy with Julius Jones at RB, he used to bring that kind of feast or famine for our Franchise…
Viva México! Go Cowboys!
Problem with that logic is our passing game was even more ineffective
So not only were you ineffective in both areas but Garrett made the conscious decision to make us one-dimensional. Basically that took us out of the frying pan and into the fryer. It was a stupid move by him that has become all to common.
Ineffective you say?
The passing game was waaaay more effective than the running game… The game was lost because the OLine sucked it up big time.
Without Williams fumble, the team is close to the Packers red zone, instead of having to defend another Packers posession.
With Choice long catch that was negated due to Witten’s penalty, the drive is continued.
Withouth Williams drop…
With a little bit of more precision Romo would have found Bennett for a TD.
In those 3 last plays, we’re talking about close to 80 yards that were lost because big paid guys not only couldn’t execute correctly, but took turns into shooting at their own foots.
You want to place all of the blame on Garrett, go ahead, I can look at the forest, you can look at a tree.
Viva México! Go Cowboys!
Our running backs rushed the ball 11 times... 11 times!!!
and there yards per attempt was just over 4 yards a carry. How does that justify that the run was doing so bad? Abandoning the run is a good way to get your QB killed which is what happened. The game was close for three quarters. There was no excuse for abandoning the run so early.
Yes there were mistakes here and there, but you are going to have that with every game. The two main culprits for this loss were the o-line and Garrett. And Garrett’s poor play calling goes back to last year. This is a consistent problem with him.
And again, the average is quite nice and all
The Packers averaged 3.75 yards per carry! They should have run in every snap and in every thrid down they would have converted! The Cowboys did a good job containing the run, 2 carries for 24 yards did most of the damage.
The Eagles averaged 3.67. 2 Carries for 24 yards did most of the damage.
The Cowboys averaged 4.36. 4 Carries for 47 yards did most of the damage, we’re talking about 10 carries that were completely uneffective.
(The numbers include the QB).
The Cowboys not only abandoned the run because of it’s ineffectiveness, the situations that Rafael explained in a previous post has more to do with it, but the ineffectiveness played a factor, too.
Viva México! Go Cowboys!
Go back and check your facts
they rushed the ball 28 times, well over twice as much as we did. If you don’t run the ball, the other team won’t respect it. Even if you are only gaining 3.5 yards a carry. And good coordinator knows that, and Jason Garrett is apparently not one.
This also led to them winning the time of possession battle, keeping their defense fresh, and ultimately winning the game.
Furthermore our passing attack was just as ineffective. You keep on ignoring that.
A HA!
It was hudson Houck’s guys who didn’t let Romo get comfortable.
You are correct sir!
"Emotion is highly overrated in football. My wife Corky is emotional as hell but can't play football worth a damn."
- John McKay, the first coach of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers
It was both
if you don’t run the ball they are going to bring it on every play. After the game Dom Capers said that is exactly what they did.
The calls with Sparano as line coach always seemed to revolve around burning the blitz with a quick hitter into the center-guard or guard-tackle gaps
"Emotion is highly overrated in football. My wife Corky is emotional as hell but can't play football worth a damn."
- John McKay, the first coach of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers
What the?
I’m supposed to go back and check my facts? Where was a I wrong?
We were talking about averages and then you mention the amount of times in which the Packers ran the ball…
The Packers rushed more? Yeah, that has everything to do with the Defense that’s playing them, I’ve explained my reasoning behind our team not running the ball and Rafael commented on this too. You’re saying that they should have run the ball still.
I can’t agree with that, and you can’t agree with our reasoning, that’s clear, so let’s just stop, ok?
Viva México! Go Cowboys!
Have you two QUITTED yet?
"Emotion is highly overrated in football. My wife Corky is emotional as hell but can't play football worth a damn."
- John McKay, the first coach of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers
The telling stat to me
According to Bob Sturm, yesterday we lined up in our base offense 13 times. Every other snap was lined up in the shotgun. No wonder Green Bay said that we became one dimensional.
I don’t so much have a problem with the lack of runs called (though I thought we should have run it more) but when we’re lining up in the shotgun formation there is no question what we’re going to do. It really limits what the defense has to be ready for.
"So you can’t stiff arm at all? What about the throat?"- Marion "Barbarian" Barber
That's not true...
They called some trickery from the Shotgun formation. I think I saw a couple high class draw and delay runs… totally fooled that 7 man blitz, too.
I think they got a few negative yards off of them, so that can further justify that the run was ineffective!
7 man blitz?
You should, at the very least, try to sound intelligent in what you’re saying…
A 7 man blitz would leave every receiver unprotected because every LB and DB would be blitzing to go along with a 4 man line… The blitzers are the extra pass rushers or run stoppers…
The Cowboys saw a lot of 3 and 4 man pass and run blitzes to go along the Packers 3 man line.
Viva México! Go Cowboys!
You take this way too seriously...
I was exageratting, dude, but it looked like they had 15 guys coming after Romo on a few of those plays.
Either way you slice it, out of shotgun invites a blitz. If the defense is playing zone and not blitzing then it would be a good time for a “tricky” HB delay/draw out of the shotgun. Not when they are sending 5 or 6 guys in for the kill.
Yeah, but it wasn't that simple
Going to the shotgun also makes it harder for the Defense to get to Romo, giving Romo a little bit of more time… And Romo was still sacked 4 times… And 3 of those sacks came in plays in which he didn’t held on to the ball for too long…
Garrett did the right thing, he tried to extinguish the heat that the Packers 6 and 7 man lines was bringing up front by beating their secondary, but couldn’t due to all of the reasons explained above.
Viva México! Go Cowboys!
My concern
Is that Garrett appears to be focusing the offense for the home run. Big plays have carried the team after the first 3 games (when they were 1st in the league against the run). We already have an Owner/GM and a head coach no one seems to respect. Let’s not look any more like the Raiders by trying to go totally vertical. The 3 and outs in the GB were atrocious. 5 rushes (or whatever it was) in the second half is a joke, regardless of what you think of the first half numbers, which overall averaged out to fairly typical when you look at the long runs and the ones for 3 or less. I also don’t know why this team seems not to be able to get to the hot read. Perhpas the KO bubble screen from the Eagles game should have been employed. Too easy to criticize so let’s hope this game was just an aberration and we see more of the team we got during the 4 game run, especially with Washington and Raiders on the board.
by WhatsUpPorkchop on Nov 18, 2009 11:23 AM CST up reply actions
The problem is that there were plays for the team to take
And they didn’t. If those plays work, you would have watched a redo of the Eagles game.
If you disagree with the game plan against the Packers, you should also disagree with the game plan that brought a victory against a division rival on the road.
Viva México! Go Cowboys!
lol...
So because he didn’t have to adjust his gameplan in Philly (because it was working) then he shouldn’t attempt to adjust his gameplan in Green Bay when it is clearly NOT working?
Worst logic I have ever heard!
Garrett isn't to blame due to poor on field execution
That’s on the players.
Were there chances for the team to take advantage of the Packers scheme? Yes. The team didn’t made the most of them? That’s on execution.
But, yeah, I kind of get that. It’s all on Garrett. The sky is falling! The sky is falling!
Viva México! Go Cowboys!
So the 12 (1 RB, 2 TE) formation can't be used to help protect Romo?
You said yourself they were blitzing up the middle, so a strong side sweep could have caught them off caught. It was never tried.
This is the 2nd time in less than a year (the Ravens last December being the other) that an opponent has commented on how predictable our offense was…
…making it that much easier to defend us. You can talk about player execution being the only relevant factor in winning and losing but the truth is Football is a lot more complex than that and it drives me nuts when people want to simplify the sport to point of Baseball.
Gone are the days when a team, like the 90’s Cowboys, is so much more talented than their adversary that they can just line up and beat them, even if the whole world knows what they are about to do. Today, more than ever, it’s become about scheme and strategy.
The team on the other side of the ball is trying to "execute" as well. If one side knows exactly what the other one is about to do than guess which side has the humungous advantage? You have to be demonstratively better than your opponent to still pull off a positive play when they’re practically looking at your playbook.
Garrett has done some beautiful work this year; running various formations and keeping opponents guessing; Green Bay was just not one of those games. I knew what the Cowboys were about to this Sunday sitting on my living room couch. Just imagine how easy it must have been for players like Charles Woodson to get a read?
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.
Let's say it this way:
You think that Philly doesn’t know our team Offense? Their early game plan and the Packers game plan were very similar, to keep Romo in the pocket with a mixture of blitzes designed to attack gaps, in order to press Romo and stop the run.
It wasn’t pretty, but the Cowboys played inspired Football and they won.
The running game was also ineffective against the Eagles, a couple of carries that combined went for 25 yards mean that the Cowboys ran for 54 yards on 18 carries. Which meant that the Cowboys key to success lied on the pass and Romo and his targets delivered to the tune of over 300 yards and 8.5 YPA.
They were predictable in that game? Against a division rival? You can bet that they were, but they couldn’t beat our team because the Cowboys executed their plays like they were supposed to. The differences with the Packers game are astonishing…
Viva México! Go Cowboys!
But they WEREN’T as predictable against the Eagles…
For example, that bubble screen to Olgetree, which twice went for huge yards, had never been run by Dallas before. This was a strategy implemented specifically for Philly. You can bet that Green Bay watched LOTS of tape of those two plays all that flowing week because they were ready for it big time. The one time Dallas tried it this past Sunday the Packer D had an immediate read on it and blew it up. Their biggest clue? Olgetree was in game and they were gambling that the one and only play Dallas would run w/ him on the field was that same play the spent all week studying.
A more innovated approach, IMHO, would have been to run some sort of fake off of that screen. A quick pump fake to Olgetree, (to sell the idea of the screen) followed by a pass to a wide open option that would have easily gotten behind their coverage. The entire Packer D stormed that play on Sunday and there was no deep help. It’s too bad their gamble paid off because as they predicated, Dallas hadn’t developed any sort of new wrinkle to their strategy.
The Wildcat or Razorback was another wrinkle thrown into the Eagles game. Yes Dallas had run it a few times earlier in the year but not for at least 3 weeks heading into the Eagles game. You could almost see the, "oh shit" look on their faces when the Cowboys lined up in that formation for their 1st TD. The Eagles clearly had NO idea that was coming and looked unsure of what to do.
By now teams have got to notice the Choice does not ever go with the pitch option on that play. He has kept the ball every single time. Why not pitch to Felix once or have Choice throw a pass? Throw in something they don’t have film on.
I’m sorry but the players weren’t the only ones that let got complacent this past weekend
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.
Garrett's offensive mentality
Has already proven flawed and a disaster for the Dallas Cowboys many times- I’ll just point to the end of season offensive swoons last year and the year before.
I fear the upcoming Giants game may start another one. This Green Bay game was the most important one, and I know alot of people will dispute that, but take the outcome for what it is:
we could have had a 2 game cushion over the Eagles and Giants
We kept the Packers in the playoff hunt
we keep within a safe distance of being beaten by both NY and Philly now
we are 6-3 rather than 7-2
These facts are not to be taken lightly unfortunately.
You work hard as a team just get a chance to sieze an opportunity- and then you fail miserably to grasp it by not understanding that you have to vary your offensive gameplan?
I’m sorry, but my perspective is that Garrett doesn’t and hasn’t made the grade, and I am on record with my posts as believing that long before this week.
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
One thing you have to account for...
Romo gets up there and checks out of a number of plays.
Seldom do his “Kill, kill, kill” cries result in anything positive for the offense.
Nevertheless, the real issue was that Romo seldom was able to set his feet and step into a ball.
The O-line has to own that, especially with Kampman not playing. Eesh!
"Emotion is highly overrated in football. My wife Corky is emotional as hell but can't play football worth a damn."
- John McKay, the first coach of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers
that's simply not true
Romo has many plenty of big plays after killing the initial play
In Romo we Trust
As a percentage of the total, you are in error.
"Emotion is highly overrated in football. My wife Corky is emotional as hell but can't play football worth a damn."
- John McKay, the first coach of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers
Ok
How do you beat the Eagles and Packers game plans against the Cowboys (to keep Romo in the pocket with a mixture of blitzes designed to attack gaps, in order to press Romo and stop the run)?
By running the ball more? That would have been unpredictable… The run wasn’t working, so yeah, a team commitment to the run wouldn’t have been expected… That would have been a recipe for a loss against the Eagles and Packers.
Give me your best shot, your game plan to beat the Eagles and Packers.
Viva México! Go Cowboys!
Garrett had GREAT gameplan for the Eagles...
The issue is implementing the exact same strategy against Green Bay. The one game the Packers are guaranteed to have watched the most film on was the game the Cowboys most recently played in, against Philly.
Garret did an outstanding of implementing a few surprise wrinkles at Philly in week 9; I had hoped he would do the same against Green Bay in week 10. Oh well you live and learn. I still think this is something he can overcome because he really has developed some of his most unique schemes this year, just not this past Sunday.
I’m hoping he has a few wrinkles up his sleeve that he’s got saved for both the Skins and Giants.
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.
Don't know what that means
But Barber had some nice runs early and then POOF it was all pass all the time
Lifetime Cowboys Fan from the Swamps of Jersey
It means that Julius Jones used to produce the kind of numbers that the running game produced on sunday, a few 0 or negative yardage carries, many 1 or 3 yard gainers and a couple of good carries.
Cowboys nation wanted him playing elsewhere because it believed that the running game wasn’t working with him on the field, and wanted Barber in because if he was a much lesser homerun threat he was rarely caught behind the LOS.
We’re seeing Julius Jones kind of production, or lack of, and there’s people that believe that the running game was working. Therefore, those are a Julius Jones’ fans.
Viva México! Go Cowboys!
Are you for real? Marion Barber is 10 times the back JuJo was
Even with a thigh injury he is playing better than JuJo. And earlier in the year when he wasn’t injured he was lighting up defenses.
JuJo just plain sucked. It is that simple.
that is just horse hooey
The only reason that the Cowboys run production has tailed off is because that Ginger Haired Jackass Genius won’t give the running backs the ball. First and Goal inside the three, WITH MARION BARBER THE BEST SHORT YARDAGE BACK IN THE NFL, and a pass is called? The sad part is that I turned to my friend before the ball was snapped and said “PASS.” If I know the soulless ginger genius’ tendencies that well, how well do you think opposing defensive coordinators know them?
This team has three, count ‘em, three good to excellent backs. They produce whenever they are given the ball. To compare them to Julius Jones is silly. Why they are not given the ball regularly is frigging mystery to me. Actually, scratch that I do understand. Running the ball is simply not elegant enough for the Princeton Wunderkind. Passes are a must, no matter what the game situation calls for. And given the ginger’s penchant for calling for home run type pass plays, your criticisms of Julius Jones ring especially hollow.
Lifetime Cowboys Fan from the Swamps of Jersey
First of all Chandus
Garrett is making his biggest mistake by not having Tashard out there alot more. I believe he is the key to our running game being more effective than a typical Barber run up the middle and being caught behind the LOS. Tashard has already shown this ability. On top of that, why can’t Garrett figure out that against these blitzing defenses, a screen to Tashard will stifle that blitz getting to Romo, especially since most likely Tashard or Felix in the open field will become a big play that the defense can’t be ready for if they are blitzing, and that should be a focus of Garrett’s offensive gameplan. Barber should be getting his touches down near the goal line. Do you know what Garrett does instead? He runs with Barber down the field, and then near the goal line, he tries to pass. What a brilliant idea- go against your strengths!
Whatever the media does to barbecue Garrett, unfortunately, he has brought this on himself- by being so drop-back oriented to begin with. Unfortunately for him, sweeping Tashard Choice and his up-the-middle running effectiveness to the side in favor of just dropping back more will mean the Cowboys offense will struggle. Alot of 2 or 3 yard runs up the middle by Tashard Choice will give the pass offense and play action a boost, that I can guarantee you Chandus. But it won’t if Garrett doesn’t see that, and we don’t even play action that much anymore because of him also. What a waste.
Sorry Chandus, but I have to respectfully disagree on Garrett. It’s just like Gee-Roj say’s- It’s not that Garrett can’t call a good game, he just follows it up with a headscratcher at the time he needs to change his strategy. There are alot of things Garrett can do to win games like the Green Bay game. The real question becomes now what does he do in December, and if we are successful enough, what does he do in the playoffs? This kind of mentality of sticking to the pass will not make the grade, and most assuredly result in another quick exit from the playoffs by the Cowboys- and all because of the offense. This Green Bay game is a symptom of what is really wrong with the Cowboys team- it’s the offensive mentality, period. That’s my belief Chandus, honestly.
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Nov 18, 2009 8:08 PM CST up reply actions
I love it when people say "quitted"
"Emotion is highly overrated in football. My wife Corky is emotional as hell but can't play football worth a damn."
- John McKay, the first coach of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers
Alright, this is my last post on this subject
And I’m doing this because it seems that we have different opinions on what an effective rushing game is.
I think that the running game hasn’t been effective for the past couple of games, most guys responding in this fan post seem to believe that the rushing game is fine and that the team should run the ball more.
We disagree and that’s evident.
So, I took on the task of charting the RB carries from the past 2 games to compare them to the numbers of the first 5 games, which is when, in my opinion, the rushing game was last seen by me as an effective unit.
I’m separating the attempts in the next 3 categories:
Poor: from negative yards to 2 yards.
Average: from 3 to 5 yards.
Good: anything above 5 yards.
And I’m using a percentage that I’ll call of efficiency for every average or above carry out of the total.
And the numbers for the first 5 games are:
Poor: 47
Average: 37
Good: 41
For a total of: 125 carries.
Efficiency percentage: 62.4%
The numbers for the past couple of games:
Poor: 16
Average: 5
Good: 10
For a total of: 31 carries.
Efficiency percentage: 48.4%
Some may argue that the team used to rush an average of 25 times per game in the first 5 games and that the average of 15.5 times per game doesn’t allow the team to find a rythm, but such a diference (14%) is too hard to swallow, I think that by running more they would have seen a couple or more good plays, but also a couple or more bad plays.
Right now, you can’t have the good, without also taking the bad. And that’s what Julius Jones used to bring to the table when he was a Cowboy, some good and a lot of bad.
Let’s hope to see a des-Julius-Jones-ized running game against the Redskins.
Viva México! Go Cowboys!
That is probably the best point in regard to our run game
- our “wasted play” percentage is almost higher than the incompletion % in the pass game. Its ridiculous how many of our runs result in low yardage.
You don't understand you have to make the defenses think you are going to run for your offense to be successful
just because passing game may be better doesn’t mean you have to abandon the run. It makes you one dimensional.
It's a tiresome argument...
The statistic kings (that’s a compliment, btw, I do enjoy seeing the stats) will argue over and over again how the run is ineffective, while the rest of us will argue that you can’t determine the run is ineffective when you abandon it after one quarter of football.
No side will ever “win”.
But it has been a fun discussion :)
You don't understand
If an attacking defense shows that it can stop the run and rush the passer along the way, what can you do? You can continue to hit your head against a wall, or you can make the defense pay for being as aggresive.
If you look at everything that I’ve said, I’m not saying that the team should continue to be one dimensional as long as the Defense pushes them in that direction, I’m saying that I understand the philosophy, not that I like it. In the end, the philosphy worked against Philly and failed to work against Green Bay due to all the reasons already mentioned.
I like a balanced Offense, but losing brain cells due to all the hits against a wall isn’t to my liking, if you can make a Defense pay for being too aggressive, you should. If you can make a Defense pay for being too laid back, you should.
Garrett wanted to beat the Packers scheme, there’s nothing wrong with that, IMO.
Viva México! Go Cowboys!
That's true.
At least noone can ever chastise him for not being aggressive.
I can see for miles and miles and miles and miles and miles...
by Aaron Novinger on Nov 19, 2009 3:07 PM CST up reply actions
Aren't you beatting your head against the wall with the pass also?
besides are running attack wasn’t nearly as unsuccessful as you are making it out to be. Barber was doing rather well against them. Garrett never gave the run a chance.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
