Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: News And Other Updates Leading Up To Pats-Giants

The VRR: Can the Cowboys Regain their Balance Against the Redskins?

The first time the Cowboys hosted an NFC East rival in their new stadium, the offense featured a devastating rushing attack that mixed both power and speed. Marion Barber ran 18 times for 124 yards and a score. Felix Jones averaged 13.7 yards on seven carries and picked up a score of his own. Tashard Choice didn't have a big game, but you could tell the coaches were trying to get him involved. Typically, that's how many of us imagined the Dallas ground game producing for the rest of the year.

Much has changed since that Week Two game against the Giants. It all began with a strained quad, and then a sprained knee, a fractured thumb. But it was okay. Miles Austin saved the day, and then Tony Romo got hot. Their success has helped make up for the fact that the Cowboys no longer lead the league in rushing.

Choice has maintained his injury bug repellent, and the team is still ranked 8th in rushing - averaging 130 YPG. That's great, but the worry is that the rushing YPG is slipping every week. The worry is that the Dallas offense is growing unbalanced. The worry is that too many passing plays draw more hits on the quarterback, and can effectively lose the time of possession battle. Losing that can wear out a defense.

Shouldn't it be the Cowboys' offense doing that to opposing defenses this back half of the season?

More VRR after the jump.

Star-divide

Last season, in a loss to the Redskins, the Cowboys' RBs had 8 carries. Last week, in a loss against the Packers, they had 11. What does offensive coordinator, Jason Garrett, have to say about this?

Garrett said it was because of "game circumstance," mentioning that the Cowboys trailed by three scores with 10 minutes remaining in the game. But the Cowboys abandoned the run after the first quarter, when Marion Barber had four carries for 27 yards.

Packers defensive coordinator Dom Capers told reporters after the game that Green Bay, which sacked Tony Romo five times, could blitz aggressively because the Cowboys were so one-dimensional.

"You don’t want to be one-dimensional in anything you do," said Garrett, whose offense has run pass plays 62.7 percent of the time this season, including sacks and Romo scrambles.

"You don’t want to just be an inside running team. You don’t just want to be an outside running team. You don’t just want to be a dropback team. You want to be able to move the quarterback, you want to be able to run the ball, play-action, drop back. "The more you can do, the harder it is on the defense. At the same time, you need to have an identity. Identity is important, too. You don’t want to be all things to all people, but you want to be good at a lot of different things."

Clarence Hill takes the opposite approach to the Cowboys' lack of rushing attempts: the running game has simply been ineffective.

Their running attempts and yards have a diminished dramatically since the start of the season. That is a more of a product of Marion Barber and Felix Jones being injured. Neither has had the same burst since returning to the lineup. Barber missed one game. Jones missed two. Barber has started to look more like his old self of late.

But Jones looks uncomfortable and tentative. He has not been a game-breaking threat. Consider that he has had only two runs longer than 10 yards the last four games since returning from the sprained knee and they were just 12 and 11 yards each. He has not had a run longer than four yards against the Eagles and Packers the past two weeks.

Jones needs to be game-breaking good for the Cowboys to be truly special on offense. He hasn’t been that lately.

Barber didn't get much of a chance to perform...apparently because of his thumb.

Running back Marion Barber saw his time limited against the Packers because of problems with a fractured left thumb that was causing him trouble on pass protection at Green Bay. Barber had four carries in the first half for 26 yards, but he carried it just one time for minus-1 yard in the second half. The Cowboys went with Tashard Choice because he could handle the blitz pickups.

"We use Marion because he's such a dominant blocker," coach Wade Phillips said, "but he was having problems so we took him out."

If Barber can't get the job done in pass protection, the coaches are more apt to go with Choice rather than Felix.

When Barber's broken left thumb prevented him from blocking effectively in the second half Sunday, the Cowboys turned to Choice to protect Romo.

"He is a better pass protector than Felix, and he picks up the blitzes better," Phillips said of Choice. Hamstring and toe injuries forced Jones to miss 10 games last season, time he could have used honing his blocking skills.

"He's just not as adept at it yet," Phillips said. "(Choice) knows his assignments well and does a good job of blocking."

We may have seen a decrease in handoffs, but we have seen an increase in the "Razorback" lately.

According to Stats & Information, the Cowboys are fifth in the league in terms of Wildcat plays with seven. Tashard Choice had a touchdown run out of the Wildcat against the Eagles in Week 8.

The Cowboys will need to run the ball against the Redskins. They are first in the league in pass defense, giving up an average of just 162.7 YPG.

Romo will be facing the top-ranked passing defense in the league as well as one of the NFL's most improved pass rushes. The Redskins had 24 sacks last season to tie for the third-worst mark in the league, and have already matched that total. Linebacker Brian Orakpo, the No. 13 overall draft pick, leads all rookies with seven sacks and veteran Andre Carter has eight. Last season, the Redskins failed to sack Romo.

"Last year I felt we had some QBs feel very comfortable in the pocket," coach Jim Zorn said. "And this year we are making quarterbacks uncomfortable in the pocket."

That pass rush could be even more potent with Doug Free expected to make his first career start Sunday at right tackle for Dallas in place of Mark Colombo, who had started 57 consecutive games. Colombo had surgery after he broke his left leg and suffered ligament damage in his ankle against Green Bay.

Look for DE Andre Carter and rookie Brian Orakpo to again spearhead the Redskins' pass rush.

Orakpo already set a club record for sacks in a season by a rookie with seven, three more than any other rookie in the league.

With 15 sacks between them, Carter and Orakpo rank as the No. 3 tandem in the league behind the Colts' Dwight Freeney and Robert Mathis (17.5) and the Vikings' Jared Allen and Kevin Williams (17).

"That's what they drafted me for, to make big plays," Orakpo said. "[Andre's] a guy I've looked up to and admired. That's what keeps great pass rushers hungry and able to improve - it's competing. You don't ever want one guy doing all the workload."

Andre Gurode has no ill-feelings about the 2006 game when Albert Haynesworth stomped on his face. The violent injury necessitated 30 stitches along with plastic surgery.

"It's good that he moved passed it. I moved passed it," said Gurode, a Pro Bowl pick the past three seasons. "He is a great player."

Haynesworth calls Gurode "one of the best centers in the game. ... He has good movement. He is big. He is strong."

Gurode opted against filing criminal charges against Haynesworth, who publicly and privately apologized to Gurode in the days after the October 2006 game in Nashville. Now that they will be on the field together again, Gurode knows there will be plenty of reminders of what happened, from the questions being asked to the video replays sure to be on TV.

"I expected when he signed with the Redskins and we played them that it was going to be brought up," Gurode said. "It's something in the past and you can't let what happened in the past define who you are today."

Haynesworth (ankle) may be questionable for Sunday's game. RB Clinton Portis (concussion) will not play.

Bob Cohn asks if Portis' best football is behind him.

But a decline would not be unprecedented or unexpected because Portis' durability and ruggedness might be catching up to him. Going into the season, only four active runners had more career carries. All of them - Edgerrin James, LaDainian Tomlinson, Fred Taylor and Jamal Lewis - have seen better days.

You may have read earlier that Doug Free will get the start at RT for Marc Colombo. The new face on the first-team defense was also announced today. Alan Ball has been named the starter at FS for the injured Ken Hamlin.

Coach Phillips makes it sound like Ball can "ball".

"He's so aggressive," Phillips said. "I mean we've seen him on special teams and he's very aggressive. And he tackles well. He's not a big guy but he tackles well. It's a concern. Their running game is a concern because they have a strong running game. They had 174 yards last week against Denver, who we know can play the run pretty well."

Special teams dynamo, David Buehler, did not practice today because of a pinky toe injury. Todd Archer said that Buehler was "limping noticeably".

Some of the Cowboys have begun the holiday season by helping to serve Thanksgiving dinner at the Dallas Salvation Army homeless center.

SB Nation's power rankings dropped the Cowboys just two spots - from 7 to 9.

Where has Jason Witten gone this year? While Romo still targets him plenty, Witten's yards per catch are at a career low, and he's been a non-factor at the goal-line. With teams keying in on Miles Austin and Roy Williams generally hit-or-miss, the Cowboys will need more from Witten if they're going to develop some offensive consistency. (And losing RT Marc Colombo to injury won't help either)

Comment 137 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

"injuries" is not an excuse for not running the ball because Choice is perfectly healthy

Basically Clarence Hill is saying rather than having Choice run the ball, they have opted for not running the ball at all. That is a ridiculous statement.

by quincyyyyy on Nov 18, 2009 7:09 PM CST reply actions  

I agree

He’s effective when he’s in there. I get upset when they don’t involve him more. I think he should start until the other until Felix and Barber are healthy.

by illcowboy on Nov 18, 2009 7:31 PM CST up reply actions  

I still don't get it

as Raf has pointed out, during the first 3 quarters, we ran 11 times and passed 15 times on first and second downs. How is that abandoning the run? How is that one-dimensional?

by scottmaui on Nov 18, 2009 7:50 PM CST up reply actions  

The reason why you and Raf don't get it is because we are saying he abandoned the run

AFTER the first quarter. Calculate the ratio for the 2nd and 3rd quarters and you’ll find a different story.

by quincyyyyy on Nov 18, 2009 8:03 PM CST up reply actions  

Agreed

For some reason, after the first quarter Garrett completely forgot about our ground game. How can you expect our running backs to come in cold, after being completely ignored and make plays. I would think finding a good rhythm and getting a feel for the run defense is absolutely necessary for a running back to have a hot streak. Unless your name is Matt Forte.

by zapruder on Nov 18, 2009 8:19 PM CST up reply actions  

Either way, it sucks.

Unless something changes, defenses are going back to that old, “just pressure Romo thing.”

With the ground game non-existent (for whatever reason), a defense can just contain Miles, bracket Witten, and bank on the Romo to Roy combo to fail. The Eagles tried, but couldn’t master it like the Pack could. Perhaps the extra 3-4 LB helps to jam up crossing routes that usually lead to big gains for the Cowboys.

I can see for miles and miles and miles and miles and miles...

by Aaron Novinger on Nov 18, 2009 8:30 PM CST up reply actions  

"Perhaps the extra 3-4 LB helps to jam up crossing routes that usually lead to big gains for the Cowboys."

That’s an interesting point. Though, it seems to me that we have more trouble with the 3-4 due to the combination of exotic pressure packages w/ these large, quick, freakishly athletic 3-4 linebackers. We just don’t diagnose these types of defenses well. i.e.: Clay Matthews looking like a pro bowler. I hope Houck does his homework on Orakpo.

by zapruder on Nov 18, 2009 8:59 PM CST up reply actions  

ok I will

in the first quarter we ran 6 times and passed 6 times.

so that means in the 2nd and 3rd quarters, we ran 5 and passed 9. That seems more unbalanced, but now consider that one of those drives was when we got the ball on our own 17 with 1:50 remaining, not a situation you would expect to run, and we threw 3 straight passes. Take out that 2-minute drive, and you have 5 runs and 6 passes.

On top of that, look at the specific situations…

The first play of the third quarter, we ran Barber for a 1 yard loss. Passing on 2nd and 11 is not at all unreasonable. Then we took a sack on the next play and passed on 3rd and 19.

The next drive, we started out with an incomplete pass, but then on 2nd and 10 we ran for 11 yards (plus 15 yard face mask penalty). Then on the next play, Romo fumbled the snap and we ended up in 2nd and 13, then after another penalty 3rd and 23. Again, not exactly ideal situations to be running the ball.

And that was it for the 3rd quarter.

So, I think it had a lot more to do with ending up in clear passing situations for reasons completely unrelated to the run-pass play calling than it did with Garrett “abandoning the run.” When you’re in the 2-minute drill from your own 17, or in 2nd and 3rd and long situations, we’d be right to criticize him for trying to run in passing situations as much as some are now for supposedly abandoning the run.

by scottmaui on Nov 18, 2009 8:39 PM CST up reply actions  

oh one mistake

I was counting all downs in the first quarter stats. We actually passed twice on 3rd downs. Rather than subtracting plays, I actually counted the 1st and 2nd down plays. in the 2nd and 3rd quarters. We ran 3 times, passed 8 times. But again, take out the 3 plays we passed in the attempted 2-minute drive, when you wouldn’t expect a run, and the balance is 3:5.

by scottmaui on Nov 18, 2009 8:51 PM CST up reply actions  

um actuall it was 4 to 6 pass run ratio (you weren't suppose to count 3rd downs)

so that is 5 running plays on first and second downs and 11 passing plays

by quincyyyyy on Nov 18, 2009 8:52 PM CST up reply actions  

I just want back and counted it again

Q2 & Q2, 1st and 2nd downs, 3 runs and 8 passes.

But 3 of those passes were in the last drive starting on our 17 with 1:50 remaining.

by scottmaui on Nov 18, 2009 8:57 PM CST up reply actions  

there were a few times

one 2nd and 8 (first play of the 2nd quarter, after we ran it on 1st down), and a couple 1st and 10s. We did run it once on 2nd and 10.

So after reviewing all that, I’ll reiterate what I said….

If you remove the 2-minute drive, and consider that there was one 2nd and 11 and two 2nd and 13s, I still don’t get how running 3 times and passing 5 times in those 2 quarters on 1st and 2nd down constitutes “abandoning the run.”

by scottmaui on Nov 18, 2009 9:05 PM CST up reply actions  

this game didn't call for balance, it called for unbalance in favor of running the ball

Garrett just can’t bring him self to do that. Our O’line was having trouble picking up the blitz and the passing game was going no where. In those cases you some times need to bring in the heavy stuff and knock the crap out of the other team. Norv Turner would do that with emmitt when teams would get aikman/irvin in a rut. they would run it like 11 times in a row. It really breaks the back of the defense.
Green Bay has two top notch corners, they are the strongist part of their defense, their d’line and linebackers are the weakest part of their defense. Attacking their db’s is attacking the strength of their d’fense.
Teams have figured out that Garrett likes to pass no matter what. So if you have a champ bailey, or charles woodson, they know Garrett will throw at them anyway. He needs to change his philosophy, and get back to the balance from the first three games. Running 40% (last six games) is not going to cut it.

by just4fun on Nov 18, 2009 9:23 PM CST up reply actions  

it's thing to say we should have gone heavy run

that’s arguable, but that’s not the same thing as saying he abandoned the run, which is what I’m saying just doesn’t ring true when you look at the details.

And when the did run in the 2nd and 3rd quarters, they got
2nd and 4: no gain
3rd and 4: 3 yards (punt)
1st and 10: -1 yards
2nd and 10: 11 yards

so out of the 4 times they ran in the mid-game (a seemingly small amount but again not out of balance especially given the down and distance situations), they had a 25% success rate. The running game was going nowhere too.

The problem wasn’t so much that they weren’t running the ball, it’s that they weren’t running it very well. Now sometimes you do keep running even when it isn’t working, but running at a 25% success rate, and then insisting on running it regardless, is not going to cut it either.

by scottmaui on Nov 18, 2009 9:53 PM CST up reply actions  

I'd be interested to see how many times they ran out of the two tightend set.

running a draw out of the shotgun doesn’t send the same message.

Regardless, Garrett seems to have a problem going away from the pass when other teams are trying to take it away (champ bailey/sam hurd). Garrett is a good coordinator, but just like many he is a pass first guy, but atleast he admitted the need to get back to a balanced offense.

by just4fun on Nov 18, 2009 10:04 PM CST up reply actions  

And this hasn't been a problem this season, just in the last game.

and as much flack as he has been getting, i’m sure he’ll be extra careful to maintain some balance.

by just4fun on Nov 18, 2009 10:22 PM CST up reply actions  

and I agree

with the overall idea that he needs to make a point to maintain the balance, and with Sturm’s criticism that he ran too much out of the 11 personnel in the shotgun, which is just inviting the blitz. I just think the flak he’s been getting about this game being so out of balance was a little overblown and not taking into account the specific situations in the game.

by scottmaui on Nov 18, 2009 10:58 PM CST up reply actions  

I like Garrett, but it's not just his lack of running that frustrates me.

I feel like these backs were getting so clogged up into blitzing last week that they weren’t able to get out in the flats or middle of the field before Romo was getting pressured. Having two backs/ one TE or some combination of that could have helped. One could stay in to protect and one could go out to beat the blitz on a hot route. The defense would then have to decided which one’s which, thus putting pressure back on them.

Sometimes, the tempo of this offense resembles that of the Colts. What works for them is that they will abuse a defense with the short passing game to help open up both the deeper passing routes and the running game. This is what I did not see Garrett do. I did not see him find a way to swing backs out, find soft spots for TEs, or find a way to feature a slot WR.

Developing a short passing game is away to beat the blitz and control the ball. 4 yards here, 6 yards there…much like a running game. This happened last year even when Brad Johnson was in. Frustrating.

I can see for miles and miles and miles and miles and miles...

by Aaron Novinger on Nov 19, 2009 9:26 AM CST up reply actions  

+100

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 Nov 19, 2009 9:27 AM CST up reply actions  

Hey!

A reasonable comment! How novel.

I don’t think Garrett or anyone else has ever forgotten about the run. They do their best to see what the defense is allowing and try to take it. The GB defense was betting that Dallas WRs and TEs could not get separation before they got Romo, same thing Atlanta and Philly tried. This time it worked for the defense. Played again, it probably wouldn’t.

But your comment on adjusting the short drops and passing game would be helpful. It can’t solve all the problems because there were times when the defense penetrated too fast for even a three-step drop. But it might have helped.

FREE THE OGLETREE!!!

by dunkman on Nov 19, 2009 10:38 AM CST up reply actions  

just heard a stat that said Garrett offense is in the top 10 in passing and running attempts..

so I guess the offense is pretty even…take it for whats it’s worth.

"Austin made the play, Austin saved the day" Brad Sham

by Boyzfan94 on Nov 19, 2009 10:43 AM CST up reply actions  

it's kinda interesting......

that Rodgers had been criticized for trying to “make the big play” instead of the quick dump-offs prior to this game isn’t it? It was almost like we got caught up into Green Bay’s (Rodgers) mentality on our offense. We should have tried the quick dump offs to loosen up their blitz and not do the shot-gun every play like Capers said. Interesting that when Garrett was trying to get a H.C. job that he wanted Capers remember? My point is, Capers probably knows Garrett’s tendencies since they both worked together in Miami. You would think Garrett knows Capers tendencies but it didn’t seem to make any difference. I know everyone likes to brush it off as “execution” but when something isn’t working you would think you could make some adjustments and not keep beating a dead horse?

by texstar on Nov 19, 2009 10:45 AM CST up reply actions  

Garrett wasn't calling plays in Miami

Last night I lay in bed looking up at the stars in the sky and I thought to myself, "where the heck is the ceiling?"

by White Wolf on Nov 19, 2009 12:12 PM CST up reply actions  

I know he wasn't but they

did work together. Don’t you think they have talked and he kinda knows Garrett’s philosophies and tendencies since they were together? Also, if Garrett had been named head coach at some of these teams (Rams, Broncos) he was talking about Capers being his DC.

by texstar on Nov 19, 2009 12:56 PM CST up reply actions  

I was thinking about this sometime after the game

Where were our outlet passes Sunday? Almost always, without fail, Romo has the option of dumping the ball off to a back when the blitz is coming. Generally good things happen when we do that. I can’t remember that happening much at all this game.

If Witten AND a back is staying in to help with the blitz, those are the two highest percentage options in the passing game, gone.

by foyesboys on Nov 19, 2009 12:37 PM CST up reply actions  

They often got stuck in pass protection because Matthews and Woodson and everyone else were leap-frogging the OL.

Before this game (and maybe the Eagles one, too), they ran alot more 1WR sets with some crazy combo of RBs and TEs moving all over the place.

Didn’t see much of that. It’s a shame.

I can see for miles and miles and miles and miles and miles...

by Aaron Novinger on Nov 19, 2009 12:42 PM CST up reply actions  

Garrett can become a great offensive coordinator

but let’s not forget HE is still a work in progress, and his background doesn’t lend itself to knowing how to make a defense respect your running game. It’s more like the talent of the players are the cause of that, and not the scheme (that’s for sure).

Aren’t the Dallas Cowboys supposed to be one of the most talented teams at RB and OL, and isn’t the offensive line really built to run block? If they are average at pass blocking, why make the offensive line do so excessively?

His focus on offense should be to try and get the ball into Tashard and Felix’s hands on short passes/screens. Once one of them has success (which won’t take long against ANY defense), How much you want to bet that our passing game to WR’s will flourish? Defenses will have to account for the big play abilities our backs have.

Like I said, Garrett’s philosiphy is flawed. With this team, and it’s players, to continue to “pass to set up the run” will just end up with the same results. Our passing game is not good enough to win the big games against good defenses on it’s own. We’ve seen this offense dance this waltz so often before, is it so hard to believe? Once Garrett accepts that this offense, on this team, must run to set up the pass more, then we will have our balance, and be a real threat on offense to win the super bowl. His pass to set up the run is not good for this team, and why I have said many times that “we didn’t need to be breaking in an inexperienced offensive coordinator during this time”. Everyday, the Cowboys window of opportunity to win a Super Bowl gets smaller and smaller, while this foolishness goes on.

Who knows? We may have already won a super bowl or two by now without this flaw. Having success by running between the tackles will bring out the best in our team, trust me. Tashard Choice and his effectiveness up the middle is the key- and someone please tell him to use him for more than just the “Razorback”!

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

by DallasPalace on Nov 19, 2009 3:47 PM CST up reply actions  

He is still learning on the run, err pass.

He’s also got a defensive-minded coach who is, in effect, his boss. I’m sure he wouldn’t mind a few more runs and long, sustaining drives for his unit.

I can see for miles and miles and miles and miles and miles...

by Aaron Novinger on Nov 19, 2009 4:07 PM CST up reply actions  

I'm sorry Aaron, but...

on other teams, the offensive coordinator can be overruled by the head coach. That doesn’t happen with the Dallas Cowboys, and it’s simply because that everyone has so much faith that Garrett can’t do wrong, and Wade isn’t an offensive juggernaut himself. But I do believe that Wade knows when to run the ball!

Is it really so hard to believe that this flaw is what has kept our team from great success? Not for me.

Alot of people, including Garrett himself probably, believe that the team of the nineties won Super bowls because of Turner, and his “pass to set up the run” mentality.

Myself, i just find it hard to believe that our passing game back then would have been what it was without Emmitt. Rememeber when Emmitt held out one year, his contract year? Everyone thought that they would be fine? After the second game, and second loss, Jerry had to do something, or else the season would be a failure.

What it really was back then was “run to set up the pass”. We would not have won Super bowls without Emmitt. That is why I have faith in Tashard the way I do- because i know that if Tashard can have success running the ball in his style- to the outside, to the inside, on screens, always picking up yards, being effective, never quitting- That is what a defense can’t do nothing about. I call it “superior determination”. And his success will cause the passing game to flourish. of that I am sure of.

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

by DallasPalace on Nov 19, 2009 4:26 PM CST up reply actions  

lol

dude, Choice is no Emmitt, #22 was one of a kind, you’re never going to see a back like him again.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Nov 20, 2009 7:52 AM CST up reply actions  

He is no Emmitt, that's true...

…but Choice does have a similar ability to make cuts in tight spaces and he sees the field really well.

Honestly I just wish Felix was healthy because when he is I think there is nobody in the league quite like him.

The last running back the Cowboys had with that type of home-run ability was wearing the number 33.

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 Nov 20, 2009 9:23 AM CST up reply actions  

He doesn't have to be

he just has to be Tashard Choice.

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

by DallasPalace on Nov 21, 2009 10:23 AM CST up reply actions  

Garrett, "whose offense has run pass plays 62.7 percent of the time this season, including sacks and Romo scrambles."

So that’s the end of the argument.
Put away the microstats from one game. It’s right there in the article.

He’s running too much. Period. Anyone who’s watched and understands football can see it w/ their own eyes and don’t need blogging “experts” or people who write articles to tell you!

The Stat above validates what most of us already knew.

by Realist Larry on Nov 18, 2009 10:59 PM CST up reply actions  

And, no, I'm contradicting myself

I’m not quoting the article or it’s opinion, but the one stat that matters in the article!

by Realist Larry on Nov 18, 2009 11:00 PM CST up reply actions  

The only thing more running would have done

is end the game sooner. The only movement down the field the team got was from passing.

FREE THE OGLETREE!!!

by dunkman on Nov 19, 2009 10:41 AM CST up reply actions  

and if Roy didn't fumble

and didn’t lose the ball in the lights, and if Tony had manage to hit Martellus, then we’d all be calling Garrett a genius.

by scottmaui on Nov 19, 2009 10:45 AM CST up reply actions  

Right. It's the problem with "failure"

When you have success, you definitely know what worked. When you have failure you are only left knowing what did not work, but still with no idea of what might have worked instead. So folks can pile on and claim that running would have solved the problem, but it might have instead produced even worse performance. That’s my theory because after the first quarter or so, the running game generally looked bad as well. Some was keeping MBIII in but a lot of it was simply poor O-line execution.

That’s not to say Garrett should not have done some different things, just that what those different things might be are all pure speculation.

FREE THE OGLETREE!!!

by dunkman on Nov 19, 2009 10:49 AM CST up reply actions  

yeah

I think we, as fans, just want Garrett to say more than it “was a lack of execution.” That’s probably the truth but we want to hear more because it sounds like a cop-out to us. It comes across as very non-chalant and boring. We want something juicy and exciting.

by texstar on Nov 19, 2009 10:53 AM CST up reply actions  

there was definitely a lack of execution

but it is also quite clear there was a lack of good play calling.

by quincyyyyy on Nov 19, 2009 11:01 AM CST up reply actions  

If both the passing and the running game fail when you are losing by one score,

which one do you force?

Most teams force the run. Garrett kicks into run-and-shoot mode.

I can see for miles and miles and miles and miles and miles...

by Aaron Novinger on Nov 19, 2009 12:08 PM CST up reply actions  

haha.....

and he is the “genius” because he is a Princeton graduate right? LOL

by texstar on Nov 19, 2009 11:58 AM CST up reply actions  

Garrett.....

better be careful using the word “execution” in Texas. Remember, we do have the “highest execution” rate in the country. If he’s not careful (more games like the GB game) the word execution( as in Garrett’s head) could take on a whole new meaning if you get my drift. I’m teasing guys-hahaha

by texstar on Nov 19, 2009 12:01 PM CST up reply actions  

And there a bunch of plays Aaron rodgers wishes he had back I'm sure

but the difference is they decided to run the ball and control the clock, so they had more opportunities to make plays. And since we stuck with passing the ball we didn’t have the opportunities.

by quincyyyyy on Nov 19, 2009 11:00 AM CST up reply actions  

Roy and Bennett are not reliable players right now.

If I’m a defense, I’d rather play one-on-one with those guys rather than Miles, the backs, or Witten.

Capers knocked out Garrett’s rooks and bishops and risked getting beat by the pawns. They couldn’t get across the board to get queened, so he won.

I can see for miles and miles and miles and miles and miles...

by Aaron Novinger on Nov 19, 2009 12:10 PM CST up reply actions  

Nice analogy.

"We'll see." --Bill Parcells

by Uncle Angus on Nov 19, 2009 5:26 PM CST up reply actions  

Garrets offense is pretty freaking vanalla...

Barely any WR motiion for whatever reason….seems like they use the same 5 plays all game…I would like to see them spread it out more with 4 WR sets….or go empty with 5 WR’s……Get Ogletree more involved in the slot..with his speed he can create something..Garrett is so inconsistant it’s painful at times to watch.

"Austin made the play, Austin saved the day" Brad Sham

by Boyzfan94 on Nov 19, 2009 10:29 AM CST up reply actions  

It's like Parcells never left

but at least he knew how to run the ball. We should never have let Payton go.

by quincyyyyy on Nov 19, 2009 11:02 AM CST up reply actions  

Parcells also

passed more than he ran with this team. I think he and Garrett know something about this O-line that we don’t. Dallas doesn’t run at well when the passing game is not “on”. Successful pass plays are not the power plays, but the draws and misdirections. I think people think that running would have solved Sunday’s ills. Watching that line’s performance, I think it would only have made Romo’s day less painful.

FREE THE OGLETREE!!!

by dunkman on Nov 19, 2009 12:15 PM CST up reply actions  

You still gotta force the run.

Can’t abandon it. Those big guys must move the DLine off the ball or fail trying. Obviously, they are liabilities in the passing game as well. It’s not as if Romo can file his nails back there.

I can see for miles and miles and miles and miles and miles...

by Aaron Novinger on Nov 19, 2009 12:24 PM CST up reply actions  

I really think you would have seen something more if there had been

both motive and opportunity. Motive meaning the Packers and Cowboys match ups were such the the run was advantageous option and opportunity meaning there were enough possessions and game sitatuions to afford to. i really don’t think garrett knows less about football than the average fan. I really don’t.

You can’t force the run when you are going 3 and out. And as a pass-based team (and they are, and it’s probably more the players make-up than someone’s choice) they can’t run if they can’t pass. Think about the Stillers – they’d love to run. But it’s not happening, so they pass.

FREE THE OGLETREE!!!

by dunkman on Nov 19, 2009 12:29 PM CST up reply actions  

I agree, but I'm not saying to do that permanently.

Just a series or two. Even if they average 2 yards per gain, these backs can still bust one loose. They just need the opportunity. That whole game felt like we were playing catch-up, when there was little reason to until the Romo sack and fumble.

I’m not questioning Garrett’s football knowledge, I’m questioning his decisions. RW has the dropsies, Romo is not always accurate. If the other weapons are being taken away in the passing game, then create. He did it against the Eagles, but the Pack was obviously ready for those screens he used to beat the blitz.

If he’s willing to force the pass with unreliable players, then why not do the same with the run just to chill things out a little. Incomplete passes and inabilities to pick up blitzers frustrate an offense more than not having a successful rushing attempt each time you hand the ball off.

I can see for miles and miles and miles and miles and miles...

by Aaron Novinger on Nov 19, 2009 12:37 PM CST up reply actions  

I'd like to adress that comment dunkman...

I believe that alot of people think that Dallas doesn’t run well when the passing game is not on. I believe it is because Garrett doesn’t use the RB’s in a correct rotation.

using the Rb’s the way I would recommend would mean one less reciever out there, and apparantly, Garrett doesn’t want to do that, and that’s why he doesn’t run the offense that way.

I would have thought that the correct way to use the “3-headed monster” would go something like this:

Choice used alot between the 20’s, Barber used alot down near the goal line. Felix being out there alot while either of those two are out there, making him a reciever (like we would hope happens) and when he’s not is when Anderson is out there.

Using the RB’s is the key to running the offense, not the optional thing to the passing game. You make it the key because it sets up play action, as well as single coverage on recievers. In other words, you make it a priority because it will make your passing game flourish.

Unfortunately, that goes against the “pass to set up the run” mentality, and that is why we don’t see plays called from that kind of offensive philosiphy. But i believe that is the best use of our offensive talent, as well as it will keep defenses guessing alot more whether we are gonna run or pass.

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

by DallasPalace on Nov 19, 2009 4:03 PM CST up reply actions  

Really Terry?

Is that all it takes? Some people will look at what I’ve written and say “You don’t see the logic”, or rave about how far off base I am.

Myself, I would just write these things because I believe them to be common sense. Is that what Jerry is looking for?

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

by DallasPalace on Nov 19, 2009 4:37 PM CST up reply actions  

I just know Garrett has already forgot more about offensive football

than all of the bloggers on this site will ever know about it, so I just find it amusing when so many fans think they know more than Garrett as to how to run the offense.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Nov 20, 2009 7:56 AM CST up reply actions  

I know huh..?

Look out Bill Walsh; here comes the mighty Garrett. ;-)

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 Nov 20, 2009 9:15 AM CST up reply actions  

Knowledge is one thing

What to do with that knowledge is another. Just because some of us here believe that he can stand some more seasoning doesn’t mean that he can’t develop to be an outstanding offensive coordinator.

This just refers to that saying I’ve had about him since last years Pittsburgh game- “the Cowboys did not nead to be breaking in an inexperienced offensive coordinator at this time”. We may have already won a Super Bowl because of this flaw. You and others may consider it minor, but when a damn breaks, the visible cracks are small in the beginning.

For an offensive coordinator, knowledge is great. But nothing can replace experience. I’m glad you find my opinion on Jason Garrett amusing, because I am one of those fans that thnks He should be under more scrutiny. Leaving him to run the offense on his own is a big mistake in my opinion, and a strong offensive minded Head Coach is definitely needed to oversee him better than what is currently happening. Wade is not the man for that job unfortunately. Your amusement just tells me moreso that my “hunch” about Garrett is more valid than I originally thought.

What “hunch” is that you ask?
That it was wrong to bring in an inexperienced offensive coordinator without a strong offensive minded head coach to oversee him and take him under his wing. I’m not saying that Jason Garrett can’t succeed, but what I am most definitely saying is it will cost the team some growing pains, and I feel Jason Garrett hasn’t progressed enough as a result in 3 years now to give us what we desire from the team. I truly hope I’m wrong, but I’m not gonna be shocked at what happens either.

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

by DallasPalace on Nov 20, 2009 12:13 PM CST up reply actions  

I may be in the minority

Garrett definitely make mistakes but I am not sure I buy that his philosophy is flawed. I think he has a scheme that he (1) believes in (2) he thinks fits the strengths of the team (3) thinks attacks the weaknesses of other teams (4) will therefore be successful.

What may be flawed here is that he doesn’t really have the personnel to make this work or he is not reading other teams well enough. I can’t answer to that. But the simple solution of “run more” doesn’t strike me as feasible based on what I’ve seen this line do when the run isn’t of the “surprise” type – misdirections, draws, etc.

But I also willingly admit that I am not sure what is to blame except for execution. That is visually obvious that in some games this team executes poorly.

FREE THE OGLETREE!!!

by dunkman on Nov 19, 2009 6:30 PM CST up reply actions  

I agree dunkman

Running when a team can’t stop our passing game would be a mistake. But what did you see in the Green bay game? I know what I saw, and our passing game wasn’t working, and maybe our running game wasn’t either, but that’s just what I’m saying. It’s like what Aaron has said: when a teams running and passing game isn’t working, most (and I really mean most) will stick to the run since there is less chance for a turnover.

But how can you draw the conclusion that our running game wasn’t really working in that game? I’m sure you can’t come to that conclusion without seeing more runs.

Garrett doesn’t make the run a priority. That’s the opposite of what he really should be thinking like, especially if he really wants to pass the ball.

Using the running backs in the correct rotation is the key. In previous posts of mine on other threads, I’ve written 2 things should happen:

1.Garrett needs to make Tashard the bread and butter type back in this offense. Nothing against Felix or MB3, but they don’t have what Tashard does, plain and simple. Felix should be used more in reciever sets, and MB3 down near the goal line.

2. Garrett needs to use Kevin Ogletree more, especially if Felix isn’t out there, and he needs to use him for more than bubble screens. No one should be thinking “Kevin Ogletree is out on the field- look for the bubble screen”. I mean, come on. You’ve got to do better than that if you are the offensive coordinator for the Dallas Cowboys.

Jason Garrett is a victim of his own tendencies and of politics:

1.He wants to pass
2. He feels like he has to play the players that are getting paid alot and the ones that are the most popular

Here is what he should do:

1. Learn to run when it is called for
2. Play whatever player is hot

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

by DallasPalace on Nov 19, 2009 7:42 PM CST up reply actions  

teams that make running the ball a priority

don’t have franchise qbs under center and as a consequence don’t score that many points.

You have to score points in this league to win games and you do that by passing the ball. All running the ball does is make your passing easier by setting up easier down and distances, like a 3rd and 3 instead of a 3rd and 8.

Look around the league and you’ll see thats true.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Nov 20, 2009 8:00 AM CST up reply actions  

What Aikman was not a franchise QB?

I kid, I kid, as I realize you’re talking about today’s game(not yesteryear) but seriously what’s wrong w/ setting up 3rd and 3’s?

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 Nov 20, 2009 9:14 AM CST up reply actions  

so what's your take on A.P.?

Favre is well Favre right? On any given day, A.P. can do it all. On any given day, Favre can win it for you.

by texstar on Nov 20, 2009 10:46 AM CST up reply actions  

absolutely nothing

and that’s what your running game should be able to do, but what happens when it’s 2d and 10?? You want to run again to make it 3rd and 8? or do you want to pick up the 1st down or make it 3rd and short.

When your running game isn’t working, you can’t just keep running or you’ll end up with a lot of 3 and outs.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Nov 20, 2009 2:17 PM CST up reply actions  

No one is saying

abandon the pass. But to say that the run should be made a priority is for the simple reason that your passing game will flourish. Nothing helps a passing game more than a strong running game, plain and simple.

It’s a philosophical difference that Garrett is unwilling to change to. He is still trying to run the offense like the Patriots with Brady. How about running it Cowboys style?

Cowboy football, in all it’s history, has always been revolved around a strong running game. The Cowboys have never been a “pass to set up the run” offense ever, at least not effectively. They have always been a “run to set up the pass”.

Have faith in Cowboy football, and forget about recent history and the Patriots and what “most teams” are doing now.

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

by DallasPalace on Nov 20, 2009 12:27 PM CST up reply actions  

that right there is your problem

You’re talking about history when in fact you should be looking at the present. The NFL is much different than it was back when the Cowboys and a lot of other teams had strong rushing games.

The NFL has morphed into a passing league because thats what the casual fan wants to see. They want to see the ball in the air and lots of TDs. The casual fan doesn’t want to see 3 yards and a cloud of dust and 14-10 games. That’s why the rules over the past several years have been changed to favor the offense and more specifically, the passing game.

No more checking receivers past 5 yards, defenders can’t horse collar, head slap, chop block, torpedo helpless receivers anymore, while at the same time, qbs are protected like the President of the U.S. and OL can virtually hold on every play.

It’s a passing game today, this is what the NFL has become.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Nov 20, 2009 2:26 PM CST up reply actions  

It's not my problem

It’s the teams problem, and you also know why Terry.

Predictability.

That is the Dallas Cowboys real opponent anymore, not the team they face on the field. It may be hard for some to accept, but predictable is what the Cowboys offense has become once again here at the end of the season.

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

by DallasPalace on Nov 23, 2009 4:02 PM CST up reply actions  

+1

We’ll get a ton of motion in the next game or two like we did early in the year, but he always seems to revert back to forcing the shotgun—even when it doesn’t work.

He will learn from this past week, for sure.

I can see for miles and miles and miles and miles and miles...

by Aaron Novinger on Nov 19, 2009 12:12 PM CST up reply actions  

Just does't seem like Garrent utililizes

Any of the RB’s in way to maximize their talents. I love MBIII but I think the book is pretty clear on him now that he should be the finisher. I much prefer Choice as the starter. He has shown good hands and an ability to run between the tackles with a burst. Leave MBIII as your third down and fourth quarter guy, plus a series or two mixed in. IMO, they should be lining Jones up all over the field, like what the Saints do with Bush and, for God’s sake, let him go back to returning kicks. If he gets hurt, so be it. He is the most explosive player on the team. Find ways to use him, even if it is as a decoy.

http://www.heymanwhatsup.com//main/category/front-page

by WhatsUpPorkchop on Nov 19, 2009 2:08 PM CST up reply actions  

I agree with you totally about this,

especially since it seems like MBIII is such a good character guy who wants to help the team. I would think he wouldn’t mind not being the “official starter” if the team was doing well. In today’s NFL, everyone knows that at some positions (RB, CB, LB) being the starter doesn’t matter at all anyway.

by WAREwolf94 on Nov 19, 2009 2:15 PM CST up reply actions  

Starting has nothing to do with it WAREwolf94

It has to do with using the RB’s in a correct rotation. I like MB3, and I like Felix. They do what they do more than extremely well. But I consider both of them more situational type backs. It’s no coincidence that our running game has gone downhill since Tashard has only been used in the Razorback.

If Garrett figures it out, and uses Tashard as the main Bread and Butter back, our run offense will shoot right back up to number 1- and our passing offense will be more effective as a result. We don’t need to be the most productive pass offense, we just need to be the most effective. The running game will give us that, against any defense.

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

by DallasPalace on Nov 19, 2009 7:52 PM CST up reply actions  

uses Tashard as the main Bread and Butter back

Different ways of saying the same thing – I agree with what you’re saying

by WAREwolf94 on Nov 20, 2009 9:49 AM CST up reply actions  

I just hope

That someone tells Garrett that he has to think that way for more than just the Redskins. There are plenty of other teams we have to run and beat on.
Why does he even give teams a chance to be in the game? They can’t do nothing against us if our running game is clicking.

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

by DallasPalace on Nov 20, 2009 11:39 AM CST up reply actions  

Running as a game strategy

As a GA Tech fan as well as a Cowboys fan I have observed the success Tech has had with the triple option.

Now I am certainly not advocating running the triple option in the pros, but there is value in the pro game to eating up the clock with a persistent and varied running game.

In this day of wide open passing offenses, it just makes sense for the Cowboys to limit the number of offensive plays we allow the opposition to run – especially since we have 3 studs to run the ball.

And don’t forget – that strategy would make Romo a much better QB.

Garrett, you better get on top of this or you will be blamed for Cowboy failure this year and be gone!

by Cecil34 on Nov 18, 2009 7:53 PM CST reply actions  

Thank You Cecil34!

wise words!

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

by DallasPalace on Nov 19, 2009 4:05 PM CST up reply actions  

Redskins #1 in the league in pass defense?

These generic stats are so deceiving because they don’t weigh strength of schedule. Outside of the division, the Redskins have faced (followed by their pass offense ranking): St. Louis (22) , Detroit (21), Tampa Bay (23), Carolina (25), Kansas City (28), Atlanta (17) and Denver (17). The only 2 teams they’ve played that were in the top half of the league in passing yards are the Eagles (9) and Giants (14).

I wish there was (maybe there is and I just don’t know about it) some rankings calculator that considered not just raw yardage stats, but how well a team did against another team compared to their average for the season. The Skins may have held teams to less yards than they usually put up, but is the difference between what teams were able to put up against the Skins and what they normally put up greater than any other team in the league? Maybe but I kind of doubt it. To me that would be the true measure of who has the #1 pass defense.

by scottmaui on Nov 18, 2009 8:19 PM CST reply actions  

Well, their upcoming schedule

consists of Dallas twice, Philly, New Orleans, NYG, San Diego, and the now Bruce Gradowski-led Raiders.

I’d assume that #1 pass defense ranking takes a huge dump beginning this week.

I can see for miles and miles and miles and miles and miles...

by Aaron Novinger on Nov 18, 2009 8:24 PM CST up reply actions  

thanks

DVOA is actually what I was meaning…

by scottmaui on Nov 18, 2009 8:54 PM CST up reply actions  

careful with using footballoutsiders, they still haven't solved the philly problem

and cincy is rated below the pitt and baltimore, dispite having a better record and sweeping both of them. FO stats are fun to look at but otherwise totally meaningless.

by just4fun on Nov 18, 2009 9:26 PM CST up reply actions  

they practice what is called pseudoscience

they point out the times that they are right, ignoring the fact that they are wrong most of the time and it’s not easy or clear to prove that one team is better than the other because most teams play each other only once or not at all. It’s kind of like people that predict the future, they point out the few times they are right, and no one remembers all the times they are wrong.

by just4fun on Nov 18, 2009 9:59 PM CST up reply actions  

It's not psudeoscience; it's statistics

and maybe cincy matches up well against steelers. Some teams are just better matchups. But the stats don’t lie.

by quincyyyyy on Nov 19, 2009 11:04 AM CST up reply actions  

no it's pseudoscience, they provide and analysis of statistics using

a formula that produces largely inaccurate results. Occasionally a few teams are gotten right. But the purpose of the DVOA is to provide a more accurate unbias “power ranking”. It may be unbiased, but it’s highly inaccurate. Arizona was ranked 21 last year and in the superbowl. Philly’s in the top5 everyyear regardless of their record, it’s even called “the philly problem” on their web site. they’ve tried to correct for it unsuccessfully. So, if they have several teams ranked inaccurately, you can pull out the one that kind of agrees with what your thinking.

by just4fun on Nov 19, 2009 3:18 PM CST up reply actions  

i agree

At this point in the season they are the better team. Just have a hard time believing it will be that way at year end. Troys knee is a concern though.

"No matter where you go, you are what you are playa"-Jay Z
Twitter Account

by Wmillion on Nov 18, 2009 11:10 PM CST via mobile up reply actions  

All stats are totally meaningless

Except for fantasy football stats when you are in a money league.

by Damnsammit on Nov 19, 2009 7:57 AM CST up reply actions  

i actually started thinking about this idea in FF

when I was trying to decide whether to start Schaub against the Colts defense. The Colts D was rated so highly against passers and I was considering benching him, but then I dug a little deeper and looked at the actual passers they had faced, which turned to be a long list of no-names with only a couple decent ones. Then I compared what each QB had done against the Colts with that QB’s average for the year, and almost without fail each QB had put up stats that were very consistent with their averages for the year. So I felt better about starting Schaub, and sure enough he put up about 20 points, which was only slightly lower than his average for the year.

Anyway, long example to say that looking at how opponents do against a team compared to their average for the year is a lot more meaningful than just looking at the raw rankings.

by scottmaui on Nov 19, 2009 10:44 AM CST up reply actions  

I do this every week in my money league...

The “projected points” is a completely worthless statistic as it only takes their average points in games they played. It doesn’t take into consideration so many other factors.

Always look at the opponent and research a little bit to determine who has a better chance at making points. Of course sometimes we never know that a Fred Jackson will throw a TD pass, and get about 70 combined yards rec/rush.

Crap happens, but the “projected points” is completely worthless to me.

by Damnsammit on Nov 19, 2009 12:37 PM CST up reply actions  

Well, that's the same as the teams we faced!

The Redskins have been solid on D for years, and you earn those stats when it’s been 8 games.
I believe they deserve respect (on D!)

What that means is that they dominate when they are supposed to, against weak teams!

I give them credit, and if your reasoning was correct, then what does that say about our Pass D, which has faced the same teams? Are they really 30th?

by Realist Larry on Nov 18, 2009 11:04 PM CST up reply actions  

if you are winning, you run

The Redskins are #1 in total passing yards allowed because they have been losing a lot — when you are down, opponents rush more to run out the clock. Only 2 teams have less pass attempts against, while only 7 teams have more rushing attempts against.

by mlibbey on Nov 19, 2009 4:36 PM CST up reply actions  

Running attack hampered?

Anyone else get the feeling the 3 headed monster is really around 2.2 at this point? Barber looks strong at first but appears to wear down (quad still hampering?) I know they took him out because of the thumb on pass protection. Felix, no matter how many beers I drink during a game, looks to be about 80-85% with the knee. Just not as crisp or sharp. I don’t know if they’re using them for decoys or what? I say let Choice give em this week off. He picks up the blitz and he looks 110% when he runs. JG, it’s your choice!

by Benthere on Nov 18, 2009 10:38 PM CST reply actions  

But just when you think it should happen

he comes out and drops back into the shotgun even more and forces passes. Losing this Redskins game would be disaster- I pray that he overcomes his personal feelings and takes a leap of faith in Tashard and our running game in general. Nothing electrifies the players and the fans than a nice effective hard core run!

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

by DallasPalace on Nov 19, 2009 4:08 PM CST up reply actions  

It has been difficult to see Barber and Felix struggle…

They both, especially Felix, look like they’re playing hurt. If only the Cowboys had a 3rd option at running back, someone who could come in for a game and give them something like 92 yards and a touchdown in just 8 carries; for a remarkable average of 11.5 yards per carry.

Oh wait, they do have that option, his name is Tashard Choice and those were his numbers from the Kansas City game, (the last game in which he was number 2 on the depth chart). In fact, his average has been 4.8 yards per carry for the season so far, (262 yards on 54 carries). I’ll take a 4.8 per carry average any day. But hey maybe an even better idea is to keep a player like that on the bench in favor of someone bogged down by a knee brace, obviously hurt, and seemingly running at only half speed

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 Nov 19, 2009 8:49 AM CST reply actions  

Felix doesn't look the same...

and I hope it is injury related and not something else. Just a few years ago we had another Jones that lit it up his first year and was a threat to “take it to the house” every time he touched the ball. I remember one night game against Seattle when he looked like possibly the best back Dallas had ever seen. But we all know how that story ended up, he being just a shell of his former self in following years. He looked hesitant… maybe even scared.

Here’s hoping that this Jones doesn’t follow that form.

by Rembrthe90s on Nov 19, 2009 9:12 AM CST reply actions  

Deja vu...

When I first glanced at the picture above, without looking at the numbers, but just seeing that first 2 on the jersey, I thought I was seeing an old pic of Emmitt coming out of the backfield. Ahhh, the glory days. Choice does remind me a lot of him.

by Rembrthe90s on Nov 19, 2009 9:14 AM CST up reply actions  

Ratio will be more balanced based on history

We had not had this much imbalance in run/pass ratio since Redskins home game last year which is ironic.

11 run playes were called last year at home against the Redskins. The following week we ran it 38 times against Cincy.

We ran the ball 14 times sunday but 3 of those were Romo scrambles. We actually called 11 runs the entire game. I’m willing to bet we run at least 30 times sunday

by cow_fanatic on Nov 19, 2009 10:45 AM CST reply actions  

and let's hope that's because we have a nice lead early

but even if we don’t, he still needs to maintain a balance. but what really kills us is getting negative plays (sacks, penalties, TFLs), and ending up in 2nd and 3rd and long when your playbook shrinks substantially. if we can avoid too many of those, he can more easily maintain the needed balance.

by scottmaui on Nov 19, 2009 10:48 AM CST up reply actions  

And needed balance is 43/57 run/pass

I’m not asking to run the ball more than pass. Since the Redskins home game last year if we simply reach 26 rushing attempts we are 7-2. All games we have won since last year’s home Redskins game we have averaged 27 attempts.

by cow_fanatic on Nov 19, 2009 10:55 AM CST up reply actions  

thats very deceiving

When we’re winning, we pound the ball during the fourth and have success, which ups the run game stats. We are not a very good running team before that fourth quarter.

by foyesboys on Nov 19, 2009 12:40 PM CST up reply actions  

I really hope that changes here down the stretch.

Would like to keep the D as fresh as possible going into the postseason.

I can see for miles and miles and miles and miles and miles...

by Aaron Novinger on Nov 19, 2009 12:43 PM CST up reply actions  

Wrong

Look at the Seattle game for example. We pounded the ball in the 4th that game because we were ahead. Our last 7 rushing attempts netted 10 yards. The majority of the damage against the Hawks was during qtrs 1-3.

by cow_fanatic on Nov 19, 2009 12:53 PM CST up reply actions  

The idea that you need to "maintain a balance"

is lost on me.
You don’t “need” to do sh&t. You move the ball forward. That’s it. That’s the only thing. How it occurs is irrelevant.
You call plays based on circumstance and advantages. Players should be prepared to execute all running and pass plays at all times, and coaches should be prepared to call them. When those plays are run are only based on circumstance.
You watch film and probe matchups at the beginning of the game, and then exploit what you see and then adapt to their adaptations. That’s how you call plays. You start with your strengths and adapt to their adaptations and adapt due to circumstances.
Injuries, down and distance, time, the score, etc… all govern what plays are called.
If Gurode can get to the 2nd level consistently, then the Cowboys will run all day. But if Witten has an advantage, then there will be more passing.

If things aren’t successful, you try other things. Furthermore, if downfield passes don’t work, short passes may. They show up in the stat sheet as a pass, but they function as a run. Is that “imbalanced”?

Playcall percentages are an amalgam of a huge number of variables that probably represent the nature of that particular game. They show turnovers, the weather, penalties, mismatches, the score, etc… to think they mean just one thing, or even anything, is silly.

by Joey2zs on Nov 19, 2009 12:20 PM CST reply actions  

Man

Well said

FREE THE OGLETREE!!!

by dunkman on Nov 19, 2009 12:25 PM CST up reply actions  

Exactly.

I don’t care if it’s a toss left or a shovel pass up the middle, ground must be gained. Something has to change to make the defense adjust to what the offense is doing.

I can see for miles and miles and miles and miles and miles...

by Aaron Novinger on Nov 19, 2009 12:28 PM CST up reply actions  

And I tend to agree

the what is something I’m not qualified to say. Even if I had all the knowledge, I’d need to know what was called, how it was executed and then I’d still only know that something else might or might not have worked.

It’s just a lot more satisfying for people to blame a single person than a unit on a team. So Garrett or Wade get hammered. But I have watched the worst teams in football protect their QBs better than Romo was last week. That’s player stuff – execution- not coach stuff. So sure, Garrett needs to hvae some continengencies avaialble when players spit the bit and don’t play well, but no play will succeed if they players don’t execute. And I think it’s obvious they blew a butt load of chances.

FREE THE OGLETREE!!!

by dunkman on Nov 19, 2009 12:33 PM CST up reply actions  

Give it to Cricket 25 times a game! lol

I can see for miles and miles and miles and miles and miles...

by Aaron Novinger on Nov 19, 2009 12:39 PM CST up reply actions  

So...

If Flozell is visibly sucking, and MBIII/Felix are hurt… do you allow Romo to get blindsided or do you run Choice for a one yard loss?
Garrett doesn’t have a slidey cardboard index thing for this, and you slide it to “Flozell Hurt” and cross reference to “Can’t Run” and then it finds “THE PERFECT PLAY” that always scores a TD.

by Joey2zs on Nov 19, 2009 12:41 PM CST up reply actions  

You take the lesser of two evils.

I can see for miles and miles and miles and miles and miles...

by Aaron Novinger on Nov 19, 2009 12:44 PM CST up reply actions  

Choice for a one yard loss...that's funny!

That’s just your way of saying what you’ve always said Joey- That Barber should be in there and Choice shouldn’t.

How about thinking correctly for the team? How about using the players correctly for each situation?

I think that’s laughable…“Chioce for a one yard loss”…HaHa! I haven’t seen many of those yet! Maybe once or twice! If anything, he seems to get back to the line of scrimmage when it should be an obvious loss! How about MB3 though? I’ve seen lots of negative yard plays by him- although that is more like Garrett putting him in that situation after his passes don’t work, with Garrett’s thinking being “maybe I’ll try a run”, and Barber get’s dropped for a loss.

It should be painfully obvious that Garrett doesn’t either know or want to use the running backs correctly. EVERY TIME the Cowboys are down near the goal line, to not put Barber or Choice in the backfield will mean a defense knows they are gonna pass. What’s so hard to understand about that? it seems to me that if you really want to pass the ball into the endzone, you would most definitely want a defense to think your gonna smash mouth it in. But do we really see an attempt to fool defenses this way? My opinion is…No. Simply because it goes against the “Pass to set up the run” mentality, and I believe Garrett cannot accept this.

If Choice isn’t used ALOT more because of his success running between the tackles, my opinion is our passing game in and off itself will fail in the big pressure games against the better defenses. Garrett’s thinking is flawed. we have to play “Run to set up the pass” to win against good defenses.

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

by DallasPalace on Nov 19, 2009 1:01 PM CST up reply actions  

I like slidey cards but no

I am referring to anticipating defensive tactics. For example GB was shading a LB into the gap left on the side they blitzed from. That’s the typical side for Dallas’ hot read. So have something different on the slidey. If they line up eight across like pHilliy, have something for that.

All that said, I don’t lay the game on the coaches.

In general, I don’t think the coach can account for individual error. Those are random occurences. You can see that in the last game. One time it’s Gurode whiffing, then Flo, then Williams dropping a pass or fumbling, then Romo missing a deep to Austin, then Felix cutting outside instead of in, and then Witten boning up his route and killing a critical first down conversion. Nothing a coach can do for that except take up drinking.

FREE THE OGLETREE!!!

by dunkman on Nov 19, 2009 1:15 PM CST up reply actions  

You have to take a larger sample

in order for ratios to work. You can refuse to accept the stat that in the last 22 games we have averaged 27 rushes in every single win. You can look at the fact that we have not won a single game in the last 22 with less than 21 carries.

If you don’t “maintain a balance”, you end up with games like last sunday.

by cow_fanatic on Nov 19, 2009 1:08 PM CST up reply actions  

you realize that makes no sense, right?

“We” doesn’t mean anything.
You’re just working with numbers that represent nothing.
In baseball, it’s always one dude, one bat, one ball. It’s never different… but allowances can easily be made for pitch type, ballpark, side of the plate, inning, etc…
In football, your numbers are meaningless because from week to week there are HUNDREDS of dudes involved… and just from that right there, there are now too many variables to draw a connecting line.

The idea there is a “we” or an “identity” season to season is a fallacy. There isn’t. Coaches change, conditions change, personnel changes, injuries occur so the qualitative output of athletes changes… there are too many variables to compare data sets to other data sets. They aren’t comparable. You CAN find numbers that by defnintion are an average… but it’s an empty math. It proves numbers can be added then divided, it doesn’t represent anything meaningful. And this is why football coaches spend 20 hours a day watching film, and baseball managers get drunk and fat and smoke cigars. Baseball managers CAN use the slide rule to manage, football coaches cannot.

For instance, throw out everything that involves Procter starting. He’s not part of the “we” in “we averaged 27 rushes.” He’s an outlying variable that ruins your numbers and proves my case. The ideal situation in which to run not only changes from season to season, but it changes week to week and down to down.

by Joey2zs on Nov 19, 2009 1:18 PM CST up reply actions  

You are at an advantage

You can use an infinite amount of variables to argue against my point but the disadvantage you have is they are based on abstract, subjective nothingness.

I am attempting to utilize stats to identify how many rushing attempts this team usually needs in a game in order to win. The stats show it’s 43% run, 57% pass. That is generally where they are in the games they win.

You can argue against this or provide your opinion simply to contradict mine but you have nothing to back your opinion up. Your opinion is subjective, I at least put some thought in to mine.

You’re just stomping your foot, crossing your arms and saying,
“Nuh-Uh!”

by cow_fanatic on Nov 19, 2009 5:54 PM CST up reply actions  

Vegas line has moved from

Dallas -13 to -11. That is agood size swing. Heavy juice on Wash. + points. I wonder if all the injuries in Dallas is what moved the line so much. I don’t bet Dallas games much, but if I bet this one I thank I would take the points.

How bout dem Frogs!!!!

by DIRE WOLF on Nov 19, 2009 1:38 PM CST reply actions  

could be a big mistake

I would never bet against the Cowboys at home against inferior opponents, there is certainly great potential for a blow out, especially with the Cowboys coming off a loss.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Nov 19, 2009 2:06 PM CST up reply actions  

true

I hope this is the game, both Roy and Austin get going.

"No matter where you go, you are what you are playa"-Jay Z
Twitter Account

by Wmillion on Nov 19, 2009 2:14 PM CST up reply actions  

I'm not going to bet it.

It could very well be one of those trap games like Philly and NYJ a few weeks ago. The line moved from NYG being the dog to the favorite, a five point swing.

How bout dem Frogs!!!!

by DIRE WOLF on Nov 19, 2009 2:19 PM CST up reply actions  

yeah

-13 is a lot of a rivarly game, especially with team getting points coming off a big win.

"No matter where you go, you are what you are playa"-Jay Z
Twitter Account

by Wmillion on Nov 19, 2009 2:07 PM CST up reply actions  

Agree, this 'balance' issue is overblown

Again, it’s confusing the succession of events with the causality of events. Cowboy fans are a very demanding and largely unsatisfiable fan base, so anything is fair game to becomes the cause celebre du jour. After NYG – Romo sucked, after DEN Garrett sucked, after KC the team had no passion, ad naueseaum.

LIke golf, football is a results-oriented game, ’it’s not how, it’s how many.’ There are no style points. I do understand the need for diversity, elements of surprise/unpredictability, but there is the concept of doing what you do best until the other team stops it. The Colts have been an excellent example of this for years.

DAL ranks #4 in total offense(YPG) – 6th in passing, 8th in rushing. The issue here escapes me. We should run more because running more is inherently good? I don’t think so. We should run more successful plays – run, pass, swim or crawl is irrelevant.

Always be more than you appear and never appear to be more than you are

by tdships on Nov 20, 2009 7:33 AM CST reply actions  

Garrett has called some of his best games ever...

…this season; just not this past Sunday IMHO. It’s promising in that the guy has clearly expanded his playbook this year and he’s expanded the size of the offense to include several players aside from the 11 who start. I like A LOT of what I’ve seen from him this year. But his past Sunday I just didn’t get the feeling that the O was ready for the Packers.

There were absolutely some great plays that the players left on the field because of fumbles drops and penalties but there are handful of those from both teams in every game that has ever been played.

What I can’t abide is all this talk about how it’s all on the players, as if the coach isn’t human and capable of making a mistake, or having an off week , or being out schemed or out-coached.

I’m sorry but the entire Cowboy team lost this game which includes the coaching staff.

I don’t know about the rest of you but I am seriously ready to move on the Redskins game at this point. In fact, one of my favorite things in life is lopsided win over the ’skins. :-)

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 Nov 20, 2009 9:38 AM CST reply actions  

I think that is fair to say

The problem is we can only speculate what part was coaching, where a lot of the execution errors were obvious. Hence the long debate.

FREE THE OGLETREE!!!

by dunkman on Nov 20, 2009 11:33 AM CST up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Dallas Cowboys blog for the SB Nation network. We talk Cowboys 24/7/365. Join the discussion but follow the community guidelines.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Jacoby1_small
Filling the Holes : Free Agency & Draft
97946_giants_cowboys__football_large_small
Draft Talk: The Wild Card, Trent Richardson
97946_giants_cowboys__football_large_small
Cowboys Crave DB's: Is Janoris Jenkins Their Guy At 14?
97946_giants_cowboys__football_large_small
Draft Talk: Vinny Curry
Small
Is the problem Anthony Spencer, or is he the victim of his surroundings?

Recent FanPosts

97946_giants_cowboys__football_large_small
Draft Profile: Marvin Jones
Small
For Those That Wanted Von Miller Last Year.....
Small
You don't have to be perfect to win the Superbowl
Small
Relative Trade Values of the current roster
Small
Why being a Cowboys fan sucks so much at this time of year... 10 Reasons
Willywonka_small
Underwear Ski Mask Guy on BTB????
Nov_2010_261_small
SB Venue Report
Small
2012 Free Agency Predictions
Apnhb
2012 blueprint for success... It all starts with Mr. Romo

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Editor

Head_shot1_small Dave Halprin

Lead Writer

Captain_small One.Cool.Customer

Profile_small Brandon Worley

Ollogo3_copy_small KD Drummond

Contributing Writers

Hotdoglu_small Aaron Novinger

Emmittintro_small rabblerousr

Kegbearer_small Kegbearer

Dr_fate_small Tom Ryle

Moderators

Ns_08bstockb-thumb-200x185_small scottmaui