When are we going to see Tashard again Garrett?
by DallasPalace on Nov 22, 2009 10:11 PM CST
Email
Print
I Don't really have much faith that Garrett is going to call a correct rotation (especially since it seems like he already done a lousy job of that) of the running backs even if he calls more runs in a game, further allowing him to prove "we should stick to the shotgun". I've yet to see him rest Barber in favor of pounding him down near the goal line- His strength. Felix is not being used as a reciever more. Tashard and his pass recieving out of the backfield as well as his between the tackle success seems to have become forgotten plays within this drop back/shotgun heavy scheme. Part of the belief and faith you must have in the running game has to do with being able to recognize a running backs ability to do more than one thing effectively against any defense, and put the RB in a position to suceed. I fear that the way Garrett is using Felix, I look at the situation as more and more a wasted draft pick by us. If he's gonna be hurt alot by not being able to take the pounding, and not be able to go full speed, then That is disheartening, since I love what Felix brings to the game. MB3 has lost something, and I don't know if he will regain it.
Meanwhile, Tashard has been a benchwarmer, and without a good reason.
When are we going to see Tashard again Garrett?
It seems like Jason Garrett doesn't know how to call an offense using the strength of what the offensive players he has at his diposal. Maybe it's not just using the running game that is a weakness in his gameplan, but also the understanding necessary to place a running back in a favorable situation to succeed, thus giving him a reason to abandon the run or keeping it a minor afterthought in an offensive gameplan. Whatever the reason, I fear if the running Dilemma of the 3 headed monster isn't adresssed, our passing game in and of itself will fail miserably, and once again end in a quick exit in the playoffs, if even that.
I also dislike the shotgun so much that words cannot do justice. Is this Cowboy football? Keeping Romo in the pocket is a huge mistake. If Romo would have not jumped the pocket, we probably would have lost to the Redskins today. There is no good reason why we don't see more roll outs and play action. Garrett is truly an uninspiring offensive coordinator, and it shows on the field with his playcalls and the players execution. People who want to point to beating the Eagles as a reference to improved playcalling by him forget that it was a close game, and we could have easily lost. I hope he starts making better playcalls, gets his thinking cap on and starts figuring things out about the team, because this stretch of games coming up will define him and the team for this year, as well as the future.
Another user-created commentary provided by a BTB reader.
51 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Felix just isn't Felix
Starting to look more and more like both Johnson AND Mendenhall would have been better picks.
"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
Felix seemed closer to himself today than he has
his KRs are still lacking though, but he ran the ball well IMO today, he appeared faster and ran w/ more confidence.. well besides on KRs.
"We play to win the game" - Herm Edwards
by nicholas.rodriguez on Nov 22, 2009 11:01 PM CST up reply actions
i thought so to
but part of that was washington was playing its safeties deep
Interesting...
Still, I thought that I would see something like this…
Garrett called a close to 50-50 balance in the first half, the RBs had good numbers, the Cowboys score at the half? 0 Points.
This is what I was saying in my previous fanpost, mistakes can derail ANY gameplan. The Cowboys came close to derailing themselves again, but hanged on though and in the end the Offense woke up.
You want Choice with more touches? I want better execution from the part of the OLine, Romo and the receivers. I think that those are much more important.
Viva México! Go Cowboys!
+1
The Knights season may have just ended, but the Cowboys year is just begining!
by aussie_cowboy on Nov 22, 2009 11:45 PM CST up reply actions
I don't want just Choice with more touches
I want all the RB’s used to what they do best. Sorry, but It doesn’t seem to me to be the case.
Everything is connected within the offense, not just the Oline, Romo and the WR’s.
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Nov 23, 2009 11:21 AM CST up reply actions
You hit the nail on da head
Garrett can’t hold on to the football, provide better pass protection, and create separation to get open.
All he can do is call the plays.
Personally, I think Red Ball called a better game.
It’s the stupid-a** self-inflicted plays and lack of execution that killed us. Thank God they still found a way to win though.
Just gimme da “W.”
Is playing smart too much to ask?
by silverblue5 on Nov 23, 2009 11:57 AM CST up reply actions
There is a far Bigger problem here...
and that is this disturbing trend over the last few years of our offense slowly dwindling as the season goes on. And, you can say it’s because we play better teams at the the end of the year, but I don’t buy that. I feel like every year the O averages around 30.0 a game, and then 1 team shuts us down, and we look awful, and we think well it was just one game we’ll bounce back. But we don’t. After that 1st team (GB) dominates Dallas, other teams get film on it and follow suit. JG doesn’t make enough adjustments after the midway point in the season.He NEEDS to roll Romo out of the pocket, Romo is so good out of the pocket, it’s like garret is single handily saving the defense the trouble of defending one of Romo’s best attributes.. he’s great on the run. We’re still yet to see a game where beside Romo, 2 of our skill positions have big a big game at the same time…We had no business winning today, we were awful all game and deserved to be in a 3-way tie for 1st (1-2 in the div would put us 3rd though)….The defense was good, but the offense was terrible. Hopefully thy can get back on track against Oakland. I just hope this doesn’t become a trend as it has in recent years
Texas Stadium has a hole in the roof so God can watch his favorite team play football.
I can't say we didn't deserve the win
When we did what we needed to do to win the game, and it doesn’t matter who deserves the win but who won it.
"We play to win the game" - Herm Edwards
by nicholas.rodriguez on Nov 22, 2009 11:08 PM CST up reply actions
I'll take it for sure
but they missed 2 FG’s either of which would have sealed our fate…. we didn’t deserve to win.
Texas Stadium has a hole in the roof so God can watch his favorite team play football.
Well if you want to go into the "what ifs"
Then we can say that they would have needed both of those field goals if Nick Folk would have kicked his, and who is to say that the Cowboys taking a 7-0 lead wouldn’t have swayed the momentum and caused a blowout.
That, of course, is IF Barber didn’t fumble in the red zone.
well
we just experienced december in november….so…maybe we’ll see our november offense in december? cause that would be freakin awesome.
Its too early to say “this is a trend”. Teams go through ups and downs and the defenses on the other sideline have been solid. If we’re still struggling by the GIants game I will be worried.
I do think Choice should be given at least one series
"We play to win the game" - Herm Edwards
by nicholas.rodriguez on Nov 22, 2009 11:02 PM CST reply actions
Where did that wildcatgo with choice..?
I was liking that alot…
Maybe they are planning on trading him after this season and don't want him to get injured
other than that, it beats the sh** out of me.
felix rus
My biggest prob with our rush offense is the lack of carries Felix and Tashard get. Why arnt we seeing Felix sprinkled in more after 2 straight runs by Barber? There were so many runs today where I found myself saying “I bet Felix breaks that 20 plus yars” where when barber gets 7-8. I dont see Dallas runing some of counter plays that Felix sprang for huge gains early on in the year. Just doesnt make sense to me.
I personally think the passing offense does better in the shotgun. I dislike it when there’s only 1 or 2 wr’s on the field when they pass. I thnik with the amount of players they have at wr and t.e they need to run the 3wr 1 te 1 rb formation more. The scoring drive was a perfect example of how effective that kind of personal package can be.
"Don't fake the funk on a nasty dunk"
by sprewelllatrell on Nov 22, 2009 11:50 PM CST reply actions
That play
almost didn’t work. Romo’s improvisation of jumping the pocket brought the victory.
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Nov 23, 2009 10:09 AM CST up reply actions
at least 10 legitimate weapons
Barber
Felix
Choice
Witten
Bennett
Roy
Miles
Patrick
Sam
Tree
These are all legitimate weapons on offense. But it is the nature of having so many that some games some players are not going to get many or any touches.
Against the Eagles, Tree got a couple WR screens and Choice got some direct snaps, and both worked very effectively. But that doesn’t mean he has to call them every game.
Barber and Felix both ran very effectively today. Altogether on 33 carries (including 1 by Choice and 2 by Romo), they had 153 yards (3rd highest of the season) for a 4.6 ypc (and without any long runs to skew the average, they were getting steady chunks). So the running game was working. The TEs also caught a combined 8 for 86 yards. That was what was working today. The offense wasn’t struggling due to a lack of TC touches.
There are definitely legitimate criticisms of his play calling at times, but sometimes I think Garrett is in a no win situation with fans. There’s only so many snaps in a game, and no matter what he does, he going to not be doing a lot of other things. No matter who he gets the ball to, some of the guys above are not going to get it much or at all in any given game.
So yeah, it would be nice to see Choice get more carries, but the reality is he’s the third back. And while he may be the most well-rounded of the three, he is not a better back than either of the other two. He could be a starting back for a lot of teams, but he’s our third back for a reason. (Similarly, I see calls for more Ogletree, and while he has a bright future, he’s out 5th WR for a reason, and the plays they gave him were very easy with no decision-making involved for a reason).
Having Barber with 20 carries and Felix with 10 carries is not overloading them and screwing up the RB rotation. With the other two backs getting healthier, Choice is going to see less touches. He’s going to be worked into the game plan, but as long as the other two backs are healthy he’s not going to get more than a very few touches, which will never satisfy some fans, but it is part of the nature of this offense. Some players lower down on the depth chart, including Choice, will show up on the stat sheet one week and then disappear the next week. Get used to it.
Well said Scott
You can't stop Patrick Crayton, you can only hope to contain him.
by APerfectStar on Nov 23, 2009 12:50 AM CST up reply actions
Great Post
Everyone can’t have 15 rushes and 8 catches, you’ve got to attempt to let your top guys get in a groove.
And your paragraph about Garrett is spot on. In every single game this year I’ve read comments about Garrett being “terrible, dumb” etc. You’d think we’re 3-7 and not 7-3. Garrett gets the blame for nearly every ill.
Who cares what Garrett's record is right now
when the chips are down, and it is an important game, this offense goes into hiding in the closet. To not place responsibility on the offensive coordinator is dumb. Someone must assume responsibility. Garrett has proven nothing. It seems like you are having a hard time believeing the reality of the Dallas Cowboys end-of-seson-swoons the last three years.
Too much shotgun, and not enough roll-outs, running game, and play action, and guess what? We aren’t doing anything different, we are doing the same old things.
When thinking of the Dallas Cowboys, my team, the end -of season swoons are foremost on my mind. Need I remind you 2 years ago the Cowboys went 13-3, and what did that get us?
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Nov 23, 2009 10:30 AM CST up reply actions
what's dumb is to place all the blame on the OC
The players need to execute better, it’s that simple. If they do, Garrett’s play calling will be just fine.
In Romo we Trust
Several teams over the past two years have called the Cowboys offense "predictable"
Predictability on the part of the offense is not good.
Players are failing to execute at least in part due to the defense knowing what is coming next
Lifetime Cowboys Fan from the Swamps of Jersey
Cowboys offense in the 90s was predictable
and teams couldn’t stop it, same with the power sweep by the Packers in the 60s.
If you execute properly, it doesn’t matter if the defense knows it’s coming.
In Romo we Trust
That's the run over the pass
The Cowboy’s Oline negated that advantage of the defense “Knowing”, and even then, they really didn’t know. it’s what made the pass offense highly effective….The running game.
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Nov 23, 2009 3:45 PM CST up reply actions
this team is not the 90s Cowboys or the 60s Packers
How many guys starting today would have started in the 90s Super Bowl Run?
If you say Romo I will piss myself laughing.
they need at least some subterfuge to make it work
Lifetime Cowboys Fan from the Swamps of Jersey
Thank you Seanrude
Predictability is the real opponent here, and that point is lost on alot of people that want to quickly claim that anyone saying anything bad about Garrett are just on a bandwagon, all saying the same thing.
By the way, this predictability can be washed away with a powerful and effective running game on offense. Aren’t we supposed to have that? To question not only the amount of runs isn’t the only issue, but who is running at at what point and position on the field in the game. This is the real question about the RB rotation. Even if the editor of BTB doesn’t like the topic of this point, it’s still a valid subject of debate. it’s been a real question about Jason Garrett ever since the day he assumed the position of offensive coordinator of the team, not just the amount of running plays the team has. It may possibly be at the root core of his apparant unwillingness to use the run against certain teams in certain games at times when it seem to be needed to be used the most (the run that is).
This post was never intended to drive home the point that we need to ditch the pass, and become a run heavy team. Anyone that believes that and posts with that mentality are missing the point of showing a defense your not predictable.
If anything, this post is intended to bring up a subject that is not recognized enough, in an attempt to help the passing game become what we hope it can become.
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Nov 23, 2009 2:22 PM CST up reply actions
It's execution, not predictability
How many mistakes were self inflicted? That’s the reason they didn’t score more than 7 points. Dropped passes, bad passes, missed blocking assignments, penalties, a missed FG, and most of all turnovers.
Dallas ran all over a good defense, had plenty of chances to keep drives alive, but just didn’t execute.
I do agree with some of your suggestions regarding use of Felix and letting Romo roll out more, not to mention the lack of a screen game. But these plays may be on the back burner due to injuries, offensive line play, other circumstances we don’t know about. I just can’t blame Garrett when the offense has been scoring points and the team has been winning.
You can't stop Patrick Crayton, you can only hope to contain him.
by APerfectStar on Nov 24, 2009 12:41 AM CST up reply actions
It's not only execution
It’s decisionmaking.
Following the week after Belichik’s blunder, that is the theme lately, and I’m sorry, our decisionmaking has been poor on offense for awhile, not just this year. Execution is just a result of that. a few wins in a row against average and below average playing teams does not make that reality go away. You would think that the best decision would be to play to the strength of your offensive players, not turn your back on it. I feel like we should be taking a firm grasp and command of games from the beginning. Instead, we see a timid and unimaginative offense take the field when it needs to be fired up and play with heart. That was actually a discussion in a post I was reading that was very interesting- the Cowboys don’t feel a sense of urgency to score until an opponent scores. I actually agree with that, and that is why I call this kind of coaching timid.
No fire and a timid Coaching staff I fear is what the team takes after, and the results show by the playcalling and demeanor of the team, and beating the Deadskins the way we did I fear does not instill any confidence in overcoming the hurdle. I truly hope we see a turnaround, but I’m skeptical.
Some people will say Garrett’s playcalling is not timid, and I’ll agree, it’s agressive (passing). but it’s timid in one way- it’s not designed to subjigate an opponent. It’s more like a “i’m gonna do what i’m gonna do no matter what, and we’ll see if you can stop it, and if you do stop it, i’ll stick with it because I don’t think you’ll continue to stop it”. Whatever happened to “I’m gonna do whatever it takes to win- no matter what that is?” His unwillingness to use certain aspects of the offense are his Achilles heel, and it shows. That’s why defensive coordinators say what they say about him and the offense (as well as the media).
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Nov 24, 2009 10:16 AM CST up reply actions
when players fail to execute
its naturally going to make the playcalling predictable.
As you've said before Terry
but players have changed, the system remains the same. I guess you’ll always say that after every important game ends up in a losss… “the players need to execute better”.
Let me give you an example Terry…..T.O.
I’m not saying we shouldn’t have gotten rid of him (on the contrary)
But it seems like everyone’s new scapegoat is Roy Williams.
Seems to me that if we get rid of him, and bring in a new WR, he’ll become the scapegoat. Where does it end?
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Nov 23, 2009 11:14 AM CST up reply actions
I never said just RW needs to execute better
All the players need to execute better and of course I’m going to say that if we don’t play well because that’s the reason whether you want to acknowledge it or not.
Garrett doesn’t play anymore, the players play the game. His play calling is fine if the players execute.
In Romo we Trust
You may or may not have Terry
but alot of people that rant and debate about our passing game are forgetting one thing- you can’t blame the messenger for the letter.
The idea that the offensive philosiphy may be flawed is not a subject that can be easily brushed aside with more minor player performance issues and run-pass ratios being quoted.
In watching Jay Cutler last night in the PHI-CHICAGO game, I started wondering about the same questions about him that are similar to questions about Romo.
If using the shotgun excessively ends up in losses, why continue to use it excessively? combine that with our dropback passes, no play action, and less use of the running game, and you make it real easy for a defense to guess at what you are doing.
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Nov 23, 2009 2:42 PM CST up reply actions
Sorry Scotty
But me seeing Tashard getting more touches is not the issue at all. I could care less whether it’s Barber, Jones, or Choice. The only reason Why I say these things and why I care and why I believe in it is simply becuase It’s the way to really make defenses not look at us as “one-dimensional” on offense. Once we prove that we can win games that way too (or at least show defenses our running game is effective), defenses will gameplan differently and that will help our pass offense better than anything. I truly believe that Choice is the better option at RB at this point, and when you see it happen, and our offense starts to rebound because of it, I hope you remember this post.
Football is a game of emotion. Sorry Scotty, but the Cowboys seemed lifeless and played with no emotion against the Deadskins. If you want to believe that the offense and the offensive coordinators playcalling have nothing to do with it, that’s fine. I can respect that. I just hope Tashard gets a chance to electrify the crowd and lift spirits and give the team belief that they can win it all, because they can. But not with this kind of deadbeat play. I would not assume the Raiders game is a gimme by any stretch of the imagination. Forgive me for writing that it seemed like the Cowboys played expecting to loose, rather than go out and do something about winning. Coaching is in question here, and leadership. Tashard happens to be one of our best leaders (what an irony). Tashard brings more than just running stats to the game.
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Nov 23, 2009 10:23 AM CST up reply actions
I just don't see it
We showed the defense that our running game was effective. They played tough through the game and showed life despite having some struggles. It wasn’t from lack of emotion or being deadbeat. That’s just too easy. Played expecting to lose? Please.
And yeah I love the emotional spark that Choice brings, but Marion brings it too. Did we somehow forget that? Choice has his role and knows his role and he’s playing it.
Respectfully Scotty, but yeah it's been forgotten
I am not looking for your agreement, nor am I seeking it. I am merely making a point for a debate, not an argument. When I read someone make a valid point that contradicts what I’ve written, I am humble enough to agree and see the logic.
The Green Bay and Washington game were similar in one way- The offense played without superior determination to succeed. Is it that out of whack to believ that the system may be at fault? I for one will not have the prejudice’s of excluding anyone in the organization from scrutiny of performance, and especially at one thing- Decisionmaking.
I watched the Bears-Eagles game last night. I came to the conclusion that Chicago’s offense is very similar to Dallas’s, with one critical difference- Our Running backs are better, all of them. Why we don’t use them in what I believe should be a potent running game and short passing game is beyond me.
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Nov 23, 2009 2:04 PM CST up reply actions
The rotation has been clear since opening day
Barber and Felix rotating on 1st and 2nd downs;
Choice is the nickel RB.
So, what’s this about an “improper rotation?”
22 first half carries, over 100 yards rushing. A YPC average close to 5.0.
Barber averaged 5.0 today; Felix 4.9 and he’s hurt.
Barber fumbled at the 12.
Unless you can make a compelling case that Tashard will get 6.0 per carry I don’t see what you’re arguing about.
I've had enough of your informed opinions Raf.
I want a Garrett lynching and I want it now.
I mean c’mon, the guys got red hair.
Red!!
Arguing?
That’s your assumption, and I’d appreciate no such insinuation.
Just using the running game more was never just the issue with Garrett and his use of the running offense.
Is it just me, or wasn’t the last time we saw the Cowboys make a real effort to pound it in the end-zone for a touchdown with MB3 was in the Denver game? Isn’t that one of MB3’s best attributes- his power running?
If MB3 isn’t being used that way (one of his best attributes), what would account for that? What would be the reason?
Questions like this aren’t even asked about our running offense, instead we are just falling into a pattern of run vs pass ratios, and think that is all there is to running the ball. There are more compelling questions to ask about the running game also.
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Nov 23, 2009 10:52 AM CST up reply actions
Raf just get's heated if you have an opinion different than his...
He’s shown that time and time again. He’s right and you are wrong. Simple as that.
3rd RB, dude
He’s not going to get a lot of touches. He’s a luxury, not a guy who HAS to touch the ball in order for us to win.
The dude’s a role player. Barber and Felix are going to get the bulk of the carries, and that’s the way it should be. Choice has a role as a 3rd down guy and the Wildcat trigger man. He performs those roles well, but he’s primarily there to be a back up in case of injury.
There’s absolutely no problem with the RB rotation, IMHO.
Epic Fail since 1985
I guess you can also say that about the running game too
that you don’t see any problem with it, right? If you think the rotation has no problem like you are saying, then you believe that there is no problem with the running offense, do I read that correctly Red Scare?
Tashard Choice may be more than a role player, but we’ll never really know when the running game itself is not perhaps used enough or correctly. That is the point of the post, and it has to do with the proper usage of implementing the “3-headed monster”.
I guess it’s just coincidence that we’ve fallen from 1st to 8th in running effectiveness since Tashard last meaningful minutes in the KC game. He’s just a RB we should use for the “Razorback”, right?
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Nov 23, 2009 3:22 PM CST up reply actions
We still have one of the best rushing attacks in the NFL
I just can’t imagine why you’d want to take Barber or Felix out for Choice. I think he’s a good RB, but it’s clear to me those two are a bit better.
But yes, you assumed correctly. I have no problems with our run offense. Our numbers are better than they’ve been in many years, if I’m not mistaken. We’re doing well in that area. It’s simply not the bread and butter of this offense.
Epic Fail since 1985
by the red scare on Nov 23, 2009 5:11 PM CST up reply actions
Maybe he's not a luxury
Maybe he’s a necessity and our offensive coordinator doesn’t realize it. How much faith do you have in an offensive coordinator like Garrett who phases out the run from a gameplan in evaluating running backs?
Let me put it a different way- will it take trading Tashard Choice to another team, become one of the leading running backs in the entire league for you to accept the cycle of bad personnel decisions this team has made in the last decade?
The question isn’t about just Tashard Choice about this post. It’s about the entire run offense and all the RB’s. We just don’t know enough to make any assumptions or decisions. We do know what strengths the players have though. Are they being utilized correctly in game situations?
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
I see your point, DP -- and I agree to an extent
Choice does make plays more often than not when he’s in the game.
And it would be cool to incorporate him into the O mix on a regular basis — just to give opposing defenses one more thing to think about.
However, I honestly (and feel free to disagree) felt that Red Ball called a more balanced game yesterday. Unfortunately, our passing offense consistently failed to execute.
Personally, I think it’d be cool if Garrett occasionally used our three-headed monster (MB3/El Gato/T-Choice) like the G-Men did with Jacobs-Ward-Bradshaw ("Earth, Wind, and Fire) the last two seasons. You know, maybe using a rhythm of running the ball to move the chains effectively AND to set up the pass.
But all in all, I just want the win.
Is playing smart too much to ask?
by silverblue5 on Nov 23, 2009 12:09 PM CST up reply actions
Bradshaw
didn’t play much in meaningful situations.
Its really hard to give 3 backs meaningful time.
Honestly, I think Choice runs better than both Barber and Felix, but thats just my opinion as a fan. I’ll trust the coaches to make the right call. We ran the ball well yesterday and Barber and Felix seemed to hit holes harder than in the past couple weeks so I’m not that angry about Choice not getting carries.
It's not that Foyesboys
Our running offense can’t be just automatically turned on and off like a switch, and it should not be treated like something we use when our shotgun formations aren’t working.
It’s a legitimate question about the offensive philosiphy, and everyone that has read my past posts knows I haven’t changed my tune at all about our offense. They may disagree, but that is why I am making the point. The offensive philosiphy is in question:
Why don’t we save Barber’s strength and use him to put the ball in the end-zone more down near the goal line, as well as the 4th qtr?
Why do we try to keep Romo in the pocket and in the shotgun, when he earned pro bowl recognition as a running QB out of the pocket, and every time he jumps the poocket, he makes a highlight reel magnificent play? (and it does seem like every time, doesn’t it?)
Why isn’t there a real effort to get the ball in the hands of our best open field threats with more short passes/screens, Felix and Tashard?
I can ask quite a few more questions also, I’m sure you know.
One thing is for certain Foyesboys, and that is this offense can stand to use more of it’s strengths rather than a gameplan that doesn’t look to exploit it’s strengths.
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Nov 23, 2009 3:38 PM CST up reply actions
Respectfully Disagree
Bradshaw seemed to break away for long runs in the 4th quarter after Jacobs and Ward wore the defenses down.
Yes, Jacobs and Ward did most of the damage, but Bradshaw did play a key role.
Is playing smart too much to ask?
And what about Ward?
everyone within the Giants organization regrets and knows it was a very big mistake to allow Ward to leave. it’s hurt they’re running game more than if they would have lost either Jacobs or Bradshaw, and that comes from Giants fans, not myself.
Tashard Choice is like Derrick Ward, not Bradshaw, since it was Ward who was the all-purpose back. Bradshaw is more like Felix Jones.
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
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.
