Blogging The Boys: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Sports blogs for fans, by fans.
Around SBN: SB Nation NFL Power Rankings for Week 11

Cowboys Q&A with Football Outsiders

You guys know Football Outsiders, at least most of you do. They produce all those funky, cool new stats that break down players into ways we didn't even think about a decade ago. Each year they produce a book called Football Outsiders Almanac 2009, which has chapters on all the NFL teams and even college stuff (available in PDF format). They sent me a copy and agreed to answer some questions about the Cowboys. If you're interested, you can get the book here.

Blogging The Boys: Last year, a lot of the Cowboys problems were blamed on injuries. According to your stats, we were in the middle of the pack in terms of team-health last year, so it must be a case of guys with no ready backup getting injured?

The rest below...

Star-divide

Football Outsiders: Well, not all injuries are created equal. Losing Terry Glenn for a season, for example, had far less of an impact than losing Tony Romo for four games, because quarterback injuries affect a team far more than wide receiver injuries, and the team had a far better replacement for Glenn (Patrick Crayton) than it did for Romo.

Because of the way the Cowboys are built, there are certain players that they simply just cannot lose and play the same way without. Romo is one of them. Flozell Adams, arguably, would be another. Jay Ratliff (who himself only got a chance to play after Jason Ferguson went down) and DeMarcus Ware are unquestionably two more. The team can handle, say, an injury to Marion Barber because they have the depth at running back and a good run-blocking offensive line up front.

BTB: The difference between the defensive performances in 2008 when Terence Newman was injured or out of games, compared to when he was healthy in the last part of the season, is remarkable. Is Newman one of the key components the Cowboys must have healthy in the secondary? More so than other players?

FO: It absolutely was; the Cowboys' pass defense was 24th in the league in DVOA while Newman was alternately hobbled and sidelined by a groin injury from Weeks 1-9. (For the uninitiated, DVOA is our core metric that measures performance against the league average for each play after accounting for the down, distance, situation, and the quality of the opposition; the Cowboys' pass defense DVOA over those weeks was 12.7%, meaning that they were 12.7% worse than a league-average team against pass plays during that timeframe.)

Once Newman came back, though, their pass defense immediately became the second-best in football, with a -12.6% DVOA. (Since you want to allow fewer yards or points than the league average, a negative DVOA is a good thing for the defense.) That was also borne out in Newman's individual metrics; he was astoundingly bad before the surgery, particularly in the first Redskins game, but was an elite corner after returning.

I'd probably add Newman to that list of "irreplaceable" guys above. There's talent in the backfield with Orlando Scandrick and Mike Jenkins (especially Scandrick, who was really fun to watch develop last year), but I think that even the most ardent of Cowboys fans would agree that neither of them are ready to be a #1 corner. Losing Newman -- or failing to have him at 100 percent -- would definitely have a dramatic impact on the team.

BTB: I've brought this up before, but without actual statistical evidence - Tony Romo is a slow-starter in games, but finishes strong. What did your stats say about this?

FO: This is exactly the sort of thing we can test for. Here's Tony Romo's quarter-by-quarter DVOA a year ago:

First: -8.8%
Second: 20.5%
Third: 11.6%
Fourth: 57.1%

(He also had a -394.7% DVOA for the three times he dropped back in overtime.)

Most quarterbacks actually get worse as the game goes along; the league average DVOA for all other quarterbacks was 8.0% in the first quarter, 10.2% in the second quarter, 3.7% in the third quarter, and -1.7% in the fourth.

The difference was even more remarkable a year ago; Romo's first quarter DVOA in 2007 was -31.5%! His fourth quarter DVOA was only 14.3%, so he didn't show the huge late-game split that we saw in 2008, but his second quarter DVOA was 35.7%, and his third quarter DVOA was a very impressive 77.6%. He also had a -21.6% DVOA in the first quarter of games in 2006.

So, to answer your question, the data supports the idea that Romo's a slow starter. As to why that is? Hard to say. My educated guess is that Romo's a player who thrives when he's improvising; I think he's the best at the league at scrambling and making throws on broken plays or off of broken routes. As the game goes on, quarterbacks naturally get a feel for the sort of coverages they're seeing and the way that defenders are playing their receivers. The more snaps Romo gets in a game, the better he knows an opposing defense.

BTB: One big concern for the Cowboys has been the play of the offensive line which we thought was inconsistent and erratic last year. What do your stats say about the Dallas offensive line?

FO: I think that Cowboys fans might have been spoiled by a healthy, effective line in 2006 and 2007. Dallas had arguably the best offensive line in football in '07, and their five starting linemen managed to make it to 158 of 160 games; only Andre Gurode missed two games, and even then, those were the last two games of the 2007 season and had no bearing on the team's playoff status.

Injuries are a part of the game, though, and it's extremely hard for an offensive line to suit up year-after-year without seeing guys get healthy. The Giants have been lucky enough to see their five guys make it onto the field for every regular season snap in each of the last two seasons, and that level of continuity and reliability goes a long way in building their offense -- if you remember how poorly backup tackle Kevin Boothe played against the Cowboys last year when Kareem McKenzie went down, you know how just losing one player could have a huge impact on that team.

Obviously, last year, that changed. Losing Kyle Kosier for virtually the entire season had a huge impact on the team, even though he was arguably their least important lineman. Montrae Holland was no replacement, and Cory Proctor was disappointing.

By our metrics, the line wasn't that much worse. We use a stat called Adjusted Line Yards to try and separate the yardage gained by a running back on a given play from that of the yards created by the team's offensive linemen. By that metric, the Cowboys were 14th in both 2007 and 2008. Their Adjusted Sack Rate -- which considers a team's sacks allowed after adjusting for passes thrown and the quality of the defenses they faced -- went from seventh in the league to 13th, but some of that has to do with Brad Johnson and the eight sacks he took on only 78 attempts.

I don't know about the inconsistency, but the best way to ensure consistency is to have your five best guys lining up for every game. If the Cowboys can make that happen, I think the consistency issues will solve themselves.

BTB: Tell us what you can about the Cowboys special teams units and how they might improve in 2009?

FO: Well, one place they probably won't improve is on field goals and extra points. Nick Folk had a great year, adding 7.9 points above what an average kicker would have provided, the second-best total in the league. Unfortunately, we tend to find that performance on field goals from year-to-year is highly random; last year's number two kicker was Jeff Reed, who was league-average this year.

What is consistent, though, is a team's performance on kickoffs, and Dallas has been below-average each of the last two years. That's mostly on Folk; his kickoffs have been far below league average, while the kick coverage was slightly worse than league average. We estimate that the Cowboys lost 7.46 points of field position on kickoffs and kickoff returns against them.

Of course, they weren't good on punts or punt returns, either. Our estimates have Mat McBriar as -6.16 points below league average, with most of that coming due to below-average distances (relative to where he punted and the league averages) and the failed punt against the Cardinals that ended his season, while Sam Paulescu only cost the team 1.26 points, with most of that coming on return length. The less said about the team's returns, the better; no one came out looking good in those units.

Bringing in David Buehler should help; Buehler's no slouch on return units as a former linebacker, and he's got a stronger leg than Folk. He should be Folk's long-term replacement at kicker.

The team will also adjust from using a four-man wedge now that the league's banned wedges of more than two players. That should inspire them to re-think their special teams scheme, and replacing veterans like Keith Davis with draft picks like Victor Butler and Jason Williams should create opportunities for hungry players to earn spots on the roster. That should help their special teams improve some in 2009.

Thanks to Football Outsiders for taking the time to answer the questions. You can check the book out here.

1 recs  |  Comment 104 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

first

FA is cool, but football is more complex game, than statistics, it is a team game, where many outcomes depend on your teammate next to you

by dcfanz on Aug 14, 2009 7:05 PM CDT reply actions   0 recs

How do you think these stats are compiled?

I see this response all the time and it irks me. FO and KC Joyner both compile their stats by watching and grading tape of every game. They don’t simply feed the NFL.com stats into a spread sheet.

Now, I’m a bit biased towards Joyner, because he does all the grading himself, while FO has a group work the stats on each team. Still, who else is doing this year in and year out?

by Rafael Vela on Aug 15, 2009 1:14 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Lies, Damn Lies and Statistics

I don’t think DC fan is disputing the quality of the stats, I just think he disagrees over their value. A lot of weight has been given to elegant theories derived from recognizing patterns in data, but in my opinion those theories have not done much to indicate validity when applied in practical situations.

A lot of factors impact a game that aren’t quantifiable, such as the team unity that DC identified. I think these kind of stats are interesting too, but I think there’s a lot more random variables than these kind of predictive theories can account for.

by Dansonofdirm on Aug 15, 2009 3:51 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

thoughts on stats vs. Stat value

what comes to mind that you probably won’t see on a stat sheet would be like romos high snap that went thirty yards back but managed to pick it up and gain a first against the rams in 2007… It looks like a very unimpressive 7 yard run on a stat sheet but I think we can both agree that was a play gifted by Romos abilities that will never show up on a stat sheet.

One last thought was barbers heart that never showed up more specifically than on a a playin 2007 against the pats, where he somehow got away from that whole defense with very little help for a two yard gain. Again on a stat sheet not very impressive but I will always remember these two plays, and they weren’t even close to be touchdowns!!

Ps. I believe stats have a purpose andni enjoy reading FO and Joyners work, they provide what few can and its very impressive, justgiving a legit argument I the contrary is all

by missingthe90s on Aug 15, 2009 8:01 AM CDT via mobile up reply actions   0 recs

barbers run

why makes barbers run even more rediculous was that was prancing in his own endzone flirting with a safety most of the time

by missingthe90s on Aug 15, 2009 8:04 AM CDT via mobile up reply actions   0 recs

The thing is...

most of what was said there is pretty much everything I’ve thought.

not all injuries are created equal

Great line.

by The Immortal Iron Fist AKA AFB on Aug 14, 2009 7:09 PM CDT reply actions   0 recs

+1 its not that you have injuries its where/who they occur to.

I find the harder I work, the luckier I get. Thomas Jefferson

by squidlo97 on Aug 14, 2009 7:12 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Happy Friday!

And I really enjoy the FO Q&A’s. Thanks Mr. Grizzard!

by sublimezg on Aug 14, 2009 7:16 PM CDT reply actions   0 recs

+ 1 About the only good thing that the DMN Blog does

It is the only real analysis you see over there and they have to get it form the outside…

by doomsdayreturns on Aug 14, 2009 7:19 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Interesting about Tony Romo's slow starts

He had a mini-version of that last night.

It would sure help the team if he could improve first quarter performance. Having other teams work from behind all game helps all facets of the Cowboys approach.

by doomsdayreturns on Aug 14, 2009 7:17 PM CDT reply actions   0 recs

I also credit that to...

A very conservative, being on your own 10 gameplan.

by The Immortal Iron Fist AKA AFB on Aug 14, 2009 7:33 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Yeah

I wonder about that too – is Garrett conservative because he needs to give Romo time to get into a groove or is Romo out of the groove because Garrett is the one being conservative while he feels out the other team? Interesting question.

Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.

by dunkman on Aug 14, 2009 8:30 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Early in the game:

Rollouts! Get Romo moving, even if it’s planned. this should be obvious to Garrett, we all saw it without these fancy (good though-I’m not putting them down) stats.
    Hopefully some early-game screens, short passes-let him get some passes under his bely before they start throwing the 20-yarders.

Injuries: Injuries are not an excuse, no matter who goes out. The Patriots lost Tom f’in Brady and won 11 games. The Giants lost Osi omendghghfg (whatever) all last year, right?
Plus dealing w/no MStrahan.
    Look, it’s the GM and coaches’ jobs to have NFL-quality backups ready to play! They don’t have to be Pro Bowlers, but they should be capable players who don’t lose games for you.

  If we lose Romo or Ware, is our season supposed to be over? Just throw in the towel?
It’s just plain whining.

by Realist Larry on Aug 14, 2009 7:23 PM CDT reply actions   0 recs

Not all injuries are created equal though

If we had a guy like Matt Cassel behind Romo, we would’ve won at least 2/3 games that he missed. Romo getting hurt was a lot bigger deal than Brady getting hurt simply because the quality of the backups were worlds apart.

Osi went out but Justin Tuck emerged as a total force and took things over. If Ware got hurt we don’t have a guy like Tuck waiting to come in and produce.

It’s not whining to say injuries affected us more than other teams’ injuries that on the surface seemed comparable to ours. It’s just facts. Our backups (as evidenced by the Oakland game) are just not ready to come in. Therefore, injuries hurt us more than they should. I really liked our draft because it built up our depth a lot. Unfortunately, these guys will all need at least a year to be ready to be dependable backups. So while we’re still having depth problems right now, I really think that in a year or two we’ll be a lot better off. We’re moving in the right direction here.

by Key19 on Aug 14, 2009 7:28 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Sure. But,

why do other teams often seem to HAVE the guy who can take over, and we don’t??
Why do they have a guy who “emerges as a force” while we only have guys who
emerge as “guys who get rolled over” ?

Why is it that the Cowboys backups are so sorry?
How does a SB winning team who’s entire game was based on pressure D up front lose Strahan and Osi Gnfjhfhf, and still win the division?

by Realist Larry on Aug 14, 2009 7:38 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

How'd they do after losing Plax?

How many playoff games did the Patsies win?

It’s not whining. It’s a fact on every single team. There are players that cannot be replaced in-season.

He who knows nothing is closer to the truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods and errors. - Thomas Jefferson

by Fighter15 on Aug 14, 2009 7:40 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

They didn't win any playoff games?

Sure.
But they MADE the playoffs and won their divisions.
11-5, and 12-4. Not too shabby.

“There are players that cannot be replaced”?
Really? Who? What team has an indispensible player?

If Brady doesn’t qualify, who does?
It’s a TEAM sport last time I checked.

by Realist Larry on Aug 14, 2009 10:13 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Not to rain on your parade

but the Patsies didn’t win their division or even make the playoffs last year. And Tuck and others stepped up for the Giants until about week 9, and then the entire defensive line steadily fell back to normal. That had alot to do with losing Osi, because guys like Kiwi and Tollefson, Renaldo Wynn, that should have had smaller, more supporting roles had to carry a big deal. And then when they started going down, there was nobody left. The dropoff in Dline had more to do with our losing at the end then Plax did. The Football Outsiders themselves proved it.

Homer: Aw, twenty dollars! I wanted a peanut!
Homer's Brain: Twenty dollars can buy many peanuts!
Homer: Explain how!
Homer's Brain: Money can be exchanged for goods and services!
Homer: Woo-hoo!

by bigbluethruandthru on Aug 14, 2009 10:50 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Dang you're right about the Pats

I keep forgetting 11-5 wasn’t good enough in the AFC last year!
It seems like you should be in at 11-5.
But the fact remains the had a good record and piled up the points, because they build their team differently and have a lot of pieces in place.

And the Giants were 12-4, in the division people around here like to brag is ‘the toughest in the FL’, so you’re nitpicking in their case. That’s pretty good. They found a way to win. Period.

This is the NFL where injuries to starters are a given-so to say ‘Our 1st string is great, as long as nobody gets hurt we’re fine’ is just asking for failure.

And I just don’t believe in using injuries as an excuse, period, so it’s an opinion that’s not going to change.

by Realist Larry on Aug 14, 2009 11:17 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

No, that's not what I'm saying

By disagreeing with you, I’m saying that you’re wrong. Injuries ARE an excuse. The list of clubs as examples is as long as my…well, let’s just say it’s long (shout out to Ocean’s 11).

St Louis losing 1/2 their line coming off a Super Bowl.
New England in the middle of their 3 of 4.
Cowboys in ’97 (and ’98 for that matter).

And if playing winning football is all that matters, then 9-7 should satiate your argument.

Lastly, I think that Holland, Choice, Jenkins/Scandrick/Ball, and quite a few others stepped up just fine. It was only after Holland and Romo went down that performances suffered greatly.

He who knows nothing is closer to the truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods and errors. - Thomas Jefferson

by Fighter15 on Aug 15, 2009 9:44 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

yeah, you're right

every time the Cowboys miss the playoffs, we’ll just list our injuries as an excuse.

That way no one gets criticized or their feelings hurt.

by Realist Larry on Aug 15, 2009 4:14 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Ratliff came on.

I’m sure the Eagles feel different about Winston Justice

by The Immortal Iron Fist AKA AFB on Aug 14, 2009 7:40 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

#1 reason is how the franchise is managed.

Jerry likes big name guys. As a result, he spends big money on big name guys. See Owens, Terrell and Line, Offensive (among others). As a result, we have less cap space for backups than most teams. I don’t have any numbers to back me up but I just am 99% sure this is true.

Also, our franchise tends to be very slow to let young guys play. See Carpenter, Bobby (but also just about everyone from last year’s draft). I would say that Scandrick and Jenkins were both better than Henry last season, but they were never allowed to start over him for whatever reason. The same fear of young players caused us to depend on a clearly injured Newman for far too long before doing the right thing and shutting him down for a while. Felix was not used enough, and it took both him and Barber getting hurt to get them to finally let Choice play at all, and he was great.

It just seems like our team is so darn scared of young players that they’ll cling to mediocre starters for far too long instead of using the young guys who are significantly better. It’s not that we don’t always have depth, but we have all of our depth in a couple of places (last year it was CB with Jenkins and Scandrick and RB with Jones and Choice). We have historically drafted miserably at the O-Line positions across the board. Hence, lack of depth. Also, as I said earlier, so much money is spent on the starting O-Line that we can’t afford to get legit backups in free agency. The last problem is that sometimes Jerry is a poor judge of talent (see Johnson, Brad). That gaffe cost us a Playoff spot and thankfully we upgraded there.

All in all, I think Jerry is moving in the right direction. I think last year’s draft class has given him more confidence in young players (hence our offseason youth movement) and hopefully this year’s class can continue our good drafting streak. However, he has to stop giving ridiculous contracts to people like Flozell Adams because that eats up a lot of cap space that can be better used.

by Key19 on Aug 14, 2009 10:02 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

We didn't just lose a quarterback for a few games

We also lost our top corner for a few games … our most explosive running back for a few games .. our left tackle was playing games without healthy arm … . We were hit hard by injuries at the most vital positions for out team.

by northtexan95 on Aug 14, 2009 10:59 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

I dont think you know what you have until your hand is forced.

Who knew a 4th round back with a slower timed 40 speed would be able to run against some of the NFLs top Ds. It would have been interesting to see how much more Choice could have produced had they put him in a little more right after MBIII hurt his toe.

Who knew a DE from the 7th round would get pushed into NT and get 8 sacks and a trip to the pro bowl.

Its hard to evaluate guys sometimes if the guy they are playing next to is a turd. We really wont totally know what we have in Free until we line him up with the other 4 starters(actually 10) in the heat of battle. We have some talent but sometimes coaches stick with Vets because they prefer guys who are less likely to make a bone headed play.
MBIII wasnt able to produce running like normal with his toe but he was also not going to miss a blitz pickup and get Romo killed. Choice got his playing increased when he knew all of his assignments. You saw what happened to this team when Romo went down.

I find the harder I work, the luckier I get. Thomas Jefferson

by squidlo97 on Aug 15, 2009 7:37 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

is there any chance this plays a part?

Aren’t our first 10-15 plays or so already drawn up? I don’t know exactly how garrett works but a lot of coaches do that. Considering how much our offense struggles early, that generally takes us to the early second quarter.

by foyesboys on Aug 14, 2009 7:38 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Probably not

Romo is the kind of guy that really turns it on when he’s needed the most. If we’re behind late in a game, Romo’s fire is burning bright. When the game is new, I just don’t think he feels that sense of urgency.

I don't believe in team motivation. I believe in getting a team prepared so it knows it will have the necessary confidence when it steps on a field and be prepared to play a good game.

Tom Landry

by White Wolf on Aug 14, 2009 7:51 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

If that's true then shame on him

That’s called not being mentally prepared. I don’t think that is the case. I think it’s more that early in the game it’s “my pre-planned scheme” against “your pre-planned scheme”. Later on it becomes “my adjusted gameplan” vs “your adjusted gameplan”. I think Romo is better than most others at doing things on the fly.

by StillHateTheGiants on Aug 15, 2009 9:58 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

I agree about shame on him

If you have the ability to make those plays, you should make them all the time. We ALL should maximize our abilities all the time. Do we? Do we all go a thousand percent all the time?

If you’re going to say it is gameplanning and scripting that causes Romo to fail early in the game, then that goes against this whole argument that Garrett’s biggest weakness was that he didn’t make adjustments. Frankly, I think we all saw that he wasn’t making the proper adjustments in ALL of our losses last year. Now I don’t think it was Garrett’s inability to make adjustments, but more that he was beholden to a certain selfish, screaming WR. I didn’t see adjustments being made out there many times. None of us really know why, we’re not in the meetings, and game evaluations. But most of us would agree adjustments weren’t being made.

Lastly, you’re saying that Romo wasn’t going out there late in the game and willing his team to scores. Really? How well do you know this player? I think it’s clear that when the game is on the line, Tony Romo gives more. He fights for that last inch. He may not always get it, but when you’re down at halftime, he comes out firing in the third quarter, and when there’s two minutes left in the game, and you’re down, Romo is going to give you his absolute most. Now he screws up sometimes. (see Pittsburgh), but I dont’ think there’s any doubt that Romo rises to the occasion.

I don't believe in team motivation. I believe in getting a team prepared so it knows it will have the necessary confidence when it steps on a field and be prepared to play a good game.

Tom Landry

by White Wolf on Aug 15, 2009 10:37 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

I am with you WW. That line of thinking would mean Tiger Woods

is mentally unprepared too, with his frequent slow starts. Everyone is different and every player will have different things that either help them get going or rattle them. Some QBs never play the same after taking a big hit in a game. Some running backs need to “get in a groove” before they are effective. It’s really not an indicator of a man’s character, just of his individual make-up.

Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.

by dunkman on Aug 15, 2009 12:24 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

To me it's clear that Romo is a closer, D-man.

Some guys start fast, and others are closers. Romo is definitely a closer. Tiger is a great analogy because he rarely roars out to a big lead, but if he’s within 2 strokes on the final day I pity the competition.

I don't believe in team motivation. I believe in getting a team prepared so it knows it will have the necessary confidence when it steps on a field and be prepared to play a good game.

Tom Landry

by White Wolf on Aug 15, 2009 8:21 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

I've nerver heard of the Boys doing the "scripted plays" thing,

although I’m sure they have a very good idea of what they WANT to do.
I think down and distance are taken into account though, and field position.

by Realist Larry on Aug 14, 2009 10:16 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Yes, the Boys script plays like every other team in the league

They all have a list of plays that take down and distance into account, and they all script plays to get them through the first quarter. To get an idea of how NFL coaches gameplan, check out this lecture given by Bill Walsh:

http://smartfootball.blogspot.com/2007/08/bill-walsh-method-for-game-planning.html

by Sweet Jethro Pugh on Aug 14, 2009 11:20 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

The scripted plays is grossly misunderstood

Every team has a set of plays they want to use if they all work according to plan. However…

there is a talk that Bill Walsh gave years ago on the concept of scripting plays. The way he describes it, you script about 15 plays as your game plan, the way you want to attack a defense. You put it on one side of your play sheet.

On the other, you have the plays you call in each situation — goal line, middle of the field, red zone,3rd down, etc. If you have a penalty or a negative play that throws you off your script you turn the sheet over and find a play that fits that particular situation. Then, if it gets you back into first and ten, you go back to your script.

Makes perfect sense to me,and I assume very few teams these days don’t handle some variation of it. Bill Parcells ripped on it, because he was Walsh’s foil, but I don’t see any reason to rip the concept.

by Rafael Vela on Aug 15, 2009 1:20 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Very interesting, thanks for explaining that, Raf.

"Everybody wants something but nobody wants to pay the price" - Michael Irvin

by 24Hz on Aug 15, 2009 9:08 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

what sort of approach do defensive minded coaches take

what sort of approach do defensive minded coaches take scripting plays for a game plan?

by AustonianAggie on Aug 15, 2009 9:50 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

That's basically what I was saying

Meaning they’re not scripted in the purest sense, but an idea of what might work, and also (I assume, I didn’t read the link yet) some plays designed to ferret out how the D will react.

by Realist Larry on Aug 15, 2009 4:16 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

as for the injuries....

We were in a particularly bad position because of the coaching staff’s wrongful faith in brad johnson. And frankly, the patriots don’t play in the nfc east – that team would finish with around 7 wins in a division like ours, far more competent than theirs. You’ve gotta take that into account when looking at the NE situation. But regardless, the coaches badly screwed up with Johnson. We went out this year and signed kitna, who is probably one of the better/best backups in the league.

As for the Giants, they had aton of dline depth, and now have even more. They’ve drafted guys at that position early for years, that was the position they were most able to sustain injury. and Osi is not the elite player ware is, don’t kid yourself. Us losing ware would be the chargers losing merriman last year. Worse probably. You just can’t replace the truly great players in the game. Osi is a solid player, but hes imo far from being a gamechanger like ware. I don’tt hink hes necessarily that much better than trent cole even.

The Giants lost their olineman McKenzie for what? two games? and Kevin Booth came in and struggled horribly, contributing to their late season decline. Who says they can replace any other injuries along the line? The Eagles are the ONLY team in this league that does this well. Jacksonvile lost two olineman early last year and just like that their season was over.

Also, we went 9-7 with a RIDICULOUS amount of injuries. Romo for 3 games, Barber not nearly full helth for most of the year between his rib injury early and the injury that limited him late, Kosier gone, Felix gone, Flo playing with no arms for 2 games, one against a good fast pass rush in Arizona, and witten defintely limited through the last month. Defensively, Newman, an elite pro bowl cb was nowhere near healthy for most of the first half of the year.

9-7 with all those injuries tells me we DO have depth at many positions, but we didn’t have the backup qb or depth along the oline we needed.

by foyesboys on Aug 14, 2009 7:49 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Those are fair points

And we did go 9-7 w/all those injuries.

I’m just not for using injuries as an excuse. Everybody can play that game, everyone has to deal with them.

by Realist Larry on Aug 14, 2009 10:19 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

i generally agree

but there are outliers. Us and the seahawks were outliers last year. Just a ton of injuries to key players.They suffered worse of course since hassleback was out much longer than Romo. We were also probably an outlier in 2007. Zero injuries till the late season injury to TO when everything was wrapped up i believe. Maybe Burnett got hurt that year too? I don’t know.

by foyesboys on Aug 15, 2009 1:52 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

We also seemed to have TO playing injured last year...

in the head! Plus his skills were seriously declining (which is why I believe he was released), and he was the key cog for the offense.

by mdlusk on Aug 15, 2009 2:26 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

I should explain what I mean by key cog...

I mean that he was the skill player who the offense (tried to) flowed through. With him not able to beat double coverage consistently anymore, he was a liability as our number 1 option in our pass first offense.

by mdlusk on Aug 15, 2009 2:28 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

I like the idea

of rolling Romo early to get the juices flowing. Nice.

Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.

by dunkman on Aug 14, 2009 8:31 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

i do too

we need to do something early in games. In 2007 i would’ve suggested using Barber on the first drive since things seemed to get rolling when barber entered the game. Now i’d say get felix involved IMMEDIATELY lol.

by foyesboys on Aug 15, 2009 1:53 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

IF not sooner.

by thruthicknthin on Aug 15, 2009 1:55 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

receiving the kickoff, hopefully

"Everybody wants something but nobody wants to pay the price" - Michael Irvin

by 24Hz on Aug 15, 2009 9:08 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

I hear what you're saying about Romo moving....

but he had such a better QB rating when he could stay in the pocket and have time to throw. The bottom line is, if the Cowboys can’t compensate for blitzes, especially from the Eagles, then nothing will matter. The teams will just continually blitz till Romo makes a mistake and then we’ll be talking about turnovers on BTB again. Now if somehow the Cowboys can make them pay with a Felix Jones run or a constant 1st down pass to Witten or Bennett, then were talking a whole new ballgame.

injuries: sure the Patriots and Giants won a lot of games, but neither of them did anything when it mattered. The Patriots were not going to win a Superbowl with their backup QB. And the Giants were doomed when #1 shot himself in the leg. The Eagles knew they could pressure Eli and they wouldn’t have an answer.

by osa1011 on Aug 15, 2009 5:16 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

really good article, backs up what a lot of us thought statistically

I think he gives a healthy newman a little too much credit for our pass defense resurgence, I think a lot of it had to do with scandrick and jenkins getting increased pt as henry kept getting hurt midseason.

by foyesboys on Aug 14, 2009 7:36 PM CDT reply actions   0 recs

And at about the same time

Wade Phillips took over the defense

by doomsdayreturns on Aug 14, 2009 9:14 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

yea that too

we were definitely more aggressive, though its kinda a chicken or the egg argument – our pass coverage was better, which allowed us to be aggressive? or he got aggressive and our cbs handled man to man as opposed to 10 yards back

by foyesboys on Aug 15, 2009 1:54 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Also

People that harp on Garrett passing too much should remember our slow starts. If you’re down, you’re going to pass more. That’s just how it works. Unfortunately, our team has started slow the past couple of years and we often get behind early as a result. We then spend half the game trying to catch up, which is done by passing the ball.

My issue is not with Garrett’s playcalling; that will fix itself if we start off better. My problem is that he’s seemingly not preparing our offense well enough to start the games off. Part of that falls at the feet of our running game and offensive line performance; if we can run the ball effectively to start games, it will give Romo his time to feel out the defense while having successful plays instead of 3 and outs and such. If on 1st and 10 Marion plods for 1 yard, chances are Garrett will pass on 2nd and long. Even if he does run again, if it’s not successful, the offense is now in 3rd and long. Then Romo passes and if he’s still feeling out the defense, it will probably be short of a first down or incomplete. Drive over. But if Marion (or Felix or whoever) can get 4 or 5 yards on first down, that makes a huge difference.

I really feel like this season’s outcome will be based heavily on how effectively we can run the ball in the early quarters. Once the passing attack gets clicking later on in games it’s not as important. However, if we’re trying to close out a game when we have a lead, of course we have to run effectively then as well.

All that said, you run when you win, not the other way around.

by Key19 on Aug 14, 2009 7:39 PM CDT reply actions   0 recs

I think passing on first down and early is OK, but he needs to call more high % plays.

Calling the 20 yarder down the seam to TO (or anyone) on 1st down? Bad idea.
A screen, rollout, or short timing pattern? Good idea.

by Realist Larry on Aug 14, 2009 10:21 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

But Romo is better on long and intermediate passes

Almost all (11 of 14) of his interceptions last year came on short passes—according to official play-by-play (even though only 44% of his passes last year were listed as short). That’s not the type of player you want to have starting the game with a lot of short stuff. If you want to get the best out of Romo, you need to be aggressive.

by Sweet Jethro Pugh on Aug 14, 2009 11:46 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

OK

but don’t QBs typically try to throw shorter passes when they are under pressure or nothing is open deep and they’ve had the ball too long? I would think a lot of QBs would probably fit that description.

Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.

by dunkman on Aug 15, 2009 6:34 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Just like not all injuries are created equal

not all stats are created equal. For example, saying the O-line was really no different without Kosier I find almost preposterous. We lost the chemistry, we lost the cohesiveness, and we lost the only guy on the line that knows how to call out assignments. I think the enitre nation could see the incredible difference in the post-Kosier season.

While I enjoy the statistics crunched by Football Outsiders, I probably wouldn’t change my playbook based on the results.

I don't believe in team motivation. I believe in getting a team prepared so it knows it will have the necessary confidence when it steps on a field and be prepared to play a good game.

Tom Landry

by White Wolf on Aug 14, 2009 7:39 PM CDT reply actions   0 recs

I think part of it

was that it took teams a while to realize just how vulnerable Procter was to the bull rush. He played in the first Philly game and they didn’t plow through him, but over time teams figured out that he was the weak link and then it got much, much worse. That probably helped hide his stats.

Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.

by dunkman on Aug 14, 2009 8:35 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

I should say that there are stats, and there are STATS!!!!

Some stats can really clue a team in, and give them an advantage. But for FO to say the O-line wasn’t that much worse after Kosier went down points out where stats can be worthless.

I happen to think the Romo stats about starting slow, and then coming on like gang-busters is a very telling stat. No matter how in depth the stats get, you just have to use the old coconut sometimes.

I don't believe in team motivation. I believe in getting a team prepared so it knows it will have the necessary confidence when it steps on a field and be prepared to play a good game.

Tom Landry

by White Wolf on Aug 14, 2009 10:03 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

To be fair

They said that STATISTICALLY they weren’t much worse, but the eye test showed that they were significantly hampered.

“…if you remember how poorly backup tackle Kevin Boothe played against the Cowboys last year when Kareem McKenzie went down, you know how just losing one player could have a huge impact on that team.

…Losing Kyle Kosier for virtually the entire season had a huge impact on the team, even though he was arguably their least important lineman. Montrae Holland was no replacement, and Cory Proctor was disappointing."

Not the best answer in the world, since their stats kind of contradict their views. But at the same time no stat is perfect and they will be the first to admit that. However, to totally discount their findings would be foolish.

by Key19 on Aug 14, 2009 10:10 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

LOL. I totally discount that finding.

However, as I stated, there are many stats that can gain an advantage. I’ve seen this debate on football blogs a hundred times, and truthfully in my own career stats are a key componant. Don’t get confused by what I’m saying Key. Stats can be great when used properly.

Here, let me say it another way. If I were crunching numbers, and I came up with a stat that said the O-line wasn’t that much worse without Kosier, I’d keep that one to myself.

I don't believe in team motivation. I believe in getting a team prepared so it knows it will have the necessary confidence when it steps on a field and be prepared to play a good game.

Tom Landry

by White Wolf on Aug 14, 2009 10:18 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

No,

Scientific Football’s grades (and Wade Phillips too, BTW) were complementary of Proctor’s run blocking. He was solid in that area. He had trouble with bull rushers,but he’s not the zero people make him out to be. (and I put myself in that category.)

The line cratered when Flozell had to play hurt and there was no SECOND backup to let him heal. Also, Davis and Gurode had significant dropoffs from ’07. I whacked on Hudson Houck and some people give me grief for that but the veteran starters, Colombo and Adams aside, dropped off in year one under him.

by Rafael Vela on Aug 15, 2009 1:25 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

I oftened wondered if Flo was that hurt why didnt Free get a shot.

Was he not ready, or another case like Choice, where they just wont go with a young guy unless forced

I find the harder I work, the luckier I get. Thomas Jefferson

by squidlo97 on Aug 15, 2009 7:58 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

All statistics aside, when it comes to this O-line

a lot of people haven’t done their jobs. The scouting department, the O-line coach, and the players. Poor blocking got Romo and McBriar both injured last year. And I sure haven’t seen any improvement with Proctor so far this year. We have to pass the ball too, we can’t just run it all the time. We need someone that can run AND pass block. The only reason Proctor is still on the roster is by default of NO competition.

Although the scouting department has done some good things lately, they really need to hit on a couple of offensive lineman in the next couple of years.

I don't believe in team motivation. I believe in getting a team prepared so it knows it will have the necessary confidence when it steps on a field and be prepared to play a good game.

Tom Landry

by White Wolf on Aug 16, 2009 8:19 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Did anyone else notice Kitna shaking last night?

He was over by the gatoraid jug on the sideline, shaking like a leaf. I think it was after that sack on the bad snap.

I don't believe in team motivation. I believe in getting a team prepared so it knows it will have the necessary confidence when it steps on a field and be prepared to play a good game.

Tom Landry

by White Wolf on Aug 14, 2009 7:54 PM CDT reply actions   0 recs

Hmmm

what’s that about?

Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.

by dunkman on Aug 14, 2009 8:35 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Either he has a serious health problem or a major case of jitters

He didn’t play a great deal the last couple of years, right? Everyone in the country knows how good Romo is about chasing down high snaps and saving the play. There was no way he was going to let the Raiders have that ball. But he got pancaked pretty good. Honestly, I don’t know, but he was definitely not in control. It bordered on spasms in his arms and hands. I hope it was just nerves.

I don't believe in team motivation. I believe in getting a team prepared so it knows it will have the necessary confidence when it steps on a field and be prepared to play a good game.

Tom Landry

by White Wolf on Aug 14, 2009 9:56 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

my point in the last thread exactly

“…Losing Kyle Kosier for virtually the entire season had a huge impact on the team, even though he was arguably their least important lineman. Montrae Holland was no replacement, and Cory Proctor was disappointing.”

no backups for the OL and the NT position
the CB’s will improve as the season progresses

That leaves a lot of hoping

by torchindefenses on Aug 14, 2009 10:28 PM CDT reply actions   0 recs

My few thoughts

We have one of the top teams fully healthy, but our backups leave something to be desired, Jerry and Tom (with help from Parcells, Ireland and I’m sure Wade too) has stocked this team well w/ top end talent, but we are lacking in the backup positions, we have started that Last year and IMO have had 2 pretty successful drafts (last year being great) This year will be the same as last year, we will be good if our main guys stay healthy (Romo, Rat, I would put Roy on this, Newman, Ware, and B. James, and all the Oline, I think Free would be the only backup that I wouldn’t immediately say its all over about, he seems decent in Pass coverage, and probably Felix is another one that cannot be out) but if any1 of those go down, it is going to be hard to even make it to the playoffs.

"We play to win the game" - Herm Edwards

by nicholas.rodriguez on Aug 14, 2009 11:11 PM CDT reply actions   0 recs

My first post

Glad to finally join

by Lone Star on Aug 14, 2009 11:33 PM CDT reply actions   0 recs

Welcome dude

Superbowl, or BUST.

by .FRoST.USAF on Aug 14, 2009 11:54 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Welcome Lone Star

If you’re a Cowboys fan, and need more information, you’re going to love it around here.

Do you want to be safe and good, or do you want to take a chance and be great?

Jimmy Johnson

by Super Bowl Shuffle on Aug 15, 2009 1:32 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

May the Schwartz be with you!

He who knows nothing is closer to the truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods and errors. - Thomas Jefferson

by Fighter15 on Aug 15, 2009 9:48 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Welcome to the best COWBOY site Lone Star,

its going to be a great season to be on here talking Cowboys!!

by thruthicknthin on Aug 15, 2009 1:47 AM CDT reply actions   0 recs

Gotta disagree on the O-Line

I really don’t think they were that good in ‘07, I think they were bailed out time and time again by a ninja-like Tony Romo and an MB3 that was almost never brought down by one tackler. Last year Romo decided he needed to more Brady-like in the pocket and inexplicably stopped protecting the ball (that or teams keyed on his ball protection) and MB3 simply wasn’t the player he was in ’07. I base this opinion only on what I saw, not numbers. I think we have a remarkably average O-line.

by GhostofGaryHogeboom on Aug 15, 2009 8:27 AM CDT via mobile reply actions   0 recs

Numbers

Romo had the highest ratio of fumbles to sacks of any starting quarterback last season.

So your opinion of his ball protection is backed up by the stats.

by kindablue on Aug 15, 2009 8:38 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Darnit.

Keyboard on my phone is so small for fat fingered guys like me.

Anyway, in 2008, when Barber wasn’t in there, both Choice and Jones had way higher ypc than him.

At what point do we just accept that Romo needs to play better in December and quit blaming everyone else?

The results and the stats both show it clearly, and the stats for the rest of the team don’t support the theory that it’s their fault. If the Cowboys want to succeed this year, they need a consistent year from Romo.

by Baked Potato Soup on Aug 15, 2009 3:23 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions   0 recs

You mean

That half of Romo’s sacks come in one month and that rushing goes down in December don’t in any way implicate the o-line? I know you blame him for the sacks, although there’s really no good argument for why he avoids sacks in the first three months and doesn’t the for the last. More likely, he’s getting more pressure in December than the other months.

I accept that Romo can play better in December, but c’mon. It really isn’t that cut and dried.

Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.

by dunkman on Aug 15, 2009 4:51 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

It works both ways.

If the answer were that he gets more pressure in December and therefore plays significantly worse because of it, then why do teams not pressure him prior to December? The running game has been consistent in that month, so it isn’t just that the line is broken down. On the other hand, Romo has a higher turnover rate, lower completion percentage, lower TD percentage, and lower ypa in December, so in my opinion, it stands to reason that he bears much of the blame for the higher sack rate as well. Everyone else has consistent stats, other than Romo and the line’s sack rate. Since the line’s stats are consistent in the other area of their game, it seems unlikely to me that it is due to them failing. Romo, however, has consistent stats in his career for December, and wildly different consistent stats in September through November. All of that stuff about slow starts, turnovers, poor decision making, etc., has little impact until December. There is no other explanation that is supported by statistics or results.

by Baked Potato Soup on Aug 15, 2009 5:52 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Hmmm

So line pressure doesn’t impact a QB’s completion percentage, TD percentage, ypa?

I am having trouble with the whole idea that every aspect of his game collapses mysteriously, including causing himself to be sacked at a significantly higer rate. Wouldn’t the simplest “unifying theory” be that the line struggles to pass protect late in the season? Given their fairly advanced age (relative the team and relative to other teams’ lines) and their size (one of the largest lines in football) combined with the rigors of playing in a very pass-heavy scheme, there are at least some reasons I can think of where I have yet to get a decent bead on why Romo might struggle.

Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.

by dunkman on Aug 15, 2009 6:06 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

What game last year do you think Romo had the most pressure?

I think we’ll agree that the Cowboys don’t call QB runs, so to me, you can tell pressure in a game by both sacks and QB runs. That would be all of the plays that the QB was under extreme duress and was either sacked or had to run for it.

If you are willing to accept that, then the game where Romo had the most pressure last year was the second Giants game when he was sacked 4 times and ran 4 times for 7 yards. In fact, that’s the most combined sacks and runs he has had in one game in his career. His rating that game was 113.7. That was only the 3rd time he had been sacked 4 times in his career, and the other 2 times were in Detroit in 2006 when his rating was 111.6, and in Philly in 2007, when his rating was 22.2. It does not appear that there is any correlation between Romo getting pressured and his rating to me. I’m actually putting together a fan shot that will go into this more, but I will tell you that there is no evidence that more pressure consistently affects Romo’s numbers.

I’ll give you a little preview, though: Romo played 13 times last year, and had the aforementioned 8 times game, 4 games where he had 5 combined sacks and runs, 3 games where he had 4, 2 games where he had 2, and 1 game with 3, and 2 games with 1. Here are his ratings by combined sacks and runs:

8 – 113.7
5 – 55.8, 113.3, 106.2
4 – 66.2, 44.9, 116.2, 90.7
3 – 123.2
2 – 113.7, 72.8
1 – 90.7, 103.6

As you can see, his rating is consistently high no matter how much pressure he is under, except in those 3 December games and his first game back from injury. Given that he has a December slide every year, it would seem that it is December rather than the amount of pressure that affects him. One of his worst games by rating was the Buffalo game in 2007, when he had a combined 2 sacks and QB runs. That’s also the only game prior to December when he has ever had a rating below 72.8, and one of only 2 prior to December where he has been lower than 82.6.

by Baked Potato Soup on Aug 16, 2009 2:07 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Oops.

The 90.7 on the 4 line should be 82.6.

by Baked Potato Soup on Aug 16, 2009 2:09 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

This is a lot of great work

but “QB pressures” also have to be considered – plays where no sack is recorded and the ball still comes out, but early or under pressure. I’m afraid the only way to measure that would be using Raf’s QB stopwatch for each drop back and look at the ability of the QB to let a route develop, set his feet, use the planned passing lane. Hard to quantify, but they as as real as any metric you are referencing and constitute the majority of the disrupted pass plays.

If you use 2008, I don’t think anyone should dispute from visual evidence that the line was poor in pass protection while being fairly decent in run blocking. I’ve watched all of those games multiple times. When I compare the second Giants game or Pittsburgh game to the first Eagles game for the time I saw for the QB to pass, the amount of pressure, etc. the difference is remarkable. The difference in the second Giants’ games was that Romo had a remarkable game (which shouldn’t have to be the standard) and the play calling was excellent (lots and lots of passes to the RBs). You also fail to mention that he played with an injured back for the final three games. For the same reason, I can’t fault barber for “fading in December” based on last season.

You saw like the rest of us what the line protection looked like for Bledsoe before Romo and when Brad and Brooks subbed for Romo. That was not NFL-level pass protection. Romo’s mobility and quick release hide a multitude of sins like pass protection break-downs with mobility and quick release (which sometimes also lead to picks); poor passing lanes from too deep penetration or not properly pushing the rusher out of the lane that is compensated for the variety of arm angles he can use, etc.

Again, I think Romo must play a role in this problem as well. My guess is that being a pass heavy offense also takes a toll on him, just as it does the line. He has to find a way to maintain his weight training late into the season because if his mobility suffers at a time when the line grinds down, the problem is exacerbated. I also think that becoming more of a running team (and I include quick hitting throws to RBs in this because the line doesn’t have to hold blocks as long) will create a more aggressive and less worn-down O-line by December, while allowing the QB to escape the wear and tear.

Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.

by dunkman on Aug 16, 2009 8:07 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Im curious about how well we ran the ball in those games along with how we faired

in our starting field position for the beginning of those drives. What was our yard per catch? Isnt that indicative of how well the WRs were getting open on those days.

We agree he needs to play better in Dec. Why cant you agree that he isnt getting the same help that he gets in Sept, Oct, Nov.

I find the harder I work, the luckier I get. Thomas Jefferson

by squidlo97 on Aug 16, 2009 9:26 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

I have acknowledged that.

However, I believe that he is the biggest piece of the December puzzle, not just an incidental one. In my opinion, his December/post season play is the only key to whether Dallas makes the playoffs and how far they go. With a 29-6 record when their QB has a better than 72 rating vs. a 2-13 record when they don’t in the past 3 years, I believe the single biggest factor in whether this team wins or loses is poor QB play. That stat includes starts by Bledsoe and Johnson. 72 is actually a rather mediocre rating, and because Romo has been so spectacular from Sept.-Nov., he has only had 1 game in those months where he was below that. Bledsoe and Johnson have had games that low in those months, though, going 0-5. They went 4-0 when they were above, also prior to December.

Essentially, the key is this for Romo, especially in December: if you are not playing well, just don’t turn the ball over. And for the coaches, if Romo is not playing well, trust your D and run game, and don’t have the offense chucking the ball up and going 3 and out or turning the ball over. That is probably an area where Romo’s slow starts come into play, because the coaches trust him to get it together at some point later in the game, I’m guessing.

If you remove the QB carries, the OL actually had one of their better run blocking months in December, by yards per carry. I definitely agree that the play calling was somewhat faulty in that month, especially if Romo was banged up, as the Cowboys passed almost 10 times more per game than they did in previous games last year, and Choice was running well.

YPC in the last 4 weeks, without QB carries: Wk 14 – 3.6 ypc, 15 – 5.5 ypc, 16 – 4.7 ypc, 17 – 4.5 ypc. For the year, the team’s average ypc, without QB carries, was 4.5. So the only game in December when they were lower than that was the Pittsburgh game, and this was against the # 1, 11, 5, and 4 rushing defenses in ypc.

I didn’t calculate yards per catch, because that is too heavily influenced by the QB.

by Baked Potato Soup on Aug 16, 2009 11:21 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Forgot to add a couple of things:

Dallas’ record from September to November the past 3 years is 26-9, and is 5-10 in December and January.

Although the general pattern is the same, 2006 has the biggest inconsistencies, including a December win when Romo’s rating was below 72, and a loss when it was 111.6, as well as an earlier loss when his rating was 109.0. There have been only 2 wins when the QB was below 72, that one, and the Buffalo game. There have been only 6 losses when the QB was above 72, with 3 that year, those 2 + the Seattle playoff game. The other ones were the Patriots game in 2007, and the Redskins and Cardinals games in 2008.

I think 2006 has the most inconsistencies not just because it was Romo’s first year as a starter, but because it was an entirely different coaching staff. However, even given that, you see the same pattern of inconsistent December play for Romo.

It’s not even so much that he doesn’t play well in that month, because he has had some great games, it’s how poorly he plays when he doesn’t play well. In December and January, he has played 15 games, and has had 4 with a rating above 110, 2 in the 80s, and 9 games from 66.2 to 22.2.

by Baked Potato Soup on Aug 16, 2009 11:40 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

I am not dismissing your work by any means

You bring a lot of analysis to the discussion. Where I struggle with your conclusions is what I see when I watch. Some games clearly Romo has had poor games, no doubt. Other games, he’s played well enoughand the team has played poorly. And the results look identical on the stat sheet. I don’t accept that he is responsible for the sacks. I see nothing at all that indicate that he is holding the ball too long or running into the pass rush.

I think there is something you said that the whole team is talking about – not compounding errors with more errors. Specifically, Jones, Romo, Phillips and Garrett have all said that the Romo issue is not that he is playing poorly or erratically, but that when a mistake is made in a game (poor route, missed blitz pick up, missed blocking assignment) that Romo needs to be more security conscious and not try to rescue every play.

The conclusion I have reached (and obviously the conclusion of the coaches who have broken down the film on Romo and the rest of the offense) is not that Romo is necessarily becoming worse in the month of December, but he may be handling other issues worse toward the end of the season. So if the WRs are hurt (as TO was in 2006 for December), or the line is playing badly (as they did in 2008), or even that teams “figure them out” as some claim the Giants did in 2007, Romo’s problem is not taking what he can get and instead trying to do the same things he was successful doing earlier in the season even when those plays are no longer there. And in my mind that makes a lot more sense (because it’s an explanation rather than an observation).

Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.

by dunkman on Aug 16, 2009 12:49 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

And I should add

that among the other “fixes” they are looking for is diversifying the offense so that the loss of one player (TO or Witten be dinged up) or the other team scheming to limit the effectiveness of one player (as teams did with Owens last season or the Pats did with Witten). This will take a huge amount of pressure off not only Romo, but the O-line and Garrett to provide the right circumstances to get the ball into playmakers’ hands. So where before you relied upon Witten and Owens virually exclusively, you can now win like Philly does with Westy using Jones; you can exploit LB coverage on Bennett when Witten gets doubled; you can play two TE sets and not have the defense put 8 in the box; you can flex MBIII out into the flats or Jones to occupy coverage or actually throw to them. I really believe that all of this reflects what the coaches really think – which is that relying on the explosive Owens and the reliable Witten actually mde them vulnerable down the road during the season.

Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.

by dunkman on Aug 16, 2009 12:56 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

I'm making a different point here.

I’m saying that even if he is under more duress in December through no fault of his own, that being under duress does not appear to affect his game. In fact, the only good game that he had this past December, great game actually, was the Giants game when he was sacked 4 times, tying his career high, and was forced to run 4 times. That’s the most combined sacks and runs that he has had in his career, so I question whether his poor play in that single month is due to more pressure. Further, if the answer to the Romo riddle is simply apply more pressure, why would teams wait until December each year to try that out? Basically, if a QB beats the blitz a couple of times, teams slow down their pass rush. If it is working, they ratchet it up. Romo doesn’t handle the blitz well in December, so other teams keep calling it.

I think Romo allows the pressure of the finishing stretch to affect him and plays poorly as a result. You say that there is no logical explanation, but I think that is pretty logical and is also both the simplest and most likely solution based on all of the numbers and results. The reason I keep pointing out the ypc of the running backs is to demonstrate that the OL is not just falling apart in that month. If they were the ones whose magic switch got flipped, then that should be reflected in all of their stats, not just the ones that also involve Romo, since all of his stats are affected. If they are the cause of his poor stats, then their stats that don’t involve him should also be poor. The only team or player stats that are consistently affected in December are the ones that directly involve Romo. Further, the team consistently loses when the QB has poor stats, regardless of month or QB. Therefore, what is the most logical conclusion?

by Baked Potato Soup on Aug 16, 2009 3:06 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Well for starters

pass blocking and run blocking are not interchangeable skills, so i wouldn’t consider that a great correlation. And I know that’s your theory, but I don’t buy into the “Romo can’t handle the pressure” angle because there are plenty of examples of Romo playing well or even excellently when the pressure is very high. If he “chokes” because it’s the 12th month, he’d also choke in a division game on Monday night football. I’d be more likely to believe a weather or breaking-down theory than a choke theory because at least they would have fewer contradicting examples.

And you mention Romo handling the blitz. The reverse of that coin is how the line handles the blitz and how WRs and RBs handle the blitz. Your stats don’t reveal anything at all about those factors and yet they are critical as well. And as other have pointed out, when you deal with a very small sample size (and I understand it’s all you have to work with) any anomaly will look like a trend. So missing Kosier – which became a bigger problem as the the season went on and teams uncovered the depth of Procter’s incompetence; the injury to TO, the injuries to Romo, Witten and Barber all have a dispooportionate impact on your theory.

Any way, great ideas on your part. This is what makes this blog so much better than the others.

Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.

by dunkman on Aug 16, 2009 5:09 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

They're different skills by the same people.

I understand and agree that run blocking and pass blocking differ. However, it makes less sense that one unit would fall apart in one area of their game in 3 straight years, yet remain consistent in the other area of their game. Meanwhile, the other half of that equation, the QB, falls apart in all areas of his game in that month.

If you and I work together on something, and we fail, but you succeed when you don’t work with me, and I fail no matter who I work with, does it make sense to say that it is because of you that we failed, or to say that it is most likely because of me?

I am willing to explore the various other theories that are offered to explain Romo’s poor play, but they continue to point back to Romo, in my opinion. There is no consistent factor that I can find that appears to affect his play other than the fact that it is December. Further, there is no consistent drop off in the rest of the team’s stats.

In fact, it was by researching the possibility that it was due to poorer play by the OL that Romo faltered that I found that Romo seems to play just as well in games where he is under heavy defensive pressure as in games where he doesn’t. I think you believe me to be a fair person in my evaluation, but if you don’t, remember that I was the one that first pointed out that half of Romo’s sacks came in December on this board, which was when I began researching the correlation between sacks and Romo’s rating.

 I don’t completely discount the eyeball evaluation of games, but sometimes we don’t see what we think we’re seeing. The numbers simply don’t support that this is not a primarily Tony Romo problem. You’re saying that because he’s not affected by the mental pressure earlier in the season, that he shouldn’t be affected late in the season, but I’m saying that it is late season mental pressure alone that affects him. It’s not even that he plays poorly every game in December, it’s that he’s wildly inconsistent, and for the most part either plays great or badly, and not a lot of in between. I don’t discount that it could be something else, but if it is, I would like to see some evidence that supports another theory. I believe that this team simply rarely wins if the quarterback plays poorly, and Romo tends to play poorly in December. The rest of the team appears to play at the same level based solely on my analysis of the stats, which admittedly may be faulty. However, I have yet to see someone display any stats or sound evidence that supports another theory.

by Baked Potato Soup on Aug 16, 2009 6:33 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

One alternate theory I'm looking at is coaching.

I haven’t quite wrapped my mind around how to properly research or analyze the affect that coaching has had, especially since there have been different head coaches and coordinators involved. However, the fact that the team has basically decided not to show up in the last game of the season for 2 straight years does not reflect well on the coaching staff, nor does the decision to increase the number of pass plays called when your RB is excelling and your QB or Line, depending on your theory, are not passing well.

by Baked Potato Soup on Aug 16, 2009 6:37 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Put yoour stats away and the games.

Nobody looks good(ok Ill give you Ware) One game someone is missing blitz pickups. Someone is dropping balls. Romo throwing ints. Coverage breaks down. Missed tackles. Barber fumbles. Play 4 of the 5 top Ds. Play calling gets bad. Stupid penalties that kill drive. Giving up Tds with 46 seconds left in the 1st half. Piss poor special teams combined with break downs. actual good plays by good teams. Wrs not getting open as much.
Alos why has the team for the last 10 years been doing the same thing even before Romo was here.
You see what you want to see and that cool. You blame Romo and spend all your time with your evil eye turned up on high picking him apart.
I dont find the pressure getting to him as much as good teams staying disiplined and not giving as much up.

I find the harder I work, the luckier I get. Thomas Jefferson

by squidlo97 on Aug 16, 2009 6:36 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Proof read dammit, put your stats away and Watch the games.

I find the harder I work, the luckier I get. Thomas Jefferson

by squidlo97 on Aug 16, 2009 6:37 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

I watch the games.

Romo hasn’t played well. Are you saying that he has? I’m not saying that the rest of the team has kicked butt, but they don’t really play worse than they do the rest of the year. And we’re not talking about one year, either. We’re talking about 3 years in a row, or every year that he has been the QB.

I am willing to consider any theory, but when I look at the various ones that are offered, they just don’t hold up. Too often it seems the defense of Romo is that the numbers lie. Well, what else is there? Essentially, you are saying that there is one area that has consistently worse stats in December, yet we should look to every other area for the solution. I’m not a Romo hater, I simply think that he is the key to the December problem that this team has. If he could be as consistent in that month as he is in other months, by not turning the ball over at a higher rate for starters, the team probably wins 3 of 4 in December, and at least 2 of 4. Why would missed tackles, poor special teams play, Barber fumbles, and penalties affect Romo’s stats? Romo plays well the rest of the year whether they running game is solid or not. He plays well the rest of the year when the team commits stupid penalties. The special teams gave away the Arizona game in 2008 and he had a 116.2 rating. I understand that luck and momentum are factors in football, and that it is a game of inches. However, if you are willing to look at the number for a second, they clearly show that the team typically wins when the QB has a QB rating above 72 and typically lose when he does not. So despite, luck, penalties, momentum, injuries, etc., this team has a .829 winning percentage when the QB has a rating above 72 and .133 winning percentage when it is lower. It is the one consistent factor in wins and losses.

by Baked Potato Soup on Aug 16, 2009 6:52 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Outside of the Hotel, our line is young for O linemen. They are right now in their prime which is 26/28 (depending on when they become starters) to about 33 or 34. I think it is more likely they slough off on the cardio training late in the season due to wear and tear of the season. Its up to Wade and Houck to make sure they keep up that cardio training all year long. They did not in 2007 and were gassed late in the season and in the games late in the season. Same as last year. Colombo and Bigg pretty much admitted that.

by burmafrd1944 on Aug 15, 2009 8:14 PM CDT reply actions   0 recs

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.
Start posting about the Cowboys »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Small
Garrett DOES Have a Running Problem
Images_small
Playoff Chances: Week 10
Captain_small
NFL Power Rankings - Week 11 - Final Edition
Captain_small
Seven Statistical Nuggets To Take The Edge Off
Barberbench_small
A good problem to have: no major draft needs (poll)

Recent FanPosts

Mom_s_camera_081_small
A Special 'Thank You' to Grizz.
Fox-jimmyjohnson_20_3
Are the Redskins the key to the division..?
Avatar_small
Mike Jenkins Bicep Treatment
Small
Anyone scared Watkins must play again...?
Small
It Isn't JUST About December
Small
More Witten please!!!
Arnold_small
To run, or not to run... That's Redball's dilemma

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Latest NFL Headlines from SB Nation

SPONSORS


Editor

Head_shot1_small Dave Halprin

Lead Writer

Small Rafael Vela

Contributing Writers

Villaronga_small Raul Villaronga

Hotdoglu_small Aaron Novinger

Landry_and_fish_small Mike Fisher