Let's revisit that old fanpost of mine now Raphael....
by DallasPalace on Sep 21, 2009 1:10 AM CDT
Email
PrintI wish I did not have to write this, since as a cowboy fan, I want nothing more than victory. But your remarks Raphael have brought me to revisit that old post of mine, and the things you wrote there. I hate saying "I told you so", but you did not even acknowledge a basic understanding of the argument that post brings up with your abrupt response. It's not like I'm some newcomer in writing here at BTB. Let me remind you now of the post if you've forgotten it....
Name of post? "Who would you blame if Tashard Choice isn't used Correctly?", and here is what I wrote in my intro to that post....
"Myself, I would put blame on Jason Garrett if the running game isn't used correctly. I know he is a passing type OC, but even he must get excited over a fierce run. So if he can't figure it out, then so be it. If he can, than the Cowboys offense will be lethal."
And for writing that post, what kind of response did I get from you?
"So you're ready to throw stones...if the THIRD RUNNING BACK — and as much as I like him, Tashard is the 3rd back — isn’t used properly.
Step back and take a look at your threat. You’re ready to go thermonuclear if the team isn’t building game plans around the 3rd back.
So what’s “misusing him?” Why don’t you define what “using him properly” means before you go painting targets on people’s heads.
What’s proper use? How many carries per game? How many catches? How many touches?"
This response to my post was written by you on april 18, 2009. I'm still at a loss for words over your response, but I am even at more a loss for words over Garretts playcalling tonight. Maybe your not even remotely understanding of NFC east rules of victory that used to exist during Aikman's era, as well as Staubach's, but I'll remind you since I watched our team all throughout the Cowboys Super Bowl history:
Run the ball, and stop the run.
If that rule can be followed, then the passing game will be there., as well as the victory. Nowadays, It seems like all the new Cowboy fans have fallen into a cycle of believeing that the pass will bail us out. That it will bring victory.
I am on record as being against that kind of thinking. The run is the real cure.The Cowboys pass offense is overrated grossly in my opinion. Add to the insult that Garrett doesn't seem like he makes any attempts to set up the pass against big-time defenses like the Giants by even showing run, and I counted a few times that no RB was even in that backfield. I'm sorry to say, but that is just stupid against the Giants Raphael. It will be stupid if it continues against Philly, Balt, Steelers, and any other of the top defenses.
No, just this blind adoration and fixation on "everything" will be allright if we pass. Too many times tonight, with wide open running lanes after a fake handoff, it seemed like the RB would have gotten at least 20 yards if he would have gotten the handoff.
In my book, if a defense gives you running lanes, and stacks the pass D, then you run on them ALL DAY until they prove they can stop it. It's the same story as the Pittsburgh game last year.
One thing even YOU can't argue is that if we would have had alot of screens and runs, it would have set up play action beautifully and gotten us our highly desired "passing" yards, but most of all negated most of our turnovers, as well as negated at least 27 of the Giants 33 points.
The saddest thing is our defense- Wade will be blamed for the loss because he is the HC, but here is the real question- Does Wade have the power to override Jerry Jones and Jason Garrett to get a different Offensive Coordinator if he wants, or is he still just a lame-duck HC that has no say so in fixing our team? Even the biggest idiot on the planet can see that our offensive playcalling was a joke. The defense had to contiinually keep us in the game.
And just what is it that this offensive coordinator needs to see to learn what to do? This Giants game was a repeat of last years loss, as well as the playoff loss the year before. He calls the game like he has had no experience playing the Giants before EVER.
If this offensive coordinator continues to not revolve the offense around the run, How many years of this do we need to see before we make a change? Yes, I'll say it- just because we had success last week against Tampa Bay through the air does indeed mean that we should have gone into this game looking to kill the Giants on the ground, because the good coaches morph the game plan to suit the opponent.
And now finally Raphael, my response to your response to my post. How much should we use Tashard Choice? Alot more than we did obviously. Take away 50 percent of our passes and run the ball, with Tashard Choice, with Felix, Deon Anderson, MB3, and Wah-Lah, A Cowboy Victory!
Tashard Choice may be our best RB option to run AND recieve the ball out of the backfield.
But by the time the Cowboy coaches realize it, our season may be to late to salvage.
Now, being forced to use Tashard if MB3 is hurt, we may get to see an explosive offense.
Maybe Emmitt was right about us winning 7 games. If Garrett continues this playcalling, that is possible
You may be the editor here Raphael, but quit acting like your god and strike out when someone's opinion doesn't jive with your own. In this instance, my assesment was right on the money and I called it like I saw it. A victory like this one will elude us again and again unless Garrett starts using his head rather than be staunch and hardheaded about the pass. I personnally don't believe he is capable. The second Redskins game last year was what I expected this game: Kill the Giants with the run, But don't give them the ball. What did I get instead? I don't care what Troy Aikman say's about Garrett. The Cowboys have a winning history that dwarfs Aikman.
Garrett's infactuation with the pass falls right into Tony Romo's gunslinger attitude, and that makes for a bad cocktail. Some teams you have to pass alot and run less. The way the Giants played, it was almost like they begged us to run the ball all over them, and we didn't. They abandoned playing stiff run D to pass cover.
How could Romo throw the ball right to Kenny Phillips? easy, Jason Garrett called that pass play and Romo did not react to seeing the safety so deep, and he just believed the play was there. irregardless of what he saw. Too many times it seemed like the Giants shifted the D right to where Romo was gonna throw at the last second.
We must accept reality that teams now are gonna know our achilles heal- our OC infactuation with forcing the pass.
How does the run game sound to you now Raphael, after the "Victory that wasn't"?
Another user-created commentary provided by a BTB reader.
112 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Let me see if I get this straight...
I didn’t read much of your post, because I didn’t care for the whole alienating one person to start an argument with a fanpost thing(really tacky), but I think I get the gist of it. You’re actually implying that the loss is Jason Garrett’s fault? OC puts up 31 points in a game where the team turned the ball over 4 times(while not answering back with any turnovers or big plays on defense of our own) and still only lost to a last second field goal?
That’s absurd. Garrett put the team in position to win the game.
And did you actually used the word “wah-lah”? That’s cute. It’s not quite the word you’re looking for, guy…
Epic Fail since 1985
Red Scare...
Putting up 31 points of offense does not win the game when you have 3 turnovers. Take away they’re chances at Turnovers, and we win. The passing game is suspect. Offensive coordinator should know this. Giants defense is very opportunistic, smart, and gameplans pressure to cause the turnovers. No reason to give them any. A gameplan like the second redskins game last year was called for. Conservative offense. No reason to give this game away. No reason at all. Just run the ball all the way to victory.
Would you be happy losing 31-33 or happier winning 17-10? This offense doesn’t work if it can’t adjust it’s gameplan to the opponent. That is what a championship team would do.
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Sep 21, 2009 2:12 AM CDT up reply actions
I agree to a certain extent with the last line...
…but in order to be that run first, pass when you absolutely have to low scoring offense, we’d have to have a much better defensive performance. I understand our D had it’s back against the wall a ton, but they still gave up huge plays. Garrett is a pass first guy because a lot of the time he HAS to be. You can’t come from behind if all you’re doing is running the ball. That takes a lot of time. If you run the ball and continue to score, but every time the opponent gets the ball they take it down and score, you’re shooting yourself in the foot. Time is a huge factor.
If our defense was playing lights out? Hell yes, pound the ball until the opponent proves they can stop it. Sit on a 4 point lead. Milk the clock. But when the defense plays like it did? You gotta’ throw the ball at least half the time.
Epic Fail since 1985
by the red scare on Sep 21, 2009 2:20 AM CDT up reply actions
The gameplan Red Scare...
Should have changed based on what the offensive coordinator was seeing. He didn’t adjust. Pounding the ball with the run would have brought the victory. Too much emphasis by the media and everyone on the Giants defense being scary. Were they? Not in my opinion. Romo seemed to play scared, like he was being sacked or was about to be sacked.
Fact is the pressure was mental, forcing Romo to turn it over. That is what the offensive coordinator has to guard against and react to. Garrett didn’t, even after he saw signs early in the game. I swear to you, during the entire second half, I was yelling at my friend (who is also a Cowboy fan) one word over and over again.
Run! Run! Run!
When Romo scored the touchdown running, I was yelling for that (I swear it!)
“Romo, take it In!” Lo and behold, look what happened.
The Giants are really not that hard to figure out. But if you understand they’re defense, you can beat them easily. Garrett just doesn’t understand. My question is how many years will it take for him to understand how to beat teams like this. Garrett has to understand he is under a microscope, and how well the offense performs is his job. Job 1 is protecting the ball, and keeping it away from teams like the Giants.
I don’t care if the Cowboys win 10-7, or 13-10, as long as they win. The 31 points put up by the offense does not absolve Garrett of his responsibilities to win the game. He has to think of what’s best for winning the game, not what’s best for producing alot of passing yards.
With the Giants, it has always been a case of keeping the ball away from them and running to victory. We can save the high flying pass happy games for teams like Carolina, Tampa Bay, and others. Running the ball effectively would have given us a chance to pass really well though. We did not stick to the run enough. It was there all day
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Sep 21, 2009 2:39 AM CDT up reply actions
Alienating one person...
To start an argument? And what do you call Raphaels response to my post? Granted, he probably has alot of pressure with his job, but excuse me, I thought points of view and opinions are what a blog are all about? Maybe you should read the post entirely Red Scare. It was me replying to a post of yours back in april that made Raphael write what he wrote in the first place.
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Sep 21, 2009 2:56 AM CDT up reply actions
You're misspelling Raf's name
Making your post insulting as well as ignorant.
Larry Allen benched 700 pounds. That is Leonard Davis times two.
Are we Talking about insulting?
Then I guess you did not read the original post Rafael made from april to even begin to understand my response.
In Mispelling Rafael’s name, it seems like you are more worried about that than Raf himself. If he is bothered by that, he should post something to that point.
His response to my belief that Garrett is a problem is what the issue is Tim. It’s was my belief then just like it is now. He stated that I should not be painting a bullseye on Garrett’s head. Garrett himself is to blame for that remark from Raf.
So you don’t like what I said. That’s ok, I’m not trying to make converts here.
Did I call anyone harsh, profane names? no.
If I believe that Jason Garrett is substandard as our Offensive Coordinator, That’s just my belief. No reason for Raf to call me insulting (or you for that matter) just because you don’t like the sound of that opinion.
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Sep 21, 2009 11:59 AM CDT up reply actions
Your argument is incoherent
Your points don’t tie together in any sequence and I can’t tell why you even believe Garrett is at fault for our loss.
We were MINUS FOUR in TO ratio.
And we have zero sacks in two games.
We allowed two receivers to get 130+ yards in passing.
Garrett called an excellent game, as I would think would be evident by our total points (despite giving up FOUR possessions with turnovers) and our 15 year FRANCHISE RECORD in rushing.
Larry Allen benched 700 pounds. That is Leonard Davis times two.
And those stats..
are supposed to justify a blunderous gameplan. Those stats mean nothing without victory. The gameplan and coaching are insufficient because of the outcome of the game.
This game resembled Romo’s first game 3 years ago more than the playoff loss to the Giants. Going backward in time is basically like talking about this offense having no progress or learning anything from the losses they’ve experienced.
My belief is that this game was lost by the offense, not the defense. True that the defense did not play good enough, But if the offense would not have committed the turnovers, we wouldn’t be talking about it. But I am glad we are talking about it, because whether we like it or not, this problem is not going to go away regardless of how many bloggers here want to blame the defense and Romo. The real culprit in our ill-advised playcalling on offense has always been Garrett. It’s blind arrogance to believe that everything is allright when it truly is not. It was blind arrogance when Garrett made the call that ended as a enny Phillips interception.You would have thought that after such experience playing the Giants, The Cowboys coaches would get a handle on understanding what to do to limit the Giants opportunites. That hasn’t happened unfortunately for us fans. If you quote me more stats, and talk about how many times we’ve beaten the Giants, the more I’ll talk about the meaningless victories that they are because they are not playoff games, and the more I’ll point to the offense turning the ball over. This game was just a bad nightmare and part 2 of the same nightmare that was last years final game against Philly.
Stop defending what you can’t justify as good enough, cause it’s not.
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Sep 21, 2009 1:32 PM CDT up reply actions
This game doesn't prove your point though
I agree with your premise, even though we know Romo can torch secondaries, this team is really built to pound the ball and set up play action passing.
But I didn’t feel like Garrett was forcing the pass too much, rather Romo just made 2 extremely poor throws and one bad pass that was a total fluke INT. The play selection was perfectly split 50/50. Exactly 29 pass plays and 29 run plays. The running plays just happened to be extremely productive.
So it begins...
If we are built to pound the ball...
Then why didn’t we do it? It’s the Offensive coordinators job to come up with a gameplan. Garrett failed, period. He will continue to fail if he doesn’t protect the ball on offense. Tony Romo is a gunslinger, and in alot of games, he will put up huge numbers. But some games, we must all admit, he must be reigned in, and this is Garretts job.
Garrett may not have been passing the ball too much, but the facts reamin that through the pass we lost this game. The turnovers were lethal. That is were I come from: was the passing necessary?
I’m not saying they should not try to pass down the field, what I am saying is this game was more important than to just throw it away. Championship teams find a way to win no matter what it takes. We seem to be in this perpetuel merry-go-round same old- same old song and dance with the Giants. The story ends up the same- Romo with 2, 3, 4 interceptions. Eliminate that, and would the Giants win? I doubt it. Paramount when playing the Giants is limiting the Giants offensiive opportunities. They are not a juggernaut, but if you keep giving any team, especially them, continual chances on offense, then you know what the result is.
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Sep 21, 2009 2:23 AM CDT up reply actions
How can you argue that we didn't run enough?
We had a MONSTER run game tonight.
Take away Romo’s pick-6 INT for a TD and we win the game
Indeed
Not only that, but there was at least one huge play(the soon-to-be-infamous Flozell Adams vs. Justin Tuck trip play) negated by a penalty which led to a pick later. TONS of stupid things happened in the game, none of which involved our running game or offensive play calling.
Epic Fail since 1985
by the red scare on Sep 21, 2009 3:32 AM CDT up reply actions
What I wouldn't do to
Turn back the clock, take 25 percent of the pass plays called tonight and replace them with runs. The Giants wouldn’t have been expecting it, and we wouldn’t have had the interceptions. Cowboys voctory, 20-7.
Can someone please go out there and tell Romo to run a first down play by dropping back, and passing it out of bounds on purpose. Then ask Romo what it feels like, and tell him it’s a wonderful thing to keep the ball away from the defense. Obviously, Garrett has no control over him, in fact, he encourages him to play risky like that.
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Sep 21, 2009 3:39 AM CDT up reply actions
the NFL is a little more complex than
pass= lose
run= win
The Knights season may have just ended, but the Cowboys year is just begining!
by aussie_cowboy on Sep 21, 2009 3:49 AM CDT up reply actions
I am
definitely not saying that, and you impling that Aussie is wrong. My opinion is that Garrett did not react to Romo’s innefectiveness and did not help him by allowing him to continue to throw down the field in risky passes. Would running the ball instead of incompletions have been such an awful alternative? How many times do you have to see the same thing against the Giants before you say something? Did the 2nd Redskins game last year have any meaning at all? They won a game I thought they would lose for sure if they continued to run. But we have Felix and Tasheard also this year. There is no reason to not use the run more than we did in this game (my opinion, sorry for my belief). I watched the Cowboys of the 90’s run the ball to set up the pass beautifully, and it works trust me.
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Sep 21, 2009 3:57 AM CDT up reply actions
What I am saying is that Garrett did exactly that
I watched the Cowboys of the 90’s run the ball to set up the pass beautifully, and it works trust me.
We ran for over 250 yards tonight. That is more than usual for this team, and Garrett did use the running game very effectively (#1 in the NFL throug two games). But eventually you have to look to your pro bowl qb to make some plays. Tonight, Eli did that and Romo didn’t.
The Knights season may have just ended, but the Cowboys year is just begining!
by aussie_cowboy on Sep 21, 2009 4:02 AM CDT up reply actions
Great minds think alike lol
The Knights season may have just ended, but the Cowboys year is just begining!
by aussie_cowboy on Sep 21, 2009 4:07 AM CDT up reply actions
Then explain
the dysfunctional offense that looked like it should be running when passing, and yes, a few times pass when it ran.
just leave your opinion about my belief that we did not run the ball enough as just that- your opinion. Raphael has to respond to his remarks he made back in April himself
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Sep 21, 2009 4:08 AM CDT up reply actions
I don't think that the offense was dysfunctional
I think Romo would like to have a few of his passes back
+1
The Knights season may have just ended, but the Cowboys year is just begining!
by aussie_cowboy on Sep 21, 2009 4:13 AM CDT up reply actions
The "dysfunctional offense"
put up 31 points despite four turnovers adn a defense that did not help at all in terms of feild position. It might just be me, but I think that is pretty good. And I disagree completely with this:
looked like it should be running when passing
You cant run the ball all the time. We have a pro bowl quarterback who just happeneed to have a bad game. You dont give him a $69 million contract then tell him to hand off all game.
And of this:
just leave your opinion about my belief that we did not run the ball enough as just that- your opinion. Raphael has to respond to his remarks he made back in April himself
I believe the purpose of a blog such is this is for everyone to discuss their thoughts. Am I wrong?
The Knights season may have just ended, but the Cowboys year is just begining!
by aussie_cowboy on Sep 21, 2009 4:13 AM CDT up reply actions
You guys obviously have forgotten one thing...
This kind of game has been repeated over and over again for the last 3 years against the Giants, and it hasn’t worked.
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Sep 21, 2009 1:38 PM CDT up reply actions
We are now 4-1
against the Giants in the regular season with Romo and Garrett. Therefore the gameplan has worked.
The Knights season may have just ended, but the Cowboys year is just begining!
by aussie_cowboy on Sep 21, 2009 3:21 PM CDT up reply actions
Was it my imagination Bishop, or...
did we not turn the ball over unnecessarily with the pass? Was this even the first time Romo played like this against the Giants?
This game, we needed to limit the Giants chances. Play keep away with the ball.
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Sep 21, 2009 3:33 AM CDT up reply actions
He didn't really throw high risk passes
besides the deep shot that Phillips easily picked off.
If he was just winging them 20 or 30 yds into double coverage every attempt, I’d feel different.
Also RB’s can fumble (Felix put one on the turf), so running the ball more doesn’t necessarily result in better ball security either.
I can’t put any blame on Garrett for this loss. Romo just had a bad game.
So it begins...
by APerfectStar on Sep 21, 2009 3:46 AM CDT up reply actions
+1
The Knights season may have just ended, but the Cowboys year is just begining!
by aussie_cowboy on Sep 21, 2009 3:49 AM CDT up reply actions
I'll pretend you didn't say that Aperfectstar
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Sep 21, 2009 1:39 PM CDT up reply actions
OK
But I did, and it’s the truth.
So it begins...
by APerfectStar on Sep 21, 2009 9:48 PM CDT up reply actions
Your truth as you see it, not everyone
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Sep 22, 2009 3:49 PM CDT up reply actions
This is ridiculous.
We had the most rushing yards the team has had in over 15 years, and averaged 8.7 yards per carry. That seems like a pretty effective running game to me. We lost this game because Romo played poorly, not because Garrett coached poorly. We have scored the third most points in the league in the first two weeks, and average 184.5 yards per game on the ground. That makes us the best rushing team in the NFL through 2 weeks.
The Knights season may have just ended, but the Cowboys year is just begining!
Yeah Aussie...
We are 1-1, losing a big division game to a team we can’t seem to understand how to play against, our defense is probably ranked last in the NFL after tonight based on our offense doing some 3 and outs, as well as turnovers.
If Romo plays poorly, it unfortunately is a reflection on Garrett (whether we like it or not, fair or not). Might our running game being so effective be the reason why we should have used it more? absolutely. But Garrett didn’t do that. Are you saying he coached well? I’m sorry Aussie, I didn’t see it that way. The coaching is a problem unfortunately (my opinion) respectfully.
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Sep 21, 2009 3:48 AM CDT up reply actions
I am saying he coached well
as he did last week. (I refer back to us being the third best team in the NFL in terms of yards and the best in the NFL in terms of yards per play). This is while Romo played a terrible game one week, and we played against a very good defense.
I dont really see what this has to do with Garrett’s playcalling (Your original argument in this post [other than to diss Raf]):
We are 1-1, losing a big division game to a team we can’t seem to understand how to play against, our defense is probably ranked last in the NFL after tonight based on our offense doing some 3 and outs, as well as turnovers.
But I understand if you dont have any comeback for actual statistics.
The Knights season may have just ended, but the Cowboys year is just begining!
by aussie_cowboy on Sep 21, 2009 3:52 AM CDT up reply actions
-10000
Sorry, its nothing more than a reflection of Romo having a shitty day.
There is a ton of blame to go around but Garrett is probably a guy with the least amount of blame.
DC, CBs, Pass rush, Turnovers, Safetys, WRs, ect… These are the biggest problems and whether your a Homer or a Gomer its undeniable.
Your shot at Raf is off base. From my take he simply said your over reacting to the use/misuse of a 3rd option RB. He never said we should pass more or argue about the pass/run ratio. I dont think the proper use of the 3rd RB option even falls into the 100 biggest worries of the 2009 Cowboys.
If you want a semi-legitiment arguement on Garrett it should be whether Romo should have been benched. Thats pretty weak because even the gomers know you shouldnt bench a QB unless he has several crappy games in a row.
The only thing I got from your post is Raf hurt your feelings and you dont like Garrett and Choice should be used more. Tell me your run/pass ratio you have in mind and the split of the carries between the 3 RBs.
KICK ASS every day!!!
Since Raf wrote ...
the Demeaning post, I really didn’t rant and rave then. I waited until now to respond, because it was the apropriate time This was the first big game. because of what his demeaning post implied (me painting bullseyes on Garrett’s head), he still hasn’t clarified or justified the meaning behind it. He might not have liked me putting responsibility on Garrett, but He didn’t have to imply that I was painting bullseye’s, because I’m not. If any bullseye is there, it is a figment of Raf’s imagination, or Garrett put it there himself. I even wrote to Raf these same things. he did not respond. He is to far above responding or having time to reply to such an outburst of his apparantly, and the demeaning is not acceptable. it’s not necessary from other bloggers, and it’s not necessary from him either. if I was that ticked off, I would have ranted back then.
But I waited until the appropriate time to respond to the demeaning (regarding him).
I like Garrett. I want him to succeed badly. Did ever occur to you, that I just want responsibility on Garrett because he, out of any coach we have, could show such anger, and hopefully get a point across to our 67 million dollar QB? Or is it rather that you think Wade could do that? Or the other Wade (Wade Wilson). I want Garrett to seize this moment now, and get in Romo’s face and say something valuable to kick him into gear if he screws up again. If he doesn’t, then that will further prove he is not possibly able to control Romo, but someone has to. If this coaching staff stays passive like this and shows no life, how long will it be before you yourself say something about change? A coach, showing anger during a game, at foolish mistakes, WILL get the players attention. No one else on this staff, to me, seems to have the Kahuna’s. One thing I don’t think you’ll argue with me on is what the outcome has been against the last 4 big games we have played (NYG, Philly, Balt, Pitt), the pass was instrumental at failure because our turnovers are there. Take that out of the equation, and I’m sure that we would have had a shot to win in every game.
As far as Tashard Choice not being used enough, I’m taking a leap of faith and say he is the better all purpose back right now. I also believe Tashard and Felix should be out on the field at the same time, to confuse defenses, and for our offense to use one of them as a decoy.
In the Giants game, I called for us to be 65-35 run/pass. We were just about 50-50.
That’s ok against them (if we have no turnovers) but that has rarely happened when we play them. If that 15 percent would take away only 1 interception, we still win, but it may have taken away 2, and related to more points off the board for them. Please notice, against them, how little they score when they have to drive the length of the field to score, because it’s all FG’s, and how much they score off turnovers. Turnovers are they’re cash cow. You can’t underestimate that or mistake it.
Against the Panthers, we should go 50-50 run pass. But our passing game should include both Felix and Tashard alot more than what we’ve seen so far. It matters little to me if you disagree with me about RB. But about using both the RB’s more in the passing offense, I don’t think you’ll argue with me (just a hunch). Screens with either of them would devastate our opponents.
I’m sorry that your disagreement with me has maybe made you question my perspective. I’m out in the fringes of Cowboy fandom. I really am not posting here to convert you or anyone for that matter. Just to state my opinion, for better or worse.
I’m not here to write things to make people feel good. No matter what, Cowboy fans are not gonna feel good, not now at least. I know I have a bad feeling in my stomach over what has happened. Would you accept what has happened at the end of last year, as well as what has happened so far this year? I thought so.
In april, when I created the post “Who would you blame if Tashard is not used correctly”, it was right after his splendid performance against the highly vaunted Pittsburgh Steelers, and a post created to make people see that running the ball had it’s wisdom. Raf took it the wrong way and responded with wrath. It was wrong by him, but not the end of the world by no means. He is not above making a mistake. But it’s what you do to correct those mistakes that matters. Same thing with Romo by the way, not just Raf. Mistakes are a part of life.
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Sep 24, 2009 7:46 PM CDT up reply actions
Dude,
Get over what Raf did or didn’t do.
It is difficult to hear the “tone of one’s voice” when only looking at text from a keyboard.
Raf is an awesome analyst / writer and is one of the main reasons for the success of BTB.
Just agree to disagree and move on.
I do have a comeback Aussie
Putting the statistics aside considering how they will be
How is it that you believe the coaching made a difference in this game? I’m sure that’s what the Giant’s are saying right now..
“They’re coaching was better than the last time we beat them”
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
I would love to continue the debate
but I dont really know what your getting at with this comment.
The Knights season may have just ended, but the Cowboys year is just begining!
by aussie_cowboy on Sep 21, 2009 4:08 AM CDT up reply actions
But I dont really know what you are saying with that comment
The Knights season may have just ended, but the Cowboys year is just begining!
by aussie_cowboy on Sep 21, 2009 4:08 AM CDT up reply actions
What I'm gettin at Aussie is this...
What has changed? nothing. The outcome? The same. Spagnuolo is not even the defensive coordinator, yet Garrett can’t figure it out. You say it’s Romo’s fault the way your posting, I say it’s Garrett that’s at fault. Romo does share some of the blame, but no matter what, Garrett has the responsibility.
The debate we are talking about has to do with how the Cowboys go about to defeat the Giants. We just have differing opinions on how the Cowboys should do that.
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
Okay
but this just doesnt make sense:
The outcome? The same. Spagnuolo is not even the defensive coordinator, yet Garrett can’t figure it out.
Firstly, the outcome is not the same, coming into this game Romo and Garrett were 4-0 against the Giants in the regular season, and secondly, we put up 31 points and rushed for over 250 yards at 8.7 yards per carry. If that isn’t “figuring it out” then I dont know what is. Give me an example of what kinds of stats our offense would need for Garrett to have “figured it out”.
The Knights season may have just ended, but the Cowboys year is just begining!
by aussie_cowboy on Sep 21, 2009 4:16 AM CDT up reply actions
The biggest stat
a notch in the win column.
Here you are writing about this too Aussie:
“You cant run the ball all the time. We have a pro bowl quarterback who just happeneed to have a bad game. You dont give him a $69 million contract then tell him to hand off all game.”
That’s wrong Aussie. Do you want to know why? You really have to do whatever it takes to win the game-period. I’m not saying we should just run (no way), but we should have run more than we did. I truly believe that. Especially if the Giants were giving us huge gaping lanes to run through for what seemed like all game
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Sep 21, 2009 4:23 AM CDT up reply actions
Well we are just in disagreement
I think we ran enough (the most rushing yards in over 15 years is imo indicative of that). My point of raising Romo’s ocntract was that he played well enough to deserve that contract (though granted he didn’t tonight). The reason we had “huge” running lanes was because Garrett stuck with the pass. I also think its important that our offensive co-ordinator have faith in our pro bowl qb.
The Knights season may have just ended, but the Cowboys year is just begining!
by aussie_cowboy on Sep 21, 2009 4:56 AM CDT up reply actions
Garrett having faith in Romo is not the problem
The entire team having faith in Garrett is the real problem. Is it just me, or did I sense the entire team (or at least the defense) just kind of give up a little after the Kenny Phillips interception? That is the real fundamental truth of offensive playcalling- confidence. Once that gets undermined, and it spreads throughout the whole team based on the actions of a leader of the team, you can forget about it. Especially against a big time foe and rival like the Giants. They, unfortunately for us, were able to smell the blood. Again, this problem is not gonna go away, because it has always been here, and it has never left. That feeling of no confidence in what you are doing is the real foe. I really hate to be negative, and write such truths about our team, because nobody wants to hear it. But it should be heard at this point, and it doesn’t even matter if every Cowboy fan in the world doesn’t understand or believe it.
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Sep 22, 2009 12:51 PM CDT up reply actions
How can you POSSIBLY blame Garrett for Romo's INT to Kenny Phillips?
There was more than one Cowboy running routes on that play. Romo had choices, and he made the wrong choice. In his presser, Romo said that it was his fault and that he did not account for the Safety being that deep in coverage.
If Garrett is going to be held accountable for all of Romo’s mistakes, he better call a whole lot more running plays to Barber, Jones, and Choice.
If, and I say again, IF the entire team lost any confidence – it had nothing to do with Garrett and everything to do with Romo.
Uh, maybe it might have to do with...
The interceptions that keep happening over and over again in big games that are important.
The fact that the running game had so much success that we went away from it at the time we needed to use it the most. In your defense of Garrett, saying how could I possibly blame him, you are possibly assuming that Romo himself made the call to pass at that point in the game (to any reciever). Or that he just chose the wrong reciever. Did you ever stop to consider that running the ball might have been the best option at that point in the game? That is what Garrett’s job is, is it not? How’s this- you blame Romo, I’ll Blame Garrett, and we’ll leave it at that. You are not posting here because of blame, you seem to be posting here because you just don’t like the fact that I am putting responsibility on the person who’s job it is to see that these things don’t happen. You seem to also not accept the fact that they not only happen, they keep happenning, without anyone saying that it is a problem. Why? Do you think Garrett is “untouchable”? Is he not above scrutiny, and the reality that he is not able to do his job correctly against these type of teams? I don’t see what legs you are standing on in these points of yours bishop. I know you probably think I’m in the minority, but I think you know deeep down inside that there are alot of people questioning Jason Garrett’s ability to overcome this obstacle. He hasn’t proven anything yet to me. Alot of teams have offensive coordinators that put up good stats, alot of that is players and not the coordinator himself. But it’s that critical playcalling in big games that differentiate the great offensive coordinators with the average ones, and we don’t maybe even have a good one in Garrett. You can go back to blaming Romo now…..
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Sep 22, 2009 3:20 PM CDT up reply actions
Bishop...
We seem to keep debating in circles. You believe it wasn’t playcalling, I believe it was playcalling- specifically Jason Garrett allowing Romo the opportunity to throw THAT interception. Garrett should have known better, but he is still a young and obviously not experienced enough offensive coordinator to take that play away from Romo (no matter whether the execution was bad or good). Romo didn’t deserve the opportunity to even take that throw. He had a horrible game leading up to that point regardless of stats. Mark my words Bishop, although you may not think it’s fair, Jason Garrett has some heat on him right now as we debate this. That playcall was unecessary, regardless of how many fans think Romo is at fault.
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Sep 22, 2009 8:05 PM CDT up reply actions
Again, I disagree
In the middle of your post you said Garrett should, “take that play away from Romo no matter whether the execution was bad or good.”
I can tell you now that if that play was properly executed and led to a TD instead of a pick, we wouldn’t even be having this conversation. And everyone would be talking about what a great game Garrett called. The problem was not the play, it was the player.
+1
The Knights season may have just ended, but the Cowboys year is just begining!
by aussie_cowboy on Sep 22, 2009 11:13 PM CDT up reply actions
You go with that Bish! Go boy!
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Sep 24, 2009 12:40 AM CDT up reply actions
It probably was...
me watching the passing game so inneffective that made me think our gameplan was flawed.
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Sep 21, 2009 1:43 PM CDT up reply actions
The turnovers
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Sep 21, 2009 1:43 PM CDT up reply actions
I see what you are saying...
Garrett, as the offensive coordinator, should not feel any responsibility for the poor record and performance by the offensive unit.
including, most importantly, bad decision making by the quarterback.
I really don’t understand what you are defending. I think it is more like denial. Denial over the fact that against the big time defenses in the NFL, the Cowboys can’t hang. It’s not being negative to talk about it. What is negative is to not at least bring up an issue, discuss and debate it, and see what can be done to solve the problem. That is what a blog is all about.
Please don’t respond back in the same manner that Aussie has, with a “you don’t see the logic” response that is typically written on this blog after someone doesn’t conform to accept what you are arguing.
Garrett himself has accepted responsibility for the offenses poor performance. The real question is, what is he going to do about it. We’ll have to wait and see.
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Sep 21, 2009 4:49 PM CDT up reply actions
If Garrett had called
a few more runs and a few less passes – I don’t think there would have been any difference at all in the outcome….
UNLESS, the pass plays you take back are the 3 INTs that Tony threw
Bishop, I'm not saying that...
Against every team we make the run a priority. That would be foolish. We are too good a pass offense. But what more do you need to see when we play the Giants?
Let me explain what I mean when I say we should make the run a priority. Do you rememeber that running back Emmitt Smith? Eat the clock ball. Feed the Giants they’re own poison, and let them suffocate. If they don’t have the ball, and we go on long time consuming drives, how much you wanna make a bet that we won’t be seeing highlights of Mario Manningham, Steve Smith, and the turnovers would be a goose egg. Against teams like them, the biggest job has always been keeping the ball away from they’re offense. If you keep it away from them, you help the defense tremendously (on this team, the offense needs to help the defense). If you do that, then it may not be that glamorous score, but a victory? without a doubt. 17-7, 21-13,13-7 would most likely be the kind of score that kind of game would have. I wonder if Garrett realizes what it means to draw up a gameplan like that, or more importantly what kind of talent he has with the players at his disposal.
That is why Raf’s reaction to my post last april was not only out of line, it was childish. How stupid is it to not want to win a ballgame, or to accuse someone for a point of view of what should happen for a team he loves and desperately wants to see have victory over such a horrendous foe.
Nothing against MB3 or Felix Jones, I love them both and they have they’re roll on the team (obviously) but so does Tashard. He is not the 3rd string back (that is what most Cowboy fans think though). Do you even know what Tashard Choice is? He is the complete back. He should not be on the bench so much. The complete back means he is the all-purpose, the use for every situation, mr. all-everything. Pass the ball to him in the flats. Draw plays. Make the defenses respect that run. Even make the defenses think your gonna pass, then screen or handoff to Tashard. He will make the first down. Felix Jones and MB3 are not that kind of back. Patience, look for your block, vision.
Garrett had the right kind of gameplan for the Giants in last years 2nd Redskins game, but he used the wrong back- he used MB3 in that game. Tashard should be the back we use against the Giants this way. Make no mistake about victory over them. They would worry about his abilities so much, it would change they’re defeensive gameplan to stack the pass D, and then Romo would be able to air it out to single coverage. But Garrett obviously can’t see it. He himself is still a work in progress as an offensive coordinator. He relies too much on big pass plays, and passing in general, against teams he don’t need to. How many re-enectments of Romo’s first game 3 years ago does he need to see before he changes the offensive gameplan against these type of teams.
What I am saying most of all in the post “What if Tashard Choice isn’t used correctly” is not that we make Tashard the starter in every game (although I still believe he should be), but rather use him more than Felix and MB3 when we play teams that have stifling run defenses like Philly, NYG, Balt, Pit, etc., and give him the start over the other RB’s in those type of games. He has already proven productive against these top D’s, what’s the problem Garrett? I see, you don’t want to start having doubt come into Felix’s and MB3’s mind over who the starter is, and you don’t want to hurt Jerry’s feelings. You already have hurt his feelings Garrett by not beating the Giants, who are a team and have always been a team that is there just for us to beat. You show your inexperience and foolishness as an offensive coordinator by not taking advantage of the weapons you have at your disposal. In my book, none of them are the starters. They all are, and they are to be used against the opponents we face that best suits they’re talents. Playing the Giants screams the words “Tashard Choice”, but no one hears, no one understands. In the end, I’m just a fan like you. I want the Cowboys to win. Do not tell me we do not have the talent to play and win a game like that. Our offensive line was designed to play a smash mouth, time consumtion, keep away type game.
Even if we don’t make first downs every time, at least they’re won’t be the Romo interceptions, which are unnecessary and totally Garretts fault and Garrett can do something about it no matter what anyone say’s, including Raf. You may not like the glamour of a game like that, but I promise you that you will enjoy the victory.
And I am still waiting for Raf to come here and write some sort of explanation about the meaning (and demeaning nature) of his post last april about “who would you blame if Tashard isn’t used correctly”. But obviously, he won’t or can’t or doesn’t care. He doesn’t like anyone speaking negatively about Garrett apparantly, but I only call it as I see it.
I know one thing- after you see Tashard’s performance this coming week, it will prove nothing to me. I already know what to expect. But in quoting what Aussie wrote to me yesterday when he wrote “don’t you wonder why there are so many people here that disagree with you”, the answer is yes, I do wonder. I wonder why the Dallas Cowboys have alot of fan’s that have forgotten the rules of the NFC East. It’s a simple rule, really.
Run the ball, and stop the run.
We can do both. But we can’t if Garrett can’t understand.
Don’t bother to quote me how much we ran against the Giants, because no matter what every blogger on this site say’s, the feeling I got watching the game against the Giants says it all, and it said to me that the Run was a secondary thought in the offensive coordinators mind (what else is new).
That is why we lost. There is no good explanation anyone can give me as to why Romo was allowed to throw the interception to Kenny Phillips, and thus throw the game away. It was unnecessary, and it only proves my belief that Garrett has alot to learn. He still thinks the passing game is the way to beat these type of teams. Reality, though, screams at him and every Cowboy fan, that not every team will be beat that way. He’s a onetrick pony in my book. He still has alot to learn. It is still very bizarre to me that he played on the same team with Emmitt, yet what he saw Emmitt do had no effect on him whatsoever. Without Emmitt, those Cowboys were not able to win.
Too bad Tashard can’t get vindication by getting a starting role while Felix and MB3 are completely healthy, but he will force the issue with performance, that I promise you. Every other Cowboy fan in the world can believe whatever they want, when they see it happen, I’ll refer them back here to read this post. Raf, say something man. You can’t be all about anger, accusation, and no respect when it comes to the Tashard Choice post and “Dallaspalace” (me). You’ve got to have faith and courage too. Courage to admit when you are wrong, and faith that everything is gonna be fine.
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Sep 22, 2009 10:27 AM CDT up reply actions
Bingo!
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Sep 22, 2009 3:53 PM CDT up reply actions
The defense was put on its heels by the offense
And if you believe he called a great game, that’s fine, I respect your opinion.
Unfortunately, I don’t agree.
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
+1
The Knights season may have just ended, but the Cowboys year is just begining!
by aussie_cowboy on Sep 21, 2009 4:52 AM CDT up reply actions
Okay, but
If you don’t understand what I mean about coaching then here it is:
Whatever happened to pride? Whatever happened to laying it all on the line for the victory?
I’m sorry, but the players don’t seem to be taking the coaches seriously enough to play lights out for these coaches.
I hope it changes, and salvage our season, and get a chance to return the favor to the Giants later when we play them.
But for some reason, these coaches are not good enough to get the best out of these players. There is no reason to faulter like this, other than just poor coaching. We don’t have good enough discipline.
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Sep 21, 2009 4:53 AM CDT up reply actions
There is a reason to faulter like this
although I dont really know whta “this” is, because we lost on a last second FG to possibly the best team in the NFL. Every team loses games, it doesn’t mean the player’s are not giving their all. I dont really see how Romo’s three poor passes (the reason we lost) indicate that the coaches are not good enough. Dont forget that these same coaches led us to a record breaking season in 2007.
One loss doesnt equal poor coaching, unless you believe that evry coach who has every played a role in the NFL is a poor coach.
The Knights season may have just ended, but the Cowboys year is just begining!
by aussie_cowboy on Sep 21, 2009 5:00 AM CDT up reply actions
This is not one loss...
It’s the same game over and over again. Don’t act like this game doesn’t matter, because it did- very much so. It is a reflection of what we have learned and how we adjusted. We failed miserably unfortunately.
And just for those people who want to go back to blaming the defense, here is what i have to say:
What would you expect this defense to be playing like against the Giants after the Romo turnovers? How would you expect them to feel after Felix’s fumble?
Tashard Choice was definitely not used enough in this game. He seems to be a “Giantkiller” and no one brings that up and talks about it. I will. I posted last april my belief that Tashard should be the starter, MB3 and Felix should be the role backs, with a more equal splitting of time going to Barber. Felix should be the one coming in for change of pace. But to not use these backs more against an opponent that we needed to use them against is the real tragedy and sin.
Throw the ball to Tashard choice out of the backfield. Throw it to Felix, and MB3 more. over and over again until the Giants change they’re Defense and allow us to pass deep on them. Garrett did not think that way, setting up the pass plays to have success. His staunch pass mentality doomed the Cowboys again, and it will be the same outcome next time if he doesn’t change his thinking. Meanwhile, the Giants are laughing that they goaded the Cowboys offense once again into playing the game right into they’re hands. It’s a true tragedy.
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Sep 21, 2009 2:38 PM CDT up reply actions
I am done with this argument
You dont see logic and that probably wont change.
The Knights season may have just ended, but the Cowboys year is just begining!
by aussie_cowboy on Sep 21, 2009 3:22 PM CDT up reply actions
That's right Aussie
Your logic seems to elude even yourself, because you are arguing for something you can’t justify. Even you can’t deny the fact that there is something dysfunctional about the offense. What would be your idea of what the Cowboys should do to solve the enigma that are the Giants and Eagles?
Oh wait, I know your answer already. You’ll probably say Garrett, no matter what, will call a great game, and that Romo needs to pass the ball more.
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Sep 21, 2009 4:17 PM CDT up reply actions
Some thing I cant justify?
31 points, despite 4 turnovers. That isnt dysfunctional. ’nuf said.
The Knights season may have just ended, but the Cowboys year is just begining!
by aussie_cowboy on Sep 21, 2009 11:23 PM CDT up reply actions
You might have said enough about it....
But I haven’t. You can’t justify the point you are arguing, because you don’t understand it, or you don’t want to understand it.
You say everyone that has posted on here has posted in disagreement with me. That’s ok with me. Garrett being at fault is my opinion because I can’t blame Wade “lame duck” phillips. He is a puppet, not a coach. I love the guy, and he is a great D coordinator, but I feel it’s a dysfunctional offense because it’s a dysfunctional team. It’s dysfunctional because there are 2 coaches, not 1. THAT is dysfunctional (my opinion). And I also feel that the offense is more to blame than most people obviously think. Can Wade override Jerry and Jason Garrett and make offensive playcalls? See what I’m saying now?
Please explain to me how you believe the offensive playcalling has made a difference in pivotal big games, like last year’s Pitt, Balt, and Philly games? Throw in this NYG game with them too. Is it stats you want to quote about all those games that justify your point? My response if you qoute stats for those games will be obvious- they were all losses.
Have you ever played football man? It’s more than stats, sir. It’s a feeling out there of courage and confidence. Confidence that you have in your power, the will to succeed. Jason Garrett’s offense does not instill that confidence, because it is revolves around passing. Passing, unfortunately, is no sure thing. The run is an afterthought in Jason Garrett’s world. One would think that after the success we had running the ball against the Giants, that he would learn to stick to the run. Apparantly, we don’t even get that.
If you feel that strongly about it Aussie, then explain that horrible call for a pass that resulted in the loss, that interception by Kenny Phillips?
Don’t talk about interceptions happen, because they have already happened many times againstthe Giants over and over again in the last 3 years, even in games we have beaten them. Let me make it even simpler than that by asking this question- why did Garrett ALLOW romo to throw that pass?
How about the same question applied to lasyt years Pitt, Balt, and Philly games? Did he really need to pass the ball as much in any of those games? Please justify what you are defending, because I have seen enough. 3 years, and Garrett is not doing anything different- he’s doing the same thing over and over again, miserably I might add.
Look, I’m not trying to put you down, and I am not trying to direspect you. We are fellow Cowboy fans. As I said before, we just have a different point of view on how the Cowboys should go about winning.
You believe Garrett called a good game, I don’t. Let’s leave it at that, ok?
As far as Rafael is concerned, he is an adult. Are you saying to me he can’t make mistakes? of course he can. Can he man up and accept that mistake? we’ll see. That is for him to face up to, not you for him, so please quit trying to justify his reaction to my post, because it was out of line, and HE needs to face up to that himself.
Maybe Rafael will realize it when he watches Tashard Choice monday night against Carolina. We need to give this defense confidence, not undermine it. And now, it’s nuff said.;
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Sep 22, 2009 1:37 PM CDT up reply actions
Again you are diverging from your initial point
I feel it’s a dysfunctional offense because it’s a dysfunctional team. It’s dysfunctional because there are 2 coaches, not 1. THAT is dysfunctional
What does that have to do with Garrett’s playcalling.
Have you ever played football man?
Have you, because if you have, why would you say:
Let me make it even simpler than that by asking this question- why did Garrett ALLOW romo to throw that pass?
I am pretty sure that Garrett’s playcall did not ask Romo to throw the ball to Kenny Phillips. If you have played football, you should understand that there is a difference between poor play calling and poor execution.
And finally,
Please justify what you are defending, because I have seen enough. 3 years, and Garrett is not doing anything different- he’s doing the same thing over and over again, miserably I might add.
Garrett’s offense set almost every record in team history in 2007. That is not performing miserably. This year, we have the best rushing attack and the third best overall offense so far. How can you criticise that?
The Knights season may have just ended, but the Cowboys year is just begining!
by aussie_cowboy on Sep 22, 2009 11:20 PM CDT up reply actions
+1
And to reply to “Garrett is not doing anything different – he’s doing the same thing over and over again”
Are you kidding?
He has all kinds of new wrinkles in his formations this year. Things we’ve NEVER seen before.
No playoff appearances last year
as well as disgustingly stupid offensive playcalling decisions in the Pitt game last year, bad passing in the Baltimore game, a no-show for the Philly game, and now, the best part- a grand opening blunder of our 1.3 billion dollar stadium! How dare I be so down and depressing? Everything is fine!
You know, i’ve got to be honest, but your responses really, really do remind me of the coaching staff. No reaction, calm, no problems. Everything is fine……
I want Garrett to succeed just as much as you do. You think I’ve come to this conclusion easily? It’s been 3 years Aussie? The turnovers against the Giants (as well as others) are getting worse? You quote every stat but the most important ones.
wins and playoff victories.
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Sep 24, 2009 12:31 AM CDT up reply actions
Your the Anti-Terry.
You have such a woody for Garrett you dont look at whats written and logically process it.
The fact that we were 4-0 against the Giants with Romo QBing and Garrett calling the plays just goes by the wayside as you repeat your rant.
I know most of the posters on this thread and I dont recall any of them thinking we shouldnt run more than last year. Im personally for balance. their are some games the other team will stack the run and make you beat them passing. Some teams will stack the pass and make you beat them running.
The deep pass was not a bad call. A deep pass (thats not intercepted) will keep the D honest. It will keep the running lanes open.
The thing is when the playoffs come those teams can take away what you do best. You need to be able to both. I have always felt we threw the ball to much last year and late in the season when we needed our running game it wasnt there from neglect(a lot of that was due to injuries and I realize that) Pitts running game sucked last year but they never abandoned it. You still had to play it honestly.
KICK ASS every day!!!
I do not have a...
Woody for Garrett. I have a yearning for Romo to succeed. Everyone wants to post It’s not Garrett’s fault, It’s Romo, or whatever.
You are right Squido- there is no proof that if we would have had better success if we would have run and not pass downfield. But the chances of a turnover diminish significantly with a short pass to the flats for a screen, or a run. And that would have related to taking 7 points off the Giants scoreboard. At this point, we would have had nothing to loose to try it.
And in deflecting responsibility for plays from Garrett to whomever (Romo probably), what is it that gets accomplished by that argument? If you ask Garrett himself, he will accept his responsibility. He has to.
If no one takes charge, and starts holding the people (in this case Tony) by the throat ( not literally) for responsibility, then that is a symptom of bad coaching. The coaches have to step in (with sound decisions) and show the player (in this case Tony) what the repurcussions are of such foolishness.
I’m sorry, but I can’t bring Wade into this picture. He is a puppett, and not involved in the offense hardly. I also believe that to be a problem, to the point that in other posts of mine, I have called us a “dysfunctional” offense, or team. We needed a strong offensive head coach to oversee Garrett and Romo. But I don’t want Wade involved. Unless Jerry and Garrett will heed him, which probably you and myself doubt will happen in regards to the offense.
Sorry my friend, I believe it is Garrett’s job that is at stake. I know it’s wrong, he may even be our best coach, but responsibility? definitely Garrett. Blame Romo, but it’s Garrett that would lose his job first, then Tony if things go Awry. Make no mistake about that. It’s Sad.
Likewise, I believe Garrett is the one that has to take charge and get in people’s face and yell. Don’t tell me you don’t have to do that, these are grown men, blah blah blah, because then Squidlo, I will tell you THAT is a problem. Too much coddling is self-defeating. This is football Squidlo, you know what I mean? Don’t even try to tell me that if a NY Giant player making a huge mistake, that Coughlin wouldn’t yell. He would. It’s not out of line at all. Is everybody afraid of hurting Romo’s feelings? How about him continuing to hurt fans feelings with such mistakes?
Get me yelling at Romo. I’ll tell him the truth. I’ve got an ugly and mean face too. I’ll say things that will make him go out there next week and throw for 400 yards with no interceptions.
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Sep 24, 2009 6:32 PM CDT up reply actions
How did this post get recommended?
This guy is completely incoherent.
Larry Allen benched 700 pounds. That is Leonard Davis times two.
Incoherent?
Keep your demeaning opinions to yourself. I don’t remember writing anything demeaning about you when responding to your posts.
Be assured that I can demean you up and down, left and right, sideways and straight ahead if I want too. I just don’t because it’s not respectful.
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Sep 24, 2009 6:40 PM CDT up reply actions
The Cowboy defense…
…has ZERO sacks and ZERO turnovers through the 1st two games (after getting virtually no turnovers in all of 2008 either). And they weren’t even close to getting to Eli last night. Manning threw for 330 yards last night one week after this same defense was shredded on the ground by the Bucs; and none of this is Garrett’s fault. If I’m mad at anyone on the coaching staff, it’s Wade.
Why was he once again (and as always) playing the corners so far off the ball giving the Giants receivers a clean release? Where were those exotic blitz packages I kept hearing about all off-season? Most of the night he continued to call for a consistently ineffectual 4-man rush with a deep umbrella zone. Anyone who studies the Giants knows that if you pressure Eli he’ll make stupid throws. But Wade seemed content to just let him sit back, comfortably in the pocket and tear apart the porous Dallas secondary.
The turnovers last night were bad but this defense should have been able to even some of that out by getting some turnovers of their own. Romo’s interceptions, as absolutely horrific as they were, would not have been nearly as costly if the Cowboys could have nabbed a couple Eli passes. Heck, the Cowboys might have won last night if they could have produced a single sack. Through the 1st two weeks of this very young season the Defense looks like one the worst in the NFL and that’s on Wade not Jason.
The 2009 Dallas Cowboys: Talk to me in December.
The NFC East has won 11 Super Bowls; oddly none of those have come courtesy of the Eagles.
yup
one sack could have literally been the difference in winning or losing last night.. How sad is that.. What was I thinking when I drafted Dallas’ D in my fantasy league, haha! 0 points in back to back weeks. They single handedly lost me 2 games in a row. I’ll take the blame though, I shoulda known better.
+1
one sack could have literally been the difference in winning or losing last night.
Totally agree there. I have Dallas D in a couple leagues. Luckily, I have Gore in one, Brees in another, and CJohnson in another. Phew!
And the sign said long haired freaky people need not apply ...
http://twitter.com/BloggingTheBoys
by Aaron Novinger on Sep 21, 2009 2:31 PM CDT up reply actions
I understand where you are coming from gee-roj....
and alot of your points I agree with. Over the last decade, our defense has never been dominant enough to win games decisively without help from the offense, so I take the defensive shortcomings as an accepted reality. If the team was going to make defense a priority, then they should have never gone to a 3-4 and tried to copy the Patriots. The Patriots had very special players for the 3-4, and it may never happen again that such a collection of players be assembled for the 3-4 with such success. The Cowboys should be a 4-3 team (my belief) but we have to go with what Jerry wants. That doesn’t mean we have to like it though. The drafting has been horrible for the defense. There have been good picks, but too many average/bad picks to put it all together. In a nutshell, our defense is good enough to keep us from loising games, but not good enough to win them when it’s crunch time. They can play the occasional “lights out” type of game, but it’s too infrequent. Consistency is eluding the coaches on defense. I hope Wade can get a grip on it, but if the offense is dealing blows to the defense by committing turnovers, you can forget about it. That is why a conservative offensive gameplan is called for. If you don’t believe me, watch next week when we run the ball more because now, after this game, Garrett will be forced to limit his mistakes. The funny thing is, this gameplan we had against the Giants should have been our gameplan against Carolina. This game against the Giants called for a run/pass ratio of 65/35. But our run pass was about 50-50, and the pass plays killed us as usual against them. When will Garrett learn?
Now, if Garrett doesn’t do 50-50 against the Panthers, and runs more, then it will be a closer game, and Carolina might even win. That is why I am calling the offense dysfunctional, because of the gameplan. It seems like Garrett can’t call the right gameplan for the opponent we are playing. I am strictly referring to top teams defenses he has to face. Carolina is a good team, but they are obviously not the NY Giants.
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Sep 21, 2009 2:04 PM CDT up reply actions
Aren't you at all curious as to why every single poster on this fanpost disagrees with you?
Maybe it is because you’re wrong.
The Knights season may have just ended, but the Cowboys year is just begining!
by aussie_cowboy on Sep 21, 2009 3:24 PM CDT up reply actions
I really don't care if you like my posts Aussie
You really are posting your opinion, and that’s fine. But that is YOUR opinion. After a loss like yesterday, any issue should be brought up and talked about. Don’t try telling me that what progress that the team has made has been effective, and that everybody disagrees with me. Niether is true in MY opinion.
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Sep 21, 2009 4:24 PM CDT up reply actions
One part is true
Every comment in this thread as of right now, has been in direct disagreement with your assertion that Garrett is the reason Dallas lost the game. That isn’t an opinion, that is a fact.
So it begins...
by APerfectStar on Sep 21, 2009 9:55 PM CDT up reply actions
ty
The Knights season may have just ended, but the Cowboys year is just begining!
by aussie_cowboy on Sep 21, 2009 11:24 PM CDT up reply actions
And you are assuming
That relates to the whole world of Cowboy fans out there? There probably are alot of people that feel Jason Garrett has alot to prove, and they are just not posting here because they haven’t stopped by to read. Just because you are here posting your opinion means nothing other than that. Other people have other opinions, and they won’t coincide with mine or yours.
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Sep 22, 2009 3:41 PM CDT up reply actions
Not assuming anything
Simply pointing out the fact that no one has posted a comment in the thread that agrees with your opinion. I specifically said only those who commented so far.
So it begins...
by APerfectStar on Sep 22, 2009 9:18 PM CDT up reply actions
why does this post remind me of
Summarizing the Dallas Cowboys in two words; inconsistently amazing.
If you think this post is so bad...
Then I wonder how you’ll feel after Romo has another 3-4-5 interception game the NEXT time we play the Giants. The feeling you’ll get is alot worse than what you think about this post, but then you will come back here and probably try to make your point that Garrett made the perfect calls, and we did all we could do to win the game.
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Sep 24, 2009 12:22 AM CDT up reply actions
Any time that Romo throws an INT
whether it be past, present or future
It is not and cannot, ever, be Garrett’s fault. Period.
It is absolutely ridiculous to pin any INT on an OC.
Whether it happens in little league, pop warner, junior varsity, varsity, college, or the pros – the OC is not responsible for an INT thrown by the QB.
Still bishop...
you go with that , and keep believing that Garrett’s job is safe if Romo continues.
Garrett will be gone before Romo if Romo continues to blunder. Don’t ask me about that, ask someone that agrees with you. You’ll understand what I’m talking about then.
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Sep 24, 2009 12:35 AM CDT up reply actions
I'm not saying that Garrett's job is safe
I am saying that the INTs are not Garrett’s fault. It couldn’t be. That’s an impossibility.
Jerry Jones could make the mistake of getting rid of the wrong guy. His love affair with Romo could possibly cost us too many consecutive years without a playoff win or a Super Bowl appearance; with or without Garrett.
Exactly
and in this game against Carolina, I actually don’t want Garrett to get conservative and go too heavy onthe run, although he might. He should keep the playcalling at 50-50 run/pass. But Garrett might react to the turnovers and
go heavy on the run, but I think we still win.
Against the Giants, though, his pass happy playcalling, and ALLOWING Romo to keep blundering, may doom him. The same issues of playcalling come up when we will play Philly, New Orleans, as well as any other top team. Getting conservative and using the run more when we play teams like that should be around 65-36 run pass. 50-50 will only do to beat teams like that when there are zero turnovers.
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Sep 24, 2009 12:47 AM CDT up reply actions
I'm thinking that the pass/run ratio is not based on the fact
of whether an opponent is a “top team” or not. I would think that the pass/run ratio is based on the defense we are facing.
If their front seven is a little weaker or has soft spots – you run. If their DBs have weaknesses – you pass more.
It is possible that we could play a top level team that is extremely tough against the run, but susceptible to the pass.
So – just because they are a top level opponent – does not necessitate that you have to run more.
Of course, any time we get far behind in points, the pass play will become a greater factor. And vice-versa, when we get far ahead in points the run should be more of a factor.
I believe in what you are saying Bishop
What I don’t believe is when you are committing interceptions, no matter who’s fault the QB or Reciever, you don’t use the pass at critical junctures of a game. It’s risky, because you are playing an opportunistic team, you’ve already committed turnovers, the time of posession isn’t in your favor, and because of the turnovers, the playcall stands on shaky ground.
fault may be the reciever or the QB, but responsibility falls directly and squarely on the offensive coordinator.
others (maybe yourself) believe that just running the ball in that type situation, or screens would have just ended up with us just punting.
I’m not so certaiin. The momentum swing that happens against such teams is devastating. If you just run the ball, you at least take time off the clock, and you limit they’re chances to score more. add to that you give your defense time to rest. And you do not have the momentum swing.
these 3 things are3 our biggest adversaries, not the Giants. The Giants coaches just use them against us. Limit the opponents offensive opportunities, and keep the ball for yourself. That kind of playcalling is offensive playcalling. It’s offensive playcalling. If Romo’s passes were good during the game, then I can see this debate between me and you.
But again, have I not stated that Romo has made these kind of mistakes dating back to his first game against the Giants 3 years ago? His coaching has not had an effect, or is not good enough, and until he proves that he has earned the right to throw that pass, the offensive coordinator should not give it to him. That is my belief truly bishop. You may believe differently, and I can understand that, but this is how I believe, especially since these kind of passes have been called, and made into interceptions against this team, over and over in critical big game situations. Trying to win the game the way I’m describing, do we have anything to loose? Will it happen? probably not. But we have already seen what has happened doing things this way more than once I will add.
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Sep 24, 2009 10:30 AM CDT up reply actions
Imagine who I am then Bishop..
I am a Cowboy fan living under the most adverse conditions- surrounded here in NY by Giants fans. Imagine the scorn, the namecalling, the backstabbing, the belittling, the berating, that being a Cowboy fan here would subject you to.
I don’t get that though bishop, you know why? When people see me, they opt not to say stupid things. I will confront them on they’re stupidity, and make them look stupid. As much as all my friends here have tried to make me a Giants fan, it’s all for naught. They have respect for the Cowboys when they talk to me about them. But behind my back, I know what they are saying. We are a proud team, and have proud fans, and we will overcome.
I’m a true New Yorker, and I haven’t really hated the Giants ever. Like I said in other posts before, I still truly believe that the Giants are a team that was meant to exist just as a team for us to beat. If that is true, then how could it not be that that they would be among the best teams in the league? If we truly are to be NFL champions, then my belief is well founded. The measuring stick is there, and we do measure up, but not mentally. Mentally, the blunders will cost us. We have to eliminate those. Once we do, victory is ours.
Our defense isn’t as good as the Giants. It doesn’t have to be. It’s good enough. But we have to help it, not undermine it.Our offense is better than theirs. We haven’t proven that yet, but we will.
This, in my opinion, is no different a situation than in the early nineties, when the Giants won a super bowl, then we overcame them to go on and win 3 super bowls in 4 years. The Giants have always been a measuring stick. They probably always will be.
I’m happy that Brandon Jacobs and Justin Tuck are trash talking the Cowboys down. The Cowboys need to be pissed off. They need to go kick some ass. That’s just the way it is bishop.
But not siezing the chance to limit they’re (or any opponents) opportunities? That which needs to be done? That is almost a sin that shouldn’t be forgiven.
One day, back in the nineties when we were winning Super Bowls, there was a Cowboys- Giants game on, and I invited my friend to come and watch it with me. He was an avid Giants fan, and was not happy with his team. He declined, and said abruptly “I am not gonna come over and watch the game at your Dallas Palace!”
And thus was born my Screen name. It really has nothing to do with the new stadium, and it never did.
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Sep 24, 2009 12:18 PM CDT up reply actions
So are you arguing that Garrett called for an INT?
Because in that case, yes, I think his playcalling is questionable. But last I checked, Garrett hasn’t QBed for us since the 1990’s and Romo threw the picks.
Larry Allen benched 700 pounds. That is Leonard Davis times two.
No, but calling a pass play on that down resulted in an interception
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Sep 24, 2009 5:32 PM CDT up reply actions
Calling a run could have resulted in a fumble
but in neither case would it have been Garrett’s fault
Less likely though Bishop
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Sep 24, 2009 5:57 PM CDT up reply actions
Dallas,
I have just a few thoughts on this discussion. First of all you need to remember that the Giants were down at least 3 defensive tackles in this game. Tuck went down with an injury, Alford was out along with Canty. It might have been four, I’m not sure but on a hot and humid night in Texas, that is going to make a difference. If those players were available, maybe we don.t run as well. Maybe we do, but I doubt it.
As for the OC debate, I cannot blame the coordinator when the QB says in his presser “I didn’t see the FS.” I have played football and one of the first rules of offense is to recognize where the FS is on each play. Kenny Phillips was not taking a bathroom break when the offense lined up. There were other options for Romo, it was not a one receiver route. The OC cannot know what the defense is going to be when he calls the play. That’s why there are audible options. The fact that Romo is not the sharpest knife in the drawer is not the OC’s fault.
Lastly, can’t go with you on the “Choice is the best back” analysis. He is basically Barber lite. He doesn’t have Jones" speed or Barber’s size or power (or pay grade for that matter.) If Choice proves to be Adrian Petersen, he will start over Barber but that is not going to happen.
BTW, I live halfway between Philly and N.Y. so I get no rest from these people no matter what the Cowboys do.
Well, again here I'll say it, respectfully
Romo did not earn the right to make the pass, plain and simple. If he had connected on some passes, and had not thrown passes so jittery, I would have had more confidence and excused the playcall. But something was off with Tony all night, and maybe it had to do with the fact that the Giants are hunting to hurt him. Since his passes were off, couldn’t Garrett see this? All the more reason that in THAT situation, you don’t have to do that. That is what I believe, and sorry for that. The thing that always kills us is not the pass, it’s the turnover. Less chance of that happenning with the run.
Tony needs help when we play angry teams that want to get him, as well as loathe our franchise as much as they do. Can’t you hear it in they’re voice, man? Now we’ve even got a no name linebacker from the Giants talking crap. That “Danny Ware”, saying his piece on how the stadium sux, the Cowboys Suck. Whatever dude. Adolescent chatter from a no-name.
No, I still believe we can win a game that way against them. Keep away. Make them earn everything they get. Here are the big points in making me say that and why isn’t any one willing to say these things, but here I am saying it, hoping it’s for the betterment of our team.These are the truths we have to accept and analyze as a result of the game:
1. The Giants, having to go the length of the field, will not score a mass amount of points when they get to the red zone, ending in just alot of field goals. They’re percentage of touchdowns to FG’s in the red zone is horrible. They don’t scare me on offense when they have to go the length of the field. More times than not, they will have just FG’s.
2. Why were we not blitzing the hell out of Manning and playing press with the CB’s? That made it even more difficult to win, because we will not stop they’re offense with the prevent defense. That is painfully sad.
3. Passing, and “Romo-Friendly”, to some of us, doesn’t just mean passing to the recievers. A good amount of passes should go to the Backs, not only the TE’s. They are safer passes, and why in the heck wouldn’t you want Felix or Tashard with the ball in the open field? Downfield passes are not the only type of passes. Revolving your offense around a short passing game like that may reap wonderful benefits.
The title of the DVD of the Giants-Cowboys game after I burned it?
“You had no business winning this game”
Aptly titled I might add.
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Sep 24, 2009 5:29 PM CDT up reply actions
"Romo didn't
earn the right to make that pass?" Now I know I’m confused. The guy has been in the league seven years. He has been to the Pro Bowl. He makes 69 million dollars. What more right does he need? “The Giants were hunting to hurt him?” You were kidding when you said that right? Some how I think all teams are looking to hit him as hard as they can.
We cut Owens so Romo could be the leader. O.K., so lead. Now it’s the coordinators fault. In the Philly game last year it was the O-line’s fault.
There are way too many excuses being made for a 7 year NFL veteran. But maybe we are working with flawed basic material in the first place. Division I schools all passed on him. The entire NFL passed on drafting him, even the ‘Boys. Somebody had to see something they didn’t like. QBs are the crown jewels of the NFL. Maybe our “diamond in the rough” is really a “pig in the poke.” I’m not saying that as a conslusion, just food for thought.
Whatever the reason Jevans....
Coaching, playcalling, offensive line, recievers, these are all excuses in my opinion. My opinion and belief has been that coachiing is at the root core of the problem for awhile now.
You may be right. maybe Romo is Danny White II. I’d like to think that’s not the case. All I can say is, my belief, is that the coaching or/and playcalling are not…right.
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Sep 24, 2009 8:20 PM CDT up reply actions
About Tashard
I don’t know what it is, but his Mojo is undisputable. I believe he is a weapon we have to use more of. He is not Felix Jones, but he has is role, and I’m not convinced he is being used correctly. Watching him last year against NYG, Pitt, Balt. was a wonderful thing. He now has experience against the better defenses in the NFL. If anything, all you can say about him in a nutshell is this:
Steady, productive, seldom makes a mistake, has committment to win, and consistently comes up with a big play, plays hard.
Sounds great to me.
I can say the same things about Felix, but I don’t believe he is best suited as an everydown back. He is the ultimate situational back. Use him as such until Tony gets more comfortable with him to throw the ball more to him. We have to get that aspect of Felix’s game going, because it is the future.
Tashard, right now, seems to be more ready to be the every down back .
Today, earlier, I was listening to “Lunchbreak” on DC.com, and I heard Nick Eatman and Derek Eagleton jokingly talking about trading Tashard Choice, and I said to myself “have these men lost they’re mind? Tashard is a touchdown producer, and you can never have too many of them!”
We have lost too many chances at great players over the last decade. losing one at a position, even though it is one of strength, should not be even discussed, if your trying to build a Super Bowl roster.
"Amongst the enemy's Lair, there will always be a DallasPalace!"
by DallasPalace on Sep 24, 2009 5:55 PM CDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Blogging The Boys
Related FanShots on Blogging The Boys
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.
