Minnesota loss was not on Romo
by SpuroftheMoment on Jan 19, 2010 11:16 AM CST
Email
PrintWanted to post this yesterday in response to some posts/comments I’ve been reading on the blog about Romo “choking” and the turnovers he had against Minnesota being “all his fault”, or “typical Romo” and other ridiculous notions. Unfortunately once you join “Blogging the Boys” they make you wait a full day to post. So this is a day late and probably a dollar short, but hey, what can ya do?
Concerning Romo… first, I don’t see how anybody can argue that the fumbles were Romo’s fault. Edwards made Marc Columbo look like a broken turnstile on the first one (and throughout the day). Should Doug Free have been in there instead? That’s debatable. And that would be a coaching decision, not a decision made by Romo. On the second fumble, the protection called by either Jason Garrett or the offensive line coach directly resulted in Jason Witten blocking Jared Allen one-on-one. That is the epitome of a mismatch. Tony Romo had absolutely no chance on either play. Those turnovers were not Romo’s fault, unless you’re arguing that Romo needed to pull out one of his patented “whirling dervish” moves to avoid the pressure. And if that’s your argument, there’s really no hope for you.
Now to the interception. Most people think Romo just boneheadedly, stubbornly threw it to Leber because Romo sucks. That is ridiculous. So here’s what I saw, based on the limited replays I saw during the broadcast, and feel free to argue with me rationally if you can.
The Cowboys sent three receivers out on patterns. Each of them ran curls. What that means is the receiver runs to the first down line (or near it) and turns around to catch the ball. The play is designed so that the second the receiver turns around, the one with the most space between him and his defender (in this case Crayton) should have the ball thrown to him immediately. It is a timing play. It really only works as a timing play because the receiver runs a route that forces him to turn around and wait for the ball to come. As soon as Crayton turned around, the ball should have been there.
And it would have worked. Crayton was open. If the ball had been there right away it would have been a first down. Romo wanted to throw it right away too. He did. I know this because he attempted to do it. But Romo was forced to move in the pocket because of the initial pressure he was under (offensive line failure), and where he moved was right in front of a defensive lineman that jumped in the air when Romo first attempted his throw. This forced Romo to double-clutch. This allowed the defender covering Crayton to close the gap, negating the timing of the curl route. This also allowed Ben Leber, who was nearby and saw Romo’s first attempt, to move into position between Romo and Crayton. When the defensive lineman came down from his jump, Romo immediately threw the ball (so he wouldn’t be sacked), hoping Crayton would be able to shield his defender and make the first down catch anyway. Romo never saw Leber because the defensive lineman’s jump shielded Leber’s movement. The throw was rushed (again, Romo was under TREMENDOUS pressure), which forced it to be inaccurate. Even if Leber wasn’t there, the throw would have been at Crayton’s feet, making it an extremely difficult catch. Instead the ball hit Leber in the gut and it was “another horrible play by that idiot quarterback. How did he NOT see Leber!”
Well I just told you how. Argue it if you can.
Another user-created commentary provided by a BTB reader.
65 comments
|
6 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
100 % accurate
I couldnt agree more. It amazes me how this O-Line continues to have multiple pro bowlers every year. These guys collapse at the wrong time every year…
I thought the interior line played adequately. I don’t think they’re pro-bowlers either, but they were going up against the Williams monsters and held up okay. It was the tackle play (especially from Columbo) that disappointed me. Flo getting injured just made it that much worse, but because of the coaches. I think the coaches figured Free would need help with Allen because that’s the snap assumption, but what they should have done instead was give Free a shot to prove himself 1-on1 vs. Allen (what do you have to lose?) and slide protection over to Columbo’s side—who was getting owned.
by SpuroftheMoment on Jan 19, 2010 1:45 PM CST up reply actions
Think back to last year though and key moments this year...
- our inability to convert 3 and short.
- Getting Romo killed in baltimore last year and in 44-6 against the iggles
- Couldnt protect Romo at Denver or in Green Bay (5 sacks in each game).
I just think we completely overrate these guys. They commit a lot of pentalty’s and seem to create a lot of other negative plays as well (RB’s getting hit in the backfield).
The group needs to be completely revamped.
I agree the group needs to be upgraded in certain areas. I’d be hesitant to attempt a complete upgrade at every position though. Heck, even trying to replace three starters would be a pretty daunting challenge. If the Cowboys agree that Free can play RT pretty well, and that Gurode and Bigg are good enough to stick around, spending some time replacing Adams (or just finding a talented guy to spell him) and Kosier would certainly be enough for me.
by SpuroftheMoment on Jan 19, 2010 2:49 PM CST up reply actions
An absolutely freakin' outstanding post!!!
Could not have argued it better myself. I like you Spurofthemoment, I hope you decide to stick around, we need more bloggers like you.
In Romo we Trust
thanks
I really dig this blog. Only found it this year, but it’s been required reading throughout the season. I especially enjoy the analytical posts made by Rafael Vela. I’d like to stick around and hopefully contribute a post now and then. That’s the plan, at least.
by SpuroftheMoment on Jan 19, 2010 1:33 PM CST up reply actions
Terry,
Only people without a proper understanding of the game of football would put this lose on Romo. Most people I’ve seen on this blog are plenty clever enough and have put the blame where it belongs; the offensive line.
And the biggest problem with the Oline was Marc Colombo no doubt. Never seen a worse game from a Tackle ever. Remember we debated this Terry when they rushed Marc back in for Free and I said it was a terrible decision and you thought it was a good one. You said the coaches knew better and I said this coaching staff has a history of leaving better players on the bench (e.g. Crayton & Williams over Austin for the first month until an injury got him a start) and going with the veteran instead.
Now I still like our coaches (both Wade and Garrett) but let’s be honest here, they (or more specifically Wade as he’s the Head Coach) completely blew this call (Colombo over Free) and it cost us any chance of victory.
I disagree
There is no guarantee that Free would have performed better than Colombo, thats pure speculation on your part.
BTW, there are a lot of bloggers on this blog who don’t have a proper understanding of the game of football, that should be obvious to you as a BTB regular.
In Romo we Trust
I disagree with your disagreement!
How you can not see (or admit) that Marc Colombo was not ready to be on the field is beyond comprehension. Your comment about "there’s no guarantee" and it’s "pure speculation" that Free would have been better is also really silly logic. Why didn’t we start Stephen McGee over Romo then? After all there’s no guarantee that McGee wouldn’t have single handedly won us the game apart from pure speculation, right? There’s no guarantee about anything in football. Speculation (the contemplation or consideration of a subject) is using evidence and logic to make our decisions.
I speculated that Colombo over Free was a terrible decision because Free was playing excellent and Colombo was still not recovered from a serious injury, you and the coaches speculated that it was a good move. Colombo’s performance removes any doubt about who was right. The coaches and you were both way wrong on this one whether you can admit or not.
Yes it was ridiculous.
That was the point. Your logic was ridiculous, of which you now agree.
"Colombo is better than Free" – Straw man argument Terry, that was not the question we were discussing. I’ll take your complete avoidance for the second time in a row of the point I raised as an admission that you have no answer and are therefore wrong but won’t admit it.
I don't agree at all
You have absolutely no idea how Free would have performed against Edwards, none at all. Colombo being better than Free was the issue, thats my opinion and I’m sticking to it.
In Romo we Trust
Terry your giving me a good laugh here.
You’re incapable (or unwilling) to address what I said.
Anyone who can read can see the issue was starting an obviously still injury effected Marc Colombo over a healthy and playing very well Doug Free. Please read that sentence several times so you understand. Now that you understand, please go back and read my comments again (and again if need be). Your argument simply is; "you have absolutely no idea how Free would have performed". That’s a really weak argument of which when the same logic is used against you, you admit is ridiculous.
Here’s Ray Edwards stats again; Five tackles, three sacks, four tackles for a loss, six quarterback hurries and a forced fumble (Edwards also sat out the forth quarter). Doug Free kept All-Pro Jared Allen without a sack in the second half when we went pass heavy.
All you’ve done is assert that you’re right when all the available evidence says you’re wrong. Just because you assert something strongly doesn’t make it true Terry.
P.s. I flew to the moon and back on a cuckoo-clock while reading minds inside the star of Sirius. That’s my opinion and I’m sticking to it, end of story!
Columbo
I think Columbo was as ready as he’d every be. The week before he destroyed Juqua Parker which tells me that he was healthy. I suspect that Garrett wanted Columbo in the game bc he’s a superior run blocker. Running behind Columbo and Davis is ususally a pretty good call.
With that said, I think Columbo just can’t handle Edwards. Peter King did have Edwards as his all-pro DE over Jared Allen, so maybe Edwards is just really good. If Adams hadn’t been injured I think there’s a decent chance Free would have replaced Columbo because it was Edwards speed rush that was bedeviling Columbo. That plays to Free’s strength (quick feet and good pass protection) and I think Free would have done a better job in pass protection. Frankly it would have been hard to do worse than Columbo.
by Fan in Thick and Thin on Jan 20, 2010 12:48 PM CST up reply actions
Hey Fan,
I’m not so sure he was ready and don’t think he destroyed Parker. I even commented after that Philly game that he still looked really hobbled and had trouble moving. Now he was never the most mobile Tackle but he looked worse to me. And when he went up against a good speed rusher it all unraveled. Also they ran away from Colombo more often than not against Minny.
Check the highlight of Jones 73 yard TD run against Philly and watch Colombo lose the DT in 1 second and then limp after him as the DT nearly gets his hand on Felix (and ruin the game sealing TD). He’s never been real mobile but he’s never been that bad either. It seems obvious that he wasn’t properly recovered from his broken leg and ankle ligament problems.
Luke
Before the Minny game, I rewatched the Philly game bc I was curious how Colombo played. I watched every play focusing on Columbo. Perception will always be subjective so we’ll just have to chalk it up to that bc when I watched it focusing on Colombo I thought he dominated Parker.
by Fan in Thick and Thin on Jan 21, 2010 2:45 PM CST up reply actions
The arguments here seem to be meaningless
Each party has made up their mind regarding Columbo and Free. There is no fact in the matter, merely opinion regarding:
1) whether Columbo was ready or still lingering from injury
2) whether Free would have done better
3) whether Columbo is better than Free to begin with
What we do know is that Columbo was unsuccessful. Would Free have done better, I suppose we’ll never know. When Flo went down it even prevented us from knowing if Free was going to replace Columbo because he had to replace Flo. Perhaps the coaches were about to give Free his chance. Reality is that normally Columbo is a solid RT. He wasn’t last Sunday. Before Sunday we knew OT was an area of need simply because of Flo’s age and declining play. We got to see Free for 6 games or so this season and there’s some signs of ability there…however, against Jarred Allen (one of the top DE’s in the game) Free was exposed that to be LT he has some work to do. The coaches must decide if Free can take the next step to LT or if he can only be a good RT…that will play a large part in how they approach the draft regarding the OT position.
by Kansas Cowboy on Jan 23, 2010 10:07 AM CST up reply actions
A retarded monkey
could tell that loss was not on Romo. It’s just that he was sacked 6 times, which is a ridiculous amount as it is, but he was hit every single time he dropped back. We couldn’t even run a damn draw play because their front four was just mauling our entire o-line.
What’s weird is that the Vikings have a hall of fame caliber players in Allen and the Williams Wall, but it was Ray Edwards doing most of the damage. Our o-line just didn’t have a chance going up against a well rested Vikings d-line playing at home.
Ray Edwards abusing Columbo and Adams getting injured during the game was the biggest reason for the loss in my mind. There was some suspect play calling (the Barber misdirection pitch for a loss of 7) and protection designs (Witten vs. Allen 1-on-1… why!?) called at key moments in the game, but if the Cowboys can’t keep an edge rusher out of the backfield when the defense only rushes 4, they can’t win the game. If Adams had remained healthy and Free had replaced Columbo… who knows? But that’s pissing in the wind.
by SpuroftheMoment on Jan 19, 2010 1:40 PM CST up reply actions
Completely Agreed
An incomprehensible moron was sitting next to me on Sunday, watching the game. After Romo got crushed by Allen (because somehow Witten got lined up against Allen one-on-one on something not a quick pass) The exchange was as follows:
Her: “God, Romo’s just so stupid!”
Me: “What the (expletive) is he supposed to do? He got hammered from the blind side in less than 2 seconds!”
Her: “I don’t know, he needs to change his strategy! What an idiot!”
Me: (Face buried in hands, murderous rage in chest).
Her boyfriend: “Sweetie, shut up.”
Thank goodness for her boyfriend.
Greetings from the Humungus, the Ruler of the Wasteland, the Ayatollah of Rock and Roll-A. I laugh at your puny plans.
The quick and emotional outburst is understandable, I think. When Romo threw his lone interception I was certainly upset about it. Thoughts immediately sprang into my mind in rapid succession. I thought to myself, I says: “Self… Romo just ended the flippin’ game! If I ever meet a real Viking I’ll probably punch him in the face! Why does God hate me and only me!?”
If Romo had magically materialized in front of me at that exact moment I’d have probably thrown my sandwich at him. But that’s only because a) football is insanely difficult to follow on the field because there’s so much going on and it’s all happening so fast all at once, and b) it’s kinda emotional when you watch your team hand the other team the ball, no matter the circumstances.
But, y’know, I watched the freaking replay and realized almost immediately it wasn’t Tony Romo’s fault that he threw the int. So that immediate emotional outburst was rendered moot by what was unfolding on my television screen. So my advice to that young lady is this:
“Watch the replay, woman.”
by SpuroftheMoment on Jan 19, 2010 2:00 PM CST up reply actions
My philosophy: if you don’t know anything about something, don’t say anything. I’m glad her boyfriend felt the same way. She was spewing ignorance way before that, but I really almost went upstairs and watched the 2nd TV.
Greetings from the Humungus, the Ruler of the Wasteland, the Ayatollah of Rock and Roll-A. I laugh at your puny plans.
by Lord Humungus on Jan 19, 2010 7:00 PM CST up reply actions
HAHAHAHAHA
While I will not blame Romo for this game, my initial emotional response after the interception led me to blurt out “nice to see Cabo San Tony decided to show up today.” However, Aikman’s analysis on all the replays involving the turnovers helped calm my nerves. As that game progressed I kept waiting for Joe Buck’s hatred of the Cowboys to manifest itself to the point Aikman would start putting this game on Romo. But I must say I was pleasantly surprised.
"Oh I would have said something to Buddy but he didn't stand on the field long enough, he put his BIG FAT REAR END into the dressing room!"---Jimmy Johson, November 23, 1989.
It really isn’t the easiest sport to really understand, but I agree if not for the reason that most women just don’t care enough.
Greetings from the Humungus, the Ruler of the Wasteland, the Ayatollah of Rock and Roll-A. I laugh at your puny plans.
by Lord Humungus on Jan 19, 2010 7:01 PM CST up reply actions
it's easier to understand if you've played it
and obviously most women don’t play the game.
In Romo we Trust
I kinda disagree on the INT
I know Romo couldn’t see the defender, but thats not an excuse. You have to be sure of these things. But it is understandable. And honestly, we really needed a play at that point, I’m not gonna blame him. He didn’t press untill that point. Still….one second is all it takes for things to completely change around with the defense, Romo knows that I’m sure.
The fumbles – anyone that blames him fumbling on Allen’s immediate blindside pressure is out of their freakin mind. The edwards one – Romo tried to tuck it, which is why I’m not mad, sometimes the defender just makes the play.
I get where you’re coming from. But it was either throw the ball or take the sack. Of course the Cowboys needed a play, and Romo knew that, but there was no play to be had other than what Romo figured was there to Crayton. He was bracketed on all sides by the DL, and had no time to make any other decision than what he made. You could even argue that he saw Leber at the very last second and that’s why the pass was released the way it was.
by SpuroftheMoment on Jan 19, 2010 2:29 PM CST up reply actions
Yeah, it was third down
and he was just trying to make something happen. It was the nail in the coffin, though.
Well, at what point are fumbles the QB's "fault"?
When he fumbles without getting hit?
I was seething when they ran the 4th down pass to Witten that went for one yard. Don’t suppose that’s Romo’s fault, I guess.
The play before his first fumble, he was scrambling and should have ran for about 10 yards but made a horrible attempt of a pass to Deon Anderson right before crossing the line of scrimmage, of all people, for an incompletion.
Yes the O-line was thoroughly outclassed, and yes Garrett was to blame, but to deny that Romo came up small in the biggest game of his career is to wear fan blinders. It doesn’t mean he didn’t have a fantastic year or that he isn’t the QB of the future, but sometimes aren’t great QBs supposed to rise above adversity?
I would imagine that Romo would largely agree and take some of the blame.
he used to hold the ball much more carelessly in the pocket
and hes had 3-5 fumbles in his career where hes on the move, winds up and the ball gets swiped. Those are bad fumbles. The ones yesterday, not so much.
Romo didn’t play great – I’ve said that. In the second half, he was playing scared (with good reason, but still). He pretty much stopped looking austin’s way and looked solely at witten. His mechanics weren’t good either, but some of that was the fact that the humongous minnesota tackles make it difficult to step up in the pocket. But seriously – losing your LT midgame makes any qb look really bad.
also
can’t edit these, so I’ll just add…
“I would imagine that Romo would largely agree and take some of the blame.”
There does seem to be a sense of “owning up” with this team now and I, as a fan, appreciate that a ton. Romo talks about getting better. The players and coaches talk about being accountable. Hopefully that continues into next season.
by SpuroftheMoment on Jan 19, 2010 2:55 PM CST up reply actions
well...
the first fumble was either Romo’s fault or Gurode’s. No question. If that had been recovered by the defense, I’d have been upset with Romo and Gurode. As to the others…
1st lost fumble – Romo tried to tuck the ball. Edwards just made a great play. I blame Columbo for allowing Edwards to get to Romo within a second or two. If Romo hadn’t tucked the ball, I’d blame Romo too.
2nd lost fumble – Romo was hit from the blindside while attempting to throw the ball. He had no chance to tuck it (like he did the other times he was sacked). I blame the coaches that decided to have Witten block Allen.
Witten ran the pattern that was called on the 4th down play. I’m gonna guess that was on the coaches that designed the play, but yeah, Romo could have tried to hit somebody else. Haven’t really thought about that play a ton, primarily because even if converted we would have gotten a 1st down trailing 27-3. Whoopee.
I realize Romo could have made some better decisions throughout the game. But I’d argue it’s pretty tough when you’re under nearly constant assault from men that outweigh you by 100 lbs.
by SpuroftheMoment on Jan 19, 2010 2:44 PM CST reply actions
On the Jared Allen sack
it looked like Minnesota ran an overload to Allen’s side. The first rule of O-line play is to block the guy closest to the QB. Free blocked #71 which was correct and that left Witten on Allen. The Cowboys got out schemed on that one. If memory serves that was either the first or second play that Free was in the game for Flo.
i think there is plenty of blame to go around
50% line
30% play calling
20% Romo
Yeah the line was attrocious, but they were attrocious because of the following
Play calling – if you compare Favre’s 3 step drops and Romo’s 7 steps, you know that playcalling was part of the problem. Favre probably averaged 2-3 sec in the pocket a pass, while Romo averaged 5-6 sec. Where was the misdirection plays? where was the 3 step drops that worked well on the first few drives. Garrett keep letting Romo drop back and he keep getting smashed … umm how about a few slant/screens/draws … horrible playcalling. As for Witten blocking Allen 1 on 1 ………..
Romo – As much as it was the line fault, team cannot win in the playoff with 3 tos and fumbling 3 times, While the 2nd fumble was the lines fault, the other 2 was on Romo. He also took too long to throw, always looking for the deep option, sometimes that was the reason for the sacks… there was 1 play in the second quarter which typified his play, Witten was open for a 10 yd gain, Romo decided to look further down field, then was chased out of the pocket, threw the ball to Witten, then was hit hard ….. quite simply he should have threw the same pass after 2 or 3 seconds, he waited 5 or 6 prior to throwing the same pass, that QB hit was on Romo and not the OL. The whole game, he looked down field every play and that was what Minnesota was taking away, all his +10 yard gain was from short passes, Romo need to stop forcing thing and just take what the D gave him.
There are plenty of gain going around
wow
not even 1% blame on the QB who had 3 turnovers (almost 4) and who led an offense that scored 3 points.
I am a flaming Romosexual, but man you take it to a whole new disturbing level.
I know it was 34 points
but I wouldn’t put much on the defense, either. Minnesota’s offense consisted of short fields and Favre throwing up prayers to Rice, who, to his credit, went up and snatched the ball even when he was perfectly covered. He’s a stud. Their offense didn’t do anything they wanted. They just didn’t usually have to go very far.
no, not even 1%
because the turnovers had no bearing on winning or losing this game.
In Romo we Trust
ummm
the 2nd to was at 7-3 and a fumble mean 14-3
The first fumble costed field position means it end up being a 48 yarder instead of a 26 yd or scoring a TD
The third only let them get a 3 possession led,
no none of them matter
not true
!st fumble happened on a 3rd down, if Romo doesn’t fumble the Cowboys punt
2nd fumble resulted in 3 points for Vikes, which wasn’t Romo’s fault at all
INT resulted in 3 points for Minnesota
Nope, none of them mattered at all
In Romo we Trust
Not playcalling nor execution
physical superiority (Read: Speed/Quickness/Athleticism, things the Cowboys lack, a topic I’ve broought up before) is the cause.
Saying it’s a lack of execution implies that the players were in the wrong places, missed asignments, made mental mistakes, etc.
They executed fine, the plays called were the best available,-but they got beat at the point of attack, again and again……..
Pessimists say the cup is half-empty, while optimists say it's half-full. Well, isn't it both? Realist Larry, 2009
by Realist Larry on Jan 20, 2010 1:07 AM CST up reply actions
I suppose that all determines how to define execution.
When Adams is 2 seconds too late getting off the line to block Allen – I call that lack of proper execution
When Colombo takes 3 steps back in pass protection and then watches Edwards fly pass him and hit Romo – ditto
Could be
Or could be they’re slow , at least compared to the guys they were playing that day.
Which is more likely? The other guy was quicker, or they suddenly forgot they are allowed to move when the ball’s snapped?
When Ware beats a guy on the edge, do we say the other guy didn’t execute? Or that Ware is a stud and a better player?
Pessimists say the cup is half-empty, while optimists say it's half-full. Well, isn't it both? Realist Larry, 2009
by Realist Larry on Jan 20, 2010 9:51 PM CST up reply actions
What Romo said about the INT
If you listen to his post-game conference, he basically said that it was a timing route, he expected Crayton to go inside, but Crayton went out. That might be Crayton’s fault, I don’t know. Romo pulled back the pump, and then tried to throw the out route. By then, the linebacker had snuck in underneath (because of the first pump fake).
So it’s partially on Crayton (if he did the wrong thing), partially on the O-line for the interior pressure, but mostly, IMHO, on Romo.
But I agree, the loss is not his fault. Colombo got roasted by the 4th best defensive lineman on their team.
lol
residual effect!
Pessimists say the cup is half-empty, while optimists say it's half-full. Well, isn't it both? Realist Larry, 2009
by Realist Larry on Jan 20, 2010 1:01 AM CST up reply actions
Romo gets no blame
Geez, what was he supposed to do, put on a cape and fly over Minn’s DLine?
The blame goes(Since we’re quantifying here): 50% OLine
40% DLine (uhh, that would be Minnesota’s)
and 10% coaches for playing some guys who shouldn’t have been given as much time, and going for long FG’s when it was becoming apparent we were going to need a field-position strategy.
Pessimists say the cup is half-empty, while optimists say it's half-full. Well, isn't it both? Realist Larry, 2009
and another 20%
goes to favre for making some really good throws. That throw to Rice was incredible. Not many qbs make those. McNabb certainly didn’t.
but going on what we can control, I’d say:
60% OL. I don’t care how good Minny’s dline is, these guys can and should have played better.
20% coaches for some interesting decisions. Free and Choice not getting playing time was bothersome to me. I think its likely, that this game is far closer if Free starts at RT. Columbo was a disaster.
10% suisham
10% Romo. Its just hard to blame him cause he played a really solid first half of football. Second half, not so much, but it didn’t matter by then, the OL was getting trashed. If the game was close, this would be higher, but he had to force the ball later in the game.
a dozen nfl qb's can make that throw
if sensi turns around, it’s a pick. since he didn’t, “a perfect pass?” hogwash. if the defender never turns around, it’s not exactly a tight window there
Rice didn't even have to move his arms or even look up at the pass
that’s why Sensi didn’t turn around. You watch the receivers eyes and then when he looks up you turn around. Rice never looked up and the ball landed directly in his hands, in stride. It was a perfect pass.
Have to Agree
Hello all Vikes fan here but what I saw was when Dallas decided to go away from the run our D line went rabid. Had Jason kept pushing the run it would have kept us alot more honest. Another point when comparing the defenses is the base formation and Id love some feedback on this, I do not think a 3-4 is a good base formation and here is why.
1) Your main pass rush comes from OLB, its always a speed rush, a little feller like Deware has no bull rush, if you want to see the difference look at Reggie White doing a bull rush, now that messes up an O line.
2) The main pass rushers are alot shorter than a standard 4-3 which means fewer batted balls.
3) Speed rush can get hurt really bad with counters and delays/traps because of the position of the OLB and the fact hes going to get hit by a man 50+ pounds heavier.
Just some thoughts from seeing the 3-4 becoming more popular with alot of NFL teams as of late. I guess Im old school but if you can put pressure on with just 4 big cats it closes the flats and under routes off which keeps the dump passes out and forces the QB to hold the ball longer.
Garrett never really gave up on the run until the 4th quarter when the score was 20-3
At that point, the best option is to pass the ball and try to get out of bounds to save time on the clock. But Romo had no time due to insufficient blocking up front.
I personally think
the 3-4 does a better, more consistant job against the run. The problem is that you really rely on a couple of guys to get all the pressure. With our lack of lb athleticism, it limits the number of blitzes we can throw out there.
But seriously, you guys are really talented up front. You have the best DT combo in the league by far. Allen is a monster and Edwards is oncoming. That would be like us having a healthy ware (keep in mind, the guy wasn’t fully healthy most of the year and was far less effective than normal), Ratliff at DE, spencer and a big nose tackle.
If you have the lb athleticism like Pitt, teams can wreak havoc on an opposing front. At the end of this season, we were very relaint on Ware and Spencer, and I think at some point you need more than that.
Really, if you have the talent, either D does just fine.The pats and steelers ran 3-4s.The Colts, Giants and Ravens I believe ran 4-3s. All defenses were ridiculous when at their best the last decade.
Disguise
I do think the 3-4 can hide alot for a young QB to read, the Jets dont give you anything to read until after you start the dang snap count. Its hard to argue against the 3-4 for run defense, I agree I think the Williams Wall in the middle is making that base 4-3 look a helluva lot better vs the run than alot of other teams that run that same defensive set. The other point that was mentioned and Ive noticed it to we dont seem to see those dominant DEs in the drafts like we have in the past, most of them being pushed inside to DT status, maybe we have to look at converting some of them back to DEs when they get to the NFL. The 3-4 lists the two other lineman in a 3-4 as DE’s but they look more like DTs to me, in stature and playstyle. Thank you for your replies you guys know your football.
As to the run
You had alot of success running on the edges early, that had me very nervous that our secondary was going to get exposed on the play action later. I know running up the middle wasnt consistent but when Felix gets out on the perimeter it makes me uncomfortable. Hes very quick and runs hard north and south.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
SBNation.com Recent Stories
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Sore loser Bully Ray spits beer in the face of Brandon Jacobs
- Anthony Shadid followed the Green Bay Packers, with love, from a distance
- Concussions on kickoffs were cut in half in 2011
- ESPN exec’s tip for Jon Gruden: Recognize when not to speak
- Report: Several teams (and leagues) interested in Randy Moss
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.
