Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Indy 500: Coverage of the 'Greatest Spectacle In Racing'

Cowboys Offense 2010: Old Moose Wine in New Bottles

Daryl Johnston was the Cowboys' Original F-Back

The Cowboys make regular investments in the tight end position, both high in the draft and low.  Jason Witten was snagged at the top of the 3rd round in 2003 and got some serious consideration at the top of the 2nd round that year.  Martellus Bennett was a low 2nd round pick in 2008 and carried the highest of 2nd round grades on Dallas' draft board that year.  In between, the Cowboys picked Anthony Fasano with their 2006 2nd rounder.

The Cowboys also make a point of picking a tight end low each season to keep the position stocked.  Bob Slowikoski (6th round, 2002) Sean Ryan (5th, 2004) and John Phillips (6th, 2009) fit this category.  Dallas has picked a tight end in six of the last eight drafts.  By contrast, Dallas has picked just one fullback in that span, that being Deon Anderson in 2007. 

The emphasis on tight ends has led to a flurry of stories and speculation about the Cowboys "new" offense.  I've fallen prey to the argument myself.  Yet, a review of Dallas' running game shows that Jason Garrett runs basically the same attack which Norv Turner and Ernie Zampese put on the field in the '90s.  Garrett has to mix and match lead blockers for his halfbacks, but the schemes are still the same.

Heading into 2010, the two tight end discussion has again begun.  The team looks forward to better play from second-year man John Phillips, who got extensive time as the team's F-back as the 2009 campaign progressed.  The team uses the term F-back, where others call the position an H-back.  The player is a hybrid fullback/tight end, who can line up on the end of the line of scrimmage next to a tackle, on a wing outside an OT or a TE or in the backfield as a fullback.  Fans are also intrigued by priority UFA Scott Sicko, who has Phillips' measurables, and much more speed.

For the next couple of days, I want to look at the F-back position and will conclude on Monday by offering my pick for this year's F-back starter, a player who might surprise some of you.  Today, I want to step back roughly 15 years to show there is nothing new about the F-back position.  The Triplet Cowboys used the same schemes we see now, but had one guy doing the F-back work, instead of the four who share the job now.

Star-divide

F Stands for Fullback, Flexed Back and Flanker Back

Then, as now, the Dallas Cowboys run an I-based attack.  The team wants a power running game, and runs nearly all its plays with a tailback set seven yards behind the line of scrimmage, directly behind the quarterback.   Occasionally, when Dallas goes to a spread set, with three or four receivers, the tailback will be the lone player behind the QB. 

On most first and second down plays, and on most short yardage 3rd-down plays, the Cowboys will put a fullback in the backfield, either directly between the QB and the HB, in a straight-I set, or, more frequently, behind one of the guards to give the "off-set-I" look:

             SE                         LT    LG   C   RG   RT   TE

                                                         QB                                                FL

                                                  FB

                                                         TB

Here is perhaps the most common Dallas formation of the '90s, the 21 set, with two backs, one tight end and two receivers.  Here you see the offset-I, with the fullback set to the weak side, away from the tight end.  The Cowboys can also offset the fullback to the strong side, giving a more power-I look.

From '91 through '93, when Norv Turner was calling the plays, the fullback deployed behind a guard or center on almost every play when he was on the field.  The bread and butter plays of Dallas attack, the lead draw, the isolation runs, the off tackle runs, the "power" counter traps, all called for the fullback Daryl Johnson to attack linebackers deployed behind and between the defensive ends.

When Zampese replaced Turner in '94, he began to move Johnston around, and made him more the F-back Cowboys fans see today.  I've gone back to a key Cowboys game from their last title season to show that the Johnston most people see in their minds' eyes is not the Johnston Zampese was using.

Divisional Playoff vs. Philadelphia, January 7, 1996

(For clarity, I'm going to use Joe Gibbs' term H-back, when Johnston lines up on a wing, outside an OT or TE Jay Novacek.)

Series two, after a three and out:

  • Play one -- Johnston lines up as an H-back, on the wing outside LT Mark Tuinei and motions wide of Michael Irvin, making Johnston the flanker and Irvin the slot back when the ball is snapped.
  • Play two -- Johnston lines up as an H-back flanking TE Novacek who is on the left; then motions to be the wing outside RT Erik Williams at the snap.
  • Play three -- Johnston here begins the play as the flanker left, outside of Irvin, then motions into the left slot at the snap and runs a shallow cross.
  • Play four -- Johnston lines up as the traditional straight-I fullback and leads Smith on a draw.
  • Play five -- Johnston starts as a straight-I fullback and again motions to left flanker; Dallas runs a "naked" draw for Smith.
  • Play six -- Johnston lines up as the H-back on the left, with Novacek strong right.  The Moose runs a quick out into the left flat.

Notice, six different plays, with four different roles for Johnston.  He was a flanker, a flexed tight end in the slot, an H-back on the edge of the offensive line and, for one play, a true I-formation fullback.  This is precisely the way Garrett uses his F-backs today.  And note this was not a one series change-up role by Zampese.  Here's how Johnston lined up in the first half of that game:

Position  Number of Plays at Position
Fullback, in a Straight I or Offset I   8
H-back  7
Flexed Tight end, in the slot  2
Flexed Tight End, flanking the Split End  3

 

Daryl Johnston was the original F-back, what people call the second tight end in the current scheme. Only 40 percent of his snaps found him in the backfield.  25% of his snaps found him out among the receivers. 

Note his receiving production in relation to Novacek's in the last three years they played together, the overlap between the last Turner and first Zampese seasons:

  • Jay Novacek, '03 through '05 -- 51 catches per season;
  • Daryl Johnston '03 through '05 -- 42 catches per season.

About the ratio people would envision from a two-TE set if Martellus Bennett ever lived up to his draft position, no? 

The Moose was a battering ram, who could line up anywhere on the field, and produce in the passing game.  Nowadays, Jason Garrett is trying to take college tight ends who lined up everywhere and teach them to flex into the backfield and mash inside linebackers.  He hasn't found the guy who can do this play-after-play, at least not yet, so he keeps trying. What he hasn't changed is his playbook.  Turner and Zampese would feel comfortable calling many of these plays.  After all, they integrated them in the Cowboys attack.

Monday:  Who is the best candidate to become the current full-time F-back?

Comment 58 comments  |  1 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

First

To point out “Jason Garrett” should be Witten at the beginning of the post,

by Left Coast Cowboy on May 27, 2010 3:00 PM CDT reply actions  

thanks

too many Jasons to keep straight.

by Rafael Vela on May 27, 2010 3:03 PM CDT up reply actions  

It's understandable.

Last year, just having 2 guys with a J first name playing TE had a lot of the announcers and highlight readers tongue tied.

by Baked Potato Soup on May 27, 2010 3:04 PM CDT up reply actions  

Throw in a Johnston and a Jay and it was bound to happen.

by Baked Potato Soup on May 27, 2010 3:05 PM CDT up reply actions  

And to be nitpicky...

I assume that you meant 93-95 when comparing receptions for Novacek and Johnston – not ‘03-’05.

by doomsdayreturns on May 27, 2010 4:50 PM CDT up reply actions  

My vote is still Bennett.

The coaches graded him as a great blocker, and athletically he has the tools. Hopefully he has that 3rd year leap to balance out his sophomore slump, and takes it to the next level. I think he would both cause the most direct matchup problems as well as give the Cowboys the most flexibility as far as masking their plays. Given his blocking skills and receiving potential, teams wouldn’t be sure whether to key on him or Witten. They could line up in a traditional 2 TE formation and then motion either of them into the backfield or out wide, or whatever, making the defense scramble.

Sicko sounds like he has that athleticism as well, but I am completely unfamiliar with him. Given his alma mater, he might be the best choice as far as understanding the playbook and reading defenses and making the right route and blocking adjustments. Of course, book smart and IQ don’t necessarily translate to playbook smart and football instincts. Phillips was steady and solid, and seemed to make the most of his opportunities. If Sicko can flash his potential, I’d love to see all of these guys make the team.

I understand that Anderson is supposed to be a great lead blocker, but I don’t think he’s great enough to compensate for the limited play set that he allows. I think if he was blowing guys out of holes like Lorenzo Neal then that’s a different story, but I don’t recall that happening much. Maybe I just missed it.

by Baked Potato Soup on May 27, 2010 3:17 PM CDT reply actions  

My guess ..

is Witten takes the Moose role and Bennett is Novacheck. Bennett is a good blocker, he turns DEs very well on outside runs .. just ask Jaqua Parker. But blocking straight ahead, I always felt Witten thrived at that.

by spadesking131313 on May 27, 2010 4:52 PM CDT up reply actions  

+82

Trust them...they know what they're doing.

by Aaron Novinger on May 27, 2010 6:58 PM CDT up reply actions  

Watched the Felix highlight on youtube yesterday

The play where Free got way up the field and took care of the safety along the sideline. Witten takes out 2 Iggles with one block to allow Felix to go untouched.

Dez Bryant, Miles Austin, Jason Witten, Felix Jones = defensive coordinator's Kobayashi Maru scenario

by APerfectStar on May 28, 2010 7:20 AM CDT up reply actions  

I agree.

I’m guessing Bennett may be the F-Back the Cowboys are looking for. I’m intrigued by Sicko also, but I don’t know much about him, and Phillips certainly proved he has a role to play on this team.

I think the Cowboys are hoping that one of these guys can be a solid enough blocker that they don’t have to keep Anderson around.

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

by 24Hz on May 27, 2010 7:04 PM CDT up reply actions  

the problem we have now

is that deon sucks in the passing game, so our on-field personnel kind of signal what plays we migth run. a player like johnston coudl line up anywhere and go in motion and create match up problems for defenses. not only was he good as a lead blocker, he had great hands and ran great routes and was reliable outlet.

if phillips/sicko or bennett can be half effective as a lead blocker (in traditional I-back), then we might (25%/75%) see deon gone.

its a totally different animal running through the hole, identifying LBs or safteis coming in and blocking them and allowing the RB to make his cuts and make yards. that’s what a true FB does well.

I also think if things workout with Beuhler then Sicko will benefit. if he shows anything, he would be worth keeping over the 6th WR or 9th DB.

by CowboysFanatic on May 27, 2010 3:24 PM CDT reply actions  

Any opinions on how replacable Deon Anderson is?

Given his legal issues for allegedly pulling a gun on a valet, I think his chances to stay in Dallas are no better than 50/50.

If he goes, and our UDFA Fullback (Gronkowski?) isn’t the answer, I wonder how different our offense would look after losing both Flo and Deon? Would seem to be a big hit to our power running game, but provide more talent and flexibility for our passing game – with Free being better at pass protection and screen-pass blocking than Flo, and any converted TE being a better pass catcher & route runner than Deon.

So should we expect less power running and more short passes for the Cowboys in 2010? And can Garrett effectively ramp up a short passing attack that’s been largely neglected and ineffective the last few years?

by Left Coast Cowboy on May 27, 2010 3:39 PM CDT reply actions  

If the F back is so flexible,

wouldn’t it telegraph a run play when he lined up in the backfield?

by elharpo on May 27, 2010 4:41 PM CDT reply actions  

hopefully...

then the play action would work well

by Damnsammit on May 27, 2010 5:19 PM CDT up reply actions  

options

he could stay in to block, he could run a wheel route, so no

by faenix on May 27, 2010 5:28 PM CDT up reply actions  

So what are the run to pass ratios back in 96?
How is that different from now?
How often did we go shotgun when we were inside the 20 in ’96?
What kind of routes did DJ run? And how many were thrown to him?
How often did the ’96 cowboys run out of the spread?

“Turner and Zampese would feel comfortable calling many of these plays.”
Who wouldn’t? Every offensive strategy has a lead draw and off tackle play.
Even the Oilers did and they were run and shoot.

And you use this to imply that the schemes and offensive strategy are the same? Sorry, you don’t have enough info to support that.

Zampese was a west coast adopter from Coryell in San Diego State. Garrett seems to have been influenced by this but he puts in a whole new wrinkle. Garrett is “spread” happy. Zampese ran a tight, timing offense.
This oversimplification of how a coordinator applies formations and positions to their stratgey is inferring waay too much.

by rotovibe on May 27, 2010 5:23 PM CDT reply actions  

Why the negativity?

You are one of the most football savvy posters on BTB. You should use your powers for good and not for evil…

We all can now see what DalaiLike has done to the budding careers of his so-called pet cats. He meant well, but he used his power unwisely…

FREE THE OGLETREE!!!

by dunkman on May 27, 2010 9:11 PM CDT up reply actions  

not my intent.
It’s an intelligently written article. It’s worth debating because of that fact.
But I can see how this can be perceived. I’ll try to watch that.

by rotovibe on May 27, 2010 9:37 PM CDT up reply actions  

I like it!

As an arguementative SOB by nature I applaud your comment and hope that you are correct in your veiw that Garrett may bring more to the table than a 15 year old play book.

No disrespect intended to the author.

by bad knees on May 28, 2010 5:31 AM CDT up reply actions  

Kinda confused about this post ...

Where did he say that they run the same offensive game plan?

I got that they run the handful of same rushing plays and deploy similar formations. How does that equate into same “offensive strategy”? …

by spadesking131313 on May 27, 2010 9:36 PM CDT up reply actions  

umm…his thesis?
“The emphasis on tight ends has led to a flurry of stories and speculation about the Cowboys “new” offense. […] Yet, a review of Dallas’ running game shows that Jason Garrett runs basically the same attack which Norv Turner and Ernie Zampese put on the field in the ’90s. […] but the schemes are still the same."

He states the perception of the “new” offense and says that it is essentially the same as what we used to run under Zampese. Formations, playcalling for runs and passes make up the “offensive strategy”.

And…
“Turner and Zampese would feel comfortable calling many of these plays. After all, they integrated them in the Cowboys attack.”

by rotovibe on May 27, 2010 9:46 PM CDT up reply actions  

wow,

you post the sentence and then mis-apprehend it:

Yet, a review of Dallas’ running game shows that Jason Garrett runs basically the same attack which Norv Turner and Ernie Zampese put on the field in the ’90s. Garrett has to mix and match lead blockers for his halfbacks, but the schemes are still the same.

See the bold on running game? This entire piece was about the fact that Dallas running game now is basically the same running game as then.

So you run off and stretch it to the rest of the offense. Arguing with ghosts is easy, but you’re arguing with a point I never made. i never said anything in the story about the passing game because this story isn’t about the passing game.

by Rafael Vela on May 28, 2010 11:40 AM CDT up reply actions  

You want the answer?

Do the work. The data is easily obtainable, with google and, oh, some effort.

But being a curmudgeon comes much easier to you, from what I can see.

by Rafael Vela on May 27, 2010 9:51 PM CDT up reply actions  

here's some googleage and a little summary for yah

Highlights of final game against the eagirls last year.
The wildcard game was more of the same with a little single back action.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6AJa7Ez8ztk&feature=related

2nd and 5 on dal 25 – power left 24 wham. with Phillips at the 3.
2nd and 10 on Phil 34 – power right 24 counter. Crickett at the 3.
3rd and 4 on Phil 10 – SHOTGUN formation double TE right
3rd and goal on Phil 7 – SHOTGUN bunch right
1st and 15 on Dal 17 – SHOTGUN strong left
2nd and 17 on Dal 39 – SHOTGUN strong right
3rd and 4 on Phil 15 – SHOTGUN strong left
3rd and 2 on Dal 28 – SHOTGUN strong right
1st and 10 on Phil 49 – Power left offset I pitch counter.
2nd and 7 on Dal 36 – power right fake lead draw. Crickett at motion 3.
3rd and 11 on Dal 25 – SHOTGUN strong left.

This is just the highlights.

This is a spread offense with some power run plays. The more Felix stays on the field, the more we are going to run the “F-back” motion from a single back set. Garrett wants to run a more balanced attack with some preferences for 2 TE sets as opposed to a FB. This isn’t like Zampese’s offense. Just sayin.

If I remember correctly, we hardly threw any bubble screens back in the 90’s either.

by rotovibe on May 27, 2010 11:00 PM CDT up reply actions  

Well, Garrett doesn't have the same type of players as the 90s teams did, especially on the line.

He doesn’t have Emmitt Smith, but instead a host of interchangeable parts.

I also think he’s adjusted to a league that is pass-oriented and has changed its rules to be so. For that, there is no reason that he shouldn’t create his own type of offense that mixes F-back sets with that of the spread offense. But I think Raf is showing how the F-back also fits in the spread offense as Moose did many moons ago.

This reminds me of one of the NFC championships against the 49ers(?). I remember wondering why Moose was in the slot, and I think he even caught a slant pass…maybe it was an out. Anyways, to me he seemed to be used by Zampese much in the same way Garrett is trying to use one of his guys, which is most likely Witten.

Trust them...they know what they're doing.

by Aaron Novinger on May 28, 2010 10:08 AM CDT up reply actions  

Uh no

You’re misunderstanding my main point and spiraling out an argument based on that.

The running attack Dallas used in the ’90s is the same one it uses to day. It runs fewer running plays but it uses the same running plays it did then. It uses an F-back more to do it than it did then, but the way it runs is the same.

Lead draws were 29% of Dallas running attack last year, a ratio as high as the ’90s.

When Dallas passes the ball, Garrett does use more 3 and 4 receiver sets. On that point you are correct. And he definitely uses more shotgun. Why shouldn’t he? He’s got a more mobile QB and the line at his disposal is far more leaky. The first Houck lines gave up 20 and 18 sacks. The current lines are giving up 32, 34 sacks a season.

It’s a concession to the talent on hand. If he didn’t shotgun, Romo would have sack totals in the 40s.

Now, what patterns do the receivers run? A lot of the Turner/Zampese timing stuff. Some of the WC stuff he picked up from Jim Fassell in New York. I asked him to his face to describe his playbook and he told me a composite of things he’s picked up along the way.

But I stick to my original point. If you want to categorize him, he’s a modern day Oakland Raiders circa the John Madden era. He wants a power running game and and attacking, down the field game.

As for being a spread offense? The only NFL team that fits that category is the Patriots. Dallas uses too many TE heavy sets to be a spread. They will turn it on, as your stretch of plays shows. But on a game-to-game basis, it’s wierd.

Garrett ran A LOT of 22 packages in certain games as his base set last year. Two TEs. Two backs and either Roy or Miles as the lone WR.

That’s not spread. That’s not even Turner. That’s Woody Frickin’ Hayes ball.

You see how “debate” works when you don’t begin by sauntering in like the blog police and making act on an arrogant assertion of what people can or can’t say. You’re a smart guy, when you’re not being an unctuous prick.

by Rafael Vela on May 28, 2010 10:53 AM CDT up reply actions  

wierd, it cut off my post.

You’re misunderstanding my point, which is the basis of all this. It is that the running game Dallas ran then is the running attack they run now.

And it is. The Cowboys then and the Cowboys now are an I formation running team. Garrett runs less overall, but everybody nowadays does. When he does run, it’s from the same Turner/Zampese playbook. Offset I’s with H-backs.

This is a spread team? Hardly. The only NFL team that fits that description is the Patriots, who run shotgun 75% of the time or so and use 3 WRs are their base set. The Cowboys run way too many two and three TE sets for that.

Garrett does run sequences from spread and occasionally a game from a shot-gun based attack (see the Packers game) but on a game-to-game basis, that’s not the case. He runs the 22 set, two TEs and two RBs, far, far more than the Johnson/Switzer play callers did. That’s not Turner ball or Zampese ball. That’s Woody Hayes, though the I formation runs still come from this package.

Garrett does use more shotgun, but that’s a concession to his talent. The first two Houck lines gave up 20 and 18 sacks per season. The three lines under Garrett gave up 25, 32 and 34 sacks, almost double what the older guys did. If Garrett left Romo under center, those numbers would be in the 40s. You got a more mobile QB and a leaky line which takes lots of penalties, you move him back.

But that doesn’t change what he calls when the down is 1st and 10. He called the lead draw on 29% of his runs last year, up from 20% the year before, and he was more effective. If he had a young Larry Allen and Nate Newton instead of Kosier or Davis, he would do it even more, and run the 22 set even more. But he still runs it a lot, which is not what spread teams do.

And you have not touched on what his receivers do when he sends them down the field. A lot of them are the Turner/Zampese timing stuff. A lesser percentage is the WC stuff he picked up from Jim Fassell in New York. I asked him to his face to describe his attack and he said it’s a composite of the bigger systems in the league, and that nobody runs a “pure” offense anywhere. They’re all swirls of Gibbs/Turner/Zampese/WC family, some of the McDaniel spread thrown in.

You want to debate, I’m all for it. But you can’t hold a debate when step one is you dropping in and arrogantly declaring, “you can’t say this, and you can’t say that.” You’re not the blog police. You want to talk football, great, lets talk football.

Jason Garrett is a grossly misunderstood guy on Cowboys boards and getting people to understand what a chameleon he is helps everybody.

by Rafael Vela on May 28, 2010 11:09 AM CDT up reply actions  

You’re suggesting that Moose is essentially the first f-back on this team. Correct?
Other than his alignment in the formation, what kind of patterns did he run? He ran mostly flat routes and some crosses. And he occasionally had the ball go his way.

Our h-backs now run a good number of the route tree, challenging the coverage with posts, and midfield routes.
Moose was never utilized in this way. Aikman used him as a dump man.He ran the occasional streak route but as a decoy. He was valued more for his interior blocking ability.

So I don’t see a direct correlation with how Moose was used with what we are trying to do today. Other than the run blocking. Which only addresses half the strategy. That is why I think Garrett approaches that position differently than previous OCs. Especially when you have to consider that the position is more than just how they line up on the field. This will be evident in what role they play not only in the run game but also in the passing game.
We want to find a “moose” who is a serious receiving threat as well.
We’ve never tried to make the FB a serious receiving threat in the 90’s.
I’m suspecting they want more TE than FB in the H-back attribute mix.

And yes I agree that the run approach is similar.

I should have been more specific about my term “spread”. This offense wants to spread the defense, often times only having a single back. TE’s would indeed make it something else. That’s my bad.

officer rotovibe

by rotovibe on May 28, 2010 1:41 PM CDT up reply actions  

hah!

You don’t need jackasses posting stupid pics.

by rotovibe on May 28, 2010 4:17 PM CDT up reply actions  

Guys, guys can't we all just get along

I hate to see 2 knowledgeable football minds get off on the wrong foot.

Dez Bryant, Miles Austin, Jason Witten, Felix Jones = defensive coordinator's Kobayashi Maru scenario

by APerfectStar on May 28, 2010 7:28 AM CDT up reply actions  

Too many questions . . .

 . . . so I shall answer just one, if everyone trusts my “Denny Crane Mad Cow Disease” memory:

Shotgun utilization with Aikman – 0.00% — He hated it so they didn’t use it.

From the hometown of Bob Lilly,

by Long Ball on May 27, 2010 10:12 PM CDT up reply actions  

Just some observations

Johnston was an elite blocker. While he was not fast, he was quick out of the backfield. He had excellent hands. He ran his routes with precision. He was a battering ram on the first tackler, but didn’t go much beyond that. What really separated Johnston was his intelligence, his ability to absorb the concepts and carry them out to perfection.

So…who do we have on the roster like that? Witten. However, Witten is too valuable in his current role as Romo’s relief valve. Let’s see, who else fits that description? Barber. He’s a great blocker, has great hands, understands the schemes, he’s intelligent, and he’s got a quick first step. And haven’t we all believed that the offense would be less predictable if we could get two of our wonderful backs on the field at the same time.

My vote is for Barber. Perhaps this is why the Cowboys are installing Felix as the lead tailback.

When I die I want to go peacefully in my sleep like my Grandfather -- not screaming like the passengers in his car.

by White Wolf on May 27, 2010 11:41 PM CDT reply actions  

Have to agree w/ Iron Fist...Barber seems too fragile to lead block

He has all the skills and mental toughness, but not the durability (and probably not the size in today’s NFL). He’s proven to be deadly with limited snaps and when a defense is tired, but he just seems to breakdown as a physical workhorse.

by Left Coast Cowboy on May 28, 2010 12:21 AM CDT up reply actions  

But run blocking isn't something he's done before

I’d rather see one of the TE’s do the job. Plus as LCC points out, it would be kind of risky injury-wise.

Dez Bryant, Miles Austin, Jason Witten, Felix Jones = defensive coordinator's Kobayashi Maru scenario

by APerfectStar on May 28, 2010 7:33 AM CDT up reply actions  

bad move

he is good blocker as in pass protection. but as a lead blocker going through the whole taking on DL men or LBs. he would suck.

by CowboysFanatic on May 28, 2010 8:41 AM CDT up reply actions  

Okay I had a couple of things going against me.

1. It was way past my bedtime
2. I was trying to be creative, and outguess everyone.

Some thoughts on the candidates:
Witten, as stated is Romo’s go to guy. Without him out in the short patterns, who in the heck is going to save Romo when nobody else is open? Plus, I’m guessing at his age he doesn’t want to become a battering ram. His job will be to throw a chip block and get 10 yards deep.

Bennett is perhaps the best candidate as a lead blocker, but he has that whole ass-clown thing to grow out of. Not sure Garrett is going to trust such an important role to him. Bennett is just not suited for this role. He’s more of a downfield TE. Great blocks in the open field, and YAC. Maybe Bennett is ready to dedicate himself, and the coaches see this. If so, it could definitely be Bennett.

Phillips also is a good blocker, but has he really proven himself capable of a role such as this? Perhaps Phillips has been asked to practice this role, and he’s been working on it.

Sicko has the speed, and he has good hands, but my understanding is that he isn’t quite there yet as a blocker. Maybe he can block, and he just hasn’t been asked to do so in college. I think Sicko makes the team as some combination of TE/FB/ST/LS. I can believe they’re going to develop Sicko, but he won’t be taking this role this year.

I wasn’t really thinking of Barber so much as a lead blocker, but someone who could carry out the other duties well. Plus, I think you’re all right about the blocking part of it concerning Barber. I think you’ll see Barber in some of these formations as a dump off/screen candidate.

There doesn’t really seem to be one guy that can do all of these things, which means more platooning. It takes a village.

When I die I want to go peacefully in my sleep like my Grandfather -- not screaming like the passengers in his car.

by White Wolf on May 28, 2010 9:20 AM CDT up reply actions  

Interesting.

Would love to see more receptions out of Barber. Also, they’ve been using both him and Felix in red zone situations during OTAs.

He’s a helluva pass protector, but of course doesn’t bring enough weight up against linemen as a TE or true FB would. He’ll blow up LBs though.

Trust them...they know what they're doing.

by Aaron Novinger on May 28, 2010 10:11 AM CDT up reply actions  

How deadly could Barber be at the second level?

I really like Barber in a pass catching role. Leave the primary RB duties to Felix and Tashard. Those two will get the job done. I really love the direction this team has been going the last few years. Jerry, Wade, and JG make a great team. With DeCamillas on ST, Campo coaching the DB’s, and Houck with new blood on the line, we really have a top notch coaching staff.

When I die I want to go peacefully in my sleep like my Grandfather -- not screaming like the passengers in his car.

by White Wolf on May 28, 2010 11:28 AM CDT up reply actions  

Even if Bennett became a viable receiving option, I wouldn't expect a ratio quite that even.

No matter how involved Bennett became I can’t envision a healthy Witten catching any less than 65-70 passes. 30-35 receptions would be a good solid number for Bennett.

by MadMick on May 28, 2010 5:51 AM CDT reply actions  

plus he ain't getting no younger, so someone needs to step up!

be a shame to have to go looking for a guy after we have to go looking for a guy after we have drafted so many; not that we need this guy tomarrow.

by bad knees on May 28, 2010 5:57 AM CDT up reply actions  

I believe it's realistic to expect Witten to be a top flight player for 3-4 more years.

Also the way this offense is designed it seems that the 2nd and 3rd wide receivers get far more targets than those positions got in Aikman’s heyday where after obvious favorites Irvin and Novacek, Aikman actually targeted his backs far more than the 2nd or 3rd WR.

How much Bennett is used in the receiving game this season will depend on variables such as how underwhelming Roy is (or isn’t) and how quickly Dez becomes a legit game-breaking option. At the moment, “too many balls to go around” sums up why Bennett probably won’t make an impact in too many box scores this season either.

by MadMick on May 28, 2010 6:57 AM CDT up reply actions  

I hope he is really...

so that more weapons are being hit, but I don’t think it’ll be because of Witten lacking ability.

I think his style of play will allow Witten to be effective much longer than alot of receiving TE’s.

It’s not like it’s Witten’s speed that makes him such a good pass catcher, he just gets open.

Anything said above is purely the opinion of AFB unless said otherwise.

by The Immortal Iron Fist AKA AFB on May 28, 2010 10:17 AM CDT up reply actions  

Yeah

it’s football smarts. He’s not very fast, he’s not all that “smooth” but he really knows how to shake coverage. Amazing.

FREE THE OGLETREE!!!

by dunkman on May 28, 2010 5:44 PM CDT up reply actions  

Yeah, something along the lines of 65 for 850 would still be a great season for Witten.

Especially if it meant Witten isn’t piling up all those intermediate 6-8 yard receptions on early downs (I’m thinking specifically of the Carolina game and to some extent the 2nd Giants game) because Romo is actually hitting Dez, Ogletree or Martellus for more substantial chain moving gains instead.

Despite still putting up elite numbers on the season, the presence of total non-entities like Roy, Austin not emerging until Week 5 and a leaky O-line actually made Witten somewhat less effective and meant he was left catching a lot more chump change as Romo’s last resort. Consider that Witten’s 1st Down Percentage dropped from 58.3 in ’07 and 61.7 in ’08 to 51.1 last season. Not only that but Witten only averaged over 10 yards per reception in seven games last season, down from twelve games in ’07 and nine in ’08.

Ideally, the Cowboys offense of the future will see Dez and Austin totaling 1,000 yards receiving a piece and Witten not catching quite as many passes but seeing his yards per reception jump up by a yard or two. If other guys are getting involved, Witten catching around 70 passes for 900 yards or so is excellent.

As great as Witten is, when push comes to shove, he’s been the guy other teams have been conceding to give Romo. It’s no coincidence that Witten’s two best games were a loss where the Cowboys underperformed on the scoreboard(2nd Giants game) despite racking up huge yards and the ’07 Lions game where they totally shut down T.O. and really should have won despite being a mediocre team.

by MadMick on May 28, 2010 8:22 PM CDT up reply actions  

Me either.

Well, I wouldn’t go as far as the next few years especially if Dez lives up to the hype which I’d expect as soon as 2011; his 2nd season. However next season at least Romo is just too comfortable throwing to Witten and not trusting enough(Roy, Martellus) or familiar enough (Dez, Ogletree) with his other receivers; especially minus Crayton (his next most trusted target in terms of longevity); not to pile up a bunch of those intermediate completions to Witten when nothing else is there.

by MadMick on May 28, 2010 7:51 PM CDT up reply actions  

Maybe another strike against Cricket making the team

One of his strengths was being the wedge buster on ST. Since the rules on wedge formations was changed, is this a skill that is no longer as useful?

Right now, I think he’s got 3 things against him:
-lack of receiving ability
-decreased importance on ST
-legal troubles

Looks like there’s a strong chance he could get cut, opening up a spot for Sicko maybe. A longer shot would be another UDFA, Terrell Hudgins, WR who is a definite receiving threat and is listed at 6-2 230 lbs. If he shows any ability to block, he might be another possibility.

Dez Bryant, Miles Austin, Jason Witten, Felix Jones = defensive coordinator's Kobayashi Maru scenario

by APerfectStar on May 28, 2010 7:46 AM CDT reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

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

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Small
X's and O's... More Basics... Cover 3...
Small
Cowboys players under 25 are more valuable than Eagles and Giants
Small
A LETTER TO MIKE JENKINS...
Kegbearer_small
Battles In The Trenches: Cowboys Athletic D-Linemen
Small
How much does pass rush matter?

Recent FanPosts

222724_1014143404454_1551120017_30067740_5911_n_small
2012: Random Thoughts about Anything but a Quiet Offseason
Demarco_murray_st_louis_rams_v_dallas_cowboys_baxpocve6rkl_small
Headed in the Right Direction...(Delusional or Reality)
Small
Beat the Pass Rush
Small
Romo and the Super Bowl Question
Ryan_2008_small
Is Tony Romo an Elite Quaterback?

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Editor

New_headshot_small Dave Halprin

Lead Writer

Brandon_small Brandon Worley

2012-05-23_14-43-22_987_small KD Drummond

Captain_small One.Cool.Customer

Contributing Writers

Emmittintro_small rabblerousr

Dallas_cowboys_nike_gloves_small Archie Barberio

Even_better_tom_small Tom Ryle

2011_07160126_small CotySaxman

Moderators

Ns_08bstockb-thumb-200x185_small scottmaui

Sean_lee_small NYHorn