Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: L'Equipe Claims He's Coming To Chelsea On Five Year Deal

Cowboys @ Texans Film Review: Finally, Some Execution

The Cowboys running game wasn't great on Sunday, but it was effective.

My apologies for this week's film review coming a few days late. I also regret to inform everyone that the popular "Film Breakdown" will not be done this week. I am officially out of the US Navy as of this week and I am in the process of moving back to Dallas over the bye weekend. I should be back to my regular blogging schedule soon.

What was the difference between the first two games of the season and the win against Houston? What changed that suddenly propelled the Cowboys back into the realm of ability we all believed they had before the season started?

I can tell you one thing: it wasn't a sudden change in coaching philosophy. Jason Garrett has actually put together great game plans all season long, altering them a bit to accommodate each opponent and his playcalling -- while popular to bash him for it -- has been fairly well rounded in all three games. Wade Phillips called a much smarter game against Houston, but this is still the same defense we've seen for the past few seasons. 

What changed was execution. A much more balanced and crisp performance by every unit of the team was the difference against Houston and showed us that when the Cowboys actually focus on the task at hand, they're going to be one tough team to beat. After watching the game again (once with the excellent radio commentary of Brad Sham and Babe Laufenberg as my audio companion) it is now apparent just what sort of team these Cowboys can truly be if they just execute and not shoot themselves in the foot.

I know, that's a tough task for this team. One can hope, however.

After the jump, my thoughts from a season-saving win.

Star-divide

  • Much has been made over the past few days over the running game "emerging" against Houston and how the better balanced offense was what sparked the scoring success. In reality, the Cowboys ran the ball just as much as they did the first two games. I know the stats say the Cowboys ran 27 times, but before that fourth quarter, minute-eating drive the balance between run and pass was the same it's always been.  The difference here was that the running game was actually effective, even if the average per carry still isn't great.

    Both Marion Barber and Felix Jones picked up big chunks in the running game, forcing the Texans to play their linebackers a bit closer to the box at times. This opened up the area in front of the safeties in the zone, which was promptly taken advantage of the passing attack.

    The Cowboys are never going to be a running team. With Tony Romo, Dez Bryant, Miles Austin, Roy Williams and Jason Witten on this team the best attack for the Cowboys is to air it out and move the ball downfield. The Cowboys don't have to be more committed to "running the ball more" to be effective; the Cowboys need to be committed to "running the ball more efficiently" for the offense to truly find the right balance.
  • We've been wondering all season what had happened to Felix Jones and this past week we saw that he still possesses that speed we all loved so much last season. The Cowboys are still trying to force him to run between the tackles on slow-developing running plays but this past Sunday Garrett finally realized he had to get Felix out in space.

    The screen play in which Felix went off for a 33-yard gain was a thing of beauty. Garrett bunched the receivers to the left side of the formation and ran a slight bootleg to the right. The initial motion of the offense to the right, combined with a nice fake by Romo, had the defense faked out and Felix had a wide open sideline with which to work. For 20 yards it was sprint between Felix and a couple of offensive linemen. It's a shame that Austin's block in the back penalty (a block exactly like that one happens all the time yet is rarely called) negated the big gain.
  • Continuing in that theme a bit, the Cowboys finally were able to use their patented delayed draw to much success. Several times the Cowboys ran the delayed draw out of the shotgun to Felix, which spread the defense out and gave the ball to the Cowboys fastest running back with plenty of space to work with up the middle. Both plays resulted in big first downs.
  • We talked over the past few weeks how Tony Romo, while still having great games, still looked just a bit "off". Against the Texans, Romo was damn near perfect. This game showcased his pinpoint accuracy, his great decision making and his ability to extend plays in order to get big gains. On the game-changing, 90-yard scoring drive in the second quarter the Cowboys converted three 3rd-and-long plays, all off of perfect passes by Romo.

    What was more impressive was his display in just how much command he has of Jason Garrett's offense. On the clinching 63-yard touchdown pass to Roy Williams, the original call was for a draw to Marian Barber. Jason Witten was lined up in the backfield and the offensive line fired off the snap for a run. Yet Romo and Williams made an adjustment between them, calling for a quick slant that took advantage of the single-safety formation the defense had lined up in. Barber picked up a blitz, Romo hit Williams in stride and he was off to the races.

    It's this sort of adjustment that we hadn't seen from Roy and Romo the past few years but something that is emerging this season. Perhaps they are finally on the same page, which will only open up the offense for big passes to the rest of the receivers.
  • Chris Gronkowski continues to improve and he is turning into one heck of a fullback. His lead block opened up a nice hole for Marion Barber's one-yard touchdown in the second quarter.
  • Doug Free, although he does get help from time to time, is having himself one heck of a season. Everyone worrying about the left tackle after the Cowboys released Flozell Adams should feel just fine now. Let me ask you: how many times this season have you heard Doug Free's name called?
  • Actually, the entire offensive line has been good. I know that Alex Barron almost lost the Redskins game all on his own, but for the most part the offensive line has improved each game. Romo has only been sacked once (technically twice) in three games, much better than the pace we were at last season.
  • Last week Wade Phillips backed off against the Bears and never really put his defense in the position to make plays. He was aggressive early but regressed into a zone scheme that the Bears slowly picked apart as the game went on. It was beyond frustrating to witness, especially considering the success they had early in the game.

    Against the Texans, Phillips dialed back the in-your-face aggression of the defense but played a much smarter game against the NFL's best offense. The Cowboys rarely blitzed in the game, instead relying on their pass coverage to put the most pressure on the passing attack of the Texans. The Cowboys were aggressive at the line, played much more man-coverage and the safeties were focuses on keeping the receivers in front of them. Some of Ware's sacks were coverage sacks as Matt Shaub had difficulties all game long finding open receivers downfield.

    Until "garbage time", when the Cowboys were playing less man coverage and had several backups in the game, the passing attack of the Texans was woefully anemic. It was very impressive to watch and had to be frustrating for such a potent offense to be stifled. The Cowboys used the same approach last season against New Orleans and while the Saints eventually gained some momentum, it wasn't enough in the end.
  • This preseason we were all in love with the linebacker depth the Cowboys possessed. Against the Texans, it was painfully obvious just much of a drop off it truly is between the starters and the backups. On one play in the third quarter, both Leon and Jason Williams were in the game to spell Keith Brooking and Bradie James. The Texans run a counter play, with the offensive line pushing to the right while Arian Foster cut to his left. Both Williams' lost containment on the play and bit on the movement of the offense, resulting in the biggest play of the game for the Texans. Foster rumbled for 26 yards on a play the Cowboys had to have seen about fifty times on tape.
  • I know we like to bash Newman from time to time and I know he's not as good as he once was, but he did a fairly decent job against three very good receivers. Andre Johnson was far from 100% but Newman and the rest of the defense did a great job of covering each receiver throughout the game.
  • Gerald Sensabaugh is quietly having a very, very good season. The game against the Texans was easily his best as a Cowboy and it's obvious that he is becoming the leader of the secondary. He tied for the team lead in tackles, saved several big plays and most importantly kept the Texans from scoring in the fourth quarter. His sure tackle of Owen Daniels at the one-yard line set up a big goal line stand by the Cowboys. A touchdown there and the game takes on a much different feel in the fourth quarter.
  • Barry Church was given some significant snaps in the goal line package and he didn't disappoint. He was in on the tackle two plays in a row to stop Foster behind the line of scrimmage, each time making a confident move to fill the hole and an even better form tackle of an elusive runner. It's easy to see why the Cowboys like him so much.
  • Finally - If the Cowboys weren't a pass-happy team before then they sure as heck are about to be. The emergence of Dez Bryant, along with the continued supremacy of Miles Austin and suddenly sharp play of Roy Williams, is going to force the Cowboys to put the ball in these receiver's hands. Dez Bryant is on the cusp of breaking out and the Texans game should have been that moment: he had two big plays nullified yet each play showcased just how good he's going to be. Despite being tackled in mid-air, he still managed to come down with the ball on a 40 yard bomb in one heck of a display of his body control in the air. The touchdown catch that was called back because of a penalty was a perfect example of his speed and burst once the ball is in his hands.

    If the Cowboys can continue to execute at this level then this offense will become near unstoppable as the season progresses. These Cowboys are primed to peak not now, but a few months down the road as Bryant develops and Garrett and Romo find the perfect balance for using all the weapons on the team.

Comment 138 comments  |  2 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

First

to say good luck on relocating, it can definitely be a pain. Very nice article.

The O-line really seems to be starting to get on the same page, hopefully it will continue through the year.

Actually, the entire offensive line has been good. I know that Alex Barron almost lost the Redskins game all on his own, but for the most part the offensive line has improved each game. Romo has only been sacked once (technically twice) in three games, much better than the pace we were at last season.

Oh, and it could be worse…Our old, decrepit, fragile line could be like this:

2. Any idea which team leads the NFL in most sacks allowed? Here’s a hint: Their quarterback is really mobile. Surprisingly, with three more sacks allowed against the Jaguars, the Eagles have given up the most with 14. Considering Michael Vick is under center, that’s notable. At some point, the Eagles must do a better job protecting him. Vick needs to occasionally step up in the pocket or just throw it away. Great mobility doesn’t solve everything, and for Philly to win the NFC East, Vick must still be standing in Week 17.

by JLMax09 on Sep 29, 2010 12:20 PM CDT reply actions  

we had around 3.7 yards per carry this game

I’m sorry but that is not good enough. Why is our ypc so low?

Sean Lissemore = The next Bruce Smith

by Lissyyyyy on Sep 29, 2010 12:22 PM CDT reply actions  

because they're not playing Sean Lissemore!

 Put Lissemore in on the OLine and that YPC will getabove 5. Guarantee it!

by Sean N on Sep 29, 2010 12:31 PM CDT up reply actions  

You are probably right

but unfortunately Garrett doesn’t think outside the box

Sean Lissemore = The next Bruce Smith

by Lissyyyyy on Sep 29, 2010 12:33 PM CDT up reply actions  

Maybe...

Marcus Spears as a TE on short yardage wasn’t far enough outside the box for him?

Rabid and luvin' it

by lonewolfz28 on Sep 29, 2010 5:18 PM CDT up reply actions  

Spears has a lil' history at that spot:

•Rated the top tight end prospect in America and the third-best overall prospect after earning consensus All-America honors.
•Became the first Louisiana player since 1991 to be named first-team 1A all-state on offense and defense as a senior.
•Finished his senior season with 28 catches for 435 yards and three touchdowns and 245 rushing yards and six touchdowns. Also made 22 tackles for a loss, 11.5 sacks and four fumble recoveries.

by psychodad on Sep 30, 2010 9:15 AM CDT up reply actions  

When you think about

the game is played in a box. Garrett thinking outside of it might be exciting, but ultimately it would also be irrelevant…

FREE THE OGLETREE!!!

by dunkman on Sep 30, 2010 7:29 AM CDT up reply actions  

Because our big running plays got negated by penalties?

Add on Felix’s big run that got negated and our YPC should go up quite bit. Also garbage time. They know we are going to run it to waste the clock so they prep for it and we don’t really mind anyways.

by Static on Sep 29, 2010 12:41 PM CDT up reply actions  

I take that back.

The big “running” play was actually considered a pass, but still I think they did just fine in the run. Besides, the Texans have a better run defense than pass defense, so why try to force the run when it worked for the most part in keeping them honest?

by Static on Sep 29, 2010 12:50 PM CDT up reply actions  

Great question

…and one I just don’t have an answer for.

One thing I had considered is this;

The O-line is a tale of two cities. On the left side, you have a lighter more athletic and cerebral Kosier and Free who are best suited pulling and getting to the second level on running plays. On the other hand, Gurode, Bigg and Colombo are in-line power run blockers who don’t seem to possess the mobility and awareness to do anything other than attempt to whuppass on the guy lined up in front of them.

Maybe, just maybe, this O-line is in transition and lacks a singular identity so much that it makes it easier for opposing DC’s to defend the run because of their split personality?

"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."

- John Wooden (God rest his soul)

by 5Blings on Sep 29, 2010 1:40 PM CDT up reply actions  

There you go 5Blings, You have the answer

To our running woes!

Short yardage needed , run on the right and longer yardge needed run on the left , LOL !

Kidding aside , I think they need to use the formations intelligently , like 1st down and second and long runs should go off-tackle left side and goal line and 3rd and short should go to the right side. Of course with variations , because it is NFL , any trend is immediatly studied and countered.

by Nan_L on Sep 29, 2010 4:17 PM CDT up reply actions  

But is this really the issue or is it one that we (okay I) created in my mind?

"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."

- John Wooden (God rest his soul)

by 5Blings on Sep 30, 2010 12:40 PM CDT up reply actions  

this is a really hard question

because it’s all context dependent.

is 3.7 ypc bad if you only run on 3 & 1 and you convert every attempted 3rd down? Nope.

is 3.7 ypc bad if you run on 3 & 15 or 1 & 10 down 20 points in the 4th quarter, yes.

and I don’t have the necessary information right now. The only value I can add is to caution against jumping to conclusions without the relevant data.

by Fan in Thick and Thin on Sep 29, 2010 4:41 PM CDT up reply actions  

Not good enough because?

Seems that however you get to a 27-13 win should be “good enough”. I’d rather see JG call what works than call plays that don’t get it done to meet some run:pass ratio.

If at first you don't succeed - blame someone else.

by Tom Ryle on Sep 29, 2010 5:25 PM CDT up reply actions  

Strictly in the opinion area

I think the current play calling is the path to another 9 to 10 wins in the regular season. I also think that was one of Brandon’s points.

If at first you don't succeed - blame someone else.

by Tom Ryle on Sep 29, 2010 6:13 PM CDT up reply actions  

We won't always be playing against a crappy secondary

and at some point our running game will have to do better than 3.7 ypc

Sean Lissemore = The next Bruce Smith

by Lissyyyyy on Sep 29, 2010 6:19 PM CDT up reply actions  

I don't think the number is all that important

a. I think they will have games where average will be higher
b. It all depends on what else is going on – if you are ripping them through the air and winning the game, who cares what the average per run is?
c. 3 runs X 3.7 ypc = 11.1 yards = 1st down. About half the runs were in the fourth quarter to eat up the clock, and the team kept moving the chains. So for that game, 3.7 ypc were more than adequate.

If at first you don't succeed - blame someone else.

by Tom Ryle on Sep 29, 2010 7:05 PM CDT up reply actions  

Well,

Chicago’s record is 3-0, but their average rushing yard per attempt this year is only 3.2

The Colts, Ravens and Saints all have winning records of 2-1, but their rushing yards per attempt are all LESS than the Cowboys this year: 3.3, 3.1, and 2.6 respectively.

Having a strong run game would help, but it’s not vital.

I pointed this out on another post already: The 31st and 32nd teams in rushing yards last year ended up with winning records of 14-2 and 13-3 and won their divisions hands down. (IND and SD)

by BishopWest on Sep 29, 2010 11:11 PM CDT up reply actions  

I may have missed it

but can you really make such broad statements about teams after three games? That seems a little silly.

And last season when the Saints won the SB they had 4.5 ypc

Sean Lissemore = The next Bruce Smith

by Lissyyyyy on Sep 29, 2010 11:40 PM CDT up reply actions  

Its a lame thing to be hung up on

A. run the ball three times in a row with that average and you have your first down.

B. We don’t need to win games with the run, we just need to “keep the defense honest”. I will take 3.7 ypc if we are running 25-30 times a game. With a run game like that, if we avoid too many penalties and mistakes we will be winning many more than just one game.

by RisingSunCowboy on Sep 29, 2010 11:36 PM CDT up reply actions  

Great write up!

I love the way this team is coming together. Roy is actually performing, Sensabaugh is doing awesome, Dez is looking like a veteran and even Barry Church is lighting it up. Love it!

I knew that game from Church in preseason wasn’t a fluke, the kid has talent and with Sensabaugh lined up next to him, it could be dangerous. Oh, and I’m not the biggest fan of Ball, he isn’t doing bad, but he isn’t doing great either.

by Static on Sep 29, 2010 12:22 PM CDT reply actions  

great analysis Brandon

As I’ve said and argued a thousand times, the difference between winning and losing is execution, the good teams that win execute what coaches call and the bad losing teams don’t. Bad or good play calling is vastly overrated.

It’s really that simple and your analysis proves as much.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Sep 29, 2010 12:34 PM CDT reply actions  

Ok, but...

Sometimes the difference between winning and losing is just pure luck. See the onside kick in the last SuperBowl.

There’s more. If a good play (call) executed well results in positive yardage, what is the result of a bad play (call) executed well? There has to be some reason it was a bad call.

Supposedly, coaches are responsible for teaching the plays and practicing them. Coaches can call whatever play they want (good or bad), but if the good or bad teams don’t learn or practice them well they won’t execute. Whose fault is this? The players for not executing? Or, the coaches for not teaching and practicing?

by LDVFootball on Sep 29, 2010 3:40 PM CDT up reply actions  

How about good old human inconsistency?

I know some days, I do not perform at whatever I’m doing as well as I do on other days. Look at baseball: The best pitchers in the majors sometimes have days they just suck. I don’t think you can always control this.

I’m not saying this is the only answer, just that we sometimes seem to think the players are machines out there who can always do exactly what they want to do. They are way better than most, but still will have some subpar days.

Hopefully, the first two games were really bad days for the team, and most of the games will be better.

If at first you don't succeed - blame someone else.

by Tom Ryle on Sep 29, 2010 5:30 PM CDT up reply actions  

I am hoping that too...

I am not completely convinced yet that we lost the first two games because the players failed to execute.

The players may not be machines, but the coaches need to be more automatic.

by LDVFootball on Sep 29, 2010 7:19 PM CDT up reply actions  

convinced or not

lack of execution is exactly why we lost and is the reason any team loses.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Sep 29, 2010 8:19 PM CDT up reply actions  

that makes no sense

If a play is executed, it can’t be a bad call.

Coaches can teach and prepare their teams well, but if the players don’t execute, it’s on them. I’ve never seen a coach ever make a throw, block, tackle, run or catch a pass. Never.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Sep 29, 2010 8:18 PM CDT up reply actions  

2 of your quotes rearranged: "If a play is executed, it can’t be a bad call"

“that makes no sense”

What if you execute the play, but the other team (they exist in reality, you know!) also executes their opposing defense, and stops you? You know, the offense ‘executes’ (right place doing the right thing) , but the other guy stands them up and stops them?

And what if they do this exactly because the coach calls a predictable, easy to defend play?

Unles your defining ‘execute’ as ‘a play that succeeds,’ in which case the argument is pointless and nonsensical..

Example: 3rd and one. A coach has consistently called the same running play 80% of the time in this situation. The other teams prepares for it. Sure enough, he calls it. The players do their jobs perfectly (execute), but are overpowered at the point of attack by superior numbers. They lose 2 yards.
That’s not on the coaches?

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 Sep 29, 2010 11:51 PM CDT up reply actions  

He'll argue Choice fumbled it so he didn't execute!

And others have too, actually. But you’re right, why were they put in that position in the first place?

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 Sep 30, 2010 12:07 AM CDT up reply actions  

Even Wade and Jason G have disavowed this call.

Wade said he should have overruled it. Jason said he didn’t realize it was on the 36, and thought it was still the 46 so left the play call in, presumably Jason would have had the intelligence to not call a hail mary pass from the 36 had he known.

So, bad play call. Period, Terry.

by mdlusk on Sep 30, 2010 8:05 AM CDT up reply actions  

poor decision, game management

the actual play called is really irrelevant

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Sep 30, 2010 3:59 PM CDT up reply actions  

No the actual (incorrect) play call was a hail mary pass, the correct play call was a kneel down.

There is no way that a 64 yard pass attempt for a TD was the correct call there.

I’m not sure that Tony can even manage to throw a 75 or so yard pass (in the air 64 yards from scrimmage, 5-8 yards back and about 5 yards into the end zone). Most people can’t, not to say Tony is weak-armed, since he is not, I just genuinely don’t know if he can air it out that far.

Anyway I’ll stop here so as to keep the argument from going on and on.

by mdlusk on Oct 1, 2010 2:29 AM CDT up reply actions  

The Hail Mary could have worked if

one of our receivers catch the ball or if we get a defensive PI and a FG opportunity out of it. If it had been the 4th quarter, there’s no questioning the call. Just because we use the same strategy at the Half instead of the end of the game, everyone gets their panties in a wad.

by BishopWest on Oct 1, 2010 7:41 AM CDT up reply actions  

Romo can throw 70 yards in the air

saw it numerous times when T.O. was here.

Also, Knell down is a decision, not really play call.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Oct 1, 2010 11:19 AM CDT up reply actions  

Guys, don't go down this road with Terry. It is madness. I know from experience

Lifetime Cowboys Fan from the Swamps of Jersey
My Beer Blog: http://tiltingsuds.wordpress.com/

by Seanrude on Sep 30, 2010 8:40 AM CDT up reply actions  

I'm just curious what he'll say about such a clear example!

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 Sep 30, 2010 10:48 AM CDT up reply actions  

if that play was executed correctly

the team makes the first down. If the defense blows it up, the offense didn’t execute it well enough.

No, its not the coaches, its the players.

Cowboys in the ‘90s ran the same plays all the time because the other teams couldn’t stop them, we executed better.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Sep 30, 2010 3:58 PM CDT up reply actions  

you completely ignore the fact that there's another team on the field

it’s like you think it’s a video game, if you put in the right players and call the right play it HAS to work.

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 Oct 2, 2010 1:01 AM CDT up reply actions  

Are you seriously saying that there is no such thing as a poorly designed play?

Or a play called in the wrong situation? Just because every player does their job properly doesn’t mean that a play will succeed. That’s just silly. If that were the case, plays like play action, draws, screens, cutbacks, and other plays that involve misdirection or trickery would not exist.

This team relies on play action passing. When the other team doesn’t think we will actually run, the other team doesn’t react to it, crashes the qb, and maintains coverage on the receivers. That’s not poor execution, that’s poor game planning.

by Baked Potato Soup on Sep 30, 2010 11:26 AM CDT up reply actions  

Guys, seriously, don't go down this road with Terry. I have done it already, and he is a complete and total lunatic on this subject

His devotion to the magical play calling abilities of NFL coaches easily outweighs his devotion to Romo and Sean Lee put together.

Plays that are incorrect calls are not really ‘plays’ except in some sort of bizarre hypertechnical sense that only he understands.

Not only does he not make sense, but the insults (ex: “A real football fan would understand this”) start to fly fast and furious.

Lifetime Cowboys Fan from the Swamps of Jersey
My Beer Blog: http://tiltingsuds.wordpress.com/

by Seanrude on Sep 30, 2010 12:54 PM CDT up reply actions  

That initial argument on that subject was quite epic.

It definitely got to the point where the thread was all the way on the left side of the screen.

Formerly Cowboyfan729
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels

by Creasy729 on Sep 30, 2010 1:10 PM CDT up reply actions  

And Terry was totally unshakable

He made the same argument over and over.

And over.

And over.

And . . .

If at first you don't succeed - blame someone else.

by Tom Ryle on Sep 30, 2010 4:28 PM CDT up reply actions  

I don't know why you perpetrate the myth that Terrence Newman is getting worse

Terrence Newman has played at the same high level since he entered the league. He’s remarkably consistent except when he’s been injured. I don’t frequently read TNew bashing and I don’t know why anyone claims it’s wide spread.

TNew was the best player on the team c2006. He didn’t get worse, DWare, Miles Austin and Tony Romo just got better. And Mike Jenkins is a talent too. But at no point has TNew become a problem

by AustonianAggie on Sep 29, 2010 12:50 PM CDT reply actions  

He's certainly become more brittle...wouldn't you agree?

"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."

- John Wooden (God rest his soul)

by 5Blings on Sep 29, 2010 1:41 PM CDT up reply actions  

no

whens the last time he missed significant time or his play suffered because he was playing hurt? That was like 2008, right?

I think fans give newman way too much crap. The guy is a solid cover corner. The worst thing about his game is that he doesn’t go after INTs or face the ball when covering deep routes. He shut down Jackson 3 times last year, which makes him the envy of every defense in this division.

by foyesboys on Sep 29, 2010 2:53 PM CDT up reply actions  

Which is right around the time...

he stopped returning punts on a regular basis IIRC.

Rabid and luvin' it

by lonewolfz28 on Sep 29, 2010 5:13 PM CDT up reply actions  

Hmmm

…maybe you’re right.

He certainly gets pounded on a lot.

"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."

- John Wooden (God rest his soul)

by 5Blings on Sep 30, 2010 12:42 PM CDT up reply actions  

My issue w TNew - he's overly reliant on his physical attributes

primarily speed and quickness, at the expense of technique. Only in the last 2 years has he paid more attention to that.

We live life forwards and understand it backwards

by tdships on Sep 29, 2010 2:00 PM CDT up reply actions  

I agree with you

except the part about the bashing. After the two Roy Williams’ and Bobby Carpenter, Tnew was probably everyone’s favorite punching bag.

by RisingSunCowboy on Sep 29, 2010 11:37 PM CDT up reply actions  

Sean Lee should be back at full for the next game.

He apparently would have been ready to go for the Texans, but wasn’t prepped for it, so they held him out. He apparently was much healthier going in to last week than they had expected. I can’t wait for him to be able to spell Brooking especially on passing downs.

by mdlusk on Sep 29, 2010 12:56 PM CDT reply actions  

That will be important as the season goes on

If at first you don't succeed - blame someone else.

by Tom Ryle on Sep 29, 2010 5:31 PM CDT up reply actions  

+1

FREE THE OGLETREE!!!

by dunkman on Sep 30, 2010 7:33 AM CDT up reply actions  

Thats crazy about the Roy 63yd that Romo adjusted it.

As I was reading that I was remind of this play back in 07 and here you can clearly hear Romo call for TO

I love it. I hope he continues to do that all year

Really?! Really?!

by thebigham on Sep 29, 2010 1:33 PM CDT reply actions  

Money quote
The Cowboys are never going to be a running team. With Tony Romo, Dez Bryant, Miles Austin, Roy Williams and Jason Witten on this team the best attack for the Cowboys is to air it out and move the ball downfield.

by BishopWest on Sep 29, 2010 1:34 PM CDT reply actions  

I can't for life of me understand why some fans insist they try to run more

The Cowboys are clearly a passing team, any fan with even any kind of football knowledge has to understand this. Thats who they are, that is there identity.

They have a top, eilte qb in Romo and arguably the best receiving corp in the league (WR and TE). Their OL isn’t built to run, thats another myth, as they pass block much better, it’s really not even close. There best running play is a lead draw, which is actually run from a passing formation.

Neither MB3 nor Felix are feature backs, they both have special skills which are much better used in limited roles throughout the game. Same goes for Choice.

Cowboys will live or die by the pass…always have since Garrett and #9 took, and always will as long as they are here.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Sep 29, 2010 1:49 PM CDT up reply actions  

+1 ... I can't for life of me understand why some fans WANT to run more

how many super bowls do teams like Indy, St. Louis, New England, NO have to win ….

by Fan in Thick and Thin on Sep 29, 2010 1:53 PM CDT up reply actions  

It's a passing league..plain aand simple

Great qbs, wrs, pass rushers and secondaries rule the league, this idea of have having to be a great running team is a thing of the past.

The evolution of the game has changed it into a passing game instead of a running game at the pro level because of the rule changes and the league wanting more scoring to attract more fans.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Sep 29, 2010 2:03 PM CDT up reply actions  

Wrong..

the year Indy won the SB was when they had a decent running game with Rhodes and Addai. New England, Brady threw for 50 touchdown, set all kind of record but when the Midgets DLine pin their ears back, Brady couldn’t muster 20 points. New Orlean had a solid running game last year, at least in the SB game against Indy. You need both the run game and the pass to be successful.

by LiLGiT on Sep 29, 2010 9:28 PM CDT up reply actions  

Wrong...

The added ingredient to the Colts that made them Super Bowl champions was not a run game (they previously had a guy named Edge who you might have heard of) but rather a run defense. In fact, if you look at their playoff run, it was their defense that outperformed thier offense even with their running game you speak of.

Formerly Cowboyfan729
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels

by Creasy729 on Sep 30, 2010 10:17 AM CDT via mobile up reply actions  

not true

Those teams scored points by passing the ball

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Sep 30, 2010 4:02 PM CDT up reply actions  

I can speak for myself

That my frustration with the running game is not that we call more running plays as much as we a) either don’t settle making one of these guys our feature running back, or b) we don’t go out and get ourselves a feature back who can be counted on to make teams pay when we hand it off to him. I was angry when we passed on Steven Jackson, and I was also perturbed when we didn’t draft either Rashard Mendenhall or Chris Johnson back in 2008. But now that we have Felix Jones, I’d rather he get the lions share of the work (as do most NFL analysts, such as Mike Maoc, and Mike Lombardi).

It's only a dream till you write it down, and then it becomes a goal.
-Emmitt Smith

by Rohpuri on Sep 29, 2010 9:00 PM CDT up reply actions  

A number of good teams use RB by committee very successfully.

Having a feature back is not important these days.

Excellent example: 2008 Giants led the entire NFL in rushing and did so by committee.
Brandon Jacobs – 219 attempts (47%)
Derrick Ward – 182 attempts (39%)
Amhad Bradshaw – 67 attempts (14%)

Last year 10 of the top 15 FEATURE BACKS did not make the playoffs:

C. Johnson – 358 carries – DID NOT MAKE PLAYOFFS

S. Jackson – 324 carries – ONLY WON ONE GAME

M. Jones-Drew – 312 carries – LOSING SEASON

M. Forte – 258 carries – LOSING SEASON

K. Moreno – 247 carries – DID NOT MAKE PLAYOFFS

R. Mendenhall – 242 carries – DID NOT MAKE PLAYOFFS

R. Williams – 241 carries – LOSING SEASON

F. Jackson – 237 carries – LOSING SEASON

F. Gore – 229 carries – DID NOT MAKE PLAYOFFS

B. Jacobs – 224 carries – DID NOT MAKE PLAYOFFS

by BishopWest on Sep 29, 2010 11:37 PM CDT up reply actions  

Because the Cowboys pass best when they have play action working.

When you have clearly abandoned the run, play action is ineffective. You have to at least present the threat of running the ball, and too often the Cowboys do not.

Because in some situations it’s better to run time off the clock rather than have 3 quick incompletions.

Because back to back 3 yard runs are still a better set up for 3rd down than back to back 1 yard passes to Dez Bryant.

by Baked Potato Soup on Sep 30, 2010 11:57 AM CDT up reply actions  

Cowboys run best when they have the draw working. When you clearly abandoned the pass the draw is ineffective.

Really?! Really?!

by thebigham on Sep 30, 2010 12:14 PM CDT up reply actions  

It's a good thing that they haven't ever done that.

However, there have been games where they abandoned the run. Or do you dispute that? Show me a game in the past few years where they only had 11 passing plays. Or where they ran the ball 70% of the time and lost.

How many times do we see drive stall out because the sequence is pass, pass, pass, punt? What is the Cowboys record where Romo throws over 35 times vs. where he throws under 35 times?

by Baked Potato Soup on Sep 30, 2010 12:45 PM CDT up reply actions  

2008-2010 record where Romo throws 36 or more times: 4-8

2008-2010 record where Romo throws 35 or less times: 17-2

by Baked Potato Soup on Sep 30, 2010 12:52 PM CDT up reply actions  

Can you sum all that up?

Seriously. That’s a lot of reading.

One thing that I noticed though is that you are saying that Dallas passed only 57% of the time last season. This year it has been about 70%, correct? I think that’s why people are saying that we need to run more. That doesn’t mean run more than pass, that means run more than we have been. Get it closer to that 60-65% range that you referred to, or even better just under 60% again.

It’s as much about play calling as results. If I have to defend the run and the pass both, you are more likely to get good results from passing on a per pass basis than if I am defending the pass every play.

by Baked Potato Soup on Sep 30, 2010 2:00 PM CDT up reply actions  

Short answer: the evidence doesn’t support the theory that pass efficiency is strongly correlated with run/pass mix. Even at a 70% pass mix.

Longer answer: there is some optimal play mix that maximizes overall efficiency. We’re not sure what that mix is 60/40, 65/35, 70/30. However,

-in general coaches do not follow optimal strategy. They err on the side of being too conservative (i.e. don’t go for it on 4th down, not enough surprise onside kicks, etc … btw, ask Jim Caldwell how it works out to follow sub-optimal strategy when your opponent follows optimal strategy)

-therefore, my guess (along with some other reasons explained in the post) is that coaches are calling a sub-optimal play mix and erring on the side of being too conservative (i.e. calling too few passes).

-I’m sure there is play mix where efficiency levels off or even declines, but I haven’t seen it in the numbers yet. I suspect that no coach has been crazy enough to call enough passes that efficiency starts to decline.

by Fan in Thick and Thin on Sep 30, 2010 2:19 PM CDT up reply actions  

Doesn't your chart basically show that as passing increases, efficiency decreases?

They won only 2 of the 13 games where they passed the most, and in only one of them were they able to have a yard or more positive passing efficiency. That would seem to suggest that passing at those levels decreases your chance of being efficient.

When they passed 62.3% of the time or less, they lost the efficency battle 7 times and went 4-3. In 3 of those wins they lost the efficiency battle by more than a yard. They also lost once when they won the battle, although not by more than a yard.

When they passed 62.7% or more, they lost the efficiency battle 7 times, 1-6, won it 4, 1-3, and tied twice, 0-2. To me that shows that the more often they pass, the less likely they are to win that battle and therefore the game.

by Baked Potato Soup on Sep 30, 2010 2:49 PM CDT up reply actions  

read the whole post.

I believe the causality runs the other way.

Lose the efficiency battle → losing the game → forced to pass.

by Fan in Thick and Thin on Sep 30, 2010 3:03 PM CDT up reply actions  

But if that is the case, why did they win games where they lost the efficiency battle?

It’s easy to say that if they passed that much and somehow still won the efficiency battle, they would win. My question is, how come they so rarely win the efficiency battle when they pass that much? Why, when they pass less and are less efficient, do they still win?

by Baked Potato Soup on Sep 30, 2010 10:50 PM CDT up reply actions  

how come they so rarely win the efficiency battle when they pass that much?

Correlation is not causation. The causation runs the other way.

Lose the efficiency battle → lose the game → forced to pass.

Left Coast Cowboy had a simliar question. See if my answer explains things.

I encourage you to look at a couple games and see which hypothesis the play-by-play supports. It’s be really cool if put what you find about specific games in the fanpost thread so we have it all in one place.

by Fan in Thick and Thin on Oct 1, 2010 10:34 AM CDT up reply actions  

btw, I encourage you to be skeptical

don’t believe anything because I say it.

I’ve provided links to the data so you can play with it and identified all the games.

do a spot check. pull up some of the outlying game and see which hypothesis the box score supports.

by Fan in Thick and Thin on Sep 30, 2010 3:09 PM CDT up reply actions  

YOU CAN'T HAVE A SUCCESSFUL PASSING GAME WITHOUT A GOOD RUNNING GAME!

Even if you want to be a good ‘pasing team,’ you have to be good at running too, or you’re predictable.
As someone above says, you have to have balance. This is the NFl. Teams are too good, especially once you reach the playoffs. Being one-dimensional = failure.

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 Sep 29, 2010 11:55 PM CDT up reply actions  

Not true that you can't have a good pass game without a good run game.

No one doubts the passing ability and efficiency of Peyton Manning.

Last year he threw for 4,500 yards and 33 TD’s.

Did he have a good running game? NO, the Colts ran for LESS yards than any team in the NFL. Dead Last.

What was his win/loss record? 14-2 and home field advantage throughout the playoffs.

by BishopWest on Sep 30, 2010 12:10 AM CDT up reply actions   1 recs

exactly

like rabble said, you must win to run the ball. so true.

Really?! Really?!

by thebigham on Sep 30, 2010 6:35 AM CDT up reply actions  

I'm at work and wish I had more time, but...

for all you pass-happy people,
then why mess around?
Go Run and Shoot, empty backfield, 2-minute offense all the time, Spread offense, Hurry-Up offense, whatever you want to call it.

If it’s so obvious, why don’t teams just go for it, like some college teams do?
I’m being sarcastic a bit, but also serious, if passing is what wins, and the Cowboys have a quality QB and receivers, is that what you want/ 80% passes, 20% runs?

Please drop the Colts argument, when Peyton Manning is their QB, he’s on a different level.

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 Sep 30, 2010 10:53 AM CDT up reply actions  

that cuts both ways ...
for all you pass run-happy people,
then why mess around?
Go Run and Shoot the option, empty wishbone backfield, 2-minute offense all the time, Spread offense, Hurry-Up offense, whatever you want to call it.

If it’s so obvious, why don’t teams just go for it, like some college teams do?

by Fan in Thick and Thin on Sep 30, 2010 12:19 PM CDT up reply actions  

no one's calling for that.

No one here has ever said “Let’s run it 70%.” Meanwhile they have actually passed it 70%!

People just want balance (under 60% passing, maybe 55/45?) and unpredictability.

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 Oct 2, 2010 12:47 AM CDT up reply actions  

Larry,

You inadvertently raise in interesting question.

Sometimes looking at the extremes helps to clarify what happens in the middle.

So here’s the question I have for you.

What do you think would fare better? An offense that was exclusively pass (e.g. 100% run and shoot) or an offense that was exclusively run (e.g. 100% wildcat)?

by Fan in Thick and Thin on Sep 30, 2010 12:31 PM CDT up reply actions  

actually, everyone took the 5th on my question

All I got was questions back!
Interesting.

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 Oct 2, 2010 1:04 AM CDT up reply actions  

What do you think would fare better? An offense that was exclusively pass (e.g. 100% run and shoot) or an offense that was exclusively run (e.g. 100% wildcat)?
Did you notice no one answered MY question though??

I noticed you didn’t answer my question …

I’ll answer your question though.

I didn’t find a decline in passing effieciency even as the mix went up to 20/80.

I don’t see a decline in pass efficiency when teams run the 2 min drill.

And I didn’t see a decline in pass efficiency on Monday night when both teams went 25/75.

I’m not sure where efficiency starts to decline but it’s not obvious that it does even at a 20/80 mix.

do I strike you as that kind of person

Yes.

by Fan in Thick and Thin on Oct 2, 2010 8:46 AM CDT up reply actions  

I strike you as a guy who is media brainwashed?

weird.

Are you saying that your answer to my question is yes, you’d like a pass-happy attack? I’m not sure.

To answer your question, my answer is both would fail, that’s obvious.

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 Oct 2, 2010 11:32 AM CDT up reply actions  

I've never called for a 3 yards and a cloud of dust.

Sometimes I wonder if you guys really read the comments!

I (and others) have called for balance! I said you have to run to be able to pass.
Find any quote from me that even hints at wanting to run run run.

It’s a straw man argument.
And not a worthwhile question, both would fail, because as I’ve stated over and over, in the NFL the defenses are too good, you need balance.

The amount of passing they did the 1st 2 games shows a scary tendency. 70% passing plays may work for a while, but in the long wrong DC’s figure you out and shut you down.
Just like we did to Philly last year. Without Westbrook their offense was a joke-and Dallas stifled them.
That could happen to the Cowboys too.

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 Oct 2, 2010 12:52 AM CDT up reply actions  

Did you notice no one answered MY question though??

Everyone wanted to provoke my reaction, but I’m calling out the pass-happy people.
No one is willing to answer and say “Yes” they should pass all the time (or say 80%).
Why not?

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 Oct 2, 2010 1:03 AM CDT up reply actions  

The Cowboys aren't really "pass happy"

Compared to other teams in the NFL, we’re right in the middle of the pack

by BishopWest on Sep 30, 2010 1:05 PM CDT up reply actions  

The Colts ran less than 63% of the time last year.

It’s not about yards, it’s about the threat of the run.

Too many Cowboys sequences end pass-pass-pass, punt.

by Baked Potato Soup on Sep 30, 2010 12:00 PM CDT up reply actions  

sorry, passed less than 63%

by Baked Potato Soup on Sep 30, 2010 12:42 PM CDT up reply actions  

Last game

during the three run heavy series, we scored only 3 points. No serious Cowboys fan should want more of that.

by BishopWest on Sep 30, 2010 1:09 PM CDT up reply actions  

No one is saying that they should pass more than run.

On the opening drive they ran 6 times and passed 5, but 3 of the 5 were on the set of downs that cashed them out. They chose to pass on 4th and 2 rather than attempt the FG. I don’t know that you can blame the running game on that one.

The next drive they ran twice for 7 yards and then threw a 1 yard pass. I guess you can blame the running game for that.

Later in the game they are trying to run out the clock and go all run, no threat of pass, and kick a FG. I’m pretty sure that’s what they wanted to do in that situation.

There was also the 63 yarder to RW that was a 2 run, 2 pass drive.

No one is saying they should go 3 yards and a cloud of dust. Or even that they need a 50/50 mix. What people are saying is that 30/70 is not enough of a mix and is too predictable.

by Baked Potato Soup on Sep 30, 2010 2:18 PM CDT up reply actions  

Bishop?

Whoya talkin to???

FREE THE OGLETREE!!!

by dunkman on Sep 30, 2010 3:45 PM CDT up reply actions  

Realist Larry,

It’s understandable that you believe that. You’ve been subjected to a 50 year campaign to convince you that run-pass balance is the Rosetta stone to understanding football. This is a situation where conventional wisdom has swamped common sense.

But step back and think about what happens on the football field. The supposed reason for the importance of run-pass balance is that you trick the defense (i.e. call a pass when they expect a run or call a run when they expect as pass). But there a few factors that limit the importance of that.

-teams still have to run the plays and whatever the play-call, defenses see whether it’s run or pass and react. At most, the benefit is a fraction of second of hesitation. That’s it. It’s a marginal edge. At the end of the day I’m confident that skill and ability (e.g. having Peyton Manning) are much more important than and having a marginal advantage on play recognition.

-There are bunch of plays where you don’t have a choice about the call (e.g. 3 & long, 2 min drill, running out the clock).

So I’d urge you not to uncritically accept claims about the importance of balance.

Anecdotally, I watched the NFL network highlights of the Cowboys game. Every single highlight was a pass. But the commentator says ‘I know we’re showing you a lot of passes but Dallas was actually a lot more balanced and that was the key to the game’. It made me laugh. If you looked at a box score you know what would stand out? What was really REMARKABLE about the Dal-Hou game? That Dallas ripped Houston through the air. 77% completion percentage, 9.5 YPA. It’s there in the statistics. It’s there in the highlights. Yet these guys still say Dallas won because of balance.

by Fan in Thick and Thin on Sep 30, 2010 7:00 AM CDT up reply actions  

Larry may be right

but only under the right circumstances.

If a team lacks a QB who has mastered the position and the nuances of the offense, a running game is a must to take pressure off him. If the team lacks receiving threats who can get separation, and sometimes get it quickly, and who can read coverages and blitzes the same way as the QB, then a strong running game is a requirement.

If a team has what it needs to be a good passing team (and Dallas does now), the running game can be used to set up the defense to make the passing game more effective. As Brandon points out, the running game was still important to drawing the LBs in to clear out the missle of the field, but the team didn’t have to rely on it to move the ball.

FREE THE OGLETREE!!!

by dunkman on Sep 30, 2010 7:39 AM CDT up reply actions  

You can be either...

a running team or a passing team. In either case, you have to be able to do the other to some degree of success or else you’ll become one-dimensional. When you face Indy, you have to shut down the passing game to the point where a decent run game can beat you.

When we can’t run, our passing game isn’t as effective. When we can’t pass, our running game isn’t as effective.

Oh, and it matters not how many yards you get through the air, or on the ground. It’s how many points you get. I’ll take those games that we have less than 300 yards total offense, but still score a ton of points because of Turnovers leading to 20 yard drive averages. Yes, a hypothetical, but it shows the point. Last year, we had stud yards per game, but our scoring offense wasn’t anywhere near as good as our yardage offense.

The style of offense we are currently running (no pun intended) is that of a passing-dominant team. There’s nothing wrong with that if you can still run effectively. The league does seem to be more passer-friendly, though I’m not sure if that’s by design or has simply happened.

Don’t forget how “pass happy” we were in the 90’s.

by Northern Cowboy on Sep 30, 2010 8:07 AM CDT up reply actions  

When we can’t run, our passing game isn’t as effective. When we can’t pass, our running game isn’t as effective.

I looked at the correlation between run efficiency and pass efficiency and there is none. I’d urge you to be skeptical.

Here’s a look at yards versus points.

And here is a look at balance.

by Fan in Thick and Thin on Sep 30, 2010 8:13 AM CDT up reply actions  

But wasn't it a very effective running game against Houston?

Perhaps I am just looking at it the wrong way, but 27-13 says the offense as a whole was very effective which would imply that the run game as a part of said offense was very effective. That’s why I think the 3.7 number is meaningless – the team kept the threat of a run credible, which made Tony and the receivers more effective, and the team got enough yards on the ground when it needed to. The score trumps all.

If at first you don't succeed - blame someone else.

by Tom Ryle on Sep 30, 2010 4:40 PM CDT up reply actions  

Exactly!

That’s why I think the 3.7 number is meaningless – the team kept the threat of a run credible, which made Tony and the receivers more effective, and the team got enough yards on the ground when it needed to.

If you can’t run at all and the defense knows it, your passing game will suffer. If the defense doesn’t know whether you can run or not, you had better have a couple good runs early if you aren’t much of a running team. At least that way, they’ll still not be able to know what to expect.

Because we can run effectively at the very least, our passing game will benefit. That we are also dangerous in the passing game should also help out the run game.

On rare occasion (ie. Payton Manning) will you have a bad running or passing game and still be a very effective offense. Manning makes the Colts passing game dangerous regardless of the running game. He could probably still lead some comebacks without any RB’s on the 45-man game roster.

by Northern Cowboy on Oct 5, 2010 7:40 PM CDT up reply actions  

The endles argument!

Some of us will never agree.

But I’ll respond to this: No one’s influenced me w/50 years of propaganda! Everything I say is from watching with my own eyes for 30+ years. I pay very little attention to the commentators (more irritating than anything) and watch much less media (ESPN etc.) than people here.

And anyone who knows me would laugh, I’m much too opinionated and independent-minded to be brainwashed by the media-do I strike you as that kind of person?? lol

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 Oct 2, 2010 12:57 AM CDT up reply actions  

Well done again, Brandon
Last week Wade Phillips backed off against the Bears and never really put his defense in the position to make plays. He was aggressive early but regressed into a zone scheme that the Bears slowly picked apart as the game went on. It was beyond frustrating to witness, especially considering the success they had early in the game.

Do you think he lacks the stones to keep pressuring the bad guys if he gets burned a couple of times? It seems like his opposite number (Martz) never waivered in his intention to get the ball downfield. You’d think Wade could have learned something from the Super Bowl winning Offensive Coordinator.

"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."

- John Wooden (God rest his soul)

by 5Blings on Sep 29, 2010 1:44 PM CDT reply actions  

now thats dedication to the cause
I am officially out of the US Navy as of this week and I am in the process of moving back to Dallas over the bye weekend

planning your career and life around the bye weekend! gotta love it

by faenix on Sep 29, 2010 1:48 PM CDT reply actions  

+1 great post

I love when I get to read stuff like this, actually breaking down stuff and analyzing it
great job

question how do you know Romo and Roy made that change on the 63 yard TD?
I think it was changed too was just curious how you know it was a draw

Garrett’s system Romo knows in and out, it Garrett is gone thats gonna suck because Romo is now getting his Drew Breezy on calling his own plays out 2 or 3 plays to option from
we should let Romo do this more and more

for one I dont think we should be a “run team” we are setup with all these playmakers in the passing game and to be honest its funner to watch
doesnt mean I dont want to run the ball
I just think if Garrett continues to call and prepare his gameplans like he did Sunday then we are gonna be a top tier offense again

by Archie Barberio on Sep 29, 2010 2:48 PM CDT reply actions  

Great post

And welcome back to shore.

If at first you don't succeed - blame someone else.

by Tom Ryle on Sep 29, 2010 5:34 PM CDT reply actions  

0 seconds left on time clock for the first half field goal

First time blogger from BSR to BTB, enjoy reading all the posts but I couldn’t contain myself any longer. It is to my understanding that when an official stops the clock for review the time clock is reset to 25 seconds. As I rewound the game over and over to this spot I clearly here the ref blow his whistle to start the game clock. Dallas was already set up on the field to kick when they showed the clock at 12 seconds. The ref had just blown the whistle a few seconds before that there was no way that the stadium clock was reset to 25 seconds. Maybe this is why no delay of game was called. Doesn’t Fox have somebody to check this before Joe $uckhead rants about this? Or am I completely wrong? If this has already been discussed I apologize.

by Seekingthe6th on Sep 29, 2010 8:14 PM CDT reply actions  

Homer Running the Clock Seen on TV

The Ref on the field had it right. Great kick! +3

Golden Rule: He who has the gold makes the rules.

by 1Bullseye on Sep 29, 2010 8:58 PM CDT up reply actions  

off topic, anyone rooting for the Deadskins over Philly Sunday?

I am , clearly, they are much more of a threat long term than Washington, even though we lost to them.

by fiverings37 on Sep 29, 2010 8:34 PM CDT reply actions  

rooting for redskins so many reasons.

If redskins win they are first in the division.
If eagles lose maybe more of a QB carousel starts
If eagles lose maybe dog killer will get broke in half by orakpo

Really?! Really?!

by thebigham on Sep 30, 2010 6:38 AM CDT up reply actions  

Another solid post from Brandon

good luck with the move back, and thank you for service.

It's only a dream till you write it down, and then it becomes a goal.
-Emmitt Smith

by Rohpuri on Sep 29, 2010 9:03 PM CDT reply actions  

Great post Brandon!

and welcome to civilian life. Just to ensure a smooth transition, I suggest you find a home with gray metal walls, no windows, little tiny rooms, and a miniature bunk. We woudn’t want any culture shock going on…

And thanks for serving. These have been hard times to be in the military.

FREE THE OGLETREE!!!

by dunkman on Sep 30, 2010 7:44 AM CDT reply actions  

+1,

Welcome back Brandon,just remember civilian life is full civilians who aren’t very civil.
 It took me a year to stop stowing my gear in 2 drawers+a milk crate…Good Luck and God bless

by psychodad on Sep 30, 2010 8:55 AM CDT up reply actions  

Took me almost a year and two moves...

before I finally unpacked my TDY bag with my 2 sets of BDU’s, 1 week of socks/underwear/t-shirts, 3 months of toiletries, etc. LOL

Rabid and luvin' it

by lonewolfz28 on Sep 30, 2010 4:34 PM CDT up 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

Demarco_murray_st_louis_rams_v_dallas_cowboys_baxpocve6rkl_small
Headed in the Right Direction...(Delusional or Reality)
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

Recent FanPosts

222724_1014143404454_1551120017_30067740_5911_n_small
2012: Random Thoughts about Anything but a Quiet Offseason
Small
Beat the Pass Rush
Small
Romo and the Super Bowl Question
Small
How much does pass rush matter?
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