Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Confidence in Jason Garrett?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 13, 14, 15  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Dallas Cowboys
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Desperado82


Joined: 20 Feb 2010
Posts: 29219
Location: Maryland
PostPosted: Sun Sep 23, 2012 10:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

DEZ88PLAYMAKER2 wrote:
Desperado82 wrote:
TD-ES-JJ wrote:
I guess I can't get behind REdball as the head coach, because I didn't really like him as the OC. So, I have issues with him that started before he was the head guy.

So, again, my confidence in him is very low.


If not Garrett...who?


This is the real question... Who is a better option for this team than Redball at this point.....

He needs to surround himself with a staff that better supports his weaknesses not go away IMO


I can't think of anybody off the top of my head. Rob Ryan is Wade Phillips. A great DC, but I don't believe he would make for a great head coach. I don't want a retread, either.

I believe in Garrett and I think we're one draft away from really being a dominant team. Garrett initiated the "retooling" (*cough* rebuilding *cough*) of the Cowboys and I believe he should be allowed at least another season to see it through. However, I think we need a change of approach on offensive playcalling and sincerely hope he relinquishes those duties after this year.
_________________

^^^Deadpulse
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
TD-ES-JJ


Joined: 25 Feb 2005
Posts: 1857
PostPosted: Sun Sep 23, 2012 10:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Desperado82 wrote:
TD-ES-JJ wrote:
I guess I can't get behind REdball as the head coach, because I didn't really like him as the OC. So, I have issues with him that started before he was the head guy.

So, again, my confidence in him is very low.


If not Garrett...who?


Well while we were hiring Redball, San Francisco hired Jim Harbaugh. I'll give you one guess as to who I'd rather have.

Now, we won today, so no matter what he got it done. But I just caution you not to overlook the things in victory that you would bytch about after a loss.I.E. stupid penalties, abandoning the run and failing offensive line play. We did that after the Giants game and it bit us in the butt in the Seattle game.
_________________


Sig Courtesy of thesickness89
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Desperado82


Joined: 20 Feb 2010
Posts: 29219
Location: Maryland
PostPosted: Sun Sep 23, 2012 10:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

TD-ES-JJ wrote:
Desperado82 wrote:
TD-ES-JJ wrote:
I guess I can't get behind REdball as the head coach, because I didn't really like him as the OC. So, I have issues with him that started before he was the head guy.

So, again, my confidence in him is very low.


If not Garrett...who?


Well while we were hiring Redball, San Francisco hired Jim Harbaugh. I'll give you one guess as to who I'd rather have.

Now, we won today, so no matter what he got it done. But I just caution you not to overlook the things in victory that you would bytch about after a loss.I.E. stupid penalties, abandoning the run and failing offensive line play. We did that after the Giants game and it bit us in the butt in the Seattle game.


We have a center who still does not know the cadence after three weeks of being with the team. At some point, the players need to do their jobs and get their act together.
_________________

^^^Deadpulse
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
TD-ES-JJ


Joined: 25 Feb 2005
Posts: 1857
PostPosted: Sun Sep 23, 2012 10:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Desperado82 wrote:
TD-ES-JJ wrote:
Desperado82 wrote:
TD-ES-JJ wrote:
I guess I can't get behind REdball as the head coach, because I didn't really like him as the OC. So, I have issues with him that started before he was the head guy.

So, again, my confidence in him is very low.


If not Garrett...who?


Well while we were hiring Redball, San Francisco hired Jim Harbaugh. I'll give you one guess as to who I'd rather have.

Now, we won today, so no matter what he got it done. But I just caution you not to overlook the things in victory that you would bytch about after a loss.I.E. stupid penalties, abandoning the run and failing offensive line play. We did that after the Giants game and it bit us in the butt in the Seattle game.


We have a center who still does not know the cadence after three weeks of being with the team. At some point, the players need to do their jobs and get their act together.


Well, Ryan was a scrub when he was released by Miami. So is it a surprise that he isn't a stud. But he's still better than the guy he replaced. Yes, only the players perform on the field, but you have practice every week for a reason, to fix whats wrong and prepare for the next week. We don't do that very well.
_________________


Sig Courtesy of thesickness89
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Desperado82


Joined: 20 Feb 2010
Posts: 29219
Location: Maryland
PostPosted: Sun Sep 23, 2012 10:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

TD-ES-JJ wrote:
Well, Ryan was a scrub when he was released by Miami. So is it a surprise that he isn't a stud. But he's still better than the guy he replaced. Yes, only the players perform on the field, but you have practice every week for a reason, to fix whats wrong and prepare for the next week. We don't do that very well.


How do you fix a guy not knowing the cadence? More time in the system.

If he can't get it, then it's a mental issue and no amount of coaching is going to fix a dumbarse
_________________

^^^Deadpulse
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
TD-ES-JJ


Joined: 25 Feb 2005
Posts: 1857
PostPosted: Sun Sep 23, 2012 10:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Desperado82 wrote:
TD-ES-JJ wrote:
Well, Ryan was a scrub when he was released by Miami. So is it a surprise that he isn't a stud. But he's still better than the guy he replaced. Yes, only the players perform on the field, but you have practice every week for a reason, to fix whats wrong and prepare for the next week. We don't do that very well.


How do you fix a guy not knowing the cadence? More time in the system.

If he can't get it, then it's a mental issue and no amount of coaching is going to fix a dumbarse


Can't argue that point. If Romo is still alive after the bye week I think this will be a much better team by then, particularly on offense.
_________________


Sig Courtesy of thesickness89
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
The_Slamman


Joined: 06 Feb 2005
Posts: 13736
Location: Las Vegas, NV
PostPosted: Sun Sep 23, 2012 11:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

TD-ES-JJ wrote:
Desperado82 wrote:
TD-ES-JJ wrote:
Well, Ryan was a scrub when he was released by Miami. So is it a surprise that he isn't a stud. But he's still better than the guy he replaced. Yes, only the players perform on the field, but you have practice every week for a reason, to fix whats wrong and prepare for the next week. We don't do that very well.


How do you fix a guy not knowing the cadence? More time in the system.

If he can't get it, then it's a mental issue and no amount of coaching is going to fix a dumbarse


Can't argue that point. If Romo is still alive after the bye week I think this will be a much better team by then, particularly on offense.


That's a big if. I fear for Romo's life against the Bears. The OL has to give a better effort or we could lose Romo for the season.
_________________
Northland wrote:
If mediocrity is your SuperBowl then Garrett is your Lombardi.


Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TheStarStillShines


Joined: 12 Oct 2004
Posts: 8812
PostPosted: Sun Sep 23, 2012 11:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Texas_OutLaw7 wrote:
I really like what Redball is doing.

Does this team have issues? Yes they sure do.

The Oline isn't great (and contrary to popular belief a 1st round pick would not have magically cured it). This is a line that is still learning how to play together. And it shows. I place a lot of the blame on the false starts on Cook. I am comfortable blaming Witten for all his drops. But the sheer amount of False starts he had along with Free tells me something was off. And Redball alluded to that by referencing the cadences. That needs to improve.

Also. I have no idea what your complaint about abandoning the run is about. If anything I was frustrated by the sheer amount of times we would run the ball on first down. Tampa can boast perhaps the best run defense in the league. And it showed in spades. Yeah - we may not have a great line. But we are not the only team they have held in check running.

I firmly believe people are still living in the 90's. Where we had a monster Oline. Where we had the best RB. Where we had a top 3 QB. Where we had a top 3 WR. We could line up tell teams we will be rushing to the right - and not be stopped. We don't have that anymore. Much to my dismay, that is not the identity of this team. And that is okay. We are a passing team. When we are successful passing - it opens our running lanes. It eases the pressure off of our OL. Romo is what makes this offense work. He always has been - he always will be. Our no huddles work because he can improvise and places more of the burden on him - and not on the rest of the team. Which, I feel is another fact that is neglected when discussing the whole abandoning the run. Redball trusts Romo enough to call the plays. I like that in my Head Coach.

EDIT:

I also enjoyed the ballsy Onside kick. It showed grit. It showed a desire to get the offense going (since we are tempo based) and it showed confidence in our defense. I am digging it. I would like Redball to continue with wrinkles like this.


It's difficult to assess JG as a head coach because he also doubles as the offensive coordinator. Clearly, the team needs to bring in someone to call the plays and add some creativity. This team is way too predictable.

And this team does abandon the run too early. Murray had 7 carries on the 2nd drive of the game, all in the first quarter. For the remaining 3 quarters, he had 11 carries. That's inexcusable and it wasn't like the team was behind and it wasn't like the passing game was on. Everyone agrees that Romo was getting knocked around at almost every pass play.

And look at the Sunday night game. The Pats didn't have much success running the football, but they stuck with it in order to keep the Ravens' defence honest. Consequently, the Pats were able to use a lot of playaction and the middle of the field opened up often. That's why you stick with the running game, so teams don't just go into attack mode and go after the QB. It's not about living in the '90s, it's about keeping the defence unbalanced and creating holes. It also about buying the QB time in the pocket, which Romo really needs.

I do agree with you about running on first down. Call a playaction pass on a couple of situations. Also, if you run it on first down, run it again on 2nd down because the defence, as we saw today, is going to be rushing the QB. And maybe just run it 3 or 4 times in a row. It's the perfect element of surprise.

Take today's game. Murray never touched the ball more than twice consecutively. He never got 3 or more consecutive carries. This has been the case with Garrett all year and even going back to past years. Teams know this. They study every play and every drive of every season and get to know tendencies. Garrett has a tendency to not run the football on 3 consecutive times. So after 2 runs, as a defensive coordinator, you send out your dime defense or call a blitz.

If you can't see why people, like myself, are calling for more balance, I'm not sure what to say to you. It's pretty obvious why it's important to run the football even if it's only getting minor results. It's more than just gaining yards but setting up plays later in the game (i.e., playaction), keeping defences honest, and buying the QB some time in the pocket since the DL can't just be in constant attack mode. In addition, it's about making the team less predictable, about wearing down the defence, and creating a physical tone. Right now, this team is way too predictable and passive on offence, and these things fall squarely on Jason Garrett's shoulders.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Texas_OutLaw7


Most Valuable Poster (6th Ballot)

FF Fanatic

Joined: 27 Mar 2005
Posts: 25129
Location: Cowboys Forum ROH Class of '12
PostPosted: Sun Sep 23, 2012 11:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

TheStarStillShines wrote:


It's difficult to assess JG as a head coach because he also doubles as the offensive coordinator. Clearly, the team needs to bring in someone to call the plays and add some creativity. This team is way too predictable.


I can agree with him splitting duties is taxing - he is pulling a Wade which I don't understand. However, I don't think his play calling lacks creativity. I don't think it's unique by any stretch, but he runs a variety of wrinkles - they are just poorly executed.

Quote:
And this team does abandon the run too early. Murray had 7 carries on the 2nd drive of the game, all in the first quarter. For the remaining 3 quarters, he had 11 carries. That's inexcusable and it wasn't like the team was behind and it wasn't like the passing game was on. Everyone agrees that Romo was getting knocked around at almost every pass play.


But give it context.

We would constantly run and get stuffed or tackled for a loss. Which would put us in a precarious situation. Worse, we would have inexcusable mental errors that would force us in long situations that essentially require us to run. AND - it's unfair to place this on the heels of Redball. Romo runs the No-Huddle how he will. Sometimes it's for a run but more often it's for a pass. He likes controlling the destiny of the teams offense. Several of the first down play calls were run. Which infuriated me to no end. Since I am of the camp you pass to open the run. But once we got into the no huddle that's Romo working his magic.
Quote:

And look at the Sunday night game. The Pats didn't have much success running the football, but they stuck with it in order to keep the Ravens' defence honest. Consequently, the Pats were able to use a lot of playaction and the middle of the field opened up often. That's why you stick with the running game, so teams don't just go into attack mode and go after the QB. It's not about living in the '90s, it's about keeping the defence unbalanced and creating holes. It also about buying the QB time in the pocket, which Romo really needs.


Well. 1. The pats have a better OL. 2. We were facing the leagues best Rush Defense. We would run and it yield an unlikeable situation. I am all for rushing. But you gotta be smart about it. Which we are not. We need to spread our the defense. We need to wear them out. And then let Murray exhaust and bruise them.
Quote:

I do agree with you about running on first down. Call a playaction pass on a couple of situations. Also, if you run it on first down, run it again on 2nd down because the defence, as we saw today, is going to be rushing the QB. And maybe just run it 3 or 4 times in a row. It's the perfect element of surprise.


My FAVORITE play we had was when we had 12 unit (Vickers in). I was SURE we were gonna run it. Instead we pass to Dez for a beautiful first down. You have to mix it up like that because we can be successful.

Quote:
Take today's game. Murray never touched the ball more than twice consecutively. He never got 3 or more consecutive carries. This has been the case with Garrett all year and even going back to past years. Teams know this. They study every play and every drive of every season and get to know tendencies. Garrett has a tendency to not run the football on 3 consecutive times. So after 2 runs, as a defensive coordinator, you send out your dime defense or call a blitz.


I am okay with running. But you have to be in a situation to be able to run. We were getting no production from the running game and then killing ourselves with the stupid penalties.

I want to see a 2:1 ratio of pass to run. I know that seems like a lot, but we play to our strengths. And I want to see us pound the ball heavily in the 4th.

Quote:
If you can't see why people, like myself, are calling for more balance, then you're not watching the games and why running the football is so important - it's more than just gaining yards but setting up plays later in the game and buying the QB some time in the pocket. In addition, it's about making the team less predictable. Right now, this team is way too predictable on offense, and this falls squarely on Jason Garrett's shoulders.


Okay Mr. Canada. I am watching the game. I get why people want to rush the ball more. But we are not effective doing it. Not when we have penalties and get stuffed at the line. I want us to have a successful rushing attack.

But like everyone always likes to say this is a passing league. My ideal team is what the Bucs coach is building. Ground and Pound with a few bombs sprinkled throughout. But it's not the team we have. A 1:1 ratio has proven ineffective. Our Running game can be lethal. But only when opposing defense respect our passing.

If you don't understand that I want the rushing game to be effective - and not just rush for the sake of rushing then you don't read my posts.
_________________


In Redball I Trust!
The price of progress is trusting the process.
Heart. Leadership. Passion. Will.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TheStarStillShines


Joined: 12 Oct 2004
Posts: 8812
PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 12:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

TO7, we're probably on the same page, but just coming at it from different angles. Your posts, though, read more like an apologist for JG and JJ, and I'm not the first one to mention this (i.e., you tend to defend their actions way too often). And I'm not arguing to run the ball for the sake of running it - I'm suggesting the team needs to run the ball for a lot of reasons. I've clearly outlined those reasons above.

Poor execution falls on the coaching staff especially if the same mistakes are happening game after game. And if Romo is indeed calling plays during no-huddle situations, which he is for the most part, then JG's job is to make him realize that he, too, is being too predictable. In that case, get out of the no-huddle and call the play instead.

I think where we disagree is using the pass to open the run. In the past, that made sense because the team had weapons at WR (Owens, Austin) and not a great RB (Jones). They also had an OL that could pass protect. This year's team doesn't have the same WR weapons, as Bryant still makes mistakes, Austin has turned into Mr. Glass, and Witten has turned into a poor man's version of Martellus Bennett (hard to believe). The OL, too, has shown an inability to pass protect. But this team does have a potential stud RB in Murray.

With the issues with the passing game and pass protection, it's time to change philosophy and use the run to open up the pass. The team can't thrown long because defences are keeping the safeties back knowing that the Boys will 70% to 75% of the time throw the football - i.e., they don't respect the run. They know that even if Murray has consecutive positive runs, the next play will be a pass more than 90% of the time.

I'm not calling for a 1:1 run-pass ratio; I'm calling for something around 40-60 or 45-55. If you take out the 3 kneel downs by Romo and have Romo's 9-yard run on 3rd-down as a passing play (since the play called was clearly a pass), the run-pass ratio today was 19-44. That's a 30-70 ratio.

On the Pats tonight, they were playing a better defence in Baltimore tonight, yet they still ran the football. The Pats had a 32-45 ratio tonight, which is what I would like to see regardless of the opponent. The Pats used playaction often and with success. One play that I liked was the fake toss sweep and then the quick slant to Lloyd. It was a clever little play call, where the entire middle of the field opened up for Brady to throw.

Now, I do understand penalties are an issue and putting the team in long yardage situations. In these instances, it's actually not a bad idea to run a draw play occasionally. Run it a couple of times out of the shotgun and see what it generates. Then on another similar situation, fake the hand off and there should be some space over the middle of the field. The Boys used to do this often a few years ago, when JG started out as the OC. Where has this play gone?

I would also like to see the team incorporate the stretch hand off. The OL, despite all of its struggles, is an athletic line, so get them out in space. This play also forces defences to move, and, therefore, they can be more easily moved out of position or be put into bad positions. Someone else mentioned last week the need to move the pocket around from time-to-time to buy Romo some time. I agree with this as well. These are wrinkles that should be incorporated by JG, not fake reverses on the first offensive play from scrimmage.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Texas_OutLaw7


Most Valuable Poster (6th Ballot)

FF Fanatic

Joined: 27 Mar 2005
Posts: 25129
Location: Cowboys Forum ROH Class of '12
PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 12:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

TheStarStillShines wrote:
TO7, we're probably on the same page, but just coming at it from different angles. Your posts, though, read more like an apologist for JG and JJ, and I'm not the first one to mention this (i.e., you tend to defend their actions way too often). And I'm not arguing to run the ball for the sake of running it - I'm suggesting the team needs to run the ball for a lot of reasons. I've clearly outlined those reasons above.


Laughing

Man, this forum is rich sometimes. Ignoring the fact that I haven't once brought up Jerry here - but somehow the apologist label gets thrown. If you were in the Chats, TSSS, you would see that I have consistently freaked out over how our running game is being used. I think it's stupid how we are running. And I have argued time and time again that we need to pass to run here. But if it makes you feel better throwing out red herrings then you have to do what you have to do.

Quote:
Poor execution falls on the coaching staff especially if the same mistakes are happening game after game. And if Romo is indeed calling plays during no-huddle situations, which he is for the most part, then JG's job is to make him realize that he, too, is being too predictable. In that case, get out of the no-huddle and call the play instead.


Sure. I can agree. Execution falls on the players just as it falls on the coaches. I am from the school of thought that if someone is not practicing well he doesn't play. You send a message that each and ever moment matter. It's part of the reason I loved Jimmy so much.

And I can agree with Romo's actions. Again I would add the caveat that Romo is doing what he feels is in the best interest of the team to win. And I can't fault him for that. You see his frustration more this year than any other. He is clearly focused on winning. And frustrated to high hell when we don't produce.
Quote:

I think where we disagree is using the pass to open the run. In the past, that made sense because the team had weapons at WR (Owens, Austin) and not a great RB (Jones). They also had an OL that could pass protect. This year's team doesn't have the same WR weapons, as Bryant still makes mistakes, Austin has turned into Mr. Glass, and Witten has turned into a poor man's version of Martellus Bennett (hard to believe). The OL, too, has shown an inability to pass protect. But this team does have a potential stud RB in Murray.


I love Murray. But I don't agree with your premise. I think we have a higher chance of success with Romo throwing than we do with Murray running on any given play. We see what Romo's magic can do with a non-existent line. Murray has shown flashes, but he won't be nearly as successful behind a non-existent line.

If we had the line of the 90's I would agree. But we have a much more athletic line now. And one that doesn't excel at the point of attack.

Quote:
With the issues with the passing game and pass protection, it's time to change philosophy and use the run to open up the pass. The team can't thrown long because defences are keeping the safeties back knowing that the Boys will 70% to 75% of the time throw the football - i.e., they don't respect the run. They know that even if Murray has consecutive positive runs, the next play will be a pass more than 90% of the time.


But it's not working. We tried that this game. We would run on first down and yield on average little to no success. We don't have a monster line. And when you tack on our miscues because of the oline we are put in a very predictable situation.

I think you would agree if not for so many false starts we would have run the ball more. We would have been in closer to downs. But when you get stuffed rushing on first down. And then get slammed with a false start. When its second and long your play book starts shrinking. You fix the lines mistakes and it goes a long way to assist in the plays we run.

Quote:
I'm not calling for a 1:1 run-pass ratio; I'm calling for something around 40-60 or 45-55. If you take out the 3 kneel downs by Romo and have Romo's 9-yard run on 3rd-down as a passing play (since the play called was clearly a pass), the run-pass ratio today was 19-44. That's a 30-70 ratio.


In my perfect world we go the Steelers route. Play boring as snot football. Run the ball 60% of the time and don't look back. But I realize that doesn't suit our teams strength. Which is fundamentally my argument. I want our offense to play to its strength which I firmly believe is in the passing game. I don't give a real damn about ratios - I can about net results.

Quote:
On the Pats tonight, they were playing a better defence in Baltimore tonight, yet they still ran the football. The Pats had a 32-45 ratio tonight, which is what I would like to see regardless of the opponent. The Pats used playaction often and with success. One play that I liked was the fake toss sweep and then the quick slant to Lloyd. It was a clever little play call, where the entire middle of the field opened up for Brady to throw.


I would still argue the Bucs have a better run defense. And if my contention is accepted - then does it not make sense to attack their weakness and not their strength?

Quote:
Now, I do understand penalties are an issue and putting the team in long yardage situations. In these instances, it's actually not a bad idea to run a draw play occasionally. Run it a couple of times out of the shotgun and see what it generates. Then on another similar situation, fake the hand off and there should be some space over the middle of the field. The Boys used to do this often a few years ago, when JG started out as the OC. Where has this play gone?


Now you and I are on the same page. I love the Cowboys Draw. Bring it back please.

Quote:
I would also like to see the team incorporate the stretch hand off. The OL, despite all of its struggles, is an athletic line, so get them out in space. This play also forces defences to move, and, therefore, they can be more easily moved out of position or be put into bad positions. Someone else mentioned last week the need to move the pocket around from time-to-time to buy Romo some time. I agree with this as well. These are wrinkles that should be incorporated by JG, not fake reverses on the first offensive play from scrimmage.


We agree this is an athletic line. I think stretch, screen, and draws would net a much more positive rushing production than up the gut plays.

In this way we are essentially advocating the same thing. Force the defense to move. Tire them out. With stretches - yeah and with passes. Make them run for their lives to stop a play. And when the fourth QT rolls around ride Murray like a hooker is being rode by a marine going off to war.

Here is the thing. What I want and what I think are successful are two radically different visions. Ultimately I think this team best functions when it utilizes the line we have in athletic plays (pulls, traps, stretches, tosses etc) as well as opening up running lanes (since the line needs all the help it can get) by keeping the defense honest against the pass. With the team we have I am a big believer we need to pass in order to run successfully.
_________________


In Redball I Trust!
The price of progress is trusting the process.
Heart. Leadership. Passion. Will.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
The_Slamman


Joined: 06 Feb 2005
Posts: 13736
Location: Las Vegas, NV
PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 12:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The real problem here can be summed up in one play... On third down Dallas ran max protection. They kept witten in to double team Bennett. The Bucs only rushed 3. Before Romo could even set his feet to pass, he got sandwiched for a sack by both defensive ends and lost a fumble. 6 guys to block 3 and an immediate sack. Does everybody see what I'm getting at here?

Run to set up the pass or pass to set up the run... It's all nonsense at this point. Why? Because the offense has no identity and cannot have an identity until their is sufficient protection for the team to establish one. Right now, the most reliable offense is Tony Romo making a play when the protection breaks down. That's really not an offensive philosophy. It's an offensive necessity.

As much as I REALLY want to agree with TSSS here, I can't. How can you game plan a strong running plan with an offense that's good for about 10 penalties a game and an offensive line that loses on the LOS more often than not.

At this point, if we are forced to choose between Romo making something out of nothing or Murray making something out of nothing, I'd trust Romo a lot more than Murray. I really feel that the best solution is to incorporate some WCO into the game plan and get Murray more involved in the passing game. This will get him in space and work as the running game in the first half. In the second half when the defense starts to wear down, go to a more conventional running game.
_________________
Northland wrote:
If mediocrity is your SuperBowl then Garrett is your Lombardi.


Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Texas_OutLaw7


Most Valuable Poster (6th Ballot)

FF Fanatic

Joined: 27 Mar 2005
Posts: 25129
Location: Cowboys Forum ROH Class of '12
PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 1:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The_Slamman wrote:
The real problem here can be summed up in one play... On third down Dallas ran max protection. They kept witten in to double team Bennett. The Bucs only rushed 3. Before Romo could even set his feet to pass, he got sandwiched for a sack by both defensive ends and lost a fumble. 6 guys to block 3 and an immediate sack. Does everybody see what I'm getting at here?

Run to set up the pass or pass to set up the run... It's all nonsense at this point. Why? Because the offense has no identity and cannot have an identity until their is sufficient protection for the team to establish one. Right now, the most reliable offense is Tony Romo making a play when the protection breaks down. That's really not an offensive philosophy. It's an offensive necessity.

As much as I REALLY want to agree with TSSS here, I can't. How can you game plan a strong running plan with an offense that good for about 10 penalties a game and an offensive line that loses on the LOS more often than not.

At this point, if we are forced to choose between Romo making something out of nothing or Murray making something out of nothing, I'd trust Romo a lot more than Murray. I really feel that the best solution is to incorporate some WCO into the game plan and get Murray more involved in the passing game. This will get him in space and work as the running game in the first half. In the second half when the defense starts to wear down, go to a more conventional running game.


That play was awful. Witten got abused (which fine TE vs DE doesn't work out very well for the offense often) but what hurt was Free not sliding over to double him. The frightening thing about that play - had Bennett not destroyed Romo Clay surly would have. Half a second longer and Smith was going to be pushed back into Romo. Simply awful.

As strong of a distaste as I have for the WCO - it would best reflect the personnel this team has.
_________________


In Redball I Trust!
The price of progress is trusting the process.
Heart. Leadership. Passion. Will.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TheStarStillShines


Joined: 12 Oct 2004
Posts: 8812
PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 6:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'd like to see elements of the WCO incorporated into the offence as well or at least Tom Moore's Indy offence with the stretch play, playaction pass, and plenty of crossing patterns and square ins.

I'd also like to see an adjustment made in pass protection. Instead doing the traditional retreat and create a pocket around Romo, the team should occasionally ask the OL to be the aggressors and hit the DL immediately in order to prevent them from gaining any momentum up the field. Might be worth trying considering how most of the OL struggle to move laterally.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
WareWolf94


Joined: 28 Apr 2005
Posts: 5519
PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 6:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The_Slamman wrote:
WareWolf94 wrote:
I think the problem is On the Field execution. Dropped balls, blown blocking assignments, careless turnovers.

All mental errors that are not being corrected. Of course, some of these coincide, but these are the things plaguing the offense.

Im just glad the team has a reliable defense that can plug the gap until these things are corrected. Remember, we have an OL with only 3 games played together.

I can't make excuses for Free's terrible game today however.

I believe Garrett is doing a good job, it's the players (and his) job to correct mental errors.


Yes or no... Does a team's inability to execute on the field ultimately fall on the head coach?


Are you kidding me? How many times have you heard, Players play, and Coaches Coach. Garrett shouldn't have to coach an NFL OL to not take a false start.

Either way, that would be on OL Coach/OC Bill Callahan.

I can't blame Garrett for Romo's 3 turnovers, or Witten's dropped balls, or Cook's inability to learn the cadence at a faster rate.
_________________


Thanks to SHSTE

http://www.footballsfuture.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=25584

When you're right, you're right.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Dallas Cowboys All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 13, 14, 15  Next
Page 3 of 15

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group