The Problem on Offense is our Playcalling and Predictability

[juck]

how about some screens and some quick passes like GB started doing last night? move the chains

[TwoDeep3]

Originally Posted by juck

how about some screens and some quick passes like GB started doing last night? move the chains

I'm with you on the screens.

But it seems we ran one and it failed because of a smart defender.

The others are these naked screens Jason likes to run that have produced little in five years.

Blocking for the ball carrier seems to be a concept that is foreign to the Dallas coaching staff.

[jimnabby]

Originally Posted by ConstantReboot

The problem with our offense is playcalling.

After rewatching the game a few times I noticed that when we had big plays, Garrett calls for run plays up the middle which would end up as a small gain or a lost. We kept doing this even in the 2nd half.

Going through the play-by-play, this is clearly not the case. Not sure how you're defining "big play", but we had somewhere between 9 and 11 plays that might qualify (double-digit yardage gains that got first downs). We passed after 5 of those and ran after 6. A couple of those runs were to the outside. We followed the biggest play (the 49-yarder to Austin) with another pass.

Originally Posted by ConstantReboot

We ran the ball more than 90% up the middle on 1st down - which mostly gained negative or 1 yard gains in the 1st half.

Well, sure, your argument is irrefutable as long as you just make stuff up. Not counting the last drive of the half (where there was less than a minute left), we ran on 7 of 10 first downs. For the game, we ran on 13 of 24 first downs.

Why do I have a feeling that if we passed more, you'd complain that Garrett was abandoning the run?

[ConstantReboot]

Originally Posted by utrunner07

I don't know how many times this has been brought up here before, but predictability is not the problem. Everyone in the early 90s knew exactly what this team was going to do but just could not stop them. The major problem here is an offensive line that is worse than some college offensive lines.

Umm the team of the 90s had probowlers and hall of famers on several positions, especially on the line. You don't take the playcalling of the 90s, and place into this years team. It doesn't work that way.

If you think our line is worst just look at Green Bay, they gave up 8 sacks during one half. However, they adjusted in the 2nd half and was able to move the ball and make a game of it. If we become less predictable, we eventually put less stress on our oline and neutralize an aggressive passrush just like what the Packers did last night.

[NickZepp]

Originally Posted by juck

how about some screens and some quick passes like GB started doing last night? move the chains

GB still got Rogers sacked a ton and only scored 12 points last night. GB probably has worse offensive issues than we have. At least we have a solid running back.

In our game against Seattle I think we forgot we had DeMarco and went away from the run too early and we got a couple 3 and outs in the 3rd quarter and never really got back in the game.

[Zordon]

Originally Posted by NickZepp

GB still got Rogers sacked a ton and only scored 12 points last night. GB probably has worse offensive issues than we have. At least we have a solid running back.

In our game against Seattle I think we forgot we had DeMarco and went away from the run too early and we got a couple 3 and outs in the 3rd quarter and never really got back in the game.

yet they've scored more points than us.

[Crown Royal]

Originally Posted by jimnabby

Going through the play-by-play, this is clearly not the case. Not sure how you're defining "big play", but we had somewhere between 9 and 11 plays that might qualify (double-digit yardage gains that got first downs). We passed after 5 of those and ran after 6. A couple of those runs were to the outside. We followed the biggest play (the 49-yarder to Austin) with another pass.

Well, sure, your argument is irrefutable as long as you just make stuff up. Not counting the last drive of the half (where there was less than a minute left), we ran on 7 of 10 first downs. For the game, we ran on 13 of 24 first downs.

Why do I have a feeling that if we passed more, you'd complain that Garrett was abandoning the run?

I'm with this guy. My biggest problem is that we try to run and when that doesn't work, we immediately go into shotgun and obviously throw a pass. This tells teams "just stop a couple of runs and then either blitz or play coverage."

[CowboyRoy]

Originally Posted by Gaede

I wouldn't say play-calling is the biggest problem, that's too subjective.

But I will say that the offense does suck. And Garrett being the offensive coordinator is responsible. Predictability, play-calling are only symptoms of the real problem--Garrett.

The #1 problem with this offense is the line. If the Cowboys had even a solid to good Oline, Romo and the talent of the skill players could overcome Garretts pass happy, predicable play calling. (not in the playoffs when coaching counts more)

But who is ultimately responsible for the debacle that is this Oline? Its Jerry and Garrett. They have wiffed, analyzed poorly on current personel, the draft, and FA Olineman for the last two years together. For Jerry, its been alot longer than that.

And then who is responsible for the undisciplined play of the Oline? That would also be on Garrett. But its alot more than that. The great lines typically have good centers. The center in the minds of Jerry and Garrett is an afterthought. "Costa is the future"? Wow!!!

[CowboyRoy]

Originally Posted by ConstantReboot

Umm the team of the 90s had probowlers and hall of famers on several positions, especially on the line. You don't take the playcalling of the 90s, and place into this years team. It doesn't work that way.

If you think our line is worst just look at Green Bay, they gave up 8 sacks during one half. However, they adjusted in the 2nd half and was able to move the ball and make a game of it. If we become less predictable, we eventually put less stress on our oline and neutralize an aggressive passrush just like what the Packers did last night.

Agreed, but that Oline also paved hte way for the running game in the 2nd half. Alot of those sacks were also coverage sacks.

[T-RO]

Give Red and Romo a good offensive line and they'd lead the league in offense. Funny how good blocking turns OCs into geniuses...and bad blocking makes them idiots. The same thing is happening in Green Bay this season. Everyone there was so dazzling, bright and creative...then their line play fell off.

So many fans just don't know what they are watching.

I'll add these assorted thoughts:
-Witten has been a liability so far this year. So far.
-Dez is having difficulty getting separation.

[Gaede]

If a good offensive line inevitably makes an offensive coordinator a genius, then why won't our genius offensive coordinator ever improve the offensive line?

The unit has been the weak link in Jason Garrett's offense for 5 years. If it's so important--and the fundamental reason that his offense continually looks like crap--why doesn't he fix it? Doesn't his refusal to address such a sore spot on the team ALSO reflect poorly on him?

[ConstantReboot]

Originally Posted by jimnabby

Going through the play-by-play, this is clearly not the case. Not sure how you're defining "big play", but we had somewhere between 9 and 11 plays that might qualify (double-digit yardage gains that got first downs). We passed after 5 of those and ran after 6. A couple of those runs were to the outside. We followed the biggest play (the 49-yarder to Austin) with another pass.

Well, sure, your argument is irrefutable as long as you just make stuff up. Not counting the last drive of the half (where there was less than a minute left), we ran on 7 of 10 first downs. For the game, we ran on 13 of 24 first downs.

Why do I have a feeling that if we passed more, you'd complain that Garrett was abandoning the run?

13 of 24 on first downs? Where did you get that stat from?

We'll the stats I see here is that we only got 14 first downs. Thus we ran 13 out of 14 first downs which is an extremely high number and a high level of predictability running on first down.

Last week Giants torched Tampa for over 500 yards passing. There was no reason to keep trying to establish the run well into the 3rd period when your down less than a TD. I'm not saying that we should be passing all the time. I'm saying we should mix it up more rather than being so predictable all the time as what we were in the Tampa game. The less predictable we are, the less chances the defense gets to load up on Romo.

There is so much complaining on this board that its the oline fault and we can't win with this oline. Sure, lets just lie down every game cause we have the worst oline. But last night showed that you don't need a superior oline to win games. Sure it helps. But with proper adjustment, playcalling and a strategy to neutralize the passrush it can be done. Just that our coaches need to do it.

[KJJ]

Originally Posted by ConstantReboot

I agree with most of what you said but I still think that coaching is really what separates this team apart more than anything else.

Take a look at the Green Bay offense. We are just as talented as they are. They went 15-1 last year. Well we went 13-3 just a few years back. We have Romo and they have Rogers. They also have a set of explosive receivers and so do we. But the difference is the coaching.

As you saw in the 1st half Rogers was getting killed. Their oline was giving up more sacks then we did vs. the Hawks.

However, the Packers adjusted during halftime. Went with a short game and started to run the ball. The also went with slants, play action, roll outs, etc. Basically, they did everything they could to protect Rogers and it worked.

[View Full Quote]What we did against the Seahawks was basically what we did in the first half. Even though we were trailing, we stuck with the same gameplan from the 1st half. We didn't adjust to take try to neutralize the passrush of the Seahawks and we looked flat.

Sure we have our Oline problems. But so did Green Bay and possibly worst. What they did is adjust to the defensive pressure by using slants, roll outs and play action. They also mixed their plays to make their attack less predictable. Remember, the announcers said "the thought of running the ball on 1st down is neutralizing the passrush." I couldn't agree more.

Thus my point is that yes we do have an oline issue. But so does many other teams like Green Bay and the Giants. Yet they don't make it an excuse for NOT putting up points and NOT winning.

Can't say the Cowboys offense is as talented as Green Bays. Rodgers is the best QB in football and their receivers as a group may be the best in the NFL. They went 15-1 last season due to Rodgers golden arm and his receivers. Their defense ranked dead last and their running game ranked 27th. The Cowboys are 5 years removed from going 13-3. They've only won 14 games the last 2 seasons and the up and down start to this season shows they don't have the team they had 5 years ago.

We both agree the Cowboys have coaching issues. The Packers were able to hang in against Seattle and compete with them through all the adversity they faced in the first half because they're better coached and have a much better team than the Cowboys. That's the bottom line.

[jday]

My list of problems with Jason Garrett's play calling get's longer by the game, but most of them, admittedly, are subjective and there really is no way I can prove I'm right.

But I think one issue in the Cowboys play calling that everyone should see as a problem is the type of running plays he calls over and over. Those running plays require players that can actually overpower the guy on the other side of the line and create a push. This OL has shown quite the opposite, often meeting Murray with their backs about two yards behind the scrimmage. That is my primary issue with Jason Garretts play calling. He's not adjusting his philosophy to fit the type of players he has.

Execution issues are one thing. But if you are asking a player to do something he physically cannot do, then you are at fault, not the player. This is his final 53 and his playbook should be designed to promote what his players can do. In this offense, the only reason you run an undisguised run between the Tackle and Center is to set up the Play Action and the Counter. We saw the Counter Weakside Cutback once in preseason, and since then it has been on the shelf. We should see that play at least once a game, probably more. But we don't. And that is why Demarco Murray get's met by his own blockers 2 yards behind the line of scrimmage.

[jday]

Originally Posted by maxdallasfan

How many snaps has Beasley or Harris had on Offense? Or Holmes?

It's always the same 3 out there.

And this is another problem I have with Jason's play calling. He should be rotating everyone in for touches to keep players fresh, give the younger players in-game experience, and to give defensive coordinators throughout the year something different to look at.