An Example of Garrett's Playcall

[jobberone]

Originally Posted by junk

What "ingredients" do you feel are missing?

There seems to be a perception around here that Garrett has a superior scheme, but the players just aren't executing it.

Well, if that is the case, it ceases to be a superior scheme. A good coach should be able to adapt what he wants to do to the strengths and weaknesses of his team. That is one thing that separates average coaches from great ones.

Garrett is going to have a learning curve as a head coach. He hasn't had the seasoning he needed before getting the head job. And, the performance on the field has reflected that. I think one of the things he'll need to learn is that he can't be so inflexible.....he'll need to adapt from series to series, quarter to quarter, game to game and season to season. He needs to adapt to the strengths and abilities of the personnel that he has. I'm not sure he is great at that yet.

If you've talked with others who feel his scheme is superior then ok but I haven't ever said that. I agree you should in a general way maximize your assets and minimize your weaknesses. I have no idea if Garrett does that but I would give him the benefit of the doubt seeing as he has the confidence of some pretty good players past and present as well as other coaches around the league. To me that means a lot more since I have no inside information and neither does 99.9% of the members of this site.

I will tell you unless you execute this kind of offense then you will spit and sputter and see exactly what we've see so far this year.

What ingredients does he need? I suspect he wants to run a traditional Coryell/Zampese/Turner/Garrett offense with the following modifications:

1. He doesn't have a Kellen Winslow. Yes, Witten is superb in this offense but he is not a WR in a TEs body. He can't stretch the field in general. So no it is not a Coryell offense per se. I think he has modified his offense well to fit his TE.

2. He doesn't have Joiner or Jefferson. We have an oft injured Austin Miles who is not bad but he doesn't have big time speed just pretty good speed. Dez is an off/on switch who creates enough problems for there to be concern. We don't have anyone after that to speak of. So he has to modify the offense to fit these guys except Dez doesn't fit right now because he can't run enough routes properly to be that dependable. I do understand Romo thinks he's getting better. So you can't run timing routes with him dependably so how's he going to modify that to fit a timing offense. The answer is he really can't. Romo just has to be good enough to see him when he does things correctly. Miles can run some horizontal routes like the WCO but there's a big problem.

3. You have to have an OL that can give you enough time for deep routes to develop. Also, you have to have time for crossing routes as well. So Romo and Garrett are under duress trying to run an offense without the tools to run it.

4. And finally you have to be able to run the ball. Coryell, Zampese, and Turner used players like Muncie (Gillman used Lincoln), Smith, and Turner. You have to be able to run effectively esp inside to run that offense at optimum. Today you need to be able to run the ball effectively. You have to get the D to play the run some so you can pass and vice versa. If they know you can't run well enough then they'll load up for the pass and if you can't throw certain routes then your hands are tied. You become even more predictable than the offense already is being a timing offense.

If you're Martz and the greatest show on earth and you don't have a big back and you would just as soon throw the ball anyway then you have a Faulk that can run outside and catch the ball like you can run at least outside. Or you're a Walsh and you don't have a lot to begin with but you have a cerebral QB so you maximize your assets by going more horizontal and run the ball with swing passes and outlet passes.

I think most here would realize that Garrett can't do a lot with the OL although he seems to be getting a fair amt out of not much IMO. I do think he could use the RBs more like Walsh or Martz but they need to stay healthy and I don't think he's given up on trying to run the ball inside. Teams are loading up on the outlet and swing/sprint passes pretty well.

Ok, so you say change the offense. And I say to what? What other offense is there and does Garrett have any experience running a different type of offense.

I'll give you the dead ball penalties to a point. I'll give you some of the execution because parts of that are on the coaches. I'll give you the sideline miscues. I don't know what else to say.

But I agree at some point you have to think about going in a different direction or double down and give the guy a long term contract thinking he'll get the tools and eventually win a trophy.

[jobberone]

Originally Posted by e41dalasfan

Just seemed like we are wasting a whole lot of time disecting a pass play that should have been a run play to begin with...In my opinion

Well, you could be right although I would give Romo the benefit of the doubt. The real problem is not making the play work. Why? Lack of execution which is the Achilles heel of any timing offense. If you want the player and the ball to meet at a particular spot at the same time then things gotta go right.

[junk]

Originally Posted by jobberone

Ok, so you say change the offense. And I say to what? What other offense is there and does Garrett have any experience running a different type of offense.

Believe it or not, there are many offenses in the NFL besides the Coryell offense.

And there are others that Garrett has played in as well, so I don't really buy that he has no experience with other offensive schemes. Does he have experience coordinating others? Not really, but that is the biggest issue with Garrett period. However, I'm not convinced what they ran in 2007 with Sparano was pure Coryell by any stretch.

Offensive schemes change all the time. Teams will readily admit they steal from each other all the time and are constantly trying to find new offensive wrinkles, not to mention the weekly adaptations for injuries, opponents, etc.

I'll give you the dead ball penalties to a point. I'll give you some of the execution because parts of that are on the coaches. I'll give you the sideline miscues. I don't know what else to say.

But I agree at some point you have to think about going in a different direction or double down and give the guy a long term contract thinking he'll get the tools and eventually win a trophy.

Sure, those are your options. I'm OK going with a young guy if he shows growth and improvement. However, I'm not convinced the offense hasn't taken a step back from last year.

Compare him with a guy like Harbaugh and the results are night and day different. Both took over teams viewed as talented but underachieving. Harbaugh took his team to the NFC championship game with much less at the QB position......but he has a lot more experience than Garrett.

Garrett could very well become a great head coach, but I think he would have better off with another 5-6 years of seasoning under an experienced head coach. His shot may have come too early. We'll see.

The good thing is that this schedule is very, very favorable down the stretch especially if Roethisberger is out when they play Pittsburgh. If he can avoid the typical December woes and get the offense on track, they have a decent shot at winning the NFC East.

[Bluestang]

Originally Posted by junk

However, I'm not convinced what they ran in 2007 with Sparano was pure Coryell by any stretch.

Terrell Owens - 81 receptions, 1355 yds, 15 TDs

The only time they had another WR that even came close to that production was in 2009.

Miles Austin - 81 receptions, 1320 yds, 11 TDs

Does anyone not remember when we put in a 3rd round supplemental claim for Josh Gordon?

This team is looking at WR help, I wouldn't be surprised if they draft one early or go veteran FA.

[jobberone]

Originally Posted by junk

Believe it or not, there are many offenses in the NFL besides the Coryell offense.

And there are others that Garrett has played in as well, so I don't really buy that he has no experience with other offensive schemes. Does he have experience coordinating others? Not really, but that is the biggest issue with Garrett period. However, I'm not convinced what they ran in 2007 with Sparano was pure Coryell by any stretch.

Offensive schemes change all the time. Teams will readily admit they steal from each other all the time and are constantly trying to find new offensive wrinkles, not to mention the weekly adaptations for injuries, opponents, etc.



Sure, those are your options. I'm OK going with a young guy if he shows growth and improvement. However, I'm not convinced the offense hasn't taken a step back from last year.

[View Full Quote]Compare him with a guy like Harbaugh and the results are night and day different. Both took over teams viewed as talented but underachieving. Harbaugh took his team to the NFC championship game with much less at the QB position......but he has a lot more experience than Garrett.

Garrett could very well become a great head coach, but I think he would have better off with another 5-6 years of seasoning under an experienced head coach. His shot may have come too early. We'll see.

The good thing is that this schedule is very, very favorable down the stretch especially if Roethisberger is out when they play Pittsburgh. If he can avoid the typical December woes and get the offense on track, they have a decent shot at winning the NFC East.

We don't run a Coryell offense. I made that clear we have modified it as does most other offenses in the NFL.

What numerous other offenses, who runs them and what are they? We modify our offense weekly we just have been backed into a corner with our options with this personnel. I will say one thing, which I don't quite understand well, is we seem to be a different team with a different tempo including the no huddle. So there is one thing to look at.

Comparing him with Harbaugh is apples and oranges. The differences in personnel are pretty great although we do have some advantages. It isn't along the OL, wasn't at ILB, and maybe some other positions. Garrett had to rebuild the OL, retool at ILB, and DB to be short.

I'm not a Garrett apologist. I'm just calling it like it is. I don't have an agenda re: Garrett. I don't want to change coaches though and I do feel he'll be a very good coach in the near future.

I have no idea how this team will do down the stretch. I think we will struggle in almost every game we play esp if we don't get turnovers and/or score more.

[junk]

Originally Posted by Bluestang

Terrell Owens - 81 receptions, 1355 yds, 15 TDs

The only time they had another WR that even came close to that production was in 2009.

Miles Austin - 81 receptions, 1320 yds, 11 TDs

Does anyone not remember when we put in a 3rd round supplemental claim for Josh Gordon?

This team is looking at WR help, I wouldn't be surprised if they draft one early or go veteran FA.

So are you saying the team needs a #1 receiver option?

I have some concerns about your comment.

Dallas has invested heavily in their receivers. A first round pick and a guy who signed a pretty major FA deal. If they need to go the well again for yet another option, that would lead one to believe that either those guys aren't really what they are cracked up to be (which points to an issue with talent evaluation) or that Garrett needs (or thinks he needs) overwhelming resources to execute his scheme.

A quick scan of the top offenses (specifically passing) show quite a few teams that don't have the options in the passing game that Dallas does and are making it work

[junk]

Originally Posted by jobberone

We don't run a Coryell offense. I made that clear we have modified it as does most other offenses in the NFL.

What numerous other offenses, who runs them and what are they?

Numerous other offenses that Garrett has experience with or that exist period? I hope the question is the former.

He played under Payton in NY who runs a hybrid WCO/Coryell. He played briefly for Gruden who was also mainly a WCO. Sparano, who has run a variety of offenses in his career including a spread offense in college. Linehan, whose system seems to be a melting pot of WC, Coryell and spread.

Like I said, there are tons of different offensive schemes and they change all the time as teams tweak and game plan to try to gain an advantage.

That's a complaint I have about Garrett. If your scheme isn't working because it doesn't fit the players you have, adapt your scheme.

We modify our offense weekly we just have been backed into a corner with our options with this personnel. I will say one thing, which I don't quite understand well, is we seem to be a different team with a different tempo including the no huddle. So there is one thing to look at.

What specifically?

Comparing him with Harbaugh is apples and oranges. The differences in personnel are pretty great although we do have some advantages. It isn't along the OL, wasn't at ILB, and maybe some other positions. Garrett had to rebuild the OL, retool at ILB, and DB to be short.

I'm not a Garrett apologist. I'm just calling it like it is. I don't have an agenda re: Garrett. I don't want to change coaches though and I do feel he'll be a very good coach in the near future.

I have no idea how this team will do down the stretch. I think we will struggle in almost every game we play esp if we don't get turnovers and/or score more.

I don't think the Harbaugh comparison is off base at all. Sure, they were stronger in some areas, but Dallas was stronger in others (WR, QB, TE in particular)

[jobberone]

Originally Posted by junk

Numerous other offenses that Garrett has experience with or that exist period? I hope the question is the former.

He played under Payton in NY who runs a hybrid WCO/Coryell. He played briefly for Gruden who was also mainly a WCO. Sparano, who has run a variety of offenses in his career including a spread offense in college. Linehan, whose system seems to be a melting pot of WC, Coryell and spread.

Like I said, there are tons of different offensive schemes and they change all the time as teams tweak and game plan to try to gain an advantage.

That's a complaint I have about Garrett. If your scheme isn't working because it doesn't fit the players you have, adapt your scheme.

[View Full Quote]All vertical offenses are an evolution as well as adaptation to personnel from Brown to Gillman to Coryell to whatever tree you pick. I don't know all the offenses in the NFL but I'd be surprised if there's anything out there that isn't. I suppose the wildcat isn't. The gun and shoot but does anyone run that. Name me an OC who doesn't run their variation of the vertical offense.


What specifically?

I specifically mentioned he changes his game plan from week to week and intragame. All vertical offenses are based off the premise of reacting to the defense. What they try to take away you go in the other direction. From the overall scheme down to down (which changes nearly every down) to the individual routes/tree a WR runs and the QB must recognize instantly. Plays change at the LOS and during the play. How much more change do you think you can have?

As far as being cornered, defenses are taking away plays that have worked for us and pushed us into plays that don't as often and are forcing us away from Austin and Witten as much as they can. Take the inside slant which worked so well at NY (and beat them with this play actually). Teams are denying that. If you're well balanced and have all the weapons/tools then you just do something else. They can't double everyone. If they take away the inside slant you run it outside. Yada. Except they not only take away the inside they then wait on the out/drag/whatever and try to jump the route or just get in the pocket of the receiver and minimize the gain or break it up or require ever tightening windows. So you go deep, posts, skinnies but the OL doesn't let you have the time for longer developing routes. That's the rub. So they load up on the pass therefore you run the ball. But they are loading up for the pass and still stopping the run. This all spells trouble for an offense with a Capital T. You must be balanced enough to parry the D. We don't have the execution/personnel to do this therefore we are very limited in what works. Voila! = 18 per.

There are valid reasons things are going the way they are and contrary to popular belief it isn't because everyone else is stupid. If there were easy answers then Garrett et al would have found it. Not saying he's perfect. Nope. He's stubborn at times but you have to realize he has to keep trying some to make things work. He has to give his players the opportunities to prove they can do he job asked of them. Like running in short yardage. You have to balance that with well we need the first down. I can run and give them the opportunity to succeed and grow or I can admit the short comings and throw for the first down even though the defense is really looking for most of the plays that can do that.



I don't think the Harbaugh comparison is off base at all. Sure, they were stronger in some areas, but Dallas was stronger in others (WR, QB, TE in particular)

It's not way off base but the situations are just not that equivalent. He didn't have to rebuild his OL. He hasn't had to work with these WRs ie Austin staying dinged up and Dez not having the ability to run routes properly. These are major problems for the team and Garrett

[Idgit]

Originally Posted by junk

..I don't think the Harbaugh comparison is off base at all. Sure, they were stronger in some areas, but Dallas was stronger in others (WR, QB, TE in particular)

I think the Harbaugh comparison is completely fair. He's done a great job with SF, and he's a great coach. They've definitely outperformed Garrett and the Cowboys so far.

[jterrell]

Originally Posted by jobberone

We don't run a Coryell offense. I made that clear we have modified it as does most other offenses in the NFL.

What numerous other offenses, who runs them and what are they? We modify our offense weekly we just have been backed into a corner with our options with this personnel. I will say one thing, which I don't quite understand well, is we seem to be a different team with a different tempo including the no huddle. So there is one thing to look at.

Comparing him with Harbaugh is apples and oranges. The differences in personnel are pretty great although we do have some advantages. It isn't along the OL, wasn't at ILB, and maybe some other positions. Garrett had to rebuild the OL, retool at ILB, and DB to be short.

I'm not a Garrett apologist. I'm just calling it like it is. I don't have an agenda re: Garrett. I don't want to change coaches though and I do feel he'll be a very good coach in the near future.

[View Full Quote]I have no idea how this team will do down the stretch. I think we will struggle in almost every game we play esp if we don't get turnovers and/or score more.

Garrett's issue isn't scheme, it is execution of said scheme as well as handling play-calling, time mgmt and disciplinary actions all at once.

I am not sure very many are successful as what Garrett is trying to do and those that are probably have a ton more experience.

I am not sure a coaching change makes us drastically better. You'd have to give me a lot more data. And I am not sure Garrett won't eventually be a great head coach. I tend to believe he will. But Coaching is a profession where there is absolutely no substitute for hard work and experience.

On the job training for the Dallas Cowboys really doesn't work.

Garrett has to be able to yank guys after penalties even if that guy is Jason Witten. He can't be too busy calling the next play. He has to handle clock mgmt much better. Those are not debatable takes imho.

This team moves the ball well enough and plays solid defense. But it commits too many penalties by far and too many turnovers by far. That is a simply lack of attention to detail. We could blame a bit of that on bad luck but after 30+ games Garrett hasn't reduced those issues at all.

The good news is we play weaker teams this 2nd half of the season. Weaker teams means we can get away with more mental and execution mistakes.

[jobberone]

Originally Posted by rickjameschinaclub

You don't have a way, but it's not because of your limitations? ..Maybe you also learned under the Garrett system of 'doesn't make sense'.

But don't worry, I wasn't really expecting a response on these points. There is no disputing the fact that Garrett's experience and his overall body of work is quite "limited"...

PM sent.

[superpunk]

Originally Posted by jobberone

Third is the routes are meant to not play into what the defense wants but to take advantage of how the defense plays.

As opposed to routes that are meant to play into what the defense wants and not take advantage of how the defense plays. Garrett is truly a man ahead of his time.

[Idgit]

Originally Posted by jterrell

Garrett has to be able to yank guys after penalties even if that guy is Jason Witten. He can't be too busy calling the next play. He has to handle clock mgmt much better. Those are not debatable takes imho.

This team moves the ball well enough and plays solid defense. But it commits too many penalties by far and too many turnovers by far.

I've said the same, with all of this. We have gotten a handle on turnovers the last two weeks. We'll see if that continues.

Garrett's strengths as a coach right now really show up during the week and during the offseason more than on game day. He's a better play caller than he gets credit for around here (so is every head coach in the history of sports message boards, everywhere). But he's got limitations with both clock management and red zone efficiency/play calling that have hurt him.

He's building better depth across the roster, though, which hasn't been easy to do given the state of the roster he came in with (easier to build a plane from scratch than it is to repair the wings mid-flight and all that). And he's definitely got the team believing in the process. We're efficient in terms of yardage offensively and defensively across the board. STs have been good, especially in terms of kicking game and punt coverage, and now our punt return game is showing signs of life.

We're missing the ability to keep drives going long enough to turn them into points. In part because our anemic rushing game and in part because we've made some mistakes in the passing game that have kept us from extending drives. But you get the sense that, with Beasley and Harris playing more and Murray coming back, we're going to start doing better in that regard as the schedule loosens up a bit. If we do, and if the team can start playing with a lead a bit, we're going to see some defensive swagger finally. It's a spiral that needs to get started. If it does, we'll make a good run at the preseason and possibly get in as one of the hot underdog teams nobody wants to play. If it does not, well, it's going to be a long offseason full of second guessing.

[jobberone]

Originally Posted by superpunk

As opposed to routes that are meant to play into what the defense wants and not take advantage of how the defense plays. Garrett is truly a man ahead of his time.

Now that makes absolutely no sense unless you're just trying to be antagonistic. Do you honestly think in general Garrett calls and Romo runs plays that are deliberately designed to have a higher risk of not working. The whole concept of the offense (any offense) is to go where they ain't.

Every OC and DC calls plays that they'd like to have back. You blitz and the OC has the perfect play for it and they bust a big play. Nobody calls the perfect play all the time and sure there are times you wonder what the heck was everyone thinking. It happens.

The only thing I see wrong beside occasional questionable call and the time management issues is the offense is working fairly well (right now) when they go hurry up and no huddle. Now that may be because the other team hasn't adequately prepped for it. So there is no guarantee that will continue to work but for the nonce I think they should incorporate it into the offense a little. But there may be good reasons to use it sparingly. Don't know.

[jterrell]

Originally Posted by Idgit

I've said the same, with all of this. We have gotten a handle on turnovers the last two weeks. We'll see if that continues.

Garrett's strengths as a coach right now really show up during the week and during the offseason more than on game day. He's a better play caller than he gets credit for around here (so is every head coach in the history of sports message boards, everywhere). But he's got limitations with both clock management and red zone efficiency/play calling that have hurt him.

[View Full Quote]He's building better depth across the roster, though, which hasn't been easy to do given the state of the roster he came in with (easier to build a plane from scratch than it is to repair the wings mid-flight and all that). And he's definitely got the team believing in the process. We're efficient in terms of yardage offensively and defensively across the board. STs have been good, especially in terms of kicking game and punt coverage, and now our punt return game is showing signs of life.

We're missing the ability to keep drives going long enough to turn them into points. In part because our anemic rushing game and in part because we've made some mistakes in the passing game that have kept us from extending drives. But you get the sense that, with Beasley and Harris playing more and Murray coming back, we're going to start doing better in that regard as the schedule loosens up a bit. If we do, and if the team can start playing with a lead a bit, we're going to see some defensive swagger finally. It's a spiral that needs to get started. If it does, we'll make a good run at the preseason and possibly get in as one of the hot underdog teams nobody wants to play. If it does not, well, it's going to be a long offseason full of second guessing.

Garrett can make his own life as a play-caller much easier by cleaning up the attention to detail stuff. His play-calling certainly faces more scrutiny because of penalties and turnovers.

He speaks often of the process but right now there needs to be a process put in place on penalties/turnovers. Start benching guys as we saw a bit last week with Hatcher. We need to see that on offense as well. If Romo throws 3 or more picks play Orton. We pay the guy for cripes sake.

Process-oriented mgmt only works if you have the right processes and actually use them. Far too often it is just lip service. Garrett has to make sure that doesn't happen on his watch. He needs a review of his processes to understand what's working well and what is failing.

As to the roster stuff Garrett isn't a lone guy there. We have a full personnel dept doing a good job. Guys we have brought in off the streets mostly have been able to play and help us. That is pro scouting. So I can't give him any special credit in this area. He isn't BP. He didn't build any of that personnel staff.