Some X's and O's and Logic

[TwoDeep3]

Back in the day of Jimmy, it was widely known, maybe because Jimmy said it so much, that the way they fashioned winning was to pass first, get the lead, then beat them with Emmitt and the ground game.

But Emmitt was part of that passing game too.

Remember when the team would start off and run the receivers on intermediate routes and then dump the ball to Emmitt? He'd get five or six yards and they would set it up again.

I used to get frustrated with that play, but in hindsight I see the wisdom. They were running the defense off then sucking them toward the line of scrimmage with the short pass.

Later in the game Novacek, Irvin and Harper were open.

So, one would assume Garrett watched this. Norv was calling those plays, and Aikman was checking down to Emmitt.

So why does this team not do that? Murray is a slippery fella and can run off that four or five yards. And like Emmitt - maybe not to the same degree - he can make people miss.

Well, one aspect is Murray has to stay in and block for Romo.

How come Garrett doesn't recognize this play as a foundation for the passing game and protection as a problem that needs solving?

I am not sold on Garrett calling plays, but I also don't believe that is the core problem with this team. Changing Garrett fort someone else doesn't fix what's broke.

But if Princeton is so freakin smart, where are plays that take advantage, set up things for later, and a line that can offer at least enough protection to host an extra receiver in a route?

[Fansince64]

Originally Posted by TwoDeep3

Back in the day of Jimmy, it was widely known, maybe because Jimmy said it so much, that the way they fashioned winning was to pass first, get the lead, then beat them with Emmitt and the ground game.

But Emmitt was part of that passing game too.

Remember when the team would start off and run the receivers on intermediate routes and then dump the ball to Emmitt? He'd get five or six yards and they would set it up again.

I used to get frustrated with that play, but in hindsight I see the wisdom. They were running the defense off then sucking them toward the line of scrimmage with the short pass.

Later in the game Novacek, Irvin and Harper were open.

So, one would assume Garrett watched this. Norv was calling those plays, and Aikman was checking down to Emmitt.

[View Full Quote]So why does this team not do that? Murray is a slippery fella and can run off that four or five yards. And like Emmitt - maybe not to the same degree - he can make people miss.

Well, one aspect is Murray has to stay in and block for Romo.

How come Garrett doesn't recognize this play as a foundation for the passing game and protection as a problem that needs solving?

I am not sold on Garrett calling plays, but I also don't believe that is the core problem with this team. Changing Garrett fort someone else doesn't fix what's broke.

But if Princeton is so freakin smart, where are plays that take advantage, set up things for later, and a line that can offer at least enough protection to host an extra receiver in a route?

Wait a minute! You expect an OC to use one play to set up another and to also use players to their strengths while not putting them in positions where their weaknesses are exposed?

What a novel concept!!!

Unfortunately, you forget who you are asking to do this. Won't happen.


Monte

[Zordon]

TwoDeep, have patience. Not till Jason gets five pro bowlers on the oline, will you see the true genius of his offense.

[TwoDeep3]

Originally Posted by Zordon

TwoDeep, have patience. Not till Jason gets five pro bowlers on the oline, will you see the true genius of his offense.

Now Zordon, all you're doing is making them boys angry.

Can't you gloss that up a bit. Maybe say you'd like to have Redball as a brother-in-law or something?

[Clove]

Originally Posted by Zordon

TwoDeep, have patience. Not till Jason gets five pro bowlers on the oline, will you see the true genius of his offense.

Isn't this the truth. Let's see, we'll need 5 pro-bowlers on the line like you said, a star RB, the 85 bears defense, and then and only then do we have the squad to compete with the rest of the league.

[Zordon]

Originally Posted by TwoDeep3

Now Zordon, all you're doing is making them boys angry.

Can't you gloss that up a bit. Maybe say you'd like to have Redball as a brother-in-law or something?

I've always said Jason would be great working in the corporate offices at Valley Ranch. Slap a VP title on him and watch that Princeton education truly flourish.

[dreghorn2]

Risen Star, who is a fine poster, likes to point out that criticizing Garrett's play-calling is stupid and frivolous.

It's one of the few takes of his that i disagree with completely.

Yes our line was/is poor etc.. but you at least have to try. I personally would have fired Garrett the minute that final Washington game was over.

That amateurish double A gap blitz that Haslett kept calling, and our lack of reaction to it, was outright embarrassing.

Garrett simply hasn't awakened to the fact that the middle of the field is no longer a no fly zone and can be used for more than buttons to the TE.

Maybe some move the pocket, some designed rollouts, more screens, get the backs involved in the flat, whatever.. like i say we should at least try.

If only we had an athletic mobile QB who could throw well on the run. (do i need the emoticon?), then we wouldn't need to position him in the same spot, 7 steps back, waiting for deep sideline patterns to come open.

I almost fell out of my chair when he called a designed rollout inside the 5 and.. guess what, we scored.

Never saw it again.

Saving it for the playoffs.

I get extremely frustrated that our coach is so reactionary when it comes to offense, 'take what the defense gives them etc..' it's so.. womanly (no offense ladies).

Bottom line is that Garrett is simply not the imaginative offensive genius that he is advertised to be, line or no line, he has shown nothing over a long sample size of being anything more than a pedestrian OC.

It is just a shame that it is going to take a crash and burn before Dallas once again sees a top flight coach with enough authority to keep Jerry in check.

No more sycophants, head coaches with reputation and stroke.

Those that think it will never happen with Jerry might be surprised, if this team takes a header in 2013 he will probably have no choice.

[Rynie]

Originally Posted by dreghorn2

Risen Star, who is a fine poster, likes to point out that criticizing Garrett's play-calling is stupid and frivolous.

It's one of the few takes of his that i disagree with completely.

Yes our line was/is poor etc.. but you at least have to try. I personally would have fired Garrett the minute that final Washington game was over.

That amateurish double A gap blitz that Haslett kept calling, and our lack of reaction to it, was outright embarrassing.

Garrett simply hasn't awakened to the fact that the middle of the field is no longer a no fly zone and can be used for more than buttons to the TE.

Maybe some move the pocket, some designed rollouts, more screens, get the backs involved in the flat, whatever.. like i say we should at least try.

[View Full Quote]If only we had an athletic mobile QB who could throw well on the run. (do i need the emoticon?), then we wouldn't need to position him in the same spot, 7 steps back, waiting for deep sideline patterns to come open.

I almost fell out of my chair when he called a designed rollout inside the 5 and.. guess what, we scored.

Never saw it again.

Saving it for the playoffs.

I get extremely frustrated that our coach is so reactionary when it comes to offense, 'take what the defense gives them etc..' it's so.. womanly (no offense ladies).

Bottom line is that Garrett is simply not the imaginative offensive genius that he is advertised to be, line or no line, he has shown nothing over a long sample size of being anything more than a pedestrian OC.

It is just a shame that it is going to take a crash and burn before Dallas once again sees a top flight coach with enough authority to keep Jerry in check.

No more sycophants, head coaches with reputation and stroke.

Those that think it will never happen with Jerry might be surprised, if this team takes a header in 2013 he will probably have no choice.

[SWG9]

TD3, this take isn't totally fair. If you look at the stats, Murray had 35 catches in (basically) nine games. If you extrapolate that over the course of the season, he would have wound up with 60+ catches, which is definitely in line with Emmitt's best years here (his best season was 62 catches in 95).

Even 50+ catches is a fine season for a RB.

The funny thing is I actually thought we were using Murray more as a threat out of the backfield in during the first few weeks of the season. After he got injured, we never really got back to doing that.

We'll see what 2013 brings.

By the way, how can you blame Garrett for this? You know that most of those plays weren't designed checkdowns to ES, but rather Aikman having the good sense to pick up some positive yards and not force anything downfield.

[Crown Royal]

Originally Posted by dreghorn2

...
That amateurish double A gap blitz that Haslett kept calling, and our lack of reaction to it, was outright embarrassing.
...

I get extremely frustrated that our coach is so reactionary when it comes to offense....

...wat

[Wolfpack]

Originally Posted by SWG9

TD3, this take isn't totally fair. If you look at the stats, Murray had 35 catches in (basically) nine games. If you extrapolate that over the course of the season, he would have wound up with 60+ catches, which is definitely in line with Emmitt's best years here (his best season was 62 catches in 95).

Even 50+ catches is a fine season for a RB.

The funny thing is I actually thought we were using Murray more as a threat out of the backfield in during the first few weeks of the season. After he got injured, we never really got back to doing that.

We'll see what 2013 brings.

By the way, how can you blame Garrett for this? You know that most of those plays weren't designed checkdowns to ES, but rather Aikman having the good sense to pick up some positive yards and not force anything downfield.

I think the OP is trying to point out that Red isnt a patient playcaller and may be laking in terms of understanding how game flow and playcalling relate.

Red wants to out execute what he wants when he wants and isnt very flexible in terms of setting something up for later on. His plan B during a game is to let Romo loose in shotgun and roll the dice.