An Example of Garrett's Playcall

[rickjameschinaclub]

This play was an example of how player execution doomed the playcall.

And as others have said not only did Garrett give Romo deep threat options but he also had underneath options to pick up the first down.

I still fail to see your point...

1.

It was 2nd and one so to act like this somehow doomed the playcall is another example of blind Garrett homerism. Did the next play result in a first down because Garrett called a beautiful play? wait a minute... Remember, the very next play was 3rd and 1, the same amount of yardarge, where they could have easily gone run or pass as well.


2.

The defense took into account every single player on the field. It is not like the defense was actually fooled by the play-call, so to act like Garrett made some sort of brilliant playcall is just blind homerism. The Cowboys were set-up in run formation, Romo audibled at the line, the LB followed Witten out to defend him.

3.

The defense, as is evident in their formation, was primarily interested in taking away the deep ball. So in essence what you claim as a great example of playcalling is essentially what teams have been giving to the Cowboys and which ultimatel fails in not getting into the endzone. That's how teams have been defending the Cowboys all year long and since Garrett's been in charge.

They were content in putting their LB on Witten in man-to-man coverage and play it from there, knowing they were close to the first down, especially considering also the Cowboys only had a yard to go.

4.

The issue has nothing to do with deep options, the issue has to do with who is the primary target in that play. How do you know the deep play was even an option, considering the Giants were playing run, to which Romo audibled out of? Do you think they were threatened by play-action from shot-gun when Romo obviously audibled out of what would have been a DRAW, considering the formation. So essentially the defense knew pass from the very beginning... So kindly explain to me how that formation created a threat of a run, where the defense was fooled?


5.

Of course Garrett has some calls that employ underneath routes, and nobody questions this point. I can just as well find countless plays where Garrett runs his men out on deep patterns, only to have defenses blitz and have Romo get killed because he's waiting for these long-developing pass plays to actually come to fruition. He doesn't attack the seams of the defense either, especially on his first or second reads.

6.

I could have told you from the very beginning Romo placed the ball a little too far. Do you really think that this 'analysis' somehow means Garrett knows what he is doing.. Let us assume that was the greatest call to ever be made in a football game that Romo just blew for the sake of argument, how does that absolve Garrett for all his crappy play calling?

[brooksey1]

Originally Posted by e41dalasfan

If it 2nd and 1 why not just run the ball?

This is the proof of the bad play calling. It is 2nd and 1 at the 19 yd line with 1:40 on the clock and we check out of the run and go to a sideline pass to pick up the first and do what? Stop the clock? It makes no sense to send in a play with a kill the run /pass option. THIS IS THE PROBLEM! This is situation football, send the run only in and play the 32 dive to run the clock down under 1 minute.

JG has to stop trying to run only against pass defenses and pass only against the run defense. He is letting the opposing defenses dictate the play calling.

[Idgit]

Originally Posted by visionary

good thread Bluestang

It's a really good thread.

Originally Posted by rickjameschinaclub

I still fail to see your point...

1.

It was 2nd and one so to act like this somehow doomed the playcall is another example of blind Garrett homerism. Did the next play result in a first down because Garrett called a beautiful play? wait a minute... Remember, the very next play was 3rd and 1, the same amount of yardarge, where they could have easily gone run or pass as well.


2.

The defense took into account every single player on the field. It is not like the defense was actually fooled by the play-call, so to act like Garrett made some sort of brilliant playcall is just blind homerism. The Cowboys were set-up in run formation, Romo audibled at the line, the LB followed Witten out to defend him.

3.

[View Full Quote]The defense, as is evident in their formation, was primarily interested in taking away the deep ball. So in essence what you claim as a great example of playcalling is essentially what teams have been giving to the Cowboys and which ultimatel fails in not getting into the endzone. That's how teams have been defending the Cowboys all year long and since Garrett's been in charge.

They were content in putting their LB on Witten in man-to-man coverage and play it from there, knowing they were close to the first down, especially considering also the Cowboys only had a yard to go.

4.

The issue has nothing to do with deep options, the issue has to do with who is the primary target in that play. How do you know the deep play was even an option, considering the Giants were playing run, to which Romo audibled out of? Do you think they were threatened by play-action from shot-gun when Romo obviously audibled out of what would have been a DRAW, considering the formation. So essentially the defense knew pass from the very beginning... So kindly explain to me how that formation created a threat of a run, where the defense was fooled?


5.

Of course Garrett has some calls that employ underneath routes, and nobody questions this point. I can just as well find countless plays where Garrett runs his men out on deep patterns, only to have defenses blitz and have Romo get killed because he's waiting for these long-developing pass plays to actually come to fruition. He doesn't attack the seams of the defense either, especially on his first or second reads.

6.

I could have told you from the very beginning Romo placed the ball a little too far. Do you really think that this 'analysis' somehow means Garrett knows what he is doing.. Let us assume that was the greatest call to ever be made in a football game that Romo just blew for the sake of argument, how does that absolve Garrett for all his crappy play calling?

I can't speak for Bluestang, but I don't know that I'd even reply to this, since you're missing the point of the thread badly by trying to pretend it has anything to do with vindicating anyone.

It's just a nice, singular, example of what our coach tried to do in a single play call, when you hear the call in advance and have the luxury of seeing the routes develop. It's an informative post, about x's and o's and not a means of pushing any agendas.

The play wasn't even successful. And, no, that's not a hidden jab at Tony Romo.

[Bluestang]

Originally Posted by rickjameschinaclub

I still fail to see your point...

1.

It was 2nd and one so to act like this somehow doomed the playcall is another example of blind Garrett homerism. Did the next play result in a first down because Garrett called a beautiful play? wait a minute... Remember, the very next play was 3rd and 1, the same amount of yardarge, where they could have easily gone run or pass as well.

3rd and 1 was an incomplete pass to KO, who had the pass hit him in the hands BTW and would have been a TD.

2.

The defense took into account every single player on the field. It is not like the defense was actually fooled by the play-call, so to act like Garrett made some sort of brilliant playcall is just blind homerism. The Cowboys were set-up in run formation, Romo audibled at the line, the LB followed Witten out to defend him.

Can you show me an example of a defense not accounting for every player on the field?

Garrett made a standard call for what the Giants generally play on defense - cover 2.

3.

The defense, as is evident in their formation, was primarily interested in taking away the deep ball. So in essence what you claim as a great example of playcalling is essentially what teams have been giving to the Cowboys and which ultimatel fails in not getting into the endzone. That's how teams have been defending the Cowboys all year long and since Garrett's been in charge.

They were content in putting their LB on Witten in man-to-man coverage and play it from there, knowing they were close to the first down, especially considering also the Cowboys only had a yard to go.

If you haven't noticed all NFL defenses are geared towards to taking the deep ball away first and foremost.

Why on earth would you want to let an offense take a deep ball shot on you?

The LB that covered Witten couldn't defend him 1v1 all day - as evidenced by his stats.

4.

The issue has nothing to do with deep options, the issue has to do with who is the primary target in that play. How do you know the deep play was even an option, considering the Giants were playing run, to which Romo audibled out of? Do you think they were threatened by play-action from shot-gun when Romo obviously audibled out of what would have been a DRAW, considering the formation. So essentially the defense knew pass from the very beginning... So kindly explain to me how that formation created a threat of a run, where the defense was fooled?

And even though the defense knew the pass was coming after the audible, the LB still couldn't cover Witten 1v1.

Just like we scored 24 points on them after going no huddle and passing the ball on them.

5.

Of course Garrett has some calls that employ underneath routes, and nobody questions this point. I can just as well find countless plays where Garrett runs his men out on deep patterns, only to have defenses blitz and have Romo get killed because he's waiting for these long-developing pass plays to actually come to fruition. He doesn't attack the seams of the defense either, especially on his first or second reads.

Please provide proof on this.

6.

I could have told you from the very beginning Romo placed the ball a little too far. Do you really think that this 'analysis' somehow means Garrett knows what he is doing.. Let us assume that was the greatest call to ever be made in a football game that Romo just blew for the sake of argument, how does that absolve Garrett for all his crappy play calling?

Peyton Manning ran about a handful of plays his entire time with the Colts. That team was the book on how to execute every play down after down.

Take the time and read this:

http://smartfootball.com/offense/pey...-colts-offense

[rickjameschinaclub]

3rd and 1 was an incomplete pass to KO, who had the pass hit him in the hands BTW and would have been a TD.

Hit him in the hand, with the defender having good position. So essentially the pass option for Romo on the first read was to take a shot at the end-zone, right? So explain to me why the first read on the pass option was Kevin Ogletree on a deep pass play, a guy Ogletree couldn't beat a single man coverage and is plain sucking up the joint?

Can you show me an example of a defense not accounting for every player on the field?

Garrett made a standard call for what the Giants generally play on defense - cover 2.

So what's your point than if it was a standard call?

If you haven't noticed all NFL defenses are geared towards to taking the deep ball away first and foremost.

Why on earth would you want to let an offense take a deep ball shot on you?

The LB that covered Witten couldn't defend him 1v1 all day - as evidenced by his stats.

First of all, DCs normally state the objective is to take away the threat of the run, because if the threat of the run is no longer there, than it opens up the passing game. Those safeties in two-deep will be forced to cheat up, if the offense keeps moving the ball. Secondly, what part of teams normally defending the Cowboys with two-deep safeties do you not understand? The Cowboys aren;t scoring and their red-zone production keeps declining.

And even though the defense knew the pass was coming after the audible, the LB still couldn't cover Witten 1v1.

Just like we scored 24 points on them after going no huddle and passing the ball on them.

Notice the key-words NO-HUDDLE, aka Romo calling the shots, not Jason Garrett. So what was Witten doing before they went no-huddle?

Please provide proof on this.

please provide proof of long-developing pass plays with the Cowboys, that cause Romo to be sacked? What, you want me to pay for the All-22 to re-run tape for you to see what is obvious? you think I'm getting paid for this. How about you go back to the thread against the Eagles and see where I pointed it out and then you can determine it from the tape, which play I'm exactly talking about as proof that this happens...

Peyton Manning ran about a handful of plays his entire time with the Colts. That team was the book on how to execute every play down after down.

Take the time and read this:

And the bread and butter of Peyton Manning's offense is play-action football, unlike Garrett's and further, getting the ball out quickly. So even if they run a 'handful' of plays, their handful of plays are based upon keeping the defense off guard. We run play-action honestly, probably twice a game. And Peyton Mannings offenses, if you pay attention, target the seams a hell of a lot during the game, which Garrett's offense doesn't in any way whatsoever.

But that has nothing to do with the point, which is, even if we assume this was the greatest call in the history of the league, how does it absolve Garrett from his atrocious play-calling, as is evidence by the fact the red-zone production is getting worse and worse and we can't put the ball in the end-zone. I guess Romo just keeps over-throwing everybody right?

So congratulations for providing an example where Romo overthrew Witten on one-play, as somehow demonstrating Garrett is a 'great coach'...

[Nexx]

Originally Posted by Doomsday101

I actually like throwing the ball deep on 2nd and 1 it is like taking a free shot knowing you have a manageable 3rd down should you not connect on the deep ball.

i agree but on this particular play they are in the red zone. getting the first is imperative imho. another instance where simplifying the offense in this area of the field might have been better. just call a run, get the first down then you can tinker on first down.

[Bluestang]

Originally Posted by rickjameschinaclub

Hit him in the hand, with the defender having good position. So essentially the pass option for Romo on the first read was to take a shot at the end-zone, right? So explain to me why the first read on the pass option was Kevin Ogletree on a deep pass play, a guy Ogletree couldn't beat a single man coverage and is plain sucking up the joint?

KO had every opportunity to make the play. Let's also not forget that the flag was thrown by the sideline judge and then mysteriously picked up without any explanation.

Witten was doubled by the S and LB, and in that same initial 2 deep look that the Giants were in once the S rotated inside to help bracket Witten, KO had the 1v1 matchup.

As far KO being targeted, well you'd have to ask Romo why he decided to go that way.

So what's your point than if it was a standard call?

See post 45.

I never claimed that this was the greatest of all plays, you just inserted those words into my mouth on your own.

First of all, DCs normally state the objective is to take away the threat of the run, because if the threat of the run is no longer there, than it opens up the passing game. Those safeties in two-deep will be forced to cheat up, if the offense keeps moving the ball. Secondly, what part of teams normally defending the Cowboys with two-deep safeties do you not understand? The Cowboys aren;t scoring and their red-zone production keeps declining.

Running the ball has had it's issues, but as AdamJT13 will say it certainly does not correlate to winning.

Yes teams are playing cover 2 looks to avoid giving the offense the big play over the top. The underneath stuff is open and they are allowing us to dink and dunk our way up the field and relying on the offense to make a mistake.

Turnovers have been the biggest problem, followed by wrong routes, poor routes, and talent at the wide reciever position.

Notice the key-words NO-HUDDLE, aka Romo calling the shots, not Jason Garrett. So what was Witten doing before they went no-huddle?

You do realize that these situations are practiced during the week right, just like they were practiced in training camp?

They are plays selected when the coaches put together the gameplans.

please provide proof of long-developing pass plays with the Cowboys, that cause Romo to be sacked? What, you want me to pay for the All-22 to re-run tape for you to see what is obvious? you think I'm getting paid for this. How about you go back to the thread against the Eagles and see where I pointed it out and then you can determine it from the tape, which play I'm exactly talking about as proof that this happens...

So just to be clear you don't want to provide a single shred of evidence of your argument because your not getting paid?

And the bread and butter of Peyton Manning's offense is play-action football, unlike Garrett's and further, getting the ball out quickly. So even if they run a 'handful' of plays, their handful of plays are based upon keeping the defense off guard. We run play-action honestly, probably twice a game. And Peyton Mannings offenses, if you pay attention, target the seams a hell of a lot during the game, which Garrett's offense doesn't in any way whatsoever.

But that has nothing to do with the point, which is, even if we assume this was the greatest call in the history of the league, how does it absolve Garrett from his atrocious play-calling, as is evidence by the fact the red-zone production is getting worse and worse and we can't put the ball in the end-zone. I guess Romo just keeps over-throwing everybody right?

So congratulations for providing an example where Romo overthrew Witten on one-play, as somehow demonstrating Garrett is a 'great coach'...

6 PA passes vs NYG, 3 in the 1st qtr, 3 in the 3rd qtr. Game plan was scrapped after all the TOs in the 1st, once we got the lead back in the 3rd they went back into the game plan until the Jones fumble required us to score a TD to win the game. After all that we lost by a few fingers out of bounds on a hail mary catch.

2 PA passes vs ATL, early in the game. Played behind a lead for most of the game.

4 PA passes VS PHI, all through out the game.

I could break it down for you further but you wouldn't get the point because your mind it already set to believe that Garrett is the problem.

There's my evidence free of charge.

[Crown Royal]

I would like to know how option routes work in this offense.

[Bluestang]

Originally Posted by Crown Royal

I would like to know how option routes work in this offense.

The route runner with the option is going to read the leverage the defender is going to play and then basically counter it with the appropriate route.

Witten is mainly that guy, just because he's the most trust worthy guy that the QB can rely on.

[e41dalasfan]

Originally Posted by Risen Star

Well, I don't know. If we burn them on a long pass play in that situation because the QB read the defense correctly, would you be asking why we didn't just run the ball on 2nd and 1?

Depends , if we score to quickly has our defense rested enough? did we leave enough time on the clock for the other team to score? How many times has this happened this year? With all the penalties and turnovers we have a running play is a safe bet ...Also we let the defense dictate what we do too much...Like someone else said9 out of10 times all a defense has to do is line in a formation that will make us change play because they know that we will ...If garrett is such a gunius why can't he draw up a running play to get a single yard??

[e41dalasfan]

Originally Posted by Gaede

I like it too. It's a great idea to take a shot when you've only a little to go on 3rd. This team can pick up short yardage 3rd downs pretty well--between Witten and Austin.

We can also have an incomplete pass and drop ...Or an incomplete pass and an interception...true story

[Gameover]

Typical inaccurate throw from Romo.I'm sure his pass would've been on target with a better offensive line!

Does anybody have video of Romo's overthrown pass to Hanna?

Worst thrown ball I've seen in my life.

How about the overthrow to Dez from the Eagles game?

[e41dalasfan]

Originally Posted by brooksey1

This is the proof of the bad play calling. It is 2nd and 1 at the 19 yd line with 1:40 on the clock and we check out of the run and go to a sideline pass to pick up the first and do what? Stop the clock? It makes no sense to send in a play with a kill the run /pass option. THIS IS THE PROBLEM! This is situation football, send the run only in and play the 32 dive to run the clock down under 1 minute.

JG has to stop trying to run only against pass defenses and pass only against the run defense. He is letting the opposing defenses dictate the play calling.

Exactly...how many times do we leave too much time on the clock, and lose because the other team drives down the field and scores...And your probably right ...Coach probably says line up so they pass the ball that way if they do score we will have enough time to score also

[jobberone]

I have started an article about the vertical offense but I'm rather busy lately so its coming together slowly. Hopefully I can write it well enough for some to understand the concepts. I'm not going to get into it here and steal my own thunder but here are some basic tenants.

First the offense is designed to make the defense cover the entire field. It is timing meaning the WR needs to be where he's supposed to be and on time. Third is the routes are meant to not play into what the defense wants but to take advantage of how the defense plays. So each route has a tree. Some vertical offenses are extremely intricate and require a huge playbook, a very cerebral QB and WRs who are on the same page and also pretty damn smart. An example is Martz's offense. Some have less tree options and reads and the playbook is smaller. An example is Turner's offense. Another tenant of the vertical offense is to take advantage of your players abilities and don't ask them to do things they aren't the best at. You can't ask Witten to play the same game Winslow did. There's a lot more but again it can wait a week or three.

If you can't understand what Bluestang is saying then I encourage you to read about the vertical offense. It won't make you an OC but at least you will have a very basic understanding of what the offense is doing and give you the understanding that its not designed for any particular receiver to run one specific route. You don't just say you go long Dez and you get open Witten.

[e41dalasfan]

Originally Posted by jobberone

I have started an article about the vertical offense but I'm rather busy lately so its coming together slowly. Hopefully I can write it well enough for some to understand the concepts. I'm not going to get into it here and steal my own thunder but here are some basic tenants.

[View Full Quote]First the offense is designed to make the defense cover the entire field. It is timing meaning the WR needs to be where he's supposed to be and on time. Third is the routes are meant to not play into what the defense wants but to take advantage of how the defense plays. So each route has a tree. Some vertical offenses are extremely intricate and require a huge playbook, a very cerebral QB and WRs who are on the same page and also pretty damn smart. An example is Martz's offense. Some have less tree options and reads and the playbook is smaller. An example is Turner's offense. Another tenant of the vertical offense is to take advantage of your players abilities and don't ask them to do things they aren't the best at. You can't ask Witten to play the same game Winslow did. There's a lot more but again it can wait a week or three.

If you can't understand what Bluestang is saying then I encourage you to read about the vertical offense. It won't make you an OC but at least you will have a very basic understanding of what the offense is doing and give you the understanding that its not designed for any particular receiver to run one specific route. You don't just say you go long Dez and you get open Witten.

So running would've benn a mistake??