An Example of Garrett's Playcall

[honyock]

Thanks Bluestang, nice thread, nice to see an illustration and explanation of the anatomy of a playcall, from the design of the play to how it fits in the game situation to what went wrong in this case.

It's funny, these threads end up being a rorschach test for what a fan sees as going wrong with the team. I didn't see the OP as being pro-Garrett or anti-Garrett, just an idea of the thinking that goes into a play design and then what goes right or wrong with the execution. More please!

[DALLASCOWBOYS2080]

is this the play?....


"It's gun double right, 32 post, kill scat right, 949 F-drag triple"..."


is my wording of that correct?

[DALLASCOWBOYS2080]

by the way. i would like to add to the previous declarations of how great this thread is. thank you OP. i have appreciated the dialogue.

[Bluestang]

Originally Posted by DALLASCOWBOYS2080

is this the play?....


"It's gun double right, 32 post, kill scat right, 949 F-drag triple"..."


is my wording of that correct?

the last word is "trickle" - a call for the RB to leak out of pass protection if a LB doesn't blitz.

[DALLASCOWBOYS2080]

Originally Posted by Bluestang

the last word is "trickle" - a call for the RB to leak out of pass protection if a LB doesn't blitz.

oh okay thnx! is the syntax correct?

[Bluestang]

Originally Posted by DALLASCOWBOYS2080

oh okay thnx! is the syntax correct?

yes it is.

[jobberone]

Originally Posted by e41dalasfan

So running would've benn a mistake??

How in the heck can you take a post I made talking about some basic generalities of a vertical offense (and not even one in particular) and come up with that?

[jobberone]

Originally Posted by DALLASCOWBOYS2080

is this the play?....


"It's gun double right, 32 post, kill scat right, 949 F-drag triple"..."


is my wording of that correct?

I didn't read his lips for one specific play but your posting of pass routes (even if basically correct for that play) don't take into account the receiver reacting to what the defense is denying and adjusting his route accordingly. A play may call for an in slant but that is denied by the defense. So the receiver reads the defense and then adjusts his route accordingly. And the receiver must read the entire defense not just his immediate defender on many plays.

[Airbag]

Great thread. Thanks Bluestang. Threads like these are the reason I joined this forum. Good stuff.

[jterrell]

Originally Posted by Gaede

I love seeing stuff like this. Much needed perspective for my daily Garrett-hating.

Real info.

I'd love to see what this offense would be capable of with Austin, and two other WR who know what they're doing. Why'd we get rid of Crayton? Robinson? Two WR who were productive here because they were smart. Bryant and Ogletree must severely handicap what we want to do. Romo missing easy passes doesn't help either. His accuracy has been pretty spotty this year.

Wonder if Garrett's offense would be better w/ a more accurate passer and at least one more capable receiver?

sigh....

lots of legit complaints about the cowboys to rely upon so no need to say things that make no sense or an untrue.

dallas didn't get rid of laurent robinson. he was severely overpaid. so severely in fact he has next to no chance to remain on that contract beyond one year. dallas really wanted laurent back. and look for him to return this off-season.

pat crayton was an underneath crossing route guy when he ran this pattern mix here. he didnt have the speed to run anyone off. dez, jogging while whistling dixie is faster, more physical and more dangerous than pat crayton.

also crayton was in the mutiny against garrett. perhaps he had valid points but whatever the case he lost that power struggle and now sits at home watching.

last 2 years crayton had 51 catches and 2 TDs. he wouldn't help us.

we definitely need a legit 3rd wr option. i expect that becomes laurent robinson after the season.

[rickjameschinaclub]

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.

KO has had several oppurtunities the whole season to make plays, and guess what? He isn't getting open and is getting worse and worse as the season progresses. The reality is, he wasn't open so now, we got another person to blame, which is the refs. The CB had perfect coverage on him andKO couldn't beat his man, like he hasn't beaten him all year long except for one anomaly. So essentially, the pass option that Romo checked into went to a bum on a crucial 3rd and 1 on a deep throw and that too after unsuccessfully attempting pass 2 other times when they only needed one yard.

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.

I'm not arguing about the play-design, which I actually stated in a previous thread I didn't mind. What I'm crapping about is why was KO the first option on the play-design. Garrett sucks as a situational play-caller and he sucks at using his personnel properly.

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

Because he was the first read, meaning the PASS OPTION Romo was given was precisely to take a shot in the end-zone. It's clear that Romo looked to the middle to draw the safety into the middle to take the inside WR and he got the coverage he wanted. They lined up both Miles and Dez on the left and Romo didn't even look that way, which clearly indicates they were trying to 'deceive' the defense. So essentially on such a crucial play, Dallas play that Garrett called demanded KO to beat man coverage on a TD, which BTW, didn't have any play-action to fool the CB defending KO... So not only does Garrett not good at calling plays, he's absolutely horrible at using his personnel..

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.

But your using it as some sort of justification that Garrett is absolved of blame. Of course you can find tape of Romo over-throwing receivers and the like, but geuss what... One play doesn't absolve Garrett of his flat-out atrocious play-calling. Based upon Dallas track-record, what makes you think they would have scored on that drive anyways, even if Witten got the first? What makes you think, based upon their continuously declining red-zone production makes you think they would have scored a TD, especially considering they had another oppurtunity to get the 1st down on the very next play?

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

Running the ball a certain amount of times does not correlate to winning, but running the ball certainly can correlate to winning. Passing also includes PLAY-ACTION which is predicated on an effective running game and by effective, one does not necessarily mean quantity.

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.

Or it could just be, when the field shortens, they don't have to worry about the underneath anymore, because the DBs no longer are following the WRs 100 yards down the field. So when Witten gets the unerneath route, he's essentially tackled right where he touches the ball.

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

That's been the excuse every year for Garrett... Doesn't cut it anymore...

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.

And your point is? So it's the coaches fault...

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

No, I don't want to analyze game tape and look up video in a game when I'm not getting paid, especially when it's common sense to anybody that wtaches football that there are plenty of situations where Garrett calls long developing pass routes that get Romo killed on 3rd downs.

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.

So TOs have nothing to do with the defense? They have nothing to do with CBs being able to read what the offense is supposedly doing? Again, your simply avoiding the point.. Dallas wen no-huddle, took Garrett out of the equation and Romo moved the ball down the field and scored. 'Dramatically' the TOs stopped.

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.

So why did they get behind and how did they come back? Your 'evidence' doesn't support you... it supports the exact opposite point..

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.

You haven't proven a single thing and your set on proving Garrett isn't the problem, when it's becoming absundantly clear he is. It's precisely why the Garrett homers are now blaming Jerry Jones for this mess. When it was Camp Cupcake, it was all about how Garrett would have effective practices and it was demonstrated by things like dress code and the 'running game' Garrett could now emphasize with Wade gone. Other excuses were cancers like TO and Patrick Crayton. Now suddenly, Laurent Robinson is the alleged savior, when guess what... Laurent Robinson did not make us some powerhouse on offense in red-zone scoring, i.e. it's been getting worse and worse every year even with Robinson. It's just that KO sucks even more than Robinson. Now the Garrett homers are telling us, he shouldn't be an OC and Head Coach at the same time...

it's just comical how many excuses are made for this ineptness....

[Idgit]

Originally Posted by rickjameschinaclub

KO has had several oppurtunities the whole season to make plays, and guess what? He isn't getting open and is getting worse and worse as the season progresses. The reality is, he wasn't open so now, we got another person to blame, which is the refs. The CB had perfect coverage on him andKO couldn't beat his man, like he hasn't beaten him all year long except for one anomaly. So essentially, the pass option that Romo checked into went to a bum on a crucial 3rd and 1 on a deep throw and that too after unsuccessfully attempting pass 2 other times when they only needed one yard.

I'm not arguing about the play-design, which I actually stated in a previous thread I didn't mind. What I'm crapping about is why was KO the first option on the play-design. Garrett sucks as a situational play-caller and he sucks at using his personnel properly.

[View Full Quote]Because he was the first read, meaning the PASS OPTION Romo was given was precisely to take a shot in the end-zone. It's clear that Romo looked to the middle to draw the safety into the middle to take the inside WR and he got the coverage he wanted. They lined up both Miles and Dez on the left and Romo didn't even look that way, which clearly indicates they were trying to 'deceive' the defense. So essentially on such a crucial play, Dallas play that Garrett called demanded KO to beat man coverage on a TD, which BTW, didn't have any play-action to fool the CB defending KO... So not only does Garrett not good at calling plays, he's absolutely horrible at using his personnel..

But your using it as some sort of justification that Garrett is absolved of blame. Of course you can find tape of Romo over-throwing receivers and the like, but geuss what... One play doesn't absolve Garrett of his flat-out atrocious play-calling. Based upon Dallas track-record, what makes you think they would have scored on that drive anyways, even if Witten got the first? What makes you think, based upon their continuously declining red-zone production makes you think they would have scored a TD, especially considering they had another oppurtunity to get the 1st down on the very next play?

Running the ball a certain amount of times does not correlate to winning, but running the ball certainly can correlate to winning. Passing also includes PLAY-ACTION which is predicated on an effective running game and by effective, one does not necessarily mean quantity.

Or it could just be, when the field shortens, they don't have to worry about the underneath anymore, because the DBs no longer are following the WRs 100 yards down the field. So when Witten gets the unerneath route, he's essentially tackled right where he touches the ball.

That's been the excuse every year for Garrett... Doesn't cut it anymore...

And your point is? So it's the coaches fault...




No, I don't want to analyze game tape and look up video in a game when I'm not getting paid, especially when it's common sense to anybody that wtaches football that there are plenty of situations where Garrett calls long developing pass routes that get Romo killed on 3rd downs.



So TOs have nothing to do with the defense? They have nothing to do with CBs being able to read what the offense is supposedly doing? Again, your simply avoiding the point.. Dallas wen no-huddle, took Garrett out of the equation and Romo moved the ball down the field and scored. 'Dramatically' the TOs stopped.




So why did they get behind and how did they come back? Your 'evidence' doesn't support you... it supports the exact opposite point..



You haven't proven a single thing and your set on proving Garrett isn't the problem, when it's becoming absundantly clear he is. It's precisely why the Garrett homers are now blaming Jerry Jones for this mess. When it was Camp Cupcake, it was all about how Garrett would have effective practices and it was demonstrated by things like dress code and the 'running game' Garrett could now emphasize with Wade gone. Other excuses were cancers like TO and Patrick Crayton. Now suddenly, Laurent Robinson is the alleged savior, when guess what... Laurent Robinson did not make us some powerhouse on offense in red-zone scoring, i.e. it's been getting worse and worse every year even with Robinson. It's just that KO sucks even more than Robinson. Now the Garrett homers are telling us, he shouldn't be an OC and Head Coach at the same time...

it's just comical how many excuses are made for this ineptness....

This was a ton of work, but you're still missing the point of the thread. You can't use a single play call to defend how a game was called. But you can use it to illustrate what we're trying to do offensively when you have the call and can then see what transpired frame-by-frame.

And I think you're fundamentally misunderstanding how the defensive set impacts our offense, btw.

[jobberone]

Originally Posted by rickjameschinaclub

KO has had several oppurtunities the whole season to make plays, and guess what? He isn't getting open and is getting worse and worse as the season progresses. The reality is, he wasn't open so now, we got another person to blame, which is the refs. The CB had perfect coverage on him andKO couldn't beat his man, like he hasn't beaten him all year long except for one anomaly. So essentially, the pass option that Romo checked into went to a bum on a crucial 3rd and 1 on a deep throw and that too after unsuccessfully attempting pass 2 other times when they only needed one yard.



I'm not arguing about the play-design, which I actually stated in a previous thread I didn't mind. What I'm crapping about is why was KO the first option on the play-design. Garrett sucks as a situational play-caller and he sucks at using his personnel properly.



[View Full Quote]Because he was the first read, meaning the PASS OPTION Romo was given was precisely to take a shot in the end-zone. It's clear that Romo looked to the middle to draw the safety into the middle to take the inside WR and he got the coverage he wanted. They lined up both Miles and Dez on the left and Romo didn't even look that way, which clearly indicates they were trying to 'deceive' the defense. So essentially on such a crucial play, Dallas play that Garrett called demanded KO to beat man coverage on a TD, which BTW, didn't have any play-action to fool the CB defending KO... So not only does Garrett not good at calling plays, he's absolutely horrible at using his personnel..





But your using it as some sort of justification that Garrett is absolved of blame. Of course you can find tape of Romo over-throwing receivers and the like, but geuss what... One play doesn't absolve Garrett of his flat-out atrocious play-calling. Based upon Dallas track-record, what makes you think they would have scored on that drive anyways, even if Witten got the first? What makes you think, based upon their continuously declining red-zone production makes you think they would have scored a TD, especially considering they had another oppurtunity to get the 1st down on the very next play?




Running the ball a certain amount of times does not correlate to winning, but running the ball certainly can correlate to winning. Passing also includes PLAY-ACTION which is predicated on an effective running game and by effective, one does not necessarily mean quantity.



Or it could just be, when the field shortens, they don't have to worry about the underneath anymore, because the DBs no longer are following the WRs 100 yards down the field. So when Witten gets the unerneath route, he's essentially tackled right where he touches the ball.



That's been the excuse every year for Garrett... Doesn't cut it anymore...



And your point is? So it's the coaches fault...




No, I don't want to analyze game tape and look up video in a game when I'm not getting paid, especially when it's common sense to anybody that wtaches football that there are plenty of situations where Garrett calls long developing pass routes that get Romo killed on 3rd downs.



So TOs have nothing to do with the defense? They have nothing to do with CBs being able to read what the offense is supposedly doing? Again, your simply avoiding the point.. Dallas wen no-huddle, took Garrett out of the equation and Romo moved the ball down the field and scored. 'Dramatically' the TOs stopped.




So why did they get behind and how did they come back? Your 'evidence' doesn't support you... it supports the exact opposite point..



You haven't proven a single thing and your set on proving Garrett isn't the problem, when it's becoming absundantly clear he is. It's precisely why the Garrett homers are now blaming Jerry Jones for this mess. When it was Camp Cupcake, it was all about how Garrett would have effective practices and it was demonstrated by things like dress code and the 'running game' Garrett could now emphasize with Wade gone. Other excuses were cancers like TO and Patrick Crayton. Now suddenly, Laurent Robinson is the alleged savior, when guess what... Laurent Robinson did not make us some powerhouse on offense in red-zone scoring, i.e. it's been getting worse and worse every year even with Robinson. It's just that KO sucks even more than Robinson. Now the Garrett homers are telling us, he shouldn't be an OC and Head Coach at the same time...

it's just comical how many excuses are made for this ineptness....

Much of what you are typing demonstrates how little you know the modern pro game and Garrett's offense. You don't have a clue. Go study about the offense and then we can have a meaningful conversation. I'm not being cruel or dismissive either.

You do have a point about the offense. Sooner or later the blame has to lie with the head of the department. However, until you have all the ingredients to bake a cake no matter how hard the cook tries, how loud the cries of the fans and owner are, you aren't getting a cake.

It would be reasonable to lament why our offense is not working to snuff rather than to point fingers without knowing what the problems are. This is where you are going wrong.

I'm going to put up a thread about the offense and I'll do it in installments so I can get part of it up and running today.

[rickjameschinaclub]

Originally Posted by Idgit

This was a ton of work, but you're still missing the point of the thread. You can't use a single play call to defend how a game was called. But you can use it to illustrate what we're trying to do offensively when you have the call and can then see what transpired frame-by-frame.

And I think you're fundamentally misunderstanding how the defensive set impacts our offense, btw.

No, I get the point of the thread. Tony Romo simply overthrew a tight-end on one play, yet we are here trying to argue some point that Garrett is absolved of blame for his coaching based upon one play.

To re-quote:

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.

So why don't you tell me how, even if we assume the playcall in the subject of this thread was the greatest offensive call ever in the history of the NFL, how that absolves Garrett of all his horrendous play-calling? How it absolves him of the fact that red-zone production keeps deterioriating, the offense ever since Garrett has been in charge is operating under third and long, i.e. the offense keeps getting progressively worse?

TO and Roy Williams couldn't run routes, now it's De and KO's not being able to run routes. Let us assume that is correct, then what does it say for Garrett's ability to judge talent as it relates to offense and his 'complex' football system homers speak so highly of. If he's such a cerebral coach, why is he putting idiots on the field? Back then, the Ol was too old, now we got new lineman and now these lineman supposedly suck. Now, Jason has Callahan as his offensive line coach to teach these lineman 'zone-blocking', as if this was Garrett's thing. Yet, Hudson Houck was brought in by Jerry and Jason to coach this OL. This guy is all over the place. Last year, it was Costa that was supposedly the weak link of this OL, Costa became the savior. When that didn't help, Murray is out. But when we actually look at the tape, Murray was getting destroyed in the back-field as well and the offense was stalling.

Now you Garret-homers want us to believe it's because Romo is sucking up the joint and not Garrett, based upon one 'bad' throw, which BTW, he made up for on the very next play when the bum KO couldn't get open in single coverage and Garrett's playcall had KO be the primary target on such a crucial route. It was inevitable...

I get it alright... it's all about excusing this ninkempoop as our head coach...

[rickjameschinaclub]

Originally Posted by jobberone

Much of what you are typing demonstrates how little you know the modern pro game and Garrett's offense. You don't have a clue. Go study about the offense and then we can have a meaningful conversation. I'm not being cruel or dismissive either.

Please don't equate the modern pro game with Garrett's offense... The guy shouldn't even be coaching a pee-wee league. I'd bet he'd expect his WRs that are 7 years old to run 60 yard outs...

The guys claim to fame was one Thanksgiving game passing over 300 yards where he just kept chucking up balls to the WRs that made plays. Arena QB, who had to follow his father to Columbia to that impressive 0-10 season under his father. The same guy who followed his father to Dallas as a 3rd stringer QB, after a career in the Arena league. It's calle nepotism and connections plain and simple.

How impressive Harrington was as a QB in Miani with Jason as his coach....