An Example of Garrett's Playcall

[Doomsday101]

Originally Posted by Idgit

The running game can be important. If running effectively keeps you from passing ineffectively, and if your outstanding defense keeps the other guys from passing effectively all the time, you can win a lot of games that way.

I agree. Not all teams are built the same way and you can win even if you are not a top passing team. There is more than 1 way to win in the NFL and football in general.

[Idgit]

Originally Posted by Doomsday101

I agree. Not all teams are built the same way and you can win even if you are not a top passing team. There is more than 1 way to win in the NFL and football in general.

It's one reason I'm bummed Murray's out (and Costa, fwtw). I thought he'd take a lot of pressure for passing effectively off or our passing game. We can win with this defense if we don't shoot ourselves in the foot with the turnovers and mistakes in the passing game.

[Doomsday101]

Originally Posted by Idgit

It's one reason I'm bummed Murray's out (and Costa, fwtw). I thought he'd take a lot of pressure for passing effectively off or our passing game. We can win with this defense if we don't shoot ourselves in the foot with the turnovers and mistakes in the passing game.

I agree. It hurts losing any front line player. People holler it is not an excuse that is unless it is a key player on the other team then we get threads like the one the other day about Philly winning if Vick did not go down. Fact is every team gets hurt when starters are out of the lineup, you will not be as good with the backup player than you are the starter but you still have to find a way to overcome and win games until starters come back.

Even the 90s' Cowboys record was not good when any of the triplets were out of the line up.

[junk]

Originally Posted by Bluestang

We need someone to consistently have that type of production.

Dez has been making strides, despite his assignment struggles this season. He's making slow improvements but he's not where the Cowboys thought he would be at this point in his career. He still has two more years on his rookie deal though.

Austin hamstring issues have been his problem but he hasn't missed a game this year because of them.

But Dallas has invested in those guys for that type of production. If they aren't getting it from them, it either means they are missing on their evaluations or aren't utilizing them correctly.

Of course you would.

What makes you say that? No need to pout.

The Packers have invested:

a 2nd round pick on WRs Jordy Nelson, Greg Jennings, and Randall Cobb.

The Saints invested:

a 1st round on WR Robert Meachem - who is no longer with the team

a 2nd on WR Devery Henderson and a 7th on WR Marques Colston

They aquired Lance Moore through free agency in 2005, but he didn't breakout until 2010

The Patriots invested:

traded a 4th round pick for Randy Moss - but that only lasted 3 seasons.

traded a 2nd round and 7th round pick for Wes Welker

a 2nd on TE Rob Grownkowski and a 4th on TE Aaron Hernandez


The Falcons invested:

a 1st round pick in Roddy White and then traded for Julio Jones giving up 5 total draft picks to include their 2012 1st and 4th round picks

I may have been off base in my assumption of what you were saying. I thought since you were pointing those things out orginally, you were advocating spending another high pick or large FA contract on another WR.

I'd have no issue investing heavily throughout the middle rounds on WRs like GB. The NO investment is certainly less than Dallas. Same for NE.

Atlanta is a comparable case to Dallas now. However, if the team made a move to add another WR high or spend a lot of money in FA, they'd have invested more.

You can't just continue to spend significant resources at the same position over and over again. You won't get better as a team.

Since 2009, Dallas has spent a 1st and 3rd for Roy Williams, a first for Dez and a six year, $54 million deal for Austin. That is a lot to spend (and more than the teams above) and then turn around and say the team still needs a TO/Miles in his breakout year level of production.

BTW, Miles is on pace for 76 catches/1189 yard/7 TD type of season.

[Crown Royal]

At this point it is unquestionable that Bryant is not worth what was given up for him. Maybe that will change but at this point, no.

It is unquestionable that what we gave up for Roy Williams was not worth it

Same with Joey Galloway.


On the other hand, our best wr threats from the past, oh, 10-15 years? Terry Glenn, Terrell Owens, Keyshawn Johnson, Miles Austin, Jason WITTEN. Every single one of them a great value and exceptional production for said value.

The key to me is that everyone up there Was very capable and effective outside.....


Except Jason WITTEN and to an extent Miles Austin, who is much better inside.

We need outside receivers who can work the sidelines better.

[Bluestang]

Originally Posted by junk

But Dallas has invested in those guys for that type of production. If they aren't getting it from them, it either means they are missing on their evaluations or aren't utilizing them correctly.

The Roy Williams debacle it what it is and what I said it is...a debacle. That really hurt in terms of what we got out of RW and in the draft of 2009.

That's a bad mark that falls on everyone involved with that, but recent drafts have been better.

Enough said there, let's not turn this into one those threads, OK?

What makes you say that? No need to pout.

Your right, I'm sorry about that.

I may have been off base in my assumption of what you were saying. I thought since you were pointing those things out orginally, you were advocating spending another high pick or large FA contract on another WR.

I'd have no issue investing heavily throughout the middle rounds on WRs like GB. The NO investment is certainly less than Dallas. Same for NE.

Atlanta is a comparable case to Dallas now. However, if the team made a move to add another WR high or spend a lot of money in FA, they'd have invested more.

You can't just continue to spend significant resources at the same position over and over again. You won't get better as a team.

Since 2009, Dallas has spent a 1st and 3rd for Roy Williams, a first for Dez and a six year, $54 million deal for Austin. That is a lot to spend (and more than the teams above) and then turn around and say the team still needs a TO/Miles in his breakout year level of production.

I'm not advocating anything other than Dallas needs to have a consistent guy that can produce double digit TDs that primarily plays on the outside. Whether that is Bryant or vet FA/draft pick it needs to be someone that can be depended on. As far as draft goes, BPA all the way no matter what.

Austin's biggest plays have primarily come from the slot so I wouldn't expect things to change anytime soon. Beasley is probably the only guy that can really challenge Austin for the slot role because of his prior experience doing it at SMU.

The story book is not done with Bryant although I'm disappointed with his progress so far. I'd at least expect the Cowboys to keep him around for at least another year as his contract doesn't expire until 2015.

BTW, Miles is on pace for 76 catches/1189 yard/7 TD type of season.

The 7 TDs would be disappointing IMO.

[e41dalasfan]

Originally Posted by jobberone

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.

It looked like a high percentage pass play that if executed correctly would yield a 1st down, but even if he would have caught the pass it would be hard for him to stay in bounds ...Well thought out play, but it is used at the wrong time in the game

[jobberone]

Originally Posted by e41dalasfan

It looked like a high percentage pass play that if executed correctly would yield a 1st down, but even if he would have caught the pass it would be hard for him to stay in bounds ...Well thought out play, but it is used at the wrong time in the game

You may very well be right. I've been speaking in generalities although I've seen the play a few times.

[Bluestang]

[jobberone]

Originally Posted by Bluestang

Nice find. I enjoyed that.

[Idgit]

Loved that. Especially the very end with Tony leaving the Linc.

[honyock]

That was sweet. Good find.

[Marktui]

Originally Posted by Andrei Kostitsyn

That drag was wide open. Easy money.

But Witten had the yardage needed for the first down. Plus they had that throw all day long.

[jterrell]

Originally Posted by jobberone

You can't yank guys esp if you have a much worse option if you do. If I'm Garrett then my number one concern is keeping Tony Romo in good enough shape to run my offense. Then you can prioritize your other concerns which I'd list as 2a,2b, yada. With the cap and parity you can't just cut or sit people easily esp if you have no depth. And that is on the GM much more than the HC.

The Chinese are great copiers for the most part. But there are plenty of times they make what looks like exact duplicates for a part even down to the serial number yada. But the part doesn't work. It fails every time you put it in. It's not made of the same stuff. You need to get the part from a reputable manufacturer if you want the machine to work at all and work well.

yes, you can yank guys.
it isn't that hard to do.
we have back ups for a reason.
play them and profit.

you do not need to bench guys for a half or game but a few plays to send a message.

anyone arguing more shouldn't be done is simply not paying attention.

[jterrell]

Originally Posted by Idgit

We sat Hatcher? What's that about? I hadn't noticed or heard anything on that front.

Where I credit Garrett for the quality of the roster, I imagine a process that works something like this: the coaches communicate to the scouting department what types of players they need and want for each position group, and how they expect to makeup the gameday roster. The proscouts evaluate the roster, and the roster of other teams to identify veteran options for improving position groups. The college scouts evaluate the college crop to identify opportunities that represent upgrades at various position groups. The front office takes the list and tries to bring in players that represent upgrades at a cost that works within their salary cap projections. The coaches then have to coach the talent for the scheme and turn everybody into probowlers.

[View Full Quote]If this is the loop, then building a team properly can fall down when coached don't really know what players they need. Or when they don't communicate their needs to the scouts properly. Or when scouts don't interpret that communication effectively or scout players properly. Or when the front office fails to land a targeted player at a price that works. Or when those targeted and signed players can't be coached properly once they're on the roster.

I give Garrett credit for the areas where coaching plays into that loop because I think he's shown signs of doing a good job in that regard (especially with the pro scouting acquisitions). I also think it's an area where Wade Phillips really fell down.

Yes. Hatcher was yanked after an off-sides. He played later in the game and addressed it saying it was a completely stupid penalty he wouldn't commit again.