Romo, OLine or Play Calling

[BlindFaith]

Interesting stat I've been looking for and found, PFF for what its worth. The actual stat I was looking for was QB throwaways, so if any of you have the premium PFF stats and care to share that would be great as I couldn't find it in the free stats.

But this article shows the average time it takes for a QB to throw the ball and also how much time he has until he is sacked.

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blo...time-to-throw/

Romo is 12th highest in terms of time to throw - 2.76
Romo is 18th highest in terms of time to sack - 3.11

It’s also worth pointing out that pass protection is an easier job when your quarterback is spending a higher percentage of his dropbacks getting rid of the ball within 2.5 seconds of the ball being snapped.

[Wolfpack]

Gotta be calling routes that will develop in 2.5 seconds as well.

[DatWin]

Originally Posted by Wolfpack

Gotta be calling routes that will develop in 2.5 seconds as well.

I swear we're like the only team who doesn't run slant patterns or 5 yard outs.

[CATCH17]

Originally Posted by Wolfpack

Gotta be calling routes that will develop in 2.5 seconds as well.

Exactly.

The design of this offense puts a lot of stress on the Oline. When the Oline isn't good and the design of the scheme doesn't help them then it's just asking for failure.

Dallas was a completely different team when they played with tempo and urgency.

[Galian Beast]

Does this take into account Romo adding more time after the pocket breaks down?

I would say this shows in inverse relation, but I think it's too difficult to look at correlation and causation here.

[da_whiz_kid]

Originally Posted by BlindFaith

Interesting stat I've been looking for and found, PFF for what its worth. The actual stat I was looking for was QB throwaways, so if any of you have the premium PFF stats and care to share that would be great as I couldn't find it in the free stats.

But this article shows the average time it takes for a QB to throw the ball and also how much time he has until he is sacked.

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blo...time-to-throw/

Romo is 12th highest in terms of time to throw - 2.76
Romo is 18th highest in terms of time to sack - 3.11

It’s also worth pointing out that pass protection is an easier job when your quarterback is spending a higher percentage of his dropbacks getting rid of the ball within 2.5 seconds of the ball being snapped.

Also, do they factor in any rollouts and avoidance of sacks? Because this happens quite often.

[kristie]

Originally Posted by Galian Beast

Does this take into account Romo adding more time after the pocket breaks down?

it's possible.

[fortdick]

Originally Posted by Galian Beast

Does this take into account Romo adding more time after the pocket breaks down?

I am sure it doesn't, because that would surely indicate he didn't suck, and that is what this is all about.

[Galian Beast]

I mean you can look at the fact that mobile quarterbacks are the highest on the list, and that is because they extend the length of plays, but it doesn't necessary determine the quality of an offensive line.

[HoustonFrog]

Originally Posted by Wolfpack

Gotta be calling routes that will develop in 2.5 seconds as well.

If you read my long post on Romo in the Delhomme thread....

http://cowboyszone.com/forums/showpo...&postcount=134

....That was pretty much my point at the end. They get in trouble, fall behind and force Romo into throwing 40-50 times again because they don't call plays and game plan around their talent. On the winning streak before the last 2 games one o the things I started to notice was we were getting the ball to D. Harris and Austin on quick hitters and letting them run. A) It works as a conservative throw that is almost like a run and B) Its gets the ball out of Romo's hands and lets guys work in space. When we were starting games slow we were less aggressive with this type of playcalling.

[ABQCOWBOY]

I think what you take out of this is that we need to design an offense that will allow us to play within our means. While it's true, IMO, that Romo extends a lot of plays and it's also true that his mobility is a big part of the reason we win games, I also believe that it's true that we hamstring ourselves because we rely on this way too often. I believe that this is a major cause of why and how we create negative plays for ourselves so often.

I have always believed that the best Romo has played is when he played for Parcells. Parcells structured the offense, and really limited it if you will, so that Romo got the ball out of his hands quickly.

I think that's probably something we really don't look to do enough, considering the talent we have on the OL.


JMO

[Galian Beast]

Originally Posted by ABQCOWBOY

I think what you take out of this is that we need to design an offense that will allow us to play within our means. While it's true, IMO, that Romo extends a lot of plays and it's also true that his mobility is a big part of the reason we win games, I also believe that it's true that we hamstring ourselves because we rely on this way too often. I believe that this is a major cause of why and how we create negative plays for ourselves so often.

I have always believed that the best Romo has played is when he played for Parcells. Parcells structured the offense, and really limited it if you will, so that Romo got the ball out of his hands quickly.

I think that's probably something we really don't look to do enough, considering the talent we have on the OL.


JMO

Exactly right on so many counts. They tried to turn Romo into a pocket passer in the years following Parcells, the problem? They didn't give him an offensive line capable of creating that pocket.

Teams saw right through this and started heavy blitzing with 2 deep safeties.

Our lack of a running game has left us completely vulnerable to that.

[BlindFaith]

Originally Posted by Galian Beast

Does this take into account Romo adding more time after the pocket breaks down?

I would say this shows in inverse relation, but I think it's too difficult to look at correlation and causation here.

I think the premium stats breaks it down that way.

[Wolfpack]

Originally Posted by HoustonFrog

If you read my long post on Romo in the Delhomme thread....

http://cowboyszone.com/forums/showpo...&postcount=134

....That was pretty much my point at the end. They get in trouble, fall behind and force Romo into throwing 40-50 times again because they don't call plays and game plan around their talent. On the winning streak before the last 2 games one o the things I started to notice was we were getting the ball to D. Harris and Austin on quick hitters and letting them run. A) It works as a conservative throw that is almost like a run and B) Its gets the ball out of Romo's hands and lets guys work in space. When we were starting games slow we were less aggressive with this type of playcalling.

Yep. Short passing game was really not called much all season, a little here and there but never much other that 7 out to the TE, which i assume is a check down.

Lots of three verticals and back in to block vs the blitzes which I dont totally get honestly. Looking for a big play but the routes are too long for the heat that was coming in and the defenses (Last Redskin game) knew it.

I think the play calling and route packages didnt help with below average OL, it just heighten them.

[Wolfpack]

Originally Posted by ABQCOWBOY

I have always believed that the best Romo has played is when he played for Parcells. Parcells structured the offense, and really limited it if you will, so that Romo got the ball out of his hands quickly.

I think that's probably something we really don't look to do enough, considering the talent we have on the OL.


JMO

Totally right. Bill had the big air horn that he blew at 2.5 second mark in practice and the ball had to be out. He was trying to not get Bledsoe killed but Romo learned to play that too.

Bill always said Romo needed managed but you can win with him and I think he's right.