1. Welcome to CowboysZone!  Join us!  Come on!  You know you want to!

What not to focus on this off season

Discussion in 'Fan Zone' started by wick, Jan 3, 2013.

  1. wick

    wick Active Member

    746 Messages
    45 Likes Received
    The ultimate success of offense is measured in points. So if Garrett's offense requires successful running to work best, we'd see it show up in the yearly point totals. But we don't. There's almost no correlation whatsoever between Dallas' scoring and how well or poorly we run the ball.

    (Year: Rush Yards/YPC/Points)
    2007: 1,746/4.2/455
    2008: 1,723/4.3/362
    2009: 2,103/4.8/361
    2010: 1,786/4.2/394
    2011: 1,807/4.4/369
    2012: 1,265/3.6/376

    Note that in the Garrett era, 2009 was overwhelming the best season running the football, both in terms of total output and efficiency per carry. It was also the year we scored the fewest points.
  2. SkinsandTerps

    SkinsandTerps Redskins Forever

    7,404 Messages
    20 Likes Received
    2009 They had the most yards and YPC...but you need to put in attempts, and red zone info.
  3. jnday

    jnday Well-Known Member

    6,275 Messages
    1,274 Likes Received
    2009 was also the the last playoff win. Are you after points or playoffs? Playoffs tells me that running was working.
  4. Star4Ever

    Star4Ever Well-Known Member

    6,037 Messages
    294 Likes Received
    Or just maybe they win because they can run the ball???
  5. phildominator

    phildominator Member

    679 Messages
    1 Likes Received
    So having a healthy DeMarco Murray playing didn't have an impact on a better offense?
  6. IrishAnto

    IrishAnto Well-Known Member

    1,091 Messages
    171 Likes Received
    While I agree that a better pass rush should help in generating turnovers, it won’t necessarily help.

    If you want proof look no further than the 2008 Cowboys.

    They generated 59 sacks (3rd highest in a 16 game season) however ended up 20th in generating turnovers (14 fumble recoveries and 8 interceptions).

    Ultimately it’s down to running a scheme that takes advantage of the talent you have that gets the job done.
  7. wick

    wick Active Member

    746 Messages
    45 Likes Received
    That's why I've tied pass rush to playing more zone coverage, which puts your secondary players in position to read the quarterback and follow the ball instead of a receiver. It is difficult to intercept a pass when playing man coverage. Play zone and generate a pass rush to force off schedule decisions and rushed throws and you will create turnovers. Note also that sacks is not the only indicator or even the best indicator of pass rush. The most effective pass rush results in a turnover, not a sack in which the quarterback retains possession of the ball.
  8. SkinsandTerps

    SkinsandTerps Redskins Forever

    7,404 Messages
    20 Likes Received
    So are you saying the Cowboys secondary is good enough to get those turnovers ?

    I feel that you would face teams that just put a speedster out there to burn the holes in the zone.

    You do know football is situational right ? Going for 4th & 1 at their 40 is a much better decision than on your own 40. However if you are down 2 scores with 3 minutes left...
  9. Oh_Canada

    Oh_Canada Well-Known Member

    6,021 Messages
    552 Likes Received
    I happen to agree with you. The Cowboys pass rush must be improved-coupled with top end corners and hopefully better safety play the Cowboys should be much better defensively.
    Offensively, the emphasis should be on finding another interior lineman who can pass protect and maybe a dynamic back who can catch passes out of the backfield.
  10. IrishAnto

    IrishAnto Well-Known Member

    1,091 Messages
    171 Likes Received
    I won't disagree with that and that why I pointed out its how you use your talent that counts most.


    And while I agree that QB pressure may result in a pick while the sack won’t, the problem I have with 2008 is that you don’t get that many sacks without generating a significant amount of pressure to boot, yet because the secondary wasn’t used properly (baring in mind we had 4 1st round picks and a 2nd round pick in the secondary) we didn’t get the turnover results you’d expect from the pass rush.

    The only problem I see it that our current secondary seems to be better suited to man rather than zone coverage.
  11. wick

    wick Active Member

    746 Messages
    45 Likes Received
    I'm struggling to understand what this has to do with anything that has been discussed in this thread.
  12. percyhoward

    percyhoward Research Tool

    8,559 Messages
    2,619 Likes Received
    You just said the only scoring opportunities are the ones that are taken advantage of.
  13. wick

    wick Active Member

    746 Messages
    45 Likes Received
    You can't take advantage of an opportunity that wasn't created. How you get the ball into the end zone hardly matters. If you pass the ball from your own 20 down to the opponent's one, what difference does it make if you pass or throw the ball into the end zone as long as you score the touchdown?
  14. percyhoward

    percyhoward Research Tool

    8,559 Messages
    2,619 Likes Received
    It doesn't make any difference of course, but that's not the point.

    The fallacy is when you suggest that more run TD only means fewer pass TD. It doesn't. It also means fewer FG attempts (both made and missed), fewer turnovers, and fewer turnovers on downs.
  15. wick

    wick Active Member

    746 Messages
    45 Likes Received
    Where did I say that?
  16. percyhoward

    percyhoward Research Tool

    8,559 Messages
    2,619 Likes Received
    Right here...

    Every time you put the emphasis on how you score, instead of how often, you're implying that more run TD does not equal more total TD.
  17. wick

    wick Active Member

    746 Messages
    45 Likes Received
    The portion you quoted means the opposite of your interpretation. I said that how you score doesn't matter, which is what you are saying above.
  18. percyhoward

    percyhoward Research Tool

    8,559 Messages
    2,619 Likes Received
    If you agree then, then more TD improves your chances of winning, and you see this stat...

    Bottom 5 Teams
    Fewest Rushing TD, 2011-12 (W-L Record)

    28th Cle 16 (9-23)
    29th Jax 14 (7-25)
    30th Kan 14 (9-23)
    31st Dal 13 (16-16)
    32nd StL 12 (9-22-1)

    ...how could you not conclude that more rushing TD would improve the team's record?
  19. wick

    wick Active Member

    746 Messages
    45 Likes Received
    More touchdowns would help improve Dallas' record. Whether those come via runs or passes is immaterial.
  20. percyhoward

    percyhoward Research Tool

    8,559 Messages
    2,619 Likes Received
    Sounds like you just said rushing touchdowns help you win just as much as passing touchdowns.

Share This Page