More aggressive offense next year

[Galian Beast]

And I'd imagine that getting Dez on a long term contract is of utmost importance to the Cowboys. Why does he "dollar for dollar make more sense"?

As far as tight ends go, Gronk dollar for dollar provides something that is very difficult to emulate. Dez's production can be replaced a lot easier at the WR position for much cheaper.

 

[SuspectCorner]

It's not about whether Romo throws thirty times or even fifty times - it's about the team-wide support Romo gets.

Does his running game bolster his efforts by providing an adequate threat in early-down, short-yardage, and goal-line situations? Does the defense provide more than a speed bump to teams that have to keep up the pace - forcing Dallas to dominate in time of possession? Do the more-talented opponent QBs feel pressured to deliver in late-game situations - and do they run for their lives like Tony does?

The more competent the Dallas defense becomes - the less pressure will be placed upon Tony Romo... and THEN the running game becomes backbreaking. Sayonara, adios, goodnight Irene.

 

[percyhoward]

There are so many factors that go into decreased TOP. As well as our increase in TOP.

And so many formulas for success that don't necessarily follow the 2014 Cowboys' pattern. For an example of an offense that excelled at keeping a truly bad defense off the field, look at the Steelers. They ranked 15th in rushing attempts, 6th in pass attempts, and 1st in TOP per drive.

 

[percyhoward]

These averages may be misleading. I'm sure if we looked at the games in which the defense was on the field longer, we would find that they were exposed more. There were games this year when the defense simply collapsed.

I remember them, but that post was comparing all of 2014's drives with all of 2013's drives -- not just a game here or there. There were teams similar to the Cowboys (Vikings and Bengals), in that their differences in TOP from one season to the other reflected their differences in points allowed. But there was certainly no league-wide pattern.

In 2013, the Dallas defense actually performed worse on the drives that began with kickoffs. IOW, they were worse when they would have been rested the most. There have been some great bend-don't-break defenses that were also among the least rested because they had trouble getting themselves off the field. I think generally the 2014 defense is underrated because of the 2013 version, and the 2014 offense. This past year's defense was horrible in the red zone, got a ton of takeaways, gave up a lot of yards, and kept teams out of field goal range better than most defenses. Overall, a little below average, but much improved over 2013.

 

[perrykemp]

As far as tight ends go, Gronk dollar for dollar provides something that is very difficult to emulate. Dez's production can be replaced a lot easier at the WR position for much cheaper.

The distance between Gronk and the 2nd best TE (Graham maybe?) in the league is much vaster than the distance between the #1 and #2 WRs in the league who I'd argue are very very close in Megatron / Dez.

 

[Galian Beast]

The distance between Gronk and the 2nd best TE (Graham maybe?) in the league is much vaster than the distance between the #1 and #2 WRs in the league who I'd argue are very very close in Megatron / Dez.

It isn't just about #1 and #2 it's about finding suitable replacements.

Compare the top 10 wrs vs the top 10 tight ends.

Gronk vs the average is also more significant than Dez vs the average.

 

[50cent]

And so many formulas for success that don't necessarily follow the 2014 Cowboys' pattern. For an example of an offense that excelled at keeping a truly bad defense off the field, look at the Steelers. They ranked 15th in rushing attempts, 6th in pass attempts, and 1st in TOP per drive.

Again useless! Different personnel, OC, offensive philosophy, QB, etc etc etc., it's uselsss! They can throw it more with a QB that is a wiz at extending plays. He's bigger than some DLmen, did you factor that and his ability to shrug lineman off like a fly? How many times did Ben use a hard count to draw an offsides to extend a play (philosophy)? Cause I can tell you Romo and our philosophy doesn't allow for it with the kill, kill calls at 2 secs on the playclock. It's a flawed formula to determine whether we should pass more or not.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

You haven't even made an assertion about Romo.

Really?

Then why did you respond to my post saying that 'less is more' with Romo then?

Why did you specifically look at QB rating in less than 30 attempts than QB rating on attempts 30+?

Because I have made the assertion that Romo's effectiveness drops off as he throws more backed up by evidence which you actually proved instead of refuting.

Since Manning, Brees, and Brady are equally less effective after 30 attempts, all you end up with is a statement about quarterbacks with a lot of attempts.

When did I mention Manning, Brees and Brady in this thread?

And what about other QB's? You're sample size is small and you're cherry picking your analytics.

Nothing wrong with "less is more," but that's just smart football with this OL, and it's got nothing to do with Romo.

It absolutely has to do with Romo. He's not as effective when he starts throwing more. His metrics show that and YOU have posted those metrics to prove this point.

It's also smart because he's an aging QB in the twilight of his career with a back issue. I don't think throwing the ball a ton is the smart thing to do for his health either.

It's smart due to the numerous times we've started off throwing the ball a ton despite being in a close game and the offense not being very efficient. Like the KC game in 2013 or the Washington loss this year. It wasn't like we were down by 17 points and had to throw the ball to get back into the game. Those games were within a TD and we kept throwing the ball and the offense sputtered in large part because of it. And the Rams game we are down by 21 points and stick with the run and the offense is balanced and efficient and ends up scoring points and wins the game.

The main issue with throwing the ball more often is that it doesn't play to Romo's abilities. Historically, he's been an excellent play-action passer and you need a threat to run to fool them on play-action. Historically, he's been best at mid-to-deep pass patterns and you're not going to throw many of those if your intent is to throw it 40+ times a game.

And Murray has been a highly productive player his entire career, so the O-Line wasn't too bad with him in the game. It just comes down to this being the first time since Parcells that we committed to balancing the offense and limiting the amount of throws Romo made (reference the recent report that Romo was not *allowed* to check out of running plays as often this year). This was a better fit for Romo's abilities and tendencies, it allowed a highly productive player (Murray) to produce even more and it kept the defense off the field.

Had we done this in previous seasons, we may not have been as successful on offense, but I think Romo is much better for it. It worked wonders in 2006 with Parcells when we didn't have nearly the running game or receiving threats or O-Line that we have now.





YR

 

[percyhoward]

The Steelers can throw it more with a QB that is a wiz at extending plays. He's bigger than some DLmen, did you factor that and his ability to shrug lineman off like a fly?

You're talking about a QB who ranks 16th among active QB in pass attempts per game, and who never even made the top 10 in pass attempts in any season until his 10th year in the league. Instead of using the run, they used short passes to Bell -- essentially long handoffs (100 targets within 9 yards of the LOS) to set up the deep ball to Brown, and they still had more TOP than we did.

 

[percyhoward]

When did I mention Manning, Brees and Brady in this thread?

Your point is that Romo's effectiveness decreases with more attempts. Not "a quarterback's" effectiveness, but specifically Romo's effectiveness. I went back over the last five years, took the top five highest-rated passers, compared their performance after 30 attempts in a game, and showed that 4 of the 5 suffer very similar drop offs after 30 attempts.

We obviously have to put Romo's number in context for it to mean something. Without the context of other QB performances in the same situation, it's just a raw number. In 1978, Staubach had an 84.9 rating, but that number doesn't tell you he led the league, until you mention what the other quarterbacks did that year.

 

[50cent]

You're talking about a QB who ranks 16th among active QB in pass attempts per game, and who never even made the top 10 in pass attempts in any season until his 10th year in the league. Instead of using the run, they used short passes to Bell -- essentially long handoffs (100 targets within 9 yards of the LOS) to set up the deep ball to Brown, and they still had more TOP than we did.

You're still trying to make a comparison that has nothing to do with why we did, what we did and for what reasons. They're are 2 different franchises with different philosophies. They did what they had to do to be successful WITHOUT THEIR PHI LOS OH AND PERSONNEL. And so did we. Does your stats include the long rift between Haley and Ben and how last year Ben stopped resisting Haleys system? Maybe his lack of resistance led to their success. Regardless, we're not adopting their short passing game, so comparing again is useless. Your Stat is flawed and I'm sure Leven Bell had a lot to do with that TOP and not just short passes.

 

[DFWJC]

The cost benefit ratio of trading Dez away is lopsided.

A whole year of picks does not replace what Dez brings to the table.

Do you really think that teams will be scared if we line up Terrance Williams, Devin Street, and Cole Beasley out wide with Escobar at TE?

They'll stack 8 in the box and kill us.

I know this was not for me and
I'm not advocating trading Dez at all.

But we would not line up that group of WRs, and deep down you know it.
With the 80-100 million we would save and all those extra draft picks, we could have Armani Cooper (or white) and Vincent Jackson (or other) and still draft 6-7 defensive players and a RB.
Lol...not kidding either.

 

[sureletsrace]

As far as tight ends go, Gronk dollar for dollar provides something that is very difficult to emulate. Dez's production can be replaced a lot easier at the WR position for much cheaper.

Who do you think could replace what Dez does at WR?

 

[sureletsrace]

I know this was not for me and
I'm not advocating trading Dez at all.

But we would not line up that group of WRs, and deep down you know it.
With the 80-100 million we would save and all those extra draft picks, we could have Armani Cooper (or white) and Vincent Jackson (or other) and still draft 6-7 defensive players and a RB.
Lol...not kidding either.

Amani Cooper is unproven in the NFL. We don't know if he can do what Dez does.

Vincent Jackson is amazing one game, then doesn't show up for the next game or three.

What defensive players in the 4th-7th rounds do you think will make an impact? The chance of hitting on those picks is small.

You're saying let's trade a proven elite player for 8 unknowns. It's just not good strategy. Out of those 8 players, what if 6 don't make the 53, and then you get one good and one average player.

You traded elite for good and average.

 

[perrykemp]

Who do you think could replace what Dez does at WR?

Last year

Dez was 12th in receptions, 8th in yards, and 1st in TD receptions for WR in 2014.

Gronk was 2nd in receptions, 1st in yards, and 1st in TDs for a TE in 2014.

From a general production perspective it looks like a there is a small set of WRs who could roughly achieve at least 80-90% of Dez's production - in fact there are more than few that exceeding his production in a number of categories last season. Obviously Dez played in a run oriented offense last year so that did affect his production. On the other hand even when the Cowboys when throwing the ball all around the yard in previous years Dez was never a 100 reception 1500 yard guy. There are typically just one or two of those a year. He is obviously the BEST redzone WR in the league at this point.

Gronk, when healthy, is the bona-fide obvious #1 TE in the league. He is a TD machine -- in fact he has only 2 less (54 vs Dez's 56) TDs than Dez in their 5 year career despite missing almost missing almost a season worth's of games. There really isn't anybody other than maybe Jimmy Graham in Gronk's level and Graham can't block a lick.

Per Game Career Comparison

In summary

Right now Dez is one of the best WRs in the game -- he might have even been the best in 2014 depending on how you slice and dice the stats.

Gronk, on a per game basis, is playing TE better than any TE in NFL history.

That's not a slam on Dez -- but there isn't another TE in the league now or ever that even approachs Gronk on a per game basis.

 

[DFWJC]

Amani Cooper is unproven in the NFL. We don't know if he can do what Dez does.

Vincent Jackson is amazing one game, then doesn't show up for the next game or three.

What defensive players in the 4th-7th rounds do you think will make an impact? The chance of hitting on those picks is small.

You're saying let's trade a proven elite player for 8 unknowns. It's just not good strategy. Out of those 8 players, what if 6 don't make the 53, and then you get one good and one average player.

You traded elite for good and average.

Why do you say 4th - 7th
What about 1st , 2nd, and 3rd....ALL three. I didn't have us using any of our picks.
Plus VJax and Cooper where just examples....as I said.
Two 1st rounder and 100 mill can buy a ton of WR help.
Love Dez,but he's not above the team.

 

[Galian Beast]

Who do you think could replace what Dez does at WR?

A group of wideouts and tight ends, being fed the ball consistently and efficiently as you can see in New England and Seattle.

 

[percyhoward]

You're still trying to make a comparison that has nothing to do with why we did, what we did and for what reasons. They're are 2 different franchises with different philosophies. They did what they had to do to be successful WITHOUT THEIR PHI LOS OH AND PERSONNEL. .

Which are anything but static, but we've gone far afield. 30+ attempts isn't a necessity for a QB on a team with this kind of OL and its potential for success in the running game. But when your running game isn't successful, 30+ attempts for Romo is no more of a bad idea than 30+ attempts for Brees, Brady, or Manning. IOW, there's no reason to specifically fear what might happen if Romo gets that many attempts in a game. It might even win you a playoff game like it did in January.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

Oh just trade Dez for picks.

Then you have to nail those picks. Everyone forgets the 2nd part.

Hitting on picks is a 50/50 proposition even in the first round.

So trade a guy who is an all pro and having a hall of fame worthy start to his career.... For the hopes you draft a Ware and not a Merriman.

Seems legit.

 

[50cent]

Which are anything but static, but we've gone far afield. 30+ attempts isn't a necessity for a QB on a team with this kind of OL and its potential for success in the running game. But when your running game isn't successful, 30+ attempts for Romo is no more of a bad idea than 30+ attempts for Brees, Brady, or Manning. IOW, there's no reason to specifically fear what might happen if Romo gets that many attempts in a game. It might even win you a playoff game like it did in January.

Are you smoking? Romo has had the burden of being the focal point of this offense since he got the gig and in every one of those seasons but 1 hes avg 30+ attempts in starts. Guess how many playoff wins he had in those 30+ avg seasons? 1! Now the one season he didn't avg 30 (avg 29), we go 12-4 and another playoff win without him being the focal point. Take pride in the fact that he threw it 31 times in a ref assisted playoff win. All of those QBS you named are Super Bowl winning QBs while passing over 30+ times a game, comparing Romo to proven winners is just as useless as your initial take. You're running your own argument in the ground.