Article on how predictable Cowboys were on offense

Bobhaze said:
There are usually 2 reasons why a team is very predictable on offense:

1. The offensive coordinator and HC don’t care if the defense know what we’re doing, our offense is so good, we believe we can be successful anyway.

2. Our HC and offensive coaches are incapable of being creative enough to operate outside of their own perameters.
Click to expand...

or HC and offensive coaches do not put in a system that makes sure they are not predictable like an extra playcalling checker that cost $100k or max $200k.
 
waldoputty said:
difference between 2016 and 2018: leary and dominant tsmith
Click to expand...

It's just that we've been running largely the same predictable offense for years. Fans have been complaining about it for years. It's been consistently productive for years. The second half of last season it was a lot less productive, and everybody thinks the solution for some reason is to be less predictable. When what really changed was that the protection when from 'good' to 'bad.'

'Predictable' isn't a bad thing if the other guys can't stop it. Weak protection is always a bad thing. It seems like the solution on offense ought to be pretty obvious and pretty easy to address to me.
 
PhillyCowboysFan said:
Thank you, thank you and thank you. People that bring that up is really missing the boat on how good a talented team that was.
Click to expand...
Imagine how fast a defense line with a line with Haley-Casillas-Hennings-Jeffcoat-Tolbert-Jimmie Jones would last?

The first year of free agency ripped out Jones and Norton.
 
Idgit said:
It's just that we've been running largely the same predictable offense for years. Fans have been complaining about it for years. It's been consistently productive for years. The second half of last season it was a lot less productive, and everybody thinks the solution for some reason is to be less predictable. When what really changed was that the protection when from 'good' to 'bad.'

'Predictable' isn't a bad thing if the other guys can't stop it. Weak protection is always a bad thing. It seems like the solution on offense ought to be pretty obvious and pretty easy to address to me.
Click to expand...
It's all Garrett's fault!!!!!!!!!!!! Lol!
 
Any who watches all of our games know how predictable we are. Even other players and coaches have spoke on this. Terrible coaching staff is a big part.
 
Idgit said:
It's just that we've been running largely the same predictable offense for years. Fans have been complaining about it for years. It's been consistently productive for years. The second half of last season it was a lot less productive, and everybody thinks the solution for some reason is to be less predictable. When what really changed was that the protection when from 'good' to 'bad.'

'Predictable' isn't a bad thing if the other guys can't stop it. Weak protection is always a bad thing. It seems like the solution on offense ought to be pretty obvious and pretty easy to address to me.
Click to expand...

i think stephen even mentioned the predictability after the season.
we have won a lot of games despite predictability.
imagine how many more if the defense had more to worry about?
predictability comes up when we are losing because we are not milking the offense for all it is worth.
just because we fix the ol, it is no excuse to be predictable 100% or 90% of the time.
of course, if we had 5 all-pro OL and another probowl backup swing tackle...
 
Ranching said:
Because our line was healthy and Zeke played every game, except the week 17.
Click to expand...


After Philly won the Super Bowl I think you can say that quality coaching should be able to overcome some things. Especially when the RB is getting replaced by a former Pro Bowl RB.

Tyron Smith being out should never have been the factor it was but in Dallas it completely debilitated the offense.
 
So what happens to the Eagles if Garrett was at the helm there instead of Pederson and Jason Peters, Carson Wentz, Jordan Hicks, etc, get injured? Does he find a way to win games if everything isn't perfect? This is the chatter you hear on Dallas radio. Oh if everything is perfect the team looks great, but if any major adjustments are required, the team falls flat on its face.

FYI the schedule in 2016 was extremely easy as well, that was a huge factor.
 
waldoputty said:
i think stephen even mentioned the predictability after the season.
we have won a lot of games despite predictability.
imagine how many more if the defense had more to worry about?
predictability comes up when we are losing because we are not milking the offense for all it is worth.
just because we fix the ol, it is no excuse to be predictable 100% or 90% of the time.
of course, if we had 5 all-pro OL and another probowl backup swing tackle...
Click to expand...

You're still making the assumption that being unpredictable is better than being predictable but teams being unable to stop it anyway. I mean, you know we're going to run it in the red zone in a two TE set most of the time....does it matter? When we're inside the five, you know you're probably going to see Dak run an option. He scores with it regularly. The whole design of the offense is to beat teams physically. It's what we do. And we've been very effective doing it for years now.
 
pansophy said:
I would be curious to see how predictable our offense was during our 3 super bowls.
Click to expand...
different time diff coach, of course they can predict with the team of coaches we have now.
had to be nice
 
Idgit said:
You're still making the assumption that being unpredictable is better than being predictable but teams being unable to stop it anyway. I mean, you know we're going to run it in the red zone in a two TE set most of the time....does it matter? When we're inside the five, you know you're probably going to see Dak run an option. He scores with it regularly. The whole design of the offense is to beat teams physically. It's what we do. And we've been very effective doing it for years now.
Click to expand...

of course it matters.
if you have the 2016 OL, yes you can score.
and it is discouraging to the other side.
but we dont have the 2016 OL.
and you get injuries like in 2017.
and in the playoffs, the other team is really good and their defense may just be able to stop your offense featuring the 2016 OL.
for example, the 2016 giants when had the 2 big DTs up the middle and our probowl C and RG were not able to move them.
 
waldoputty said:
of course it matters.
if you have the 2016 OL, yes you can score.
and it is discouraging to the other side.
but we dont have the 2016 OL.
and you get injuries like in 2017.
and in the playoffs, the other team is really good and their defense may just be able to stop your offense featuring the 2016 OL.
for example, the 2016 giants when had the 2 big DTs up the middle and our probowl C and RG were not able to move them.
Click to expand...

We had OL injuries in 2016, too. We just got serviceable OL play. The goal should be to have serviceable OL play.

And you need to be able to play defense in the playoffs, too. So you can win games with scores like 10-15 instead of losing them 34-31 when you're up against another good QB.
 
CATCH17 said:
After Philly won the Super Bowl I think you can say that quality coaching should be able to overcome some things. Especially when the RB is getting replaced by a former Pro Bowl RB.

Tyron Smith being out should never have been the factor it was but in Dallas it completely debilitated the offense.
Click to expand...
I agree. But the question was why the we're good in 2016. It was health and Zeke, it wasntwthe coaching.
 
Idgit said:
We had OL injuries in 2016, too. We just got serviceable OL play. The goal should be to have serviceable OL play.

And you need to be able to play defense in the playoffs, too. So you can win games with scores like 10-15 instead of losing them 34-31 when you're up against another good QB.
Click to expand...

even more reasonable to squeeze the last drop of potential from the offense.
being predictable 100% of the time from certain formations does not make sense, particularly with all the warts we have and will have.
we had dominant ol play in 2016 with the depth needed.
we may be able to get the depth from fa, but doubtful the same dominant play given tsmith's condtion.
we have gone from 3 probowler, 1 very good guard and free with collins as a backup to 2 probowlers, an improving rt, tsmith with a bad back and a ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Staff online

Members online

Total: 4,035 (members: 83, guests: 3,952)
Robots: 1,330

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
476,070
Messages
14,660,735
Members
24,226
Latest member
Dorsett99Yards
Back
Top