Running game philosophy

[waldoputty]

the 90's approach is to overwhelm the opposition with more force and power.
you have big dl.
then we get big ol that are pro bowl strong.

another approach is to spread out the defense to make zeke more effective.
i think this is the way to go, particularly with tfred being out and the rookie og lacking strength.
note that this second approach is complementary with the 1st approach having big pro bowl ol.

it seems garrett and linehan are stuck to the 1st approach.
in the game against the giants, it seems the multi-wr sets were more successful.
does anyone know if that was true on the running game?
i think @xwalker mentioned the tightends were used in some blocking scheme that worked, which supports the use more force approach.
though i also remember the zeke/austin reverse that worked great using misdirection.

 

[Reality]

the 90's approach is to overwhelm the opposition with more force and power.
you have big dl.
we get big ol that are pro bowl strong.

another approach is to spread out the defense to make zeke more effective.
i think this is the way to go, particularly with tfred being out and the rookie og lacking strength.

it seems garrett and linehan are stuck to the 1st approach.
in the game against the giants, it seems the multi-wr sets were more successful.
does anyone know if that was true on the running game?
i think @xwalker mentioned the tightends were used in some blocking scheme that worked, which supports the use more force approach.
though i also remember the zeke/austin reverse that worked great using misdirection.

I have been saying this for years that Garrett/Linehan poorly manage the running game because they are stuck in the 1990s mindset back when we not only had one of the best offensive lines, but also one that was much better than most NFL defensive lines back then. That's not the case now for the Cowboys or any team as the defensive linemen have gotten stronger, faster and much better.

When you see other team's running backs doing so well and looking so fast and quick with their runs its because most of the other teams have weak areas on the offensive line so they strategize accordingly by spreading out the offense.

It probably frustrates me the most though when they do the "bunch" formation near the goal line. Yet, when they go for 2, what do they do? Spread the offense out so Dak can walk into the end zone.

 

[Future]

The Cowboys run game is not based on force. A zone concept is effective because it does not depend on force, it depends far more on timing and athleticism. I know the Cowboys talk about the other defense knowing what we're going to do but they can't stop it, but that's not based on raw force - our OL doesn't have a bunch of maulers.

 

[JayFord]

We have the personnel to run the wing T and the maryland I along with the wish bone we should try that

 

[waldoputty]

I have been saying this for years that Garrett/Linehan poorly manage the running game because they are stuck in the 1990s mindset back when we not only had one of the best offensive lines, but also one that was much better than most NFL defensive lines back then. That's not the case now for the Cowboys or any team as the defensive linemen have gotten stronger, faster and much better.

When you see other team's running backs doing so well and looking so fast and quick with their runs its because most of the other teams have weak areas on the offensive line so they strategize accordingly by spreading out the offense.

It probably frustrates me the most though when they do the "bunch" formation near the goal line. Yet, when they go for 2, what do they do? Spread the offense out so Dak can walk into the end zone.

the spread / hurry-up offense also plays to dak's strength.
this coaching staff is thoroughly frustrating.
it took richard to make bjones a cb and play press/blitz.

 

[waldoputty]

The Cowboys run game is not based on force. A zone concept is effective because it does not depend on force, it depends far more on timing and athleticism. I know the Cowboys talk about the other defense knowing what we're going to do but they can't stop it, but that's not based on raw force - our OL doesn't have a bunch of maulers.

it needs force, timing and athleticism.
there is a reason why tfred is better than looney for the line and it is not just experience playing with each other
it does not help when the defense has 8 in the box.

 

[OmerV]

We have the personnel to run the wing T and the maryland I along with the wish bone we should try that

The Wing T-I Bone

 

[Future]

it needs force, timing and athleticism.
there is a reason why tfred is better than looney for the line and it is not just experience playing with each other
it does not help when the defense has 8 in the box.

The Cowboys run game does not depend on force - it allows the defensive linemen to move, but we are able to seal based on that. This OL doesn't need to push anyone back 5 yards to be effective. Frederick is better than Looney because his timing and communication are perfect, not b/c he plays with more force.

 

[waldoputty]

The Cowboys run game does not depend on force - it allows the defensive linemen to move, but we are able to seal based on that. This OL doesn't need to push anyone back 5 yards to be effective. Frederick is better than Looney because his timing and communication are perfect, not b/c he plays with more force.

i guess u r saying tfred is not better because he is stronger and more stout

 

[xwalker]

the 90's approach is to overwhelm the opposition with more force and power.
you have big dl.
then we get big ol that are pro bowl strong.

another approach is to spread out the defense to make zeke more effective.
i think this is the way to go, particularly with tfred being out and the rookie og lacking strength.
note that this second approach is complementary with the 1st approach having big pro bowl ol.

it seems garrett and linehan are stuck to the 1st approach.
in the game against the giants, it seems the multi-wr sets were more successful.
does anyone know if that was true on the running game?
i think @xwalker mentioned the tightends were used in some blocking scheme that worked, which supports the use more force approach.
though i also remember the zeke/austin reverse that worked great using misdirection.

Zeke popped a couple of good runs off of good blocking by the TEs; however, in general I'm not a fan of the Cowboys using the Heavy formations (3 TEs & FB, 3 TEs, 2 TEs & FB). Their "Heavy" package should be limited to 2 TEs. This is especially true against teams like the Giants or Panthers that have very stout interior DL.

 

[waldoputty]

Zeke popped a couple of good runs off of good blocking by the TEs; however, in general I'm not a fan of the Cowboys using the Heavy formations (3 TEs & FB, 3 TEs, 2 TEs & FB). Their "Heavy" package should be limited to 2 TEs. This is especially true against teams like the Giants or Panthers that have very stout interior DL.

what did those 2 TEs do in those 2 good runs?

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

the 90's approach is to overwhelm the opposition with more force and power.
you have big dl.
then we get big ol that are pro bowl strong.

another approach is to spread out the defense to make zeke more effective.
i think this is the way to go, particularly with tfred being out and the rookie og lacking strength.
note that this second approach is complementary with the 1st approach having big pro bowl ol.

it seems garrett and linehan are stuck to the 1st approach.
in the game against the giants, it seems the multi-wr sets were more successful.
does anyone know if that was true on the running game?
i think @xwalker mentioned the tightends were used in some blocking scheme that worked, which supports the use more force approach.
though i also remember the zeke/austin reverse that worked great using misdirection.

we did a lot of guard and guard tackle pulling combinations in both games.... its a zone blocking scheme not a man-to-man blocking scheme. and spreading the field is good, if your passing game is respected, then it forces the defense to dedicate extra resources to cover the passing game and opens up running games, but if your passing game isn't respected, teams will keep an extra man in the box which will make it difficult to run.

 

[Future]

i guess u r saying tfred is not better because he is stronger and more stout

Those things are not why he is better in the run game. They might help, but they're not the difference maker.

 

[AdamJT13]

Zeke popped a couple of good runs off of good blocking by the TEs; however, in general I'm not a fan of the Cowboys using the Heavy formations (3 TEs & FB, 3 TEs, 2 TEs & FB). Their "Heavy" package should be limited to 2 TEs. This is especially true against teams like the Giants or Panthers that have very stout interior DL.

There is some evidence that rushing success is based more on how many defenders are in the box than on the number of blockers (regardless of whether there are more blockers than defenders, the same number or fewer). In other words, spreading the field and forcing the defense to play six in the box with only your five linemen as blockers generally creates more room to run than going heavy and using eight or nine blockers against eight or more in the box.

 

[Roadtrip635]

How bout spreading out the formation. We could use Tavon and Zeke in the backfield together. We could be more creative in using Zeke in the passing game. I'm not talking splitting out wide like a TE/WR or just screens and dump offs, but actual designed plays. Here's the perfect example of Gurley in the passing game. They use Tavon, hey wait we have a Tavon, in motion to draw some attention and Gurley runs a very simple route for a easy catch and 53yd TD,....... against us. Not really overly complicated play and luckily we have one of those Tavons too. Running backs are allowed to be part of the passing game these days, it's not outlawed like it used to be.

 

[CATCH17]

There is some evidence that rushing success is based more on how many defenders are in the box than on the number of blockers (regardless of whether there are more blockers than defenders, the same number or fewer). In other words, spreading the field and forcing the defense to play six in the box with only your five linemen as blockers generally creates more room to run than going heavy and using eight or nine blockers against eight or more in the box.

This information is well known and I know our coaches know it too but I guess they just ignore it cause 90s.



Even at the goal line it’s more effective to spread it out.

 

[xwalker]

There is some evidence that rushing success is based more on how many defenders are in the box than on the number of blockers (regardless of whether there are more blockers than defenders, the same number or fewer). In other words, spreading the field and forcing the defense to play six in the box with only your five linemen as blockers generally creates more room to run than going heavy and using eight or nine blockers against eight or more in the box.

I would expect total yardage to favor running from a spread out formation.

I would be interested to know (specific to the Cowboys in recent years) what their success rate has been on 3rd and short rushing attempts from different formations.

 

[CouchCoach]

What is needed is flexibility in the formations and move to the spread at times just as OSU did with Zeke, GA did with Gurley and PSU with Barkley.

There are ways to counter the 8 in the box other than just passing, which is exactly what the DC's are trying to force. Landry was the first to successfully implement shifting and motion to get the D to react because they were sitting on his run game. If you played OL for him, you learned to pull and he valued athleticism over brute strength. That's the main reason his teams got tagged with that hated label for players, "finesse".

The Cowboys lack real creativity on offense and rely on having a PB OL and RB and try to power their run game and the 90's Cowboys did that as well but when the D closed down, they had HOF skill position players. What the Cowboys did in the 90's will not work with this team.

The other problem with how they do their run game is what happens when one of those key players is out? The team is not dependent on creativity, it is dependent on health.

 

[waldoputty]

How bout spreading out the formation. We could use Tavon and Zeke in the backfield together. We could be more creative in using Zeke in the passing game. I'm not talking splitting out wide like a TE/WR or just screens and dump offs, but actual designed plays. Here's the perfect example of Gurley in the passing game. They use Tavon, hey wait we have a Tavon, in motion to draw some attention and Gurley runs a very simple route for a easy catch and 53yd TD,....... against us. Not really overly complicated play and luckily we have one of those Tavons too. Running backs are allowed to be part of the passing game these days, it's not outlawed like it used to be.

as far i as i remember, they did the zeke/austin misdirection once.
it worked great to 15 yards worth.
then it went back on the shelf for the game.
it is as if they did their obligatory misdirection to keep defenders off zeke.
but then went back to their comfort power game zone.
there were penalties that killed a drive, but it appears the lack of creativity killed the offense in quarters 2 and 3.

 

[waldoputty]

Those things are not why he is better in the run game. They might help, but they're not the difference maker.

power is part of the game, and what makes cwilliams a liability at og currently.

also it is the number of players involved in the blocking. the old way is to put more pieces in to block, while the new way is to force the d to move its pieces away to cover the spread offense.

one is brute force and numbers.
the other has force but a more modern application of positioning the pieces