Running game philosophy

The 1990's Style can work. It worked in 2014. I just don't know if we always setup for it work here, considering a lack of depth when injuries happen. And you do need to still have a QB/Wide Receiver threat. Emmitt is greatness, but without Aikman/Irvin being there, his numbers wouldn't have been as good. With that said, Emmitt could still produce with 8 man fronts.

Gangsta Spanksta said:

The 1990's Style can work. It worked in 2014. I just don't know if we always setup for it work here, considering a lack of depth when injuries happen. And you do need to still have a QB/Wide Receiver threat. Emmitt is greatness, but without Aikman/Irvin being there, his numbers wouldn't have been as good. With that said, Emmitt could still produce with 8 man fronts.

Click to expand...

defenses may have evolved since being battered by zeke in 2016.
90's team did not have salary cap to contend with most of those years.

percyhoward said:

By rushing success do you mean successful plays (where down and distance figure into the equation) or simply yards per carry? I ask because YPC could be inflated by third down "give-up" runs in very long-yardage situations against a defense that's playing the pass.

Click to expand...

It was YPC, and it compared every MIB and each blocking advantage combination independently, so the situation you described would affect only the YPC for situations when the offense and defense were playing the exact same way (say, five blockers against four men in the box). The guy who did the analysis said he is going to look into different down-and-distance situations, but I haven't seen him post that yet. I'm not sure it would have a big effect. I mean, what defense with four of five MIB isn't playing the pass, and which defense with nine or 10 MIB isn't playing the run? But like I said, it's just "some evidence." There hasn't been a lot of analysis on it so far.

An interesting note from what has been done is that against six, seven and eight MIB, the YPC was lower when the offense had a plus-one "advantage" (blockers to MIB) and than it was when the blockers and MIB were even or the offense had a minus-one advantage (yes, it's a misnomer). For example, against eight men in the box, teams averaged 2.9 YPC when they had nine blockers, 3.7 YPC when they had eight blockers and 3.4 YPC when they had only seven blockers. Against six in the box, teams averaged 4.1 YPC when they had seven blockers, 4.7 YPC when they had six blockers and 4.6 YPC when they had only five blockers. The suggestion seems to be that space is a big factor and more bodies means less space, even when those bodies are blockers.

waldoputty said:

defenses may have evolved since being battered by zeke in 2016.
90's team did not have salary cap to contend with most of those years.

Click to expand...

The defenses may have evolved bit, is called a blanket statement. It sounds good and so is hard to argue with, but you provide absolutely no examples or links to prove your point. Here is how I look at it.

2014 -- 90's power football worked
2015 -- Injury to romo, no demarco murray
2016 -- 90's power football worked
2017 -- Dak figured out, injuries at Offensive line. No Zeke for 6 games.
2018 -- Unknown. First game Dak wasn't very good. We have a major injury at Offensive line.

Given that time line, I still don't see why the 90's style couldn't work, We are just not the most efficient organization when it comes to filling depth and coming up with solutions when everything isn't working right because of injuries.

The second statement about salary cap is true. But that seems to also effect other types of offenses..

And hey, I get other types of running style philosophies can work, and do work in the NFL. But those have problems too if events like above happen. And I still haven't seen any evidence that the 90's style power football couldn't work. In this modern NFL, most teams have very nice years one year, and then drop off the next year. Only the very well run organizations seem to be good consistently. The cowboys are hardly as efficiently run as the Patriots.

We don't have any blocking TEs despite how hard they try. This greatly cripples the running game. The philosophy we have is fine. It's the practical application of that philosophy that suffers. They need to go back to the drawing board.

AdamJT13 said:

It was YPC, and it compared every MIB and each blocking advantage combination independently, so the situation you described would affect only the YPC for situations when the offense and defense were playing the exact same way (say, five blockers against four men in the box). The guy who did the analysis said he is going to look into different down-and-distance situations, but I haven't seen him post that yet. I'm not sure it would have a big effect. I mean, what defense with four of five MIB isn't playing the pass, and which defense with nine or 10 MIB isn't playing the run?

Click to expand...

So when a team is backed up on its own 15-yard line and facing a 3rd and 18, and the play is a 12-yard run, that goes toward the YPC. But if you go by "successful plays" (40% of the yardage needed on 1st down, 60% of that needed on 2nd, and 100% on 3rd), that's an unsuccessful play, right?

waldoputty said:

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.

Click to expand...

waldoputty said:

the way they were running, they kind of had to abandon the run.

Click to expand...

I hATE the word abandon

dallasdave said:

I hATE the word abandon

Click to expand...

that is what happens with a garrett team

waldoputty said:

that is what happens with a garrett team

Click to expand...

That and a Carrot Toss

ah, the garrett era ... 10 years - 2 playoffs.

What is the defense? the QB ? the rb ? the offense? ... the coaching , errr Lord no ! .... was it the TE ? the weed ? , etc ...

dallasdave said:

That and a Carrot Toss

Click to expand...

need to toss the carrot in the grinder

Our run game took a hit when we couldn't sign Leary. Guy was a bulldozer, vicious, mean, straight razor totin dude.

They should run in all formations

Roadtrip635 said:

People talk about losing Witt and forget how good a blocker Hanna was. He was an overlooked player in our success running the ball.

Click to expand...

If the FO was smart they would try and bring back Hanna. He not only was a good blocker, but he was our most athletic.

Gangsta Spanksta said:

The 1990's Style can work. It worked in 2014. I just don't know if we always setup for it work here, considering a lack of depth when injuries happen. And you do need to still have a QB/Wide Receiver threat. Emmitt is greatness, but without Aikman/Irvin being there, his numbers wouldn't have been as good. With that said, Emmitt could still produce with 8 man fronts.

Click to expand...

Callahan called more of the run plays. He was the reason why they succeeded. Not Garrett. In fact, I don't think Callahan and Garrett got along.

Reality said:

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.

Click to expand...

I think JG calls that 12 or 13 personel, madden always called it the jumbo, so that is what I call it.
Many teams use it in short yardage, and I think it is ********. It allows the defense to bunch up in front of them!

It is better to run from a spread out formation.

Also JG is obsessed with downfield blocking, which is meaningless if the RB never gets downfield !
So many times I see linemen pull to run downfield , and the guy they dont block at the line makes the tackle in backfield or at the los.

Roadtrip635 said:

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.

Click to expand...

You're asking Jason Garrett to be creative??? I have been asking for that for 8 years - it's not gonna happen - EVER.