Zeke vs of Vikings in the box

Runwildboys · Nov 12, 2019

Nav22 said:
See my OP.

Can you read? Is Sturm’s chart too complicated for you?

Sturm's chart is showing how many men were technically "in the box". As was stated in the video, they can have LBs or DBs close to the box, like within 5 yards, which is close enough that they might as well be in the box, but it just doesn't show up in the stats that way. In fact, there could be a DB charging the line from outside the box, and his momentum would get him in the backfield before anyone in the box could.

So basically, just because the chart states that there were only 6 men in the box, it doesn't mean there weren't 8 men committed to stopping the run.

jwooten15 · Nov 12, 2019

Creeper said:
1 in the box? Should be easy to run on, no?

Zeke would still seek out contact with that one dude and fall flat on his face after running into him

CowboyRoy · Nov 12, 2019

CATCH17 said:
They did.

The problem with the guys in the box stat is that it doesn't take into account when Dallas plays 3 receivers or more.

Imagine a team putting 8 in the box when we're rolling out 3 or 4 receivers.

Their gameplan was to not let Zeke beat them. IT worked.

Doesn't seem like a very difficult thing to do anymore.

Runwildboys · Nov 12, 2019

Nav22 said:
Hahahahahah

And yet you can’t point to ONE fact that says that they DID sell out to stop the run.

Even though you then tried to call me out for NOT introducing facts.

“Eye test!!!!”

I don't understand why you discount the video presented earlier.

Nav22 · Nov 12, 2019

Runwildboys said:
Sturm's chart is showing how many men were technically "in the box". As was stated in the video, they can have LBs or DBs close to the box, like within 5 yards, which is close enough that they might as well be in the box, but it just doesn't show up in the stats that way. In fact, there could be a DB charging the line from outside the box, and his momentum would get him in the backfield before anyone in the box could.

So basically, just because the chart states that there were only 6 men in the box, it doesn't mean there weren't 8 men committed to stopping the run.

That’s all well and good, but you people can’t have it both ways (not you specifically).

Did they sell out to stop the run?

Or did our OL just get their butts kicked repeatedly against any formation?

So many crybabies here thinking this is a ZEKE SUX thread. It’s not.

The run game stunk up the joint and we stayed with it like idiots.

Dak lit it up and it was NOT because of the focus on Zeke. It was because Dak’s a baller who played an awesome game.

Toruk_Makto · Nov 12, 2019

CATCH17 said:
They did.

The problem with the guys in the box stat is that it doesn't take into account when Dallas plays 3 receivers or more.

Imagine a team putting 8 in the box when we're rolling out 3 or 4 receivers.

Their gameplan was to not let Zeke beat them. IT worked.

A RB who can't routinely break long runs can't "beat you."

blueblood70 · Nov 12, 2019

another EE hate troll thread.. its sad fans need to do this to their own...total tool DB..

another loss for Dak when Zeke doesnt get over 75Yards..Vikes did what they set out to do..dak did not bring home the win did he? no hate on dak just answering he op thread.. career year 5-4 so far..huh?

ignorance

texbumthelife · Nov 12, 2019

Nav22 said:
Hahahahahah

And yet you can’t point to ONE fact that says that they DID sell out to stop the run.

Even though you then tried to call me out for NOT introducing facts.

“Eye test!!!!”

I never said "they sold out to stop the run." If you have any understanding of the game of football, you know that a team's game plan can be to stop the run, without also selling out and/or committing multiple extra defenders to it and therefor leaving your backend naked. Just by watching the game and seeing the coverages, it's clear that's exactly what the Vikings did. The Vikings front sevens initial step on nearly every play, was toward the LOS. This is why we gashed them on play action. They committed a defender regularly to the strong side of the formation, lining him up over tackle or just outside in an "over" look. No, it wasnt an "extra defender" but it was his alignment that gives away their intention. This is just one of the very simple intricacies of "playing to stop the run" without "selling out"--which literally no one is claiming they did.

TwoDeep3 · Nov 12, 2019

Nav22 said:
Tell us again how the Vikings were “gearing up to stop Zeke” and THAT is why he struggled.

Tell us again that they “dared Dak” to beat them and that’s the only reason he played well.

Tell us again that Ezekiel Elliott should continue to be the focal point of the offense despite Dak’s career year.

Go ahead.

This charts proves the point they were playing to stop the run. I cannot see how you can include all 20 of his carries and not see the writing on the wall. In the box does not count toward the safties reading the run, or the defensive line overcoming the offensive line.

Take your emotions out of it Nav. You are way smarter than this.

CWR · Nov 12, 2019

Playmaker3128 said:
Eye test tells me the online wasn’t blocking well enough. I saw zeke getting contacts in the backfield quite a few times.

That doesn’t excuse the poor play. But to put it all on zeke is a bit ridiculous.

one of the best RBs in football Barkley has had back to back poor games. I still think zeke is fine. He’s a workhorse.

Zeke will be fine. It was exaggerated because Cook looked extremely dynamic and we just paid Zeke.

Cowboysheelsreds053 · Nov 12, 2019

Our expensive over paid OL has been HORRIBLE this year. PERIOD

Runwildboys · Nov 12, 2019

Nav22 said:
That’s all well and good, but you people can’t have it both ways (not you specifically).

Did they sell out to stop the run?

Or did our OL just get their butts kicked repeatedly against any formation?

So many crybabies here thinking this is a ZEKE SUX thread. It’s not.

The run game stunk up the joint and we stayed with it like idiots.

Dak lit it up and it was NOT because of the focus on Zeke. It was because Dak’s a baller who played an awesome game.

You're right, the O-line got their butts handed to them, and so did Zeke - but even Minnesota's HC stated that they were focusing on stopping Zeke. Dak played lights out, and anyone who tries to say otherwise is either biased or foolish. But they played the receivers man coverage, and even though Dak was putting the ball in perfect spots for the receivers, going against man coverage with WRs like ours is going to be easier on the QB. I'm not taking a single thing away from Dak, because the way he was slinging the ball, I don't know if the defense could've stopped him no matter how they played him, but Minnesota was most definitely more concerned with stopping the running game.

HungryLion · Nov 12, 2019

I know this may come as a surprise to some.

but the coaches hold back Zeke too.

I mean y’all remember 2016? Zeke and the offensive line put up that crazy production running mostly the same 2-3 rushing plays.

the running attack of this scheme is just as vanilla and plain as the passing attack. It usually gets by, by having superior talent. Period.

they also damn near criminally underutilize Zeke in the passing game. Zeke can run screens. Zeke can run wheel routes, Zeke can be used in the slot occasionally even.

we see almost none of it. And when we rarely do everyone is surprised and excited.

texbumthelife · Nov 12, 2019

Nav22 said:
That’s all well and good, but you people can’t have it both ways (not you specifically).

Did they sell out to stop the run?

Or did our OL just get their butts kicked repeatedly against any formation?

So many crybabies here thinking this is a ZEKE SUX thread. It’s not.

The run game stunk up the joint and we stayed with it like idiots.

Dak lit it up and it was NOT because of the focus on Zeke. It was because Dak’s a baller who played an awesome game.

You can't seem to understand that a team can commit to stopping the run without "selling out" to stop the run. These are dramatically different.

Yeah, the offensive line was awful running. Yes, Zeke left yards on the field. Also, yes, Minnesota clearly, plainly as day came in with the mindset of limiting Zeke.

PAPPYDOG · Nov 12, 2019

blueblood70 said:
another EE hate troll thread.. its sad fans need to do this to their own...total tool DB..

another loss for Dak when Zeke doesnt get over 75Yards..Vikes did what they set out to do..dak did not bring home the win did he? no hate on dak just answering he op thread.. career year 5-4 so far..huh?

ignorance

Give Dak 40 million a year as we're 5-4 and can only beat teams with losing records or the Eagles who fumbled on their first 2 drives.....
Zeke is it and beyond that, as you correctly state another LOSS and playoffs seem like a dream at this point.
Any worthy defense can STOP any HB it's up to the QB to gut them out and with the only exception of the Vikes game that hasn't happened.
Zeke alone cannot win every game for Dak....

JohnsKey19 · Nov 12, 2019

Playmaker3128 said:
Eye test tells me the online wasn’t blocking well enough. I saw zeke getting contacts in the backfield quite a few times.

That doesn’t excuse the poor play. But to put it all on zeke is a bit ridiculous.

one of the best RBs in football Barkley has had back to back poor games. I still think zeke is fine. He’s a workhorse.

Seems like the OL more times than not struggles when challenged by a good defensive front. I get it, the other team gets paid too. But with all the $$$ and draft capital spent on the OL, that is unacceptable. Same goes for the DL as far as struggling vs the better teams. Can't win a Divisional round playoff game if you're getting destroyed in the trenches on either or worst case both sides of the ball.

Nav22 · Nov 12, 2019

texbumthelife said:
I never said "they sold out to stop the run." If you have any understanding of the game of football, you know that a team's game plan can be to stop the run, without alsl selling out and/or committing multiple extra defenders to it and therefor leaving your backend naked. Just by watching the game and seeing the coverages, it's clear that's exactly what the Vikings did. The Vikings front sevens initial step on nearly every play, was toward the LOS. This is why we gashed them on play action. They committed a defender regularly to the strong side of the formation, lining him up over tackle or just outside in an "over" look. No, it wasnt an "extra defender" but it was his alignment that gives away their intention. This is just one of the very simple intricacies of "playing to stop the run" without "selling out"--which literally no one is claiming they did.

We gashed them on anything we wanted to through the air.

Not just playaction.

Zeke was a JOKE and the run game was absolutely horrific.

Defenders on the strong side AND taking a step toward the LOS every snap? Because running to the weak side is impossible, right? Wow, seems like you’ve done your film study! I can’t wait to read your findings!

Facts. That’s what I’m waiting for.

On what % of plays did the defenders take the first step towards the LOS? On what % of run plays were they in an “over” look.

We’re all ears!

Don’t deflect. Remember how you called ME out for not presenting facts?

DURRRR EYE TESTZ!!!
:lmao2:

blueblood70 · Nov 12, 2019

PAPPYDOG said:
Give Dak 40 million a year as we're 5-4 and can only beat teams with losing records or the Eagles who fumbled on their first 2 drives.....
Zeke is it and beyond that, as you correctly state another LOSS and playoffs seem like a dream at this point.
Any worthy defense can STOP any HB it's up to the QB to gut them out and with the only exception of the Vikes game that hasn't happened.
Zeke alone cannot win every game for Dak....

im not going to rip Dak, they need each other for sure.. fans are overly focused on contracts..let the FO and DC worry about that crud..

we need to go on a run and salvage this season.. lucky for us the east is down this year..im supporting my team until the bitter end

we can debate and complain after the season once all the data is in..

Nav22 · Nov 12, 2019

TwoDeep3 said:
This charts proves the point they were playing to stop the run. I cannot see how you can include all 20 of his carries and not see the writing on the wall. In the box does not count toward the safties reading the run, or the defensive line overcoming the offensive line.

Take your emotions out of it Nav. You are way smarter than this.

You’re joking, right?

Their DL kicking our OL’s butt is NOT “playing to stop the run.”

They beat us up front and we stuck to the run like idiots. That’s why we’ve been a national joke since late Sunday night.

Zeke and the run game were garbage no matter what looks the Vikings were in. Period.

You can’t use “BUT THEY WERE FOCUSED ON ZEKE” to try and explain away Dak’s fantastic game. That isn’t rooted in anything even remotely factual.

PAPPYDOG · Nov 12, 2019

blueblood70 said:
im not going to rip Dak, they need each other for sure.. fans are overly focused on contracts..let the FO and DC worry about that crud..

we need to go on a run and salvage this season.. lucky for us the east is down this year..im supporting my team until the bitter end

we can debate and complain after the season once all the data is in..

I consider it shameful to bury Zeke as he is the sole reason along with our Defense we have had respectable team give or take.
When a team is 2-10 when there HB is under 75 yards pretty much says it all about where our offense is inept.

Zeke vs of Vikings in the box

Confused about stuff

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Confused about stuff

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Confused about stuff

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

There are no Dak haters just Cowboy lovers!!!

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

There are no Dak haters just Cowboy lovers!!!