A Little Formation To Get You Excited

[Hostile]

well I don't think McGee should be the 3rd QB every game day, and the fact that we haven't taken a QB this high in the draft in a long time makes me believe that he won't be sitting on the bench every week, inactive

idk, I guess I'm too infatuated with the idea of bringing the option to the pro game and/or making our offense revolutionary

now what I described wouldn't be a true, option offense, but we could incorporate the general idea such as giving the QB the option to either hand-off, run or throw the football

I'm going to disagree with you. I think he should be the 3rd QB every game and should see the field unless it is a huge blowout and it's the 4th quarter.

I think the option will be short lived in the NFL. If you look at Miami's early success versus their late season struggles with it, you will see a stark contrast. Teams were unprepared when they unveiled it against the Patriots. Towards season's end they had caught up.

Every team will use some version of it even if it is only to teach their players how to stop it when they face it. I think it's usefulness is really limited to the red zone. Just my opinion. Never been a fan of the wing formations as I said earlier.

 

[casmith07]

I'm going to disagree with you. I think he should be the 3rd QB every game and should see the field unless it is a huge blowout and it's the 4th quarter.

I think the option will be short lived in the NFL. If you look at Miami's early success versus their late season struggles with it, you will see a stark contrast. Teams were unprepared when they unveiled it against the Patriots. Towards season's end they had caught up.

Every team will use some version of it even if it is only to teach their players how to stop it when they face it. I think it's usefulness is really limited to the red zone. Just my opinion. Never been a fan of the wing formations as I said earlier.

Wing formations are for service academies and high schools that don't have a kid that can throw.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

I'm going to disagree with you. I think he should be the 3rd QB every game and should see the field unless it is a huge blowout and it's the 4th quarter.

why?

I think the option will be short lived in the NFL. If you look at Miami's early success versus their late season struggles with it, you will see a stark contrast. Teams were unprepared when they unveiled it against the Patriots. Towards season's end they had caught up.

Every team will use some version of it even if it is only to teach their players how to stop it when they face it. I think it's usefulness is really limited to the red zone. Just my opinion. Never been a fan of the wing formations as I said earlier.

agree to disagree then

I think we have the talent to pull it off, not as a base offense, but as introducing another gadget play to the NFL

 

[Bob Sacamano]

Wing formations are for service academies and high schools that don't have a kid that can throw.

I guess our offense sucks then since we want to use gadget plays

 

[Hostile]

why?

agree to disagree then

I think we have the talent to pull it off, not as a base offense, but as introducing another gadget play to the NFL

I prefer to play with our best 11 on the field and that means Tony Romo is in the game. I prefer not to push a rookie QB unless we are a transition team anyway.

Hey, I like the fumblerooskie too, but Not enough to take Romo off the field.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

I prefer to play with our best 11 on the field and that means Tony Romo is in the game. I prefer not to push a rookie QB unless we are a transition team anyway.

Hey, I like the fumblerooskie too, but Not enough to take Romo off the field.

how is substituting McGee for Romo any different than relegating Romo as a blocker in the Razorback?

might as well turn him into a guy who can actually block

 

[Hostile]

how is substituting McGee for Romo any different than relegating Romo as a blocker in the Razorback?

I wouldn't want Romo on the field for the Razorback. I would want him on the field just about any other time that the Offense is in control.

 

[dallasfaniac]

What exactly has McGee shown that would justify a gameday roster spot to run a few Wildcat plays before Crayton or Stanglass?

 

[Bob Sacamano]

What exactly has McGee shown that would justify a gameday roster spot to run a few Wildcat plays before Crayton or Stanglass?

that he's athletic and can throw the football

might as well ask that question about Stephen Hodge playing special teams for us, but we're still counting on him to be one of the glues to special teams

all Crayton did practicing the razorback was throw balls into the dirt

 

[dallasfaniac]

all Crayton did practicing the razorback was throw balls into the dirt

How did those passes look? How did they look compared to McGee's?

 

[Bob Sacamano]

How did those passes look? How did they look compared to McGee's?

the passes were ugly

I don't remember any reports about McGee's passes looking bad, just that he had a propensity to go for the safe throws

 

[dcfanatic]

Another option on that is for Witten to jam the SS to the outside within the 5 yards and then turn back up the middle of the field. He'd have a step. If hit in motion it could go for 12 to 15 yards easily.

The thing I like best about this look is that you never have a situation where Witten doesn't have some kind of advantage.

We run the Post with Felix instead of the corner just to clear it a little more and Witten is definitely beating that SS with an inside cut...

[youtube]XZ06jXthNqE[/youtube]

I hope that SS has fun trying take down Witten too.

 

[dallasfaniac]

So you didn't see the throws and you are just going off the very limited reports?

 

[Bob Sacamano]

So you didn't see the throws and you are just going off the very limited reports?

yeah, I couldn't make it to TC

it's a ***** living in MD, taking the trip to TX for TC, so I decided to not go through that hassle

 

[JohnnyHopkins]

If that doesn't make you salivate then you simply aren't hungry enough for the season to approach.
[youtube]eSU2JSyGor8[/youtube]

I'm literally wet right now! (I just got out of the pool). Nice Play.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

Nicely done Hos.

 

[SLATEmosphere]

Then after we run them over them 8-10 times with that against their Nickel we go to this...

[youtube]rjpaOBGjjb8[/youtube]

Felix, Felix, Felix!

The WLB and MLB are coming at the snap because of the play action. Clears out the underneath center. The FS has a tough decision here. Go with the double on Roy, the 6'3 monster who is likely going to catch the deep pass from Romo if it's high enough or does he stay with the NB to double Felix on the corner route?

He's going with the double on Roy 8 out 10 times IMO. And the NB is doing all he can to stay within 5 yards of Felix who is as fast as they come.

Block it well and it should be six.

Just went from 6 to midnight..

 

[Yakuza Rich]

Garrett run a play action? Have you been drugged?

I still suspect that teams would use some sort of nickel package against this. Our run blocking is too suspect and when teams stack the box, we tend to neglect the running game. That would require Felix to beat a safety out wide. The Rams had Faulk who could often do that and then they had Holt and Bruce in their primes who were a deadly duo, another deep threat in Az Hakim and then a tough possession guy in Ricky Proehl. I'm still more interested in what we can do with Bennett since he provides more matchup issues than Felix does IMO. With Bennett and Witten in the game, we can give more of a running threat and still have two deep threats at TE. Most safeties can't cover Witten and I think if Bennett improves at the rate he should be, I don't think safeties can cover him either.

What this reminds me of personnel wise is more like the Pats' personnel. The Pats would show a 3WR (Moss, Stallworth, Welker), 1 TE (Watson), 1 RB (Faulk) formation. Moss is so dangerous in the deep game and Stallworth would stretch the field as well. This opened things up underneath for Welker. If teams get that down, then they'll line up Watson out wide -- not a great TE, but he's got 4.4 speed and has to be accounted for. Then you had Faulk who is a great receiver out of the backfield. That's why I would suggest making Miles Austin a starter, if for anything to stretch the field. We could then come out with a 2 TE formation, stretch one of the WR's deep, pick and choose what we want to do with Witten and Bennett and then always threaten to run the ball.




YAKUZA

 

[dcfanatic]

Garrett run a play action? Have you been drugged?

I still suspect that teams would use some sort of nickel package against this. Our run blocking is too suspect and when teams stack the box, we tend to neglect the running game. That would require Felix to beat a safety out wide. The Rams had Faulk who could often do that and then they had Holt and Bruce in their primes who were a deadly duo, another deep threat in Az Hakim and then a tough possession guy in Ricky Proehl. I'm still more interested in what we can do with Bennett since he provides more matchup issues than Felix does IMO. With Bennett and Witten in the game, we can give more of a running threat and still have two deep threats at TE. Most safeties can't cover Witten and I think if Bennett improves at the rate he should be, I don't think safeties can cover him either.

What this reminds me of personnel wise is more like the Pats' personnel. The Pats would show a 3WR (Moss, Stallworth, Welker), 1 TE (Watson), 1 RB (Faulk) formation. Moss is so dangerous in the deep game and Stallworth would stretch the field as well. This opened things up underneath for Welker. If teams get that down, then they'll line up Watson out wide -- not a great TE, but he's got 4.4 speed and has to be accounted for. Then you had Faulk who is a great receiver out of the backfield. That's why I would suggest making Miles Austin a starter, if for anything to stretch the field. We could then come out with a 2 TE formation, stretch one of the WR's deep, pick and choose what we want to do with Witten and Bennett and then always threaten to run the ball.

YAKUZA

That was against the Nickel.

 

[DaBoys4Life]

I didn't ignore it. I read it, felt it was pretty ignorant, and decided it wasn't worth my time when other people were actually excited to talk about football for a change.

But since you have opened yourself up by thinking it was so important for me to address I will.

I have no doubt that you wouldn't respect Garrett if he was your coach. That wouldn't make you worth a pint of spit as a player just like it reduced Owens' value to the team. You obviously do not grasp the need for players to respect their coaches. I can't really explain it to you beyond this. The greatest Coaches in NFL History all demanded respect from their players. None of them would have put up with a prima donna, aging blowhard who put himself above the team in importance on a regular basis.

Our current coaching staff is a joke and it's a circus in VR right now. It's sad that you can see that I don't remember them demanding respect or was that why Campo got pants last training camp.

Owens has had multiple chances in the NFL and has played for some very good football teams. He is a remarkable player who each of those very good football teams has eventually determined was not worth the effort.

If you want to continue to believe you know more than all of those football people then by all means continue in your warped and frivolous fantasies. The rest of us would like to move on to the real world.

Owens is gone and it won't hurt us one bit. He is not the be all, end all WR. Other teams can and do win without Terrell Owens. It happens every single year. The world does not revolve around him.

Owens was a lot of production and I'm not as butt sore about it as you think. I'm just trying to realize what we have that can make up for the production that we're missing from TO. I mean if we even made an attempt to draft a suitable replacement I wouldn't mind. Now you're most likely going to bring up RW and how we traded for him last year. I forget what was the reason why we did that oh yeah because the young guys couldn't step up. Now you expect me to believe that these say guys can do it now when they couldn't do it with TO their. Unless you think RW is better than an aging TO as you put it.

Forgive you for not sucking off some formation that I am drooling over? First of all I didn't ask anyone to do that. Your piss ant act is wearing razor thin with me and this kind of language is exactly why no one takes you seriously. How can they? You're nothing but a kiss up to a player who is no longer here. Wring out your crying towel and move on. Either to the Bills forum or get over it and stick around.

This place is about the Dallas Cowboys, not Terrell Owens. These formations, the players and the coaches left behind are the reason why most of us are looking forward to 2009. You're not. Boo hoo hoo. Grab a pacifier and your blankie or suck your thumb. Personally I don't care one way or the other what method you use to bend yourself into a fetal position and find your happy place.

I'm not kissing TO *** I'm just saying that he was a big part of our success. A big part of our offense and it's not right for him to take the fall where we failed in other areas and aspect that are still within the organization things that make you happy but do not please me. Maybe I did go about what I said the wrong way last night however, i was pretty tired and didn't feel like thinking so I just said what ever popped into my head and let the filters do their job LoL.

To that end I will damn well post stuff about formations and possiblities and I will discuss the 2009 Dallas Cowboys to the beatings of my tiny little heart and I refuse to give a flying damn that you are butt hurt that Terrell Owens is gone and any formation we draw up in 2009 would be better if he was still here. I don't agree. I think he was an albatross and is someone else's problem this year.

In 2008 we could not have used a formation like this for one very simple reason. A certain spotlight grabbing, whining, protesting WR we had on our squad last year wouldn't have stood for it. Forget the fact that his skills are clearly declining. Oh sure, he can have one marvelous game against a piss poor Defensive game plan and look like some kind of hero to mouth breathing masses of iLoveMeSomeMe butt kissers, but to knowledgeable football fans, he was no longer earning his paycheck and it was time to move on. He wouldn't have accepted this because.......DUH......it is a featured 2 Back formation which means this is designed to make us a RUNNING team to set up the pass. He would no longer be the focus of the offense.

Garrett may or may not use this type of formation in 2009. I have no doubt whatsoever that the man is smarter than I am. Maybe he can improve on this. Maybe he envisions something else altogether. All I was attempting to do was inject some football discussion into the daily paparazzi and piss and moan threads. I didn't take the time to even consider how this would hurt your tender feelings. I can't imagine why I would give a damn.

I have a couple of issues with what you're saying. You concede that Garrett may be smarter than you. Whether that is the case or not it doesn't take a genius to know that he misused the talent that we had last year. It also doesn't take a genius to realize some of the players on the roster last year shouldn't have been there same goes for this year,

Your asnine hatred for TO is mind boggling TBH. Yeah he caused problems in the locker but to think that the game plan was changed just too please him is silly to say the least. I really find it hard to believe that you really think that was the only problem and now that we a rid of the cancer we can do work. Oh yeah the excuse last year was that Garrett had so many pieces to work with that he couldn't properly use them and that there's only one football and such. Now he's supposed to suddenly be able to get more out of less talent I have a hard to beliving that.