Back To The Future? How The Cowboys May Be Exploiting NFL Trends With The Running Game

[waving monkey]

It was a subject of much debate before the draft and continues to be so. Why spend a fourth-round pick on Ezekiel Elliott when the running back position is so devalued in the pass-addicted NFL? Since the Dallas Cowboys were able to mount a successful running game with Darren McFadden, whose skill set is not a good fit for what the team prefers to do, couldn't they have gotten a good running back later in the draft and better spent the draft capital elsewhere? Why would they buck the trend and go against the flow of the league?

While of course the staff of the Cowboys don't share all the innermost details of their strategy, all this does raise another question: What if going in the opposite direction of the league is the whole idea?


Some of these thoughts have been circulating around sort of half-formed for a time (at least in my often chaotic brain), but they were really crystallized by an article on offensive linemen and the challenges they face in today's NFL written by Pete Prisco at CBSSports.com. (Hat tip to Landon McCool who saw this first and drew my attention to it with a tweet.) It was a missing piece of the puzzle that speaks to some significant differences in the way the Cowboys are doing things as opposed to what seems to be happening with many other teams.

The basic logic is something that is common in business: Find something that no one else is doing and exploit it. It also has a military counterpart: Figure out where a significant weakness is and hit it as hard as you can.

link/http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2016...iting-nfl-trends-running-game-ezekiel-elliott

 

[PAINFROMUKRAINE]

The word "Exploitation" and our current Coaching Staff can never be stated together. The staff does not have a clue about strategizing a game plan to exploit a weakness Furthermore, halftime and in-game adjustments to exploit an injury or play calling by the opposing team has no bearing on our game plan. Garrett and crew just stick with game plan they developed during the week. Just "Ride the Storm" and hope that you can win the game somehow.

 

[Reality]

I think they are putting way too much thought into this. Garrett was on those 90s teams and has said all along, the reason those teams were so successful on offense had to do with a having a great offensive line and a solid running game. When he got a chance to see that in action in 2014, the results were exactly what he expected and if there were still any doubters on the Cowboys staff or front office, they likely changed their minds after that season.

Garrett has always preached execution being the key, which is really what it comes down to in professional sports .. well, that and player health. The quality of players is so close that new schemes and tactics only provide you with a temporary advantage at best. What separates you from your competitors is execution and consistency. The running game provides an easier path to achieving those goals over the long term. Of course if you have a great quarterback and/or a great defense, the need for higher execution decreases a little.

The Cowboys are not run by geniuses, and that's not meant to be an insult. It's not like they arrived at this point through an elevated means of thought. The Cowboys have tried copying several successful team's blueprints over the years since the 90s, but none of them have worked. They basically tried everything else and it failed, so with Garrett's ties to the 90s teams, it made sense for them to now try rebuilding what they had back then and that all started with the offensive line. They drafted well in that area which greatly improved the running game and also showed them they can still emulate a lot of the 90s success in that area. However, Romo's age and, as a result, health are X factors now which is why they wasted 2015 when he was injured.

 

[Denim Chicken]

“Attack him where he is unprepared, appear where you are not expected.”

“You can be sure of succeeding in your attacks if you only attack places which are undefended.”

― Sun Tzu, The Art of War

 

[Thefeelofcotton]

Football comes down to two very basic concepts. Blocking vs. tackling. Whichever team does both of these better will win. The tackling for the Cowboys at times has been very suspect, even in 2014. Our blocking, for the most part, is very very good. There are times where we see lapses, but for the most part the blocking on this team is fantastic. If you block well, your running will flourish as a result and as a result of that, your pass game will also flourish. If you tackle better than the other team blocks it doesn't matter if you have Walter Peyton running the ball behind the 90s Cowboys O-Line (think about that for a sec *drool*). Also, if you tackle better, the pass game becomes almost a non-issue because as soon as any receiver catches the ball they are brought down.

 

[Doomsday101]

I think they are putting way too much thought into this. Garrett was on those 90s teams and has said all along, the reason those teams were so successful on offense had to do with a having a great offensive line and a solid running game. When he got a chance to see that in action in 2014, the results were exactly what he expected and if there were still any doubters on the Cowboys staff or front office, they likely changed their minds after that season.

Garrett has always preached execution being the key, which is really what it comes down to in professional sports .. well, that and player health. The quality of players is so close that new schemes and tactics only provide you with a temporary advantage at best. What separates you from your competitors is execution and consistency. The running game provides an easier path to achieving those goals over the long term. Of course if you have a great quarterback and/or a great defense, the need for higher execution decreases a little.

The Cowboys are not run by geniuses, and that's not meant to be an insult. It's not like they arrived at this point through an elevated means of thought. The Cowboys have tried copying several successful team's blueprints over the years since the 90s, but none of them have worked. They basically tried everything else and it failed, so with Garrett's ties to the 90s teams, it made sense for them to now try rebuilding what they had back then and that all started with the offensive line. They drafted well in that area which greatly improved the running game and also showed them they can still emulate a lot of the 90s success in that area. However, Romo's age and, as a result, health are X factors now which is why they wasted 2015 when he was injured.

I think Garrett wants to achieve balance within the offense and the run game can help set that stage but keeping the team in down and distance that is favorable to them. It is much easier running an offense that is staying in 2nd short and 3rd and short as opposed to being stuck in 3rd and long situations and trying to overcome it. With Elliott hopefully they have that guy who can allow them to stay in positive situation where we can dictate to the defense and keep Romo out of those situations where defense is able to just pin their ears back and go after him. As you said it something out championship teams were able to do and it proved to be successful in the 2014 season. I still can't help but laugh at those who will blame Garrett for all yet in 2014 were quick to claim Garrett had nothing to do with it, it was all Linehan that is until 2015 season when we played without out top 3 offensive players from the season before. While injuries are said to be no excuse all I can say it in the 90's this team struggled to win when one of the 3 triplets were out of the line up, last season all 3 of out top offensive weapons were gone and yet people can't figure out how big of a loss that was for this team.

 

[DogFace]

As teams get smaller to defend the pass The Cowboys get bigger/stronger.

This could be a very fun time.

 

[erod]

As teams get smaller to defend the pass The Cowboys get bigger/stronger.

This could be a very fun time.

This is very true. While other teams are playing checkers, Dallas can play chess. Or vice versa. Doesn't matter.

Teams have "gone small" to defend the top passing attacks. Dallas is doing the same defensively. That does, however, leave those teams vulnerable to a big line with a power running game.

To a lesser extent, it's like playing Air Force in college football. They don't have a lick of talent, but when teams have to play that Wishbone for one game in a season, it completely confuses them. You see big time programs give up 400 yards and 35 points to those little dudes.

I don't expect the advantage to last long. A few teams seem to be building toward a run game, and we all know the cycles and copycatting that occurs in the NFL.

 

[jnday]

This article discusses the very type of offense that many of us has wanted for years. Dallas now has the players to run the ball down opposing defense's throats. I like to see them run the ball when the defense can not stop it. Imposing their will on offense will go s long ways towards the whole team playing well.

 

[DandyDon52]

I think dallas and JG went to the run in 2014 mainly to protect romo who had just had the back surgery.
Also they wanted to run on 1st down and get good yardage so that Romo would have 2nd and 5 or 3rd and short.
Then they could pass or run, and get the 1st down.

I think even if Murray had stayed, they would have run less in 2015, JG had already said murray
would not get so many carries again in 2015.

So now they draft elliot, so I wonder just how much they will run in 2016??

Will it be back to 2014 level of what 392 carries just for murray, and then randle had some too.
Will they run on every 1st down again ?

I think one key is having the 3rd and shorts instead of 3rd and 5 or more.

With the backs we now have I would run more than 2014 lol.

 

[Daillest88]

I think dallas and JG went to the run in 2014 mainly to protect romo who had just had the back surgery.
Also they wanted to run on 1st down and get good yardage so that Romo would have 2nd and 5 or 3rd and short.
Then they could pass or run, and get the 1st down.

I think even if Murray had stayed, they would have run less in 2015, JG had already said murray
would not get so many carries again in 2015.

So now they draft elliot, so I wonder just how much they will run in 2016??

Will it be back to 2014 level of what 392 carries just for murray, and then randle had some too.
Will they run on every 1st down again ?

I think one key is having the 3rd and shorts instead of 3rd and 5 or more.

With the backs we now have I would run more than 2014 lol.

We might run the ball just as much as 2014 but I can tell you this there not going to give Elliott 392 carries. Alfred Morris and McFadden will get there share.

 

[erod]

We might run the ball just as much as 2014 but I can tell you this there not going to give Elliott 392 carries. Alfred Morris and McFadden will get there share.

As they should. But Elliott will get them when they matter most.

Besides, injuries will sort it out anyway.

 

[bsheeern]

I think they are putting way too much thought into this. Garrett was on those 90s teams and has said all along, the reason those teams were so successful on offense had to do with a having a great offensive line and a solid running game. When he got a chance to see that in action in 2014, the results were exactly what he expected and if there were still any doubters on the Cowboys staff or front office, they likely changed their minds after that season.

Garrett has always preached execution being the key, which is really what it comes down to in professional sports .. well, that and player health. The quality of players is so close that new schemes and tactics only provide you with a temporary advantage at best. What separates you from your competitors is execution and consistency. The running game provides an easier path to achieving those goals over the long term. Of course if you have a great quarterback and/or a great defense, the need for higher execution decreases a little.

The Cowboys are not run by geniuses, and that's not meant to be an insult. It's not like they arrived at this point through an elevated means of thought. The Cowboys have tried copying several successful team's blueprints over the years since the 90s, but none of them have worked. They basically tried everything else and it failed, so with Garrett's ties to the 90s teams, it made sense for them to now try rebuilding what they had back then and that all started with the offensive line. They drafted well in that area which greatly improved the running game and also showed them they can still emulate a lot of the 90s success in that area. However, Romo's age and, as a result, health are X factors now which is why they wasted 2015 when he was injured.

This can't be true because according to @AdamJT13 how well you run the ball has little to no effect on winning.

 

[percyhoward]

Garrett was on those 90s teams and has said all along, the reason those teams were so successful on offense had to do with a having a great offensive line and a solid running game.

Emmitt's Playoff Record
in 6 seasons with top 12-rated passer: 12-3
in 9 seasons without top 12-rated passer: 0-2

 

[kevm3]

We don't have a Bill Bellichick with Tom Brady or some super offensive genius running everything, so where we will find success is like in 2014 by having a simple, but powerful run game which takes the pressure off of Romo and frees up Dez.

 

[bsheeern]

Emmitt's Playoff Record
in 6 seasons with top 12-rated passer: 12-3
in 9 seasons without top 12-rated passer: 0-2

oh LORD......Here we go again...... SMH

But I guess the way Emmitt played had NOTHING to do with making it easier for that QB to achieve that top RATED passer status?

 

[AdamJT13]

This can't be true because according to @AdamJT13 how well you run the ball has little to no effect on winning.

In the early 1990s, we almost always won games when we passed the ball better than our opponent, regardless of whether we ran it better than our opponent. And when we didn't pass it better than the opponent, we usually lost, regardless of how well we (or Emmitt) ran it.

In fact, from 1992-95, we had a higher winning percentage when we ran the ball WORSE than our opponent (21-5, .808) than when we ran the ball BETTER than our opponent (38-11, .776).

The team that passed better in our games from 1992-95 went 62-13 (.827). The team that ran better went 43-32 (.573).

And we went 20-1 in the 21 games with our LOWEST rushing averages during those seasons.

Clearly, our games were almost always decided by whether we passed better than our opponent, not whether we ran it better.

 

[CWR]

Yes, there was a period where 3-4 defenses where far and few between and those teams running them had much less competition in getting players to fit thier scheme.

Now that its a passing league everyone says we are idiots for investing in a RB so early, however it may be the perfect time for such a philosophy.

Wether Garret and company intended on doing so from the onset well...we cant say. In either case our style of play should be beneficial as we smash other teams in the mouth. I love that idea.

 

[bsheeern]

In the early 1990s, we almost always won games when we passed the ball better than our opponent, regardless of whether we ran it better than our opponent. And when we didn't pass it better than the opponent, we usually lost, regardless of how well we (or Emmitt) ran it.

In fact, from 1992-95, we had a higher winning percentage when we ran the ball WORSE than our opponent (21-5, .808) than when we ran the ball BETTER than our opponent (38-11, .776).

The team that passed better in our games from 1992-95 went 62-13 (.827). The team that ran better went 43-32 (.573).

And we went 20-1 in the 21 games with our LOWEST rushing averages during those seasons.

Clearly, our games were almost always decided by whether we passed better than our opponent, not whether we ran it better.

And The way Defenses GAMEPLANNED to stop Emmitt have a direct EFFECT on our passing game. No matter how many yards you gain.

You think every team GAMEPLANNED the same?

 

[DeaconMoss]

It was a subject of much debate before the draft and continues to be so. Why spend a fourth-round pick on Ezekiel Elliott when t

We got Zeke in the 4th round? Man that was a good value pick.