Back Up QB Playbook- no matter who is under center

[mmohican29]

Our HC was a career Back Up QB. He manages all of our QB's the same way- including Romo. This is the ultimate offense for a Back Up QB.

It mandates:

Protect the ball
Manage the game
Take what the Defense gives you

It says nothing to the level of individual talent of your personnel. Nothing. Not the QB's, not the positional players, not the O-Line. There is no reason why this team should not run the football effectively, and yesterday was a mess, forcing young Prescott into carrying the team which he's not quite ready to do yet.

This is why all of our outcomes- including Romo's- look similar despite who is under center.
When Romo is @ QB, usually his manipulation of play calling determines more on field success than actual plays being called. Garrett can not win with average talent at QB, because he won't take advantage of superior talent at the skill positions, and in fact won't seek better talent at said positions because it doesn't fit the mold of this moribund, bland, and predictable offense.

Therein lies the problem. We don't trust the talent of our players. This playbook should be dusted off when your 3rd string QB is forced into action and you're hoping for the best. There is no creativity no innovation and it doesn't adjust.

Look @ Arizona with Palmer under center. Or even the Bucs with Winston. These teams want their QB's taking chances and are not afraid of making a mistake. They throw to people I've never heard of for huge plays. These are NFL players. They should all be able to play. The Cowboys on the other hand, may have found Winston's equivalent in Prescott and did NOTHING to give him an advantage strategically, and with players that apparently not coached well situationally.

The Cowboys play scared football on both sides because they play chained to failure instead of an exciting brand of football that is now the norm across the NFL.

Garrett, his message, his coaching staff- are all stale here. I've seen enough. Let's offer the job to a Dirk Kotter and see if he can't get some action out of these "elite" players we have.

 

[JBS]

You hit the nail on the head

Only problem is, dirk kotter is the head coach in Tampa...you aren't getting him

 

[mmohican29]

You hit the nail on the head

Only problem is, dirk kotter is the head coach in Tampa...you aren't getting him

I meant find another guy like him- I apologize lol

 

[Irvin88_4life]

The big thing I seen yesterday was the Oakland and saints game. Oakland scored a TD with 47 seconds left in the game. Instead if kicking the extra point and going to overtime they went for 2 and got it. Now the saints had hurry up and go down the field trying to get points in 40 seconds and lost. Sure they could have missed the 2 point but having faith in your players like that can bring out the best.

Why Garrett went for a FG with 4 tries inside the 10 is crazy. If you don't get the TD you force the Giants to snap the ball in their endzone. Not once but twice we were in that situation and not 1 time a fade to Dez. You invested heavily into OL with multiple first round picks and a 4th overall on a RB. Let them work. A fake run inside would leave the outsides wide open. A FB or TE pass would be wide open. Teams do it every week. QB sneak is in play

 

[Idgit]

I didn't think the play calling was bad yesterday. In fact, I think they did a pretty good job and we got bit instead by key drops and by OL penalties that make it very difficult for any offense to convert. The only really conservative calls were the TE screens, and, while I didn't like either of those calls, you have to understand why they made the conservative plays there and didn't have the rookie forcing downfield a play that was not to be had.

 

[Playmaker247]

I wonder why we didn't run more outside runs yesterday or even just some counters, those are usually successful. One thing is for sure, this offense is so much different without Romo

 

[Tabascocat]

I wonder why we didn't run more outside runs yesterday or even just some counters, those are usually successful. One thing is for sure, this offense is so much different without Romo

Same exact offense with Romo, nothing has changed. He just has the Compound W to rid the warts.........

 

[boysfanindc]

I don't remember Garrett being a dump off guy, I remember him throwing a lot of deep balls in his limited action.

 

[Beast_from_East]

I didn't think the play calling was bad yesterday. In fact, I think they did a pretty good job and we got bit instead by key drops and by OL penalties that make it very difficult for any offense to convert. The only really conservative calls were the TE screens, and, while I didn't like either of those calls, you have to understand why they made the conservative plays there and didn't have the rookie forcing downfield a play that was not to be had.

The bottom line is that any game without Romo under center should not be an automatic loss. You cannot lose 13 out of 14 games using 4 different Qbs (Weeden, Cassel, Moore, Dak) and not start having major questions being asked of the head coach.

Now some will say this is Garrett bashing, but its not. Its a serious question of why a professional football team is incapable of winning games using 4 different QBs ranging from a rookie to a seasoned vet, when its starter is not available, especially considering that multiple other teams are winning without their starters. So why can multiple teams in the league win with their backup QBs, yet Dallas cant?

If we lose to the Skins next week, that will be losing 14 out of 15 games with backups, that is unheard of in the NFL. At what point is the head coach actually responsible for the inability of his team to win a game without its starter?

 

[Alexander]

Garrett says they don't use the word "caution" regarding throws. They must use a lot of other adjectives then because I have seen three QBs doing basically the same thing by design.

 

[Gabe]

Our HC was a career Back Up QB. He manages all of our QB's the same way- including Romo. This is the ultimate offense for a Back Up QB.

It mandates:

Protect the ball
Manage the game
Take what the Defense gives you

It says nothing to the level of individual talent of your personnel. Nothing. Not the QB's, not the positional players, not the O-Line. There is no reason why this team should not run the football effectively, and yesterday was a mess, forcing young Prescott into carrying the team which he's not quite ready to do yet.

This is why all of our outcomes- including Romo's- look similar despite who is under center.
When Romo is @ QB, usually his manipulation of play calling determines more on field success than actual plays being called. Garrett can not win with average talent at QB, because he won't take advantage of superior talent at the skill positions, and in fact won't seek better talent at said positions because it doesn't fit the mold of this moribund, bland, and predictable offense.

Therein lies the problem. We don't trust the talent of our players. This playbook should be dusted off when your 3rd string QB is forced into action and you're hoping for the best. There is no creativity no innovation and it doesn't adjust.

Look @ Arizona with Palmer under center. Or even the Bucs with Winston. These teams want their QB's taking chances and are not afraid of making a mistake. They throw to people I've never heard of for huge plays. These are NFL players. They should all be able to play. The Cowboys on the other hand, may have found Winston's equivalent in Prescott and did NOTHING to give him an advantage strategically, and with players that apparently not coached well situationally.

The Cowboys play scared football on both sides because they play chained to failure instead of an exciting brand of football that is now the norm across the NFL.

Garrett, his message, his coaching staff- are all stale here. I've seen enough. Let's offer the job to a Dirk Kotter and see if he can't get some action out of these "elite" players we have.

With the defense like it is... We simply cannot afford mistakes, giving the other offense 12-15 possessions... some of them on short fields. We would get absolutely destroyed nearly every game. Arizona can afford to make mistakes because their defense has a great chance of shutting down anyone.

At the present time, we do not have that luxury.

 

[Idgit]

The bottom line is that any game without Romo under center should not be an automatic loss. You cannot lose 13 out of 14 games using 4 different Qbs (Weeden, Cassel, Moore, Dak) and not start having major questions being asked of the head coach.

Now some will say this is Garrett bashing, but its not. Its a serious question of why a professional football team is incapable of winning games using 4 different QBs ranging from a rookie to a seasoned vet, when its starter is not available, especially considering that multiple other teams are winning without their starters. So why can multiple teams in the league win with their backup QBs, yet Dallas cant?

If we lose to the Skins next week, that will be losing 14 out of 15 games with backups, that is unheard of in the NFL. At what point is the head coach actually responsible for the inability of his team to win a game without its starter?

We're losing the games because our key starters aren't making the plays that are there to be made. Period. They are in position to make the plays. And they don't make them. That went on all of last year (though it was surrounded by some truly bad QB play, too), and it went on this week. I *do* agree that it's on Garrett and the staff to fix the problem. I just don't agree that it's a scheme problem or a play calling problem.

I'm still seeing players in position to win games and not getting it done. Ultimately, that's the kind of thing that gets a HC fired. And I do agree that the staff, primarily Garrett are partially responsible for creating an atmosphere where not making a play is not tolerated. I think Garrett needs to change something. But that doesn't mean I don't first blame the players for a failure to execute at the level they're getting paid to execute at.

 

[CATCH17]

I didn't think the play calling was bad yesterday. In fact, I think they did a pretty good job and we got bit instead by key drops and by OL penalties that make it very difficult for any offense to convert. The only really conservative calls were the TE screens, and, while I didn't like either of those calls, you have to understand why they made the conservative plays there and didn't have the rookie forcing downfield a play that was not to be had.

I don't have a problem with the playcalls as much as I have a problem with play designs and not getting guys in space.


There is no excuse for year after year and game after game of letting people dictate our offense.


The Giants were content letting Witten and Beasley beat them and they of course couldn't do it.

That philosophy we have needs to change.

 

[Idgit]

I don't have a problem with the playcalls as much as I have a problem with play designs and not getting guys in space.

There is no excuse for year after year and game after game of letting people dictate our offense.

The Giants were content letting Witten and Beasley beat them and they of course couldn't do it.

That philosophy we have needs to change.

We're not going to agree on this one ever I don't think. I don't love the strategy, but I don't have a problem with it much because it usually works.

For it to work, though, players have to make the plays that are there to be made, for sure.

 

[CATCH17]

We're not going to agree on this one ever I don't think. I don't love the strategy, but I don't have a problem with it much because it usually works.

For it to work, though, players have to make the plays that are there to be made, for sure.

It's a well below .500 strategy without Romo.

I'll concede that if we make absolutely no mistakes we'll win though.

 

[Idgit]

It's a well below .500 strategy without Romo.

I'll concede that if we make absolutely no mistakes we'll win though.

Good thing we've had Romo, I guess. Because with him, we're offensively productive.

If by 'absolutely no mistakes' you mean not dropping multiple TD receptions and getting out of bounds to attempt a game-winning kick, then we're in perfect agreement. That's kind of cool, since we don't see eye to eye on the topic usually.

 

[rd26]

I've said it before, but we play to control the clock and protect the defense.

Keep it close til the 4th quarter.

The malfunction is that the team with the best QB and / or the elite defense wins those games. We lose oh I dunno...... 14 out of 15 maybe without Romo.

 

[Doomsday]

I always thought one of the advantages of hiring a young upcoming coach was the use of a modern NFL system that brings new approaches.

What Dallas has gotten with JG is a retro 90s offense that doesn't take advantage of the passing rules in today's NFL.

 

[DogFace]

It's hard to argue that Garrett is anything more than average. At best. Strategically, he appears worse.