Better running game needed

[Idgit]

Listen, I agree that running the ball isn't nearly as important in today's NFL.

I just don't buy it for the Cowboys because of the way teams defend us.

Teams are loading in coverage so much that its causing a problem.

Ill be interested to see how Peyton attacks the Giants. I'd bet his RBs have a good day on the ground if the Giants defend the Broncos the same way they defended us.

We'll see how the season starts to play out. I don't think many teams are going to be content to sit back and rush 4 the way the Giants did on Sunday. The moves we've made on offense this offseason--drafting Williams and giving him the WR3 spot so we can get Austin in the slot, drafting another receiving TE to pair with the two we have already, giving Romo more input and control offensively--we're expecting to be able to exploit the underneath zones with our passing game.

There's no way we're a 500 or better team this season playing from behind 78% of our snaps or whatever ridiculous number it was last year. We'll be a much better running team on paper for no other reason than we'll be in different game situations this year. But, especially given that our interior protection should be improved, I'm expecting a lot more productivity from our passing game, and that'll be the thing that wins us more games than we have here in recent seasons if it works for us.

 

[Blackspider214]

I think what Murray did the other night was fine. Was it great? No. Was it bad? Also no. He got the yards when we needed them. I think the limitations in his game is making guys miss and getting those extra yards and big runs. There was a few times in that game where he had a chance but could not do it.

While you don't need a great rushing attack to win in this NFL, it does help. Vikings and Skins had the best rushing attacks last year and both of them were bounced in the 1st round. Vikings pretty easily. Chiefs were also in the top 4 rushing and were 2-14.

But it all begins with the line. You can get the best backs in here but until our OL is competent, this about as good as you will see most weeks. Sure you will have a breakout game out of the norm like the Ravens game last year but 90% of the time, our running game was inefficient.

This is still a QB driven league and Super Bowls these days will be won because of a QB who can make plays.

Also, I believe in the theory to pass to set up the run. A lot of the more recent prolific offenses did this.

 

[Doomsday101]

I think doing better in the run game is also important no doubt there will be teams that it will be much harder to run the ball on and the ratio of pass to run will swing week to week in large part because of the defense you are playing against. Each game is a battle in and of itself how you go about defeating an opposing team is by trying to exploit their weakness. Having the ability to run the ball effectively as well as passing the ball effectively gives you a good chance to go up against any team and give yourself a legitimate oppertunity at success.

 

[CATCH17]

We'll see how the season starts to play out. I don't think many teams are going to be content to sit back and rush 4 the way the Giants did on Sunday. The moves we've made on offense this offseason--drafting Williams and giving him the WR3 spot so we can get Austin in the slot, drafting another receiving TE to pair with the two we have already, giving Romo more input and control offensively--we're expecting to be able to exploit the underneath zones with our passing game.

There's no way we're a 500 or better team this season playing from behind 78% of our snaps or whatever ridiculous number it was last year. We'll be a much better running team on paper for no other reason than we'll be in different game situations this year. But, especially given that our interior protection should be improved, I'm expecting a lot more productivity from our passing game, and that'll be the thing that wins us more games than we have here in recent seasons if it works for us.

I agree with all of that. I think we have a very good team this year.

I'm just worried about being in a hostile environment, late in the year, with teams selling out on not giving up the big play, and we're out there with no urgency and tempo playing at the same pace we are now trying to force passes into heavy coverage.

It will get us sent home and everyone looking like chokers yet again.

 

[Gameover]

We don't have to have a better run game in order to be better in the red-zone. That is a myth

What we need is better QB play.Better management of the game.

And it would be hard for any team to hold onto a lead late when your defense gives up 2min touchdown drives.

 

[Staubacher]

For the record, although it's hardly necessary, I've never played a down of Madden, and I don't play fantasy football.

This is a bad argument, anyway, because the posters who make the arguments based off of things that are actually measured are in the group least likely to have learned whatever it is they know about football from a video game. All it takes is paying attention to what teams do, and why, and then looking at which teams win football games against other teams, and why. Not surprisingly, if you watched that game between the Cowboys and the Giants Sunday night and somehow came to the conclusion that that battle was tipped in favor of the Cowboys because of how the respective teams ran the ball in crunch time, then there's a perfectly reasonable explanation why statistics-based arguments are going to be unconvincing to you.

Sorry I wasn't talking about you personally sorry if u thought that. Was a general observation in my circles

 

[Rockport]

You're confusing 'balance' with 'effectiveness' again. And teams aren't 'guessing' if you're running or passing based off of how many runs or passes you've called previously. They guess what you're going to do based off of your formations and your tendencies.

What defenses don't like to do is play from behind, because that puts their offense in a place where it's necessarily one dimensional, and, if that one dimension is ineffective--which is what happens when a team is getting beat--they end up on the field more. I don't think they take getting beat by the running game any more or less personally than they take getting beat by the running game. In any event, it's moot, because passing game points count the same as running game points do, so, the goal of your offense is simply to score when it has the ball. The goal of the defense is to get your offense the ball.

You have me at a disadvantage here, because you'r engaging with a poster I don't interact with in the forums, but for the record, you've got the correlation between my running game and my trench argument right. Believe me, if it were true that running the ball better helped teams generally win more games, I'd want us to work on the things that go along with running the ball better, and run blocking would be one of those things. It doesn't, so I don't. But that's only because I really want us to focus our limited resources on the things that are more likely to result in us actually winning games. Fortunately for me, that's exactly what the team has been doing under Jason Garrett, which is why I'm such a big fan of him as a HC.

I'm not confusing anything. You're just trying to confuse the issue. It's a fact that you have to have balance with your offense. You can't pass 51 times and run 21 times and expect to win week after week. If you can't run out the clock in the 4th qtr when you're ahead, you will lose the majority of those games. And if you pass 51 times and run only 21, your QB is opened up to more hits. It's so basic and elementary I'm shocked that you don't get it. With your philosophy, we'll be 8-8 like the last 2 years with substandard running games. And don't forget the 6-10 year before that. And don't flood me with meaningless stats. We both know that the Cowboys havent' been able to run out the clock via running in years.

 

[visionary]

I'm not confusing anything. You're just trying to confuse the issue. .

told ya

 

[Ender]

It's a must in a Jason Garrett offense with the lack of creativity to get guys open.

We'll have to get teams to put another safety in the box against us because this offense got figured out a long time ago.

I agree, I was really hoping the change at OC and play calling would mean more creativity in the offense... based on sunday, doesnt seem like it....

 

[Idgit]

Sorry I wasn't talking about you personally sorry if u thought that. Was a general observation in my circles

No worries. Madden-fans are the bane of message boards everywhere. I just haven't ever noticed overlap between Madden fans and NFL statistics wonks.

I'm not confusing anything. You're just trying to confuse the issue. It's a fact that you have to have balance with your offense. You can't pass 51 times and run 21 times and expect to win week after week. If you can't run out the clock in the 4th qtr when you're ahead, you will lose the majority of those games. And if you pass 51 times and run only 21, your QB is opened up to more hits. It's so basic and elementary I'm shocked that you don't get it. With your philosophy, we'll be 8-8 like the last 2 years with substandard running games. And don't forget the 6-10 year before that. And don't flood me with meaningless stats. We both know that the Cowboys havent' been able to run out the clock via running in years.

Again, for maybe the thousandth time, the running game is important. There are situations where you need to run the ball. There are a lot of them. Doing so better than the other guys doesn't make you more likely to win football games. I don't know how better to separate these two ideas beyond saying it over and over and over. But simply citing the number of carries and pointing to an imbalance between running and passing doesn't prove anything about the importance of running the ball effectively.

 

[burmafrd]

We don't have to have a better run game in order to be better in the red-zone. That is a myth

What we need is better QB play.Better management of the game.

And it would be hard for any team to hold onto a lead late when your defense gives up 2min touchdown drives.

and the usual its all romo's fault.

Only a football idiot would think that not being able to run the ball in the red zone does NOT make the chances of getting a TD worse.

 

[Rockport]

No worries. Madden-fans are the bane of message boards everywhere. I just haven't ever noticed overlap between Madden fans and NFL statistics wonks.

Again, for maybe the thousandth time, the running game is important. There are situations where you need to run the ball. There are a lot of them. Doing so better than the other guys doesn't make you more likely to win football games. I don't know how better to separate these two ideas beyond saying it over and over and over. But simply citing the number of carries and pointing to an imbalance between running and passing doesn't prove anything about the importance of running the ball effectively.

No one ever said, at least I didn't, that you have to run the ball better than other teams. Why do you keep making things up?

 

[Idgit]

No one ever said, at least I didn't, that you have to run the ball better than other teams. Why do you keep making things up?

I'm probably getting confused by the title of your thread, then: "Better running game needed."

 

[Rockport]

I'm probably getting confused by the title of your thread, then: "Better running game needed."

We need a better running game. Don't get in to symantics now. You're better than that.

 

[Idgit]

No one ever said, at least I didn't, that you have to run the ball better than other teams. Why do you keep making things up?

We need a better running game. Don't get in to symantics now. You're better than that.

I'm so utterly confused as to what your point might be right now that I'm reluctant to even reply anymore.

 

[Rockport]

I'm so utterly confused as to what your point might be right now that I'm reluctant to even reply anymore.

That's sad that you don't get it. No offense, but if you believe that you don't win championships building your team via the trenches, then you don't understand football.

 

[Idgit]

That's sad that you don't get it. No offense, but if you believe that you don't win championships building your team via the trenches, then you don't understand football.

See, now this is a separate point from the 'better running game ' point yet again.

Re: trenches, I see teams win Superbowls all the time while getting outplayed in the trenches. Now, it obviously is helpful to be better anywhere than your opponent if you can be, but that doesn't mean that it's necessary to win. If you can pass better than they can with a weaker OL than they have, you can still win the game. I can live a long and happy life with the idea that my believing that makes you sad, Amber. I'm not trying to hurt your feelings, only pointing out that you're choosing to believe things that don't have the benefit of being factually accurate.

 

[Rockport]

See, now this is a separate point from the 'better running game ' point yet again.

Re: trenches, I see teams win Superbowls all the time while getting outplayed in the trenches. Now, it obviously is helpful to be better anywhere than your opponent if you can be, but that doesn't mean that it's necessary to win. If you can pass better than they can with a weaker OL than they have, you can still win the game. I can live a long and happy life with the idea that my believing that makes you sad, Amber. I'm not trying to hurt your feelings, only pointing out that you're choosing to believe things that don't have the benefit of being factually accurate.

We better just agree to disagree. I've got NFL Hall of Famers in my court. Probably all of them if truth were known.

 

[Gameover]

and the usual its all romo's fault.

Only a football idiot would think that not being able to run the ball in the red zone does NOT make the chances of getting a TD worse.

You misunderstood my post.

 

[pancakeman]