Bob's Blog: Shotgun to the Head: Ignoring the Stats Leads to Failure

[speedkilz88]

Actually to me its starting to look like more of a shame that wade and stewart wouldnt allow capers to be hired.

Knowing what is coming in 5 weeks or hopefully later, we will be left searching for a defensive coordinator when we could have already had one in house.

He would have been here for one year and still gotten the GB offer and left. So no we wouldn't have him in house.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

Because running the ball burns time and ices victories.
Because running the ball is more effective in short yardage situations.
Because running the ball prevents all-out pass defenses (like the 6 and 7 DB base defenses that the '07 Pats faced)

Parcells isn't wrong, I fail to see where I would imply that. I'm not saying that we shouldn't run. Just saying that we're running enough.

First, I wasn't addressing you only with this.

Second, you think if Parcells were the head coach and Garrett his OC, he would endorse this kind of offense?

We practically know he wouldn't.

 

[Temo]

First, I wasn't addressing you only with this.

Second, you think if Parcells were the head coach and Garrett his OC, he would endorse this kind of offense?

We practically know he wouldn't.

Parcells doesn't run much shotgun, that's true. But I don't think it's as stark a difference as people make it out be. Romo averaged 32 attempts per game under Parcells and is averaging 34.5 so far this year.

 

[theebs]

He would have been here for one year and still gotten the GB offer and left. So no we wouldn't have him in house.

You dont know that anymore than I could say that had capers been here wade would have been fired in January.

We dont know that capers wouldnt have stayed on an extra year knowing he would be taking over in 2010.

Either way, it looks as if garrett had the right idea bringing in capers. He has the green bay defense clicking on all levels.

 

[khiladi]

Right, so can we toss out those 21 shotgun formations since they came at a time when time was running short and we were facing prevent defenses then? So then we really didn't run a lot of shotgun at all, did we?

Your argument is that we moved that ball in shot-gun formation... We moved the ball because the defenses were in prevent...

 

[theebs]

Your argument is that we moved that ball in shot-gun formation... We moved the ball because the defenses were in prevent...

Its pretty funny how you only basically show up on the weeks after we lose to complain about garrett.

Pretty funny.

 

[wileedog]

Parcells doesn't run much shotgun, that's true. But I don't think it's as stark a difference as people make it out be. Romo averaged 32 attempts per game under Parcells and is averaging 34.5 so far this year.

Drew Bledsoe also set the record for pass attempts in a season under Parcells in NE.

Bill only goes hyper-conservative when he doesn't trust his QB. Which unfortunately was most of the time.

 

[Temo]

Your argument is that we moved that ball in shot-gun formation... We moved the ball because the defenses were in prevent...

And your argument was that we used shotgun too much. But we largely used it when the defense was in prevent and passing was the only option.

 

[bayeslife]

I have asked this before, and none of the pass-happy shotgun fans have answered.

Passing the ball all the time is obviously the way to rack up yards and even points. So why run the ball at all? Ever? Why not become Texas Tech, or a run-and-shoot team from the 80s? After all, they put up incredible stats.

It's a legitimate philosophical question: Why not pass every down?

I want someone to explain to me why coaches like Bill Parcells are wrong in their approach.

I don't think I have seen ONE "pass-happy shotgun fan" yet.

But to answer your question, yes predictability would be a major problem. The point is to keep the defense on their toes, and you don't accomplish that by lining up in the same formation over and over again.

But if the point you are trying to make is that Garrett is an idiot because he did line up to pass and play in shotgun as much as he did was the reason we lost, it is so off base it's not even funny. Garrett ran the ball 23 times. Now, I'm not saying is an astronomical number by any means, but if you run the ball 23 times and only get 45 yards out of it, then there is good reason not to keep foolishly pounding the ball especially when your team needs a score. The running game was simply not there yesterday. Blocks were getting destroyed, plays were getting broken up, whatever.

No, I'm not a fan of Garrett running out of Shotgun so much. Nor do I think he ran the ball enough. But the fact is, he is an NFL coach, and I am not. He studies film and picks up tendencies, and I do not.

On the thought that maybe if we ran the ball more we would have busted a couple long ones like in Oakland (one in razorback, mind you), also think of it this way. What if on a long pass play Garrett calls for a run that once again goes to the average 2 yards and ends up killing the drive? Does he look more like a genius because he satisfies the arbitrary demand for more runs? No.

Sorry for the long post, and maybe you were just looking for that one answer and probably weren't thinking about this, but I'm just putting that out there, and hopefully this serves as an answer for others who post in this thread.

 

[khiladi]

Its pretty funny how you only basically show up on the weeks after we lose to complain about garrett.


Pretty funny.

Really??? Wasn't I saying that Garrett starts quick, teams figure him out, he resorts to the same tendencies by the end of the year and we fade..

 

[WarDaddy]

Teams wouldn't run blitz as much if we took more snaps from under center. If you pass more often out of run looks, teams would be more off-balance.

Garrett is a good play-caller. But I think talent bails him out often making a not-so-good play call look better than it really is.


It's almost like he thinks Shotgun=pass(points), QB under center=run(control clock)


Shotgun is a passing formation, primarily. That is hard to debate.

But if your QB is under center it doesn't automatically mean a run would or even should be called. It would be a mistake to assume that.

So when the Cowboys put Romo under center and we throw a pass on 1st and 10 the success of that play dictates to the defense that selling out on the run in this scenario could be a bad move. The same could be said when passing on 3rd and 1 from under center.

Garrett needs to know this.

He needs to know that it's fine to call for your QB to be under center on obvious pass downs. The offensive line needs to make him comfortable.

If the Cowboys are in shotgun chances are that a pass play is about to happen.

If the Cowboys put Romo under center chances are a run play is about to happen.


The Cowboys hardly ever put Romo under center when behind in a ball game.

That has to stop.

 

[khiladi]

And your argument was that we used shotgun too much. But we largely used it when the defense was in prevent and passing was the only option.

No, my argument was that because we moved the ball in shotgun when teams are playing prevent doesn't prove that shotgun is successful in the amount we run it overall...

 

[craig71]

I see another blog that makes an attempt to break down the offense and the improper use of the shotgun formation.What I have yet to see is a breakdown of the defense and why they called certain personnel packages.

Craig

 

[VACowboy]

I missed the part where he explains why the Cowboys are the #3 offense in the league.

Someone help me out here.

I'll try:

I'm not gonna argue the validity of the shotgun issue because I honestly have no clue whether the guy's opinion holds water or not. But I do think that rationalizing poor pass protection by citing the offense's rank is off-base. In my opinion, the only reason Romo hasn't been sacked a heck of a lot more than he has is his ability to avoid it. Maybe if Romo had a clean pocket to throw from, as Brees seems to, the Cowboys offense would be #1. There may be something to the idea that Tony is holding the ball more this year, but I think there's more to the difference in the number of sacks taken by Romo and Brees than that.

I also think there's a reason that Romo is the most blitzed QB in the League that doesn't have to do with his ability to make reads and get rid of the ball. The first thing that comes to my mind is offensive design. Of course, there's a whole bunch of other stuff that could be causing this phenomenon, but I don't think it's dumb at all to examine the offense itself, formations, playcalling, whatever.

But that's just me.

 

[Zman5]

When you fail to run play-action passes, or use formations that are friendly to the PAP, then you force your quarterback to deal with a defense that knows exactly what is coming when you set up in shotgun.

So when Romo gets killed because we didn't use formations that are friendly to the PAP, can we say Romo got PAP smeared?

 

[RoadRunner]

So what, it's Garrett's fault that the defense kept making them have to get into a shootout? Did Garrett make Bennett drop the ball? Did Garrett make Barber fumble the ball?

Romo had 3 touchdowns with ZERO interceptions and by losing the game even despite that, it is somehow related to the offense? As far as I'm concerned, the way they ran blitz all game, why not pass as much as he did?

You aren't an NFL coach, and I doubt this blog writer is either.

Garrett routinely calls shotgun formations on short yardage and goal to go situations. That has nothing to do with defense or special teams. Garrett calls the formation far too damn much.

 

[Idgit]

I challenge anybody on this board to refute the bolded points. Spin away Garrett apologists.

And yes I realize the ST's and the Defense caved in, along with 2 missed fg's and Barbers fumble changing the momentum of the game...

Tom Brady and New England run shotgun on almost 3/4ths of their passing plays. And they run effectively out of it an average of 6 or 7 times/game. It's possible to run effectively out of the formation, most teams just don't because they're in shotgun in specific game situations most often that preclude running.

Also note, at the time this article was written, we were in shotgun, scored once, misfired on what would have been another long passing touchdown, and very well would have scored had we recovered the onsides kick at the end of the game. That's pretty effective offense considering the game situation.

 

[VACowboy]

If Romo wasn't so good at scrambling Garrett would have been tar'd and feathered in this town two years ago....:laugh2:

Couldn't agree more.

 

[Coast2Coast27]

Well if defense's knows whats coming then why cant they stop it? What are we the third ranked offense in the league. On top of that why does Romo have less interceptions then both manning and bree's.


This guy is overthinking the issue. Garrett is doing an outstanding Job.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

I don't think I have seen ONE "pass-happy shotgun fan" yet.

But to answer your question, yes predictability would be a major problem. The point is to keep the defense on their toes, and you don't accomplish that by lining up in the same formation over and over again.

But if the point you are trying to make is that Garrett is an idiot because he did line up to pass and play in shotgun as much as he did was the reason we lost, it is so off base it's not even funny.

I have seen those fans, and NO, I was definitely NOT saying that Garrett is an idiot and is the reason we lost Sunday.

Good grief, I thought I made it clear that it was a philosophical question of why running the ball is important in football, or if it is not, then why.