Could the anemic run game vs the Vikes have been strategic?

[Donny Phoenix]

Disclaimer: I'm not saying there are no issues with the running game.

Exhibit 1: Dallas had diagnosed Minnesota's weakness as being in the secondary and was obviously attacking it with some success.
Exhibit 2: Demarco coming off his latest injury situation and needing to get his feet under him and back in the groove of being on the field in a live game.
Exhibit 3: 9 rushing attempts is not an attempt to establish any kind of run game, not even as a decoy.

Is it possible that Garrett, knowing the importance and difficulty of the NO game and NO's vulnerability to the run, decided to give Murray some live action to get his feet wet but mostly preserve him for this NO game and not put any new film of a healthy Murray out?

Just a thought...

 

[texbumthelife]

Disclaimer: I'm not saying there are no issues with the running game.

Exhibit 1: Dallas had diagnosed Minnesota's weakness as being in the secondary and was obviously attacking it with some success.
Exhibit 2: Demarco coming off his latest injury situation and needing to get his feet under him and back in the groove of being on the field in a live game.
Exhibit 3: 9 rushing attempts is not an attempt to establish any kind of run game, not even as a decoy.

Is it possible that Garrett, knowing the importance and difficulty of the NO game and NO's vulnerability to the run, decided to give Murray some live action to get his feet wet but mostly preserve him for this NO game and not put any new film of a healthy Murray out?

Just a thought...

This is not the first time any of these points have been raised. I think it's absurd, but if Garrett was "saving Murray" for New Orleans he should be fired on the spot. This team is not in the position to be playing two weeks ahead. They should be attacking every game of the season as if it's the last. If this is how Garrett thinks, it would answer a lot of the questions surrounding this team.

 

[WV Cowboy]

I don't think he was saving Murray, .. but I could see him believing that the Vikes run defense was way better than their pass defense and so decided to attack the secondary instead of the front 7.

As a matter of fact, I could agree with this.

I remember a few years ago the steelers had a terrific run defense, but a weak secondary and teams began to stop even trying to run on them and passed on them successfully.

 

[NextGenBoys]

This is not the first time any of these points have been raised. I think it's absurd, but if Garrett was "saving Murray" for New Orleans he should be fired on the spot. This team is not in the position to be playing two weeks ahead. They should be attacking every game of the season as if it's the last. If this is how Garrett thinks, it would answer a lot of the questions surrounding this team.

I do think it may be a possibility.

I also think that he tries to get cute with "setting other teams up" Kirk Ferentz is noted for this. Call the same plays to get your tendencies up, and then in the 2nd half of a game, or a season, you unleash your shots and hit teams off balance.

I don't think it's a firable offense, but it would help answer the anemic offense that is all to often put on display, only to have the flashes of brilliance every so often.

 

[munkee]

Disclaimer: I'm not saying there are no issues with the running game.

Exhibit 1: Dallas had diagnosed Minnesota's weakness as being in the secondary and was obviously attacking it with some success.
Exhibit 2: Demarco coming off his latest injury situation and needing to get his feet under him and back in the groove of being on the field in a live game.
Exhibit 3: 9 rushing attempts is not an attempt to establish any kind of run game, not even as a decoy.

Is it possible that Garrett, knowing the importance and difficulty of the NO game and NO's vulnerability to the run, decided to give Murray some live action to get his feet wet but mostly preserve him for this NO game and not put any new film of a healthy Murray out?

Just a thought...

It's possible Garrett had a plan to limit Murray's runs, since it was his first game back from injury. Maybe Murray was assigned a certain number of runs and Garret stuck to it. I doubt he was saving Murray specifically for NO though.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Disclaimer: I'm not saying there are no issues with the running game.

Exhibit 1: Dallas had diagnosed Minnesota's weakness as being in the secondary and was obviously attacking it with some success.
Exhibit 2: Demarco coming off his latest injury situation and needing to get his feet under him and back in the groove of being on the field in a live game.
Exhibit 3: 9 rushing attempts is not an attempt to establish any kind of run game, not even as a decoy.

Is it possible that Garrett, knowing the importance and difficulty of the NO game and NO's vulnerability to the run, decided to give Murray some live action to get his feet wet but mostly preserve him for this NO game and not put any new film of a healthy Murray out?

Just a thought...

The Cowboys weren't all that successful against the Vikings with the Pass.

As to the run, well, why would you bring back Murray if all you are going to give him is 4 carries? You can't even get an honest evaluation of the players condition with 4 carries.

 

[cowboys1981]

The strength of their defense was their front line. I think we went heavy pass in attempt to attack their depleted secondary.

 

[WV Cowboy]

The Cowboys weren't all that successful against the Vikings with the Pass.

You not good with 337 and 2 TD's ?

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

You not good with 337 and 2 TD's ?

314, 2 TDs and 1 INT, no. Not really all that impressed.

 

[perrykemp]

You not good with 337 and 2 TD's ?

314 Yards on 55 dropbacks. Cowboys average 6.1/yards an attempt which will typically get you beat.

 

[DallasCowboysRule!]

The strength of their defense was their front line. I think we went heavy pass in attempt to attack their depleted secondary.

Nothing wrong with attacking another teams weakness or even having a pass heavy offense but the threat of a running game needs to be present. I think many of us clamoring for more carries aren't saying you shouldn't focus on the pass against a depleted or weak secondary but realize that the very threat of the run helps that passing attack through play action and not letting D-Lineman rush freely on every play.

 

[mmohican29]

I do think it may be a possibility.

I also think that he tries to get cute with "setting other teams up" Kirk Ferentz is noted for this. Call the same plays to get your tendencies up, and then in the 2nd half of a game, or a season, you unleash your shots and hit teams off balance.

I don't think it's a firable offense, but it would help answer the anemic offense that is all to often put on display, only to have the flashes of brilliance every so often.

Interesting... has anyone looked at last year's playcalling? Because down the stretch we were far more explosive than in the first 8 games. I attributed this to Dez Bryan'ts emergence solely. Wondering if maybe we can't find that pivot point again this season and really, really take teams by surprise in the 2nd half of the season.

 

[Donny Phoenix]

We're definitely going to need Murray 100% confident, at full strength, and in attack mode for the Saints. Whether it's to set up the pass or to gash their front, we need him at his best. Payton and Ryan know this Dallas team and its weapons extremely well. This game is one that you put an asterisk by as soon as you see the schedule, regardless of what coachspeak is put out to the media.

 

[OhSnap]

Good point. They shoulda had a few more runs at least but they were trying to take what the defense was giving. The O line is a factor too. Like it or not the Cowboys are a passing team till the line gets better and they get a better rb or the defense gets better. This defense isn't good enough to run the ball just for the sake of running it.

 

[WV Cowboy]

314 Yards on 55 dropbacks. Cowboys average 6.1/yards an attempt which will typically get you beat.

337 yds on 34 completions.

9.9 yds per completion.

Nothing to scoff at.

 

[OhSnap]

Interesting... has anyone looked at last year's playcalling? Because down the stretch we were far more explosive than in the first 8 games. I attributed this to Dez Bryan'ts emergence solely. Wondering if maybe we can't find that pivot point again this season and really, really take teams by surprise in the 2nd half of the season.

If the new guys on the d line get in shape and Ware can have an impact they could get hot.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Good point. They shoulda had a few more runs at least but they were trying to take what the defense was giving. The O line is a factor too. Like it or not the Cowboys are a passing team till the line gets better and they get a better rb or the defense gets better. This defense isn't good enough to run the ball just for the sake of running it.

Don't really agree with this. In the second half, particularly in the 4th quarter, they were giving us the run. We really didn't take advantage of what they were giving us defensively IMO.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

337 yds on 34 completions.

9.9 yds per completion.

Nothing to scoff at.

314. We are talking about what the offense generated. They gave up sacks as well so that number is not 337. Also, you have to context it against all of the throws, not just the completions. What good does it do to only count the completions? That would be like only counting the positive runs for Murray and then trying to say that he was averaging 16 yards a carry.

Doesn't really work.

 

[WV Cowboy]

314. We are talking about what the offense generated. They gave up sacks as well so that number is not 337. Also, you have to context it against all of the throws, not just the completions. What good does it do to only count the completions? That would be like only counting the positive runs for Murray and then trying to say that he was averaging 16 yards a carry.

Doesn't really work.

I get what you are saying, but he passed for 337 yds on 34 completions. I look at it that way because they didn't give him any of those yards on incompletions. That is what 34 completions generated.

I'm not over the moon with those numbers, but I'm ok to live with that.

I don't want to throw 51 times a game either, but it is what it is. That's what we did.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I get what you are saying, but he passed for 337 yds on 34 completions. I look at it that way because they didn't give him any of those yards on incompletions. That is what 34 completions generated.

I'm not over the moon with those numbers, but I'm ok to live with that.

I don't want to throw 51 times a game either, but it is what it is. That's what we did.

That's definitely what we did but you have to take the entire picture and look at it as a whole. The entire picture mean the sacks and the incompletes as well.