Dak on Third Down GB

[khiladi]

Just as an aside, Dallas started employing more 11 personnel when Dak came back (maybe also Gallup), per the Detroit numbers, but Rush was more effective in the 2 TE sets. As far as third-down with GB, here is an “interesting tid-bit”:

Second, the third-down game picked a bad time to slump. The Cowboys were 5 of 15 on third down (33 percent) and that includes a perfect 3 for 3 on third-and-1 which often has become an automatic QB sneak. While that is a great way to convert, when we subtract those, they are 2 for 12 in the “money down” and that will not cut it.

Ignore the dribble that “Dak is normally good on third down” down below as an advanced warning for the scrub, because garbage time, soft-zone doesn’t count…

Fifteen third downs and the Cowboys passed on 11 of them. Of those 11, they converted three times. Prescott was 4 of 11 for 49 yards, no touchdowns and two killer interceptions. That passer rating is 11.3 and when you consider that spiking the football would have been considerably more efficient, you have found a culprit on where the blame lies for Sunday.

Let’s not forget how good Prescott normally is on third down. The Cowboys were 30th on third downs with Rush at 32.8 percent and are seventh with Prescott at 43.5 percent. That is a stark difference in quality, so don’t get carried away with one bad day. Green Bay did a nice job (and was allowed to get pretty physical in the secondary).

Entering the game, Green Bay had the second-highest blitz rate in the NFL at 40 percent. But on third down, the Packers don’t blitz much and are ranked 17th at 29 percent. This idea of blitzing far more on early downs was a plan that they stuck with quite a bit Sunday. Here are the 11 pass situations and you will find just two pressure packages.

The damage was done when the Packers rushed four and dropped seven when Prescott threw both picks and had a passer rating of 8.8 (which is very, very bad).

So, what happens when the Cowboys do not convert on third downs? Drives stall. Thirteen drives is a lot and 83 offensive snaps mean you are moving the ball all day. Four touchdowns is awesome, but the other nine drives were all killed on third down.

And yes, zero points in the fourth and fifth quarters. It came down to conversions on the money down … not to mention the fourth-down issue to end the game.

You can see the results below. Green Bay faced 56 snaps in 11 personnel and held the Cowboys’ 3 WR offense to just 5.25 yards per play, even though that is a primary passing offense. You will take 50 percent success rate if you are a defense and Green Bay did. Now, the bigger packages of 12 and 13 personnel also were around five yards a play. So you raise the floor of what you concede but try to lower the ceiling of big plays. Then, you try to make a play on third down and get your defense off the field.

Quotes taken from Atlantic article, “
Cowboys offense was productive, but third-down woes, interceptions costly”

So what does this mean? It’s essentially Denver all over again. You can blame the OL all you want, but in reality the blitz numbers show Dallas holds up front quite well in pressure situations. Dak, on the other hand, when defenses only rush 4, he can’t throw, particularly against a zone, to save his life.

 

[Nexx]

this is something a lot of us have known... only Dakazoids fail accept any of it. they'll blame Rowdy before they hold Dak accountable.

 

[Dak_Attack_09]

Just as an aside, Dallas started employing more 11 personnel when Dak came back (maybe also Gallup), per the Detroit numbers, but Rush was more effective in the 2 TE sets. As far as third-down with GB, here is an “interesting tid-bit”:



Ignore the dribble that “Dak is normally good on third down” down below as an advanced warning for the scrub, because garbage time, soft-zone doesn’t count…





Quotes taken from Atlantic article, “
Cowboys offense was productive, but third-down woes, interceptions costly”

So what does this mean? It’s essentially Denver all over again. You can blame the OL all you want, but in reality the blitz numbers show Dallas holds up front quite well in pressure situations. Dak, on the other hand, when defenses only rush 4, he can’t throw, particularly against a zone, to save his life.

14 point lead.

 

[big dog cowboy]

Quotes taken from Atlantic article, “
Cowboys offense was productive, but third-down woes, interceptions costly”

That means CeeDee needs to start running the right routes.

 

[MysteryIceGuro]

Dak was so bad this game they compared him to Tim Tebow. That’s pretty self explanatory for how bad he has been.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

Dak was so bad this game they compared him to Tim Tebow. That’s pretty self explanatory for how bad he has been.

He was so bad he was up 28-14 and his defense gave up 14 points….Dak needs to learn how to stop the run.

 

[visionary]

Facts have no place in this discussion

 

[baltcowboy]

He was so bad he was up 28-14 and his defense gave up 14 points….Dak needs to learn how to stop the run.

The Cowboys were like 9-11 on 3rd downs against Chicago a week before.

 

[khiladi]

Just as an aside, notice the numbers. There were 83 total snaps and 56 snaps in 11 personnel, which I’m pretty sure nowhere does that ratio apply to when Rush is QB.

So the personnel is most probably dictating way more options for Dak to choose to pass, then with Rush.

 

[khiladi]

The Cowboys were like 9-11 on 3rd downs against Chicago a week before.

That’s pretty much because the Bears run defense is garbage and Pollard was averaging like 7 YPC and had like 100 by half. That’s not a sustainable number for any team.

Dallas has been awful all season, meaning this Bears game is a statistical anomaly. Dak has pretty much sucked on third down going back to last season. Whenever he’s in his slump, this third down efficiency is always the major reason.

 

[baltcowboy]

That’s pretty much because the Bears run defense is garbage and Pollard was averaging like 7 YPC and had like 100 by half. That’s not a sustainable number for any team.

Dallas has been awful all season, meaning this Bears game is a statistical anomaly. Dak has pretty much sucked on third down going back to last season. Whenever he’s in his slump, this third down efficiency is always the major reason.

Third down issues are not all Dak. If you give credit to the running game for Chicago, you could easily blame the receivers and offensive line for the failures of Tampa/Green Bay. Dak for his career has constantly been one of the top third down quarterbacks.

 

[plymkr]

Just as an aside, Dallas started employing more 11 personnel when Dak came back (maybe also Gallup), per the Detroit numbers, but Rush was more effective in the 2 TE sets. As far as third-down with GB, here is an “interesting tid-bit”:



Ignore the dribble that “Dak is normally good on third down” down below as an advanced warning for the scrub, because garbage time, soft-zone doesn’t count…





Quotes taken from Atlantic article, “
Cowboys offense was productive, but third-down woes, interceptions costly”

So what does this mean? It’s essentially Denver all over again. You can blame the OL all you want, but in reality the blitz numbers show Dallas holds up front quite well in pressure situations. Dak, on the other hand, when defenses only rush 4, he can’t throw, particularly against a zone, to save his life.

Denver truly did expose Dak. It hasn't been the same since.

 

[khiladi]

Third down issues are not all Dak. If you give credit to the running game for Chicago, you could easily blame the receivers and offensive line for the failures of Tampa/Green Bay. Dak for his career has constantly been one of the top third down quarterbacks.

I give it credit because the Bears run defense is 29th in attempts, 28th in yards, 32nd in TDs and 24 Y/A. They are pretty much bottom dwellers in every category in defending the run.

When you are averaging 7 YPC like Pollard was against the Bears, it means the offense is ahead of the defense in terms of the chains and the OC is basically dictating to the defense what he wants to do.

Those type of numbers are unsustainable throughout the season and are usually a sign of a blow out from the get go, when playing against a bad team.

Dallas was 3-9 against Detroit.

 

[zekecowboy]

Just as an aside, Dallas started employing more 11 personnel when Dak came back (maybe also Gallup), per the Detroit numbers, but Rush was more effective in the 2 TE sets. As far as third-down with GB, here is an “interesting tid-bit”:



Ignore the dribble that “Dak is normally good on third down” down below as an advanced warning for the scrub, because garbage time, soft-zone doesn’t count…





Quotes taken from Atlantic article, “
Cowboys offense was productive, but third-down woes, interceptions costly”

So what does this mean? It’s essentially Denver all over again. You can blame the OL all you want, but in reality the blitz numbers show Dallas holds up front quite well in pressure situations. Dak, on the other hand, when defenses only rush 4, he can’t throw, particularly against a zone, to save his life.

As Dak would say playing quarterback is easy, the problem is Dak can't read the defense very well. He throws after the wide receiver has turned his route giving him less time to throw it in the smaller window,

 

[rnr_honeybadger]

Dak Prescott is a very very average QB. For all the people bad mouthing Carson Wentz here it's amazing that anyone thinks that Dak Prescott is somehow superior to Wentz especially when you factor in the fact that he started his career behind a load OLine and a stellar running game.

 

[Nexx]

Dak Prescott is a very very average QB. For all the people bad mouthing Carson Wentz here it's amazing that anyone thinks that Dak Prescott is somehow superior to Wentz especially when you factor in the fact that he started his career behind a load OLine and a stellar running game.

His success has been a product of the personnel around him. Put him on last years Bengals team and they dont make the playoffs.

 

[noshame]

I blame Kellen Moore
It's a known fact on 3rd down he takes all the receivers off the field and goes with 4 running backs.

 

[rnr_honeybadger]

He's success has been a product of the personnel around him. Put him on last years Bengals team and they dont make the playoffs.

Put him on the Browns and he would be retired selling insurance.

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

Just as an aside, Dallas started employing more 11 personnel when Dak came back (maybe also Gallup), per the Detroit numbers, but Rush was more effective in the 2 TE sets. As far as third-down with GB, here is an “interesting tid-bit”:



Ignore the dribble that “Dak is normally good on third down” down below as an advanced warning for the scrub, because garbage time, soft-zone doesn’t count…





Quotes taken from Atlantic article, “
Cowboys offense was productive, but third-down woes, interceptions costly”

So what does this mean? It’s essentially Denver all over again. You can blame the OL all you want, but in reality the blitz numbers show Dallas holds up front quite well in pressure situations. Dak, on the other hand, when defenses only rush 4, he can’t throw, particularly against a zone, to save his life.

Sounds a lot like Romo used to be

 

[Oz-of-Cowboy-Country]

When Dak throws to Shultz on 3rd and short it works. But people start complaining that Dak can only throw to Shultz.

Cole Beasley used to be our third down guy. If we had a Beasley and a Schultz would be way better on third down. That's why I'm wanting to get Turpin more involved, because he could be our new Beasley.