News: Dallas coach Jason Garrett says run-first mentality will remain

[jrumann59]

The Rams game begs to differ. We were down 21, stayed with the run and won easily. Not every team runs when they are uP. We ran while up, down or tied and stayed committed to having the run game.establish the lead to salt away and not.your mythological way of passing to get a lead and run Murray all 4th qtr. Didn't work like that.

Wasn't there a couple of defensive turnovers also and one that was returned for a TD.

 

[jrumann59]

We were down 3/going into the 4th, withthe ball and ran it 0 times in the 4th. A 3 point deficit isn't enough to say we were trailing and HAD TO THROW! We abandoned the run completely. That 2 minute offense stuff is deflecting cause one 2 minute series was 1/play but they make it seem like it was a 130 possession. They messed up an now everyone including Jerry is going with the company line of 4- two minute possessions. Its bull.

You mean the 3 play drive that ended in the interception on the hit on street and we did not get the ball back until the team was down 10 but after the Giants had already burned four minutes of the fourth up to that point. dallas spent 1:30 prior to the pick, then the giants spen 0:08 to socre the TD and the offense spent 3:00 minutes to score the TD and the giants spent another 3:34 to get to the 1 for a FG. Of the 6.5 minutes the team had the ball in the 4th when did they have time to run, their first drive INT after that they were down 10.

 

[JoeBoBBY]

If a man gets dedicated to watching for RB it means more 1 on 1 on the other receivers. Throwing to RBs near the line exploits holes in the defense usually in the flat and between the DL and LB.

I am not disputing that;

 

[RS12]

Dallas coach Jason Garrett says run-first mentality will remain

What ever it takes mentality is what I hope he means.

 

[JoeBoBBY]

Passing more effectively than our opponent in those 12 games (and in the playoff game against the Lions).

In fact, the team that has passed more effectively has won the past 23 games we have played. We are 15-0 when we have passed more effectively than our opponent and 0-8 when we have not. (The team with the higher yards per rush is 11-12 in those games.)

League-wide, the teams that passed more effectively went 16-0 in Week 1. (The teams with the higher yards per rush went 7-9.)

It's obvious what wins in the NFL.

Well, that begs the question Adam. What made our passing game more "effecive last year"?

And before we go through the entire step by step QNA.....

Do you think it was becuase of the, I dunno.....1800 yards rushing from DM?

becuase if you dont, youre in the minority. Not saying your wrong, but other all time greats in the NFL, would say you are wrong..... I'm Just putting it out there. Not saying if its right or wrong.

I think Romo was a much smarter QB last year and seems to be the same this year; His time and maturity and game awareness is allwoing him to be even better then what we thought Romo could ever be; It played a big role in the 12 last year...

But I think he benefitted a great deal, from a stellar run first identity. I think the whole team, to inlcude Romo , the Defense, etc etc , fed off that Running/Oline engine.

 

[JoeBoBBY]

Being down hub10 with less than 8 min is a great reason to abandon the run

I dont think so. I think that is nothing but panic. You can run the ball with 8 left down by 10. We just chose not to.

 

[Bullflop]

Well, here's hoping C-Mike develops sufficiently to become an active member of 2015's run-first mentality.

 

[Super_Kazuya]

I see it's still the same goofballs in this thread who thinks there is some magic formula to winning a football game. As much as I enjoyed last year, I think I would rather have gone 8-8 than suffer a bunch of people who think we have to run every down until the end of time because of one season (that we didn't win the Super Bowl in, though you'd think we did).

 

[Doomsday101]

I see it's still the same goofballs in this thread who thinks there is some magic formula to winning a football game. As much as I enjoyed last year, I think I would rather have gone 8-8 than suffer a bunch of people who think we have to run every down until the end of time because of one season (that we didn't win the Super Bowl in, though you'd think we did).

I don't think you need to run all the time I do think this offense performs better when we can show balance in the attack running and passing. Garrett and the coaching staff continue to say that as well.

 

[JD_KaPow]

The Rams game begs to differ. We were down 21, stayed with the run and won easily. Not every team runs when they are uP. We ran while up, down or tied and stayed committed to having the run game.establish the lead to salt away and not.your mythological way of passing to get a lead and run Murray all 4th qtr. Didn't work like that.

Wow, way to completely misinterpret what I said. I said nothing about how we get a lead. I made a pretty straightforward point. Show me a game where a QB throws 40+ times, and I'll probably be looking at a game where the team was playing mostly from behind. Show me a game with 30+ runs from the RBs, and most likely I'll be looking at a game where we weren't playing from behind.

There are exceptions, like the Patriots, who often game-plan to throw underneath passes all day. But in general, this will hold.

 

[Super_Kazuya]

I don't think you need to run all the time I do think this offense performs better when we can show balance in the attack running and passing. Garrett and the coaching staff continue to say that as well.

That's pretty much football 101. I think any team wants to run as long as it's successful because it's less risky than passing (fewer runs end in turnovers than passes) and has less of a chance to be completely unsuccessful (1 or 2 yard gain vs incomplete pass). However these concepts are often twisted into "Maddenisms" by dim-witted fans and announcers, like time of possession = winning (no correlation whatsoever, winning causes time of possession) or counting numbers of carries and or passes as magic numbers to winning and losing without looking at the game as a whole, all the while forgetting that defense and special teams exist.

 

[Doomsday101]

That's pretty much football 101. I think any team wants to run as long as it's successful because it's less risky than passing (fewer runs end in turnovers than passes) and has less of a chance to be completely unsuccessful (1 or 2 yard gain vs incomplete pass). However these concepts are often twisted into "Maddenisms" by dim-witted fans and announcers, like time of possession = winning (no correlation whatsoever, winning causes time of possession) or counting numbers of carries and or passes as magic numbers to winning and losing without looking at the game as a whole, all the while forgetting that defense and special teams exist.

I don't disagree with any of that. Going into this season I was under no illusions Dallas would be running as much as they did this past season however I do think the Cowboys view the run as an important part of what they want to do offensively. As far as needing to run more than we pass? or pass more than we run I would just say situations and defensive alignments within the game dictates a lot of that. My main objective is keeping defense guessing so they are not able to just pin their ears back and come after Romo, fewer big hits on him the better

 

[JoeBoBBY]

I see it's still the same goofballs in this thread who thinks there is some magic formula to winning a football game. As much as I enjoyed last year, I think I would rather have gone 8-8 than suffer a bunch of people who think we have to run every down until the end of time because of one season (that we didn't win the Super Bowl in, though you'd think we did).

Well compared to the last 8 or so years. That was our big year; Trust me 8-8 is a real possibility if we continue to have to pass the ball 45 times a game....

or do you think, other QBs will make that same mistake Eli did on a routine basis?

 

[Doomsday101]

Well compared to the last 8 or so years. That was our big year; Trust me 8-8 is a real possibility if we continue to have to pass the ball 45 times a game....

or do you think, other QBs will make that same mistake Eli did on a routine basis?

I would hope we are not turning the ball over 3 times on a routine basis. Dallas flat outplayed NY in that game, those turnovers cost us 17 points. I don't expect dallas do continue doing that but outside of that Dallas was not having any problems moving that ball down the field through out the game.

 

[Sarge]

Sigh. When you throw 40+ passes, it's usually because you're playing from behind. When you run 30+ times, it's usually because you're NOT playing from behind.

Yes, the Cowboys want to be a run-first team. But the 2014 Cowboys were able to maintain their run-first identity because they were winning games, not the other way around.

Exactly.

 

[Super_Kazuya]

Well compared to the last 8 or so years. That was our big year; Trust me 8-8 is a real possibility if we continue to have to pass the ball 45 times a game....

or do you think, other QBs will make that same mistake Eli did on a routine basis?

As long as our defense doesn't give up 6500 yards again, we won't be 8-8 again even if we pass the ball every down and play Escobar in the backfield.

 

[JoeBoBBY]

As long as our defense doesn't give up 6500 yards again, we won't be 8-8 again even if we pass the ball every down and play Escobar in the backfield.

Well then. that makes a whole lot of sense. Since are defense is better......Bombs away!!!!

 

[50cent]

Wasn't there a couple of defensive turnovers also and one that was returned for a TD.

We got a fumble that lead to a FG at the end of the 1st half to put us down 21-10 and Carter returned an INT for a TD AFTER WE HAD ALREADY TAKEN LEAD AFTER TRAILING 21-0.

 

[50cent]

You mean the 3 play drive that ended in the interception on the hit on street and we did not get the ball back until the team was down 10 but after the Giants had already burned four minutes of the fourth up to that point. dallas spent 1:30 prior to the pick, then the giants spen 0:08 to socre the TD and the offense spent 3:00 minutes to score the TD and the giants spent another 3:34 to get to the 1 for a FG. Of the 6.5 minutes the team had the ball in the 4th when did they have time to run, their first drive INT after that they were down 10.

No I mean the one play after Beasley fumbled and we promptly came right back on the field and threw an INT aimed at Witten. 2 plays, 2 turnovers in the first half that only had us down 7 points. We were not in 2 minute offense when Romo got picked on Streets target.

 

[50cent]

Well, that begs the question Adam. What made our passing game more "effecive last year"?

And before we go through the entire step by step QNA.....

Do you think it was becuase of the, I dunno.....1800 yards rushing from DM?

becuase if you dont, youre in the minority. Not saying your wrong, but other all time greats in the NFL, would say you are wrong..... I'm Just putting it out there. Not saying if its right or wrong.

I think Romo was a much smarter QB last year and seems to be the same this year; His time and maturity and game awareness is allwoing him to be even better then what we thought Romo could ever be; It played a big role in the 12 last year...

But I think he benefitted a great deal, from a stellar run first identity. I think the whole team, to inlcude Romo , the Defense, etc etc , fed off that Running/Oline engine.

Well said and completely true.