DMN Blog: Grounding out the running game

[EPL0c0]

That's a bit misleading. 3 of those "rushes" were by Tony Romo and him running on what was supposed to be a pass play where the WRs were unable to shake their coverage OR, because the WRs were having to run a 30yd pattern, protection broke down and Romo was running for his life.

the RBs had 11 carries.

 

[CF74]

I won't nearly be upset because I know that we at least tried to pound the rock with our 3 RB's.

Nah, Barber will gimp out 22 carries and Felix and Choice will fight over the rest...:bang2:

 

[kramskoi]

Garrett was a backup QB on a team that had the best OL at the time and arguably the best RB in the history of the game. He knows the value of a great run game as much as anyone would. The idea that he passes alot because thats what he liked to do is kinda comical to me. He was never a guy who would game after game throw 50 balls.

The running game is too inconsistent, has been for years and thats why we dont run more. I know nobody likes to hear it, but its true. It was that way when Parcells was here, it was that way when Payton called plays, it was that way when Sparano called plays and its been that way since Garrett has been here and called plays. Other than a handful of games here and there, its been this way for years. And the reason its inconsistent is because these guys are just not as good at run blocking as they are at pass blocking. People can talk all they want about how big our OL is, but as a unit they dont get a good push on run plays. Sometimes they open some nice holes, but more often than not they get no push or allow defenders into the backfield almost untouched.

...218 yards at Lambeau last year...same offensive line...same running back...it's not this simple but you get the idea...

 

[dbair1967]

...218 yards at Lambeau last year...same offensive line...same running back...it's not this simple but you get the idea...

Against a totally different defense, which is ranked considerably higher than they were last yr.

And while the RB's have the same names, two of the three are not anywhere near 100%, and both of those guys were last yr.

 

[dbair1967]

Oh and another thing Dbair..

When's the last time we lost and we all thought:"wow we ran the ball way too many times."

.

Happened all the time in the Parcells years.

 

[Rampage]

Against a totally different defense, which is ranked considerably higher than they were last yr.

And while the RB's have the same names, two of the three are not anywhere near 100%, and both of those guys were last yr.

I keep hearing this. if that's the case than why isn't Choice getting any touches cause he looked good against 4 teams in december who all had top 5 defenses?

 

[dbair1967]

I keep hearing this. if that's the case than why isn't Choice getting any touches cause he looked good against 4 teams in december who all had top 5 defenses?

Well, he did get most of the carries vs Denver and had basically no success.

Other than that, I have no idea. If Barber and Jones say they are healthy enough to play and can practice, obviously they are gonna get their reps. Its the coaches jobs to decide if said guys give you the best chance to win. Since I'm pretty sure Phillips, Garrett, Peete and Houck want to do everything they can to win games and keep their jobs, I'm guessing they really believe MBIII and Jones do give them the best chance to win.

 

[Hoofbite]

Commanders game prediction: Garrett over-runs the ball, and people clamor for the pass.

I have no doubt it will happen. 25+ draw plays will do that to people.

 

[SLATEmosphere]

Happened all the time in the Parcells years.

Ya because Parcells had Barber,Felix and Choice right?

Just stop man.

Seriously. Since Garrett has been here when was the last game where we actually ran the ball too much. Resulting in a loss. I would love to hear this answer.

 

[NextGenBoys]

Ya because Parcells had Barber,Felix and Choice right?

Just stop man.

Seriously. Since Garrett has been here when was the last game where we actually ran the ball too much. Resulting in a loss. I would love to hear this answer.

So you want him to lose games by running too much, instead of passing too much?

How idiotic. The result is still a loss.

 

[SLATEmosphere]

So you want him to lose games by running too much, instead of passing too much?

How idiotic. The result is still a loss.

Where the **** did I say that?

My point is how many times have we lossed because we pass too much? ALOT

How many times have we lossed because we ran too much. ZERO.

So how about we pound the rock 30 times. I don't care if we force it. Run the damn ball 30 times and see where that gets you because there's going to games where the pass game isn't there.

 

[Hoofbite]

Ya because Parcells had Barber,Felix and Choice right?

Just stop man.

Seriously. Since Garrett has been here when was the last game where we actually ran the ball too much. Resulting in a loss. I would love to hear this answer.

Are you trying to say that greats such as Hambrick, Julius Jones, Eddie George and a plethora or others aren't as good as what Dallas has now?

 

[Bluefin]

The running game is too inconsistent, has been for years and thats why we dont run more. I know nobody likes to hear it, but its true.

And the passing game isn't?

The offensive line never has a false start or hold in passing situations?

Tony Romo never makes a bad read or a bad pass?

The receivers never bust routes or drop the ball?

Claiming the running game is too inconsistent is a cop out, IMO.

Sure, we have some runs that are stopped for losses, but we also run numerous draws and delays. If the defense sniffs those out, it'll be a minimal gain, nothing at all or a negative play.

But we average 5.1 yards per running play, good for 2nd in the NFL while only averaging 25.6 rushes per game, which places us at 24th in the league.

And when the opposing defense takes a starting corner and uses him to shadow Jason Witten almost the entire game, that tells you all you need to know.

The Packers were playing the pass and we never even tried to run them out of that tactic. The way you take advantage of a corner covering your tight end is by running at him until the move out of that set.

The running backs gained 228 yards and averaged 8.4 yards per carry against the Giants in week two and they never stopped playing the pass.

Why?

Because even with video game production in the backfield, Jason Garrett still elected to let Tony Romo throw 29 times while only giving the backs 27 carries.

They knew Garrett.

It isn't in his nature not to ask Romo to win every single game.

That's fine if the opposing defense is bothering itself with our ground game for some reason, but when a team dedicates itself to stopping the air attack we don't have a counter.

Garrett has zero problem throwing almost every down if a defense shows run or the situation dictates it. But what about when we need to run because the passes aren't there?

As things stand, we lose those games.

There's a time to pass and a time to run, Garrett is suited for only one of those situations right now.

 

[SLATEmosphere]

Are you trying to say that greats such as Hambrick, Julius Jones, Eddie George and a plethora or others aren't as good as what Dallas has now?

That's exactly what I'm saying.

Not running the ball 30+ times with these backs is a crime. It's really unbelievable.

 

[dbair1967]

Ya because Parcells had Barber,Felix and Choice right?

He had Julius Jones and Barber for most of the time, for alot of that time many thought it was one of the better RB duos in the league.

Seriously. Since Garrett has been here when was the last game where we actually ran the ball too much. Resulting in a loss. I would love to hear this answer.

Your question is ridiculous IMO. If winning and losing came down to something as generic as how many times a team runs the ball, wouldnt everybody run the ball more? Also, how do you explain teams like New England, Indy, Arizona, San Diego and Philly. Those teams just arnt winning this yr either, they seem to win every year. We are not the league leader in passing attempts per game, nor are we the league leader in pass/run% leaning more towards the pass.

 

[dbair1967]

And the passing game isn't?

The offensive line never has a false start or hold in passing situations?

Tony Romo never makes a bad read or a bad pass?

The receivers never bust routes or drop the ball?

Claiming the running game is too inconsistent is a cop out, IMO.

Sure, we have some runs that are stopped for losses, but we also run numerous draws and delays. If the defense sniffs those out, it'll be a minimal gain, nothing at all or a negative play.

But we average 5.1 yards per running play, good for 2nd in the NFL while only averaging 25.6 rushes per game, which places us at 24th in the league.

And when the opposing defense takes a starting corner and uses him to shadow Jason Witten almost the entire game, that tells you all you need to know.

The Packers were playing the pass and we never even tried to run them out of that tactic. The way you take advantage of a corner covering your tight end is by running at him until the move out of that set.

The running backs gained 228 yards and averaged 8.4 yards per carry against the Giants in week two and they never stopped playing the pass.

Why?

Because even with video game production in the backfield, Jason Garrett still elected to let Tony Romo throw 29 times while only giving the backs 27 carries.

They knew Garrett.

It isn't in his nature not to ask Romo to win every single game.

That's fine if the opposing defense is bothering itself with our ground game for some reason, but when a team dedicates itself to stopping the air attack we don't have a counter.

Garrett has zero problem throwing almost every down if a defense shows run or the situation dictates it. But what about when we need to run because the passes aren't there?

As things stand, we lose those games.

There's a time to pass and a time to run, Garrett is suited for only one of those situations right now.

So why arnt we 0-9? Why do we rank at or near the top of the league in alot of different offensive categories? Why did we go into the GB game with the fewest 3 and outs in the NFL?

 

[NextGenBoys]

Where the **** did I say that?

My point is how many times have we lossed because we pass too much? ALOT

How many times have we lossed because we ran too much. ZERO.

So how about we pound the rock 30 times. I don't care if we force it. Run the damn ball 30 times and see where that gets you because there's going to games where the pass game isn't there.

The ONLY teams that are going to lose because they run too much are teams that have poor QB's.

We have one of the best in the league. Depending on down/distance and time, I have no problem with running the ball. But passing is what wins in this league, and I'd be willing to bet we have near equal runass ratio of the best teams in the league.

 

[SLATEmosphere]

He had Julius Jones and Barber for most of the time, for alot of that time many thought it was one of the better RB duos in the league.



Your question is ridiculous IMO. If winning and losing came down to something as generic as how many times a team runs the ball, wouldnt everybody run the ball more? Also, how do you explain teams like New England, Indy, Arizona, San Diego and Philly. Those teams just arnt winning this yr either, they seem to win every year. We are not the league leader in passing attempts per game, nor are we the league leader in pass/run% leaning more towards the pass.

It's ridiculous because you can't answer it. New England and Indy have the two best QB's in the league. Arizona has Fitz and Boldin. San Diego and Philly have accomplished nothing. Nice try.

I'll ask you again. Whens the last game where we ran the ball too much and still lost. Because I can think of at least 4-5 losses where the game was in reach and the ball was sprayed everywhere and lost. Okay so that doesn't work.

 

[Rampage]

The ONLY teams that are going to lose because they run too much are teams that have poor QB's.

We have one of the best in the league. Depending on down/distance and time, I have no problem with running the ball. But passing is what wins in this league, and I'd be willing to bet we have near equal runass ratio of the best teams in the league.

it's also a big part in why teams lose in this league. for example the giants and packers game. even if you don't get much on the ground you still have positives(wearing down the defense,giving yours a rest, setting up playaction) their's no positives from incompletions unless you get PI or illegal contact called.

 

[SLATEmosphere]

The ONLY teams that are going to lose because they run too much are teams that have poor QB's.

We have one of the best in the league. Depending on down/distance and time, I have no problem with running the ball. But passing is what wins in this league, and I'd be willing to bet we have near equal runass ratio of the best teams in the league.

How about when the passing game is clearly not working for watever reason, you adjust to it? Maybe an idea?