DMN: Cowlishaw: Cowboys won't be balanced on offense; their weapons are in passing attack

[iceberg]

I've never been a fan of Coleslaw's writing, but he occasionally makes sense on his new radio show.

well he's not making sense now. the issue isn't that we don't have talent at RB. the issue is we one once to make people happy then go pass crazy. i wouldn't mind bringing in help for murray as insurance against his injuries but we've not really let him grind it out.

last year he only carried the ball 217 times but for a 5.2 yard average. so yea, a headline of only talent at WR is like, bogus man. dez and witten are our "proven" assets and while we hope williams continues to grow and beasley stays the midget beast he can be, what do we really have in the passing game?

oh, romo.

but murray, 217 carries. 13 carries a game.
matt forte - 289 carries, 18 pg.
moreno w/pass happy denver - 248, or 15.5 pg
foster / tate - 302 carries, 18.8 pg
ray rice only got 214, but pierce got 152, or 336 / 22.8 pg

the point isn't that we can't run, we just don't. it frustrated us all, including murray last year. so this article seems to just be tossing crap on the wall cause he had a deadline to make but really makes no point at all.

 

[Hardline]

If I have a healthy Murray on my team. Its run on first down,run on second down and then run on 3rd down. Murray is not an average RB. He can put up elite stats and should be used like the Vikings use Peterson. I love it best when we are running the ball down the defenses throat. It eats up clock, wears down the defense and demoralizes them .

 

[ghst187]

The Cowboys aren't built to grind it out. Draft or sign a RB to compliment Murray, and that may change. I'm happy when people say Murray needs the ball more because that means he's not being over worked. The Cowboys don't have another option at RB on the current roster.

Two words, Carlos Hyde

 

[Screw The Hall]

The question really isn't about balance for me. It's really having a sense of when you need to do what. Garrett has been absolutely putrid in this area. Sometimes you need to throw it 50 times. There will be other occasions when you'll need to run it 40. It's the coaches job to know what's working (or not working) and adjust the gameplan accordingly.

As many have already alluded to the Green Bay game is the worst example that I personally have ever seen of a coach being completely clueless in this area. But he's been bad on many other occasions. That game was just a ridiculously over-the-top example of how bad he can actually be.

Again, it really has nothing to do with the number of plays that are pass/run. It is all about "feel", and that has to change dramatically this year or we need a new coach asap.

 

[OhSnap]

This offense has evolved into a beast--it is no longer the Air Coryell system anymore. Maybe in terminology of the play calls but thats about it. Sometimes this offense looks like a horrible version of the WCO and sometimes it looks just like a hot mess. The offense lives and dies by the big play and 2 minute offense. This offense does score a lot of points but they do not do it efficiently and leaves the defense hanging a lot. The offense is a problem and running the football successfully and consistently with help this team tremendously.

Sure it looks like a chinese fire drill sometimes now but if you go back to the first 4 years when Garrett started calling the plays and he had a decent running game and decent defense and T.O. it looked like another AC offense to me with 55-60% passing and the rest running. My point is Cowlishaw is predicting that this offense wont be balanced when it was never meant to be balanced in the first place.Don't get me wrong I'd like to see ALLOT more running but it takes a better team than they've had the last couple years.

The Denver Broncos attempted over 200 more passes than they did runs to get to the SB but I doubt anyone in Denver is writing articles about how they need to be more balanced.

 

[jobberone]

I could care less about balance.

They scored 439 points last year.

Score at least that many again and I'm a happy camper.

50 more would be good. Real good. Or am I being greedy?

I agree. The offense needs s bit of work. The defense.....well....not sure what's the best way to describe it.

 

[ShiningStar]

When you have a QB, a WR and a TE........you don't run the ball.

after the first interception, RUN the ball. If you are running, need i remind anyone of the GB game, and you are doing it, dont STOP. If the whole league goes passing, go running. If the whole league is running, start passing. You start trends by not following the others.

 

[ShiningStar]

50 more would be good. Real good. Or am I being greedy?

I agree. The offense needs s bit of work. The defense.....well....not sure what's the best way to describe it.

you are not greedy, we just have to see if the team can do that. We got the easy part down, now the hard part.

 

[big dog cowboy]

Cowlishaw: Cowboys won't be balanced on offense; their weapons are in passing attack

It's a passing league. I get it. But, with this team all conversations begin and end with the defense. Anyone who breathes air knows that. Well, with one exception I guess. We need a OG/C and OT prospect, IMO a vet RB and WR and we are good. Four weeks from today we will all be asking how we just upgraded the defense in the draft. Why not write an article about that???

 

[jobberone]

It's a passing league. I get it. But, with this team all conversations begin and end with the defense. Anyone who breathes air knows that. Well, with one exception I guess. We need a OG/C and OT prospect, IMO a vet RB and WR and we are good. Four weeks from today we will all be asking how we just upgraded the defense in the draft. Why not write an article about that???

I'm good with a vet WR. I'm not certain about the RB but I don't have a problem with it either. I definitely can see some pros for a vet RB in leadership, blocking, knowing the game, and running routes and having good judgment on the field. The downside is the salary mostly depending on the age.

 

[big dog cowboy]

I'm good with a vet WR. I'm not certain about the RB but I don't have a problem with it either. I definitely can see some pros for a vet RB in leadership, blocking, knowing the game, and running routes and having good judgment on the field. The downside is the salary mostly depending on the age.

My thinking (don't laugh) is we might just might try to run the ball more and we have nothing proven behind Murray if he misses another 3 or 4 games. Vet RB's are cheap and you hit on every single reason to bring one in.

 

[RS12]

The basic problem I see is that a team team who already chucked it too much, just hired an OC who wants to chuck it even more. Sad part is this team is close to being a dominant running team, Pollack did a nice job with ZBS. But hey they'll be entertaining, thats all that matters right?

 

[jobberone]

My thinking (don't laugh) is we might just might try to run the ball more and we have nothing proven behind Murray if he misses another 3 or 4 games. Vet RB's are cheap and you hit on every single reason to bring one in.

I agree. We don't have a proven every down back. They need to find one even if he's already here.

 

[dallasdave]

As long as we're WINNING, I don't care if we're throwing the ball 50+ times or not. I just don't want to see crap like the GB game last year where we lost, that was pitiful and just showed how inept Garret is as an offensive coordinator.

Well said, just win games. Look how much Denver threw the ball last year.

 

[big dog cowboy]

Look how much Denver threw the ball last year.

Well, there was some guy named Manning back there throwing the ball remember? You don't sign one of the best QB's to ever play the game just to hand the ball off.

 

[Brooksey]

I could care less about balance.

They scored 439 points last year.

Score at least that many again and I'm a happy camper.

With this defense? 439 points...big deal. Denver scored over 630. The 439 points also includes defensive scoring. Our defense improved year to year on turnovers/scoring and as a consequence we scored more points directly. Year to Year our offensive production was pretty flat. Balance has a history of winning super bowls , 65% passing has a history of winning zero super bowls. You can slant the ratio to the pass at 55-60% but we over cook the filet my man.

It's JG/ Callahan trying to be cute on downs we need to run, for clock or whatever and he passes it, which ends up incomplete, batted pass, a sack or a int. Blowing the close games by refusal to run because there's eight in the box. Who came up with that one?

Denver passed it 60% of the time and scored over 600 point we passed it an insanely 65% and scored 439 with a with some help from our defense.

 

[Brooksey]

It's a passing league. I get it. But, with this team all conversations begin and end with the defense. Anyone who breathes air knows that. Well, with one exception I guess. We need a OG/C and OT prospect, IMO a vet RB and WR and we are good. Four weeks from today we will all be asking how we just upgraded the defense in the draft. Why not write an article about that???

Yeah but SF and Seattle think it's still a running league. They run more then pass even with QB keepers eliminated.

 

[dallasdave]

Well, there was some guy named Manning back there throwing the ball remember? You don't sign one of the best QB's to ever play the game just to hand the ball off.

If I RECALL the Cowboys threw the ball quite a bit in their loss to Denver this year. When the score is 51 to 48 neither team is just handing the ball off.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

after the first interception, RUN the ball. If you are running, need i remind anyone of the GB game, and you are doing it, dont STOP. If the whole league goes passing, go running. If the whole league is running, start passing. You start trends by not following the others.

Really?

 

[MichaelWinicki]

Yeah but SF and Seattle think it's still a running league. They run more then pass even with QB keepers eliminated.

There's some merit in what you post but that doesn't mean that this is the clear path to success for every team.

You could also suggest that they (those two teams) can be more conservative when it comes to an offensive philosophy because they have a lot of faith in their defenses (and rightly so) to stop the other team.