Dunbar TD overlooked

The only thing Dunbar's touchdown did was tick off FF owners of Dallas' other offensive players. Personally, I wish they were getting Darius Jackson more involved.
 
dmq said:
The only thing Dunbar's touchdown did was tick off FF owners of Dallas' other offensive players. Personally, I wish they were getting Darius Jackson more involved.
Click to expand...

First he'd have to make the active roster.
 
pugilist said:
That was such an idiotic playcall regardless that he scored, still bothers me..
Click to expand...

A TD is a TD...the play call is subject to opinion. Just give me the TD.
I will take idiotic play calls all game long if each results in a TD.
So it wasn't pretty, no style points. And some don't like it. Can never understand the criticism at times. Guess you wouldn't like it if it was the game winner in the SB then.
 
I still can't believe that was Lance Dunbar's first career touchdown.

The guy has had some big plays. Strange that he had never scored.
 
erod said:
I still can't believe that was Lance Dunbar's first career touchdown.

The guy has had some big plays. Strange that he had never scored.
Click to expand...
He did score on a long td that was called back because of penalty
 
Biggems said:
Nowadays, when we see Dunbar, we think of passing situations. He never gets the ball anymore as a RB. Well, in the last game, they ran him a few times, including once on the goal line.

How is this significant? Now, it is on film and future opponents have to prepare for. Now, when we bring in Dunbar, opposing defenses cannot just assume pass. Now we have allowed for our offense to mix things up and confuse the defense.

I would love to see one play with Dunbar. I know it was a bit of a broken play, but I would like to see Dak and Dunbar do a similar play to the Wentz/Sproles play. I could really see that working up to a handful of times this season for some nice yardage.
Click to expand...
Like Dez..

the problem with Dunbar is he can't stay healthy.

I really don't want him taking ops away from Zeke and Morris.

And when DMC returns..

Morris experiments are over.
 
VACowboy said:
I can't remember who it was against, but Dunbar caught a long pass down the right sideline in a game last year and I said YES! MORE OF THAT PLEEZ!

Dunbar has elite quickness and great hands. He will beat LBs every time. He needs to be an option more often on wheel routes like that. I'd much rather see him on the field in offensive sets than Whitehead.
Click to expand...
They would like to see that as well, however the problem is that he can't stay healthy. The only healthy season he had was Demarco's 1800yd season, and that was because Murray took 98% of the snaps.
 
The problem is when Dunbar is on the field, 95% of the time you can guess what is going to happen; the same is *almost* true with whitehead.
 
MileyDancer said:
The problem is when Dunbar is on the field, 95% of the time you can guess what is going to happen; the same is *almost* true with whitehead.
Click to expand...
It doesn't matter if you can guess what's going to happen. What matters is creating mismatches. When Dunbar is in the game and they are covering him with a linebacker you want to exploit that with the pass.
 
pugilist said:
That was such an idiotic playcall regardless that he scored, still bothers me..
Click to expand...
So even plays that score td's are bad play calls now. This team can't seem to do anything right. :)
 
Biggems said:
Nowadays, when we see Dunbar, we think of passing situations. He never gets the ball anymore as a RB. Well, in the last game, they ran him a few times, including once on the goal line.

How is this significant? Now, it is on film and future opponents have to prepare for. Now, when we bring in Dunbar, opposing defenses cannot just assume pass. Now we have allowed for our offense to mix things up and confuse the defense.

.
Click to expand...


That definitely was a tendency buster. They just wanted to get that on film.
 
Airbag said:
Keeping personnel on the field to keep the Bears from subbing IS design. That is not circumstance.

There was nothing keeping them from subbing out Dunbar. They didnt want to.
Click to expand...
It was either or. Either they sub for Dunbar and thereby allow the Bears to sub out players, or they prevent the Bears from subbing and have to keep Dunbar on the field. They couldn't do both.

The either-or situation only arose because they gained 29 yards down to the one on the previous 3rd-down play, putting them in a position to power run against a favorable defense. If they had their druthers, they would have had a different runner in, but they didn't have that choice. Either run in a favorable situation with a less-than-optimal RB for that situation, or don't get to run in a favorable situation at all.
 
jimnabby said:
It was either or. Either they sub for Dunbar and thereby allow the Bears to sub out players, or they prevent the Bears from subbing and have to keep Dunbar on the field. They couldn't do both.

The either-or situation only arose because they gained 29 yards down to the one on the previous 3rd-down play, putting them in a position to power run against a favorable defense. If they had their druthers, they would have had a different runner in, but they didn't have that choice. Either run in a favorable situation with a less-than-optimal RB for that situation, or don't get to run in a favorable situation at all.
Click to expand...
Well said an I agree.
So the coaching staff believed that by leaving Dunbar in and not allowing the Bears to sub out players created a favorable matchup.

And it appears they were right considering it scored a TD.

I was just trying to explain the rationale behind the decision to offset the "Duh, bad play call" posts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Staff online

Members online

Total: 1,726 (members: 28, guests: 1,698)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
466,180
Messages
13,921,264
Members
23,795
Latest member
Derekbsenior
Back
Top