For those wanting Dallas to run the ball more

[dstovall5]

if you truly believe your first 2 statements, then the third one makes no sense

if you know doing something makes you more effective but some days you not able to do it

the response should not be: give it up completely

the response should be: why cant i do it on some days?

it is a radical new idea called "Problem solving"

look it up

that is what a good coaching staff does
they are not supposed to throw up their hands and say 'oh well, we cant run the ball effectively so lets give up'

OTOH, when one goes into a retrospective analysis with a preconceived notion, you migth be surprised how often one is able to 'find' that the analysis backs up that notion

its called bias

No, it's called common sense, look it up.

It's obvious our offense is potent when we have a solid running game going smoothly and actually getting positive gains. But that's not what happens every game. You don't continue running the ball as much when it's being ineffective, creating 3rd and long situations which then puts your passing game in tight spots.

And what makes no sense? That I believe when we're running the ball effectively, that we should stick with it, but when we're not we should let out passing game carry us, what's so hard about that to comprehend? Lol.

 

[dstovall5]

Still run the ball.

Because if you want all the pass plays to work that are built off of deception, then you have to actually run the ball to get them to be as effective as possible.

It is simple football.

Then why are we so good at play action, yet we don't run that much compared to the rest of the league. I mean, you did say "Play action also works if you actually run the ball some."

That's kinda of contradicting, right? We rarely run the ball, yet we're very good at play action ...

 

[visionary]

No, it's called common sense, look it up.

It's obvious our offense is potent when we have a solid running game going smoothly and actually getting positive gains. But that's not what happens every game. You don't continue running the ball as much when it's being ineffective, creating 3rd and long situations which then puts your passing game in tight spots.

And what makes no sense? That I believe when we're running the ball effectively, that we should stick with it, but when we're not we should let out passing game carry us, what's so hard about that to comprehend? Lol.

my post was in English but i specifically tried not to use big words

my apologies

 

[dstovall5]

my post was in English but i specifically tried not to use big words

my apologies

It's ok, common sense isn't so common these days, it's not just you who lacks it, bud.

 

[Rockport]

Lately, there seems to be a trend going on around here. People more and more have been saying we need to run the ball more and stop abandoning it, but is that really in our best interest? The reason we DON'T run the ball more is because we're terribly inconsistent at it. So lets take a look at each of our games and see how our running game produced.

W week 1 21ATT / 88YDS = 4.19YPC - *W/O LongRun 20ATT / 75YDS = 3.75YPC
L week 2 13ATT / 37YDS = 2.84YPC - *W/O LongRun 12ATT / 25YDS = 2.08YPC
W week 3 34ATT / 193YDS = 5.70YPC - *W/O LongRun 33ATT / 152YDS = 4.60YPC
L week 4 15ATT / 77YDS = 5.13YPC - *W/O LongRun 14ATT / 56YDS = 4.00YPC
L week 5 12ATT / 43YDS = 3.58YPC - *W/O LongRun 11ATT / 30YDS = 2.72YPC
W week 6 19ATT / 48YDS = 2.52YPC - *W/O LongRun 18ATT / 34YDS = 1.88YPC
W week 7 21ATT / 66YDS = 3.14YPC - *W/O LongRun 20ATT / 54YDS = 2.70YPC
L week 8 21ATT / 50YDS = 2.38YPC - *W/O LongRun 20ATT / 41YDS = 2.05YPC
W week 9 8ATT / 32YDS = 3.50YPC - *W/O LongRun 7ATT / 5YDS = 0.71YPC
L week 10 16ATT / 89YDS = 5.56YPC - *W/O LongRun 15ATT / 54YDS = 3.60YPC
W week 11 20ATT / 107YDS = 5.35YPC - *W/O LongRun 19ATT / 77YDS = 4.05YPC
W week 12 29ATT / 145YDS = 5.00YPC - *W/O LongRun 28ATT / 100YDS = 3.57YPC

As you can see, I not only found our ATT/YDS/YPC for each game, but I also added another column where I took away our longest run. What this shows is how inconsistent our running game is.

For example, there's no reason taking away a 27 yard gain should account for 85% of our total yards, that's just pathetic. With the long runs taking out, you can see how bad we are running the ball consistently, and it's part of the reason we have such a big problem moving the chains. It seems like during critical situations where we need 3-4 yards to pick up a first, we always get stuffed, or at least don't pick up the first down. And the stats even back this up, our YPC on 2nd/3rd and short is ranked 27th/29th out of all NFL teams, that's terrible.

I understand if we're running the ball well (like today) then there's no reason to abandon it, but when our running game has only 20-30 yards after 10 carries, then yes it's time to start passing the ball. Especially when we have one of the better QBs in the NFL. I just can't wrap my head around how inconsistent we are running the ball, your running game is usually suppose to be somewhat consistent week in and week out.

So I don't understand what all the fuss is about, why do people want us to continue running the ball even when it's ineffective? For the most part, all our running game has been doing this year is creating 3rd and long downs for our passing game, but yet people still don't want us to abandon it.

So what am I missing here?

Yes, you're missing the reason for an effective running game and therefore a balanced offensive attack. Running the ball effectively means you're winning the battle in the trenches. You're being more physical than the opponent. When you do that, the mental aspect affects the opponent negatively. All downhill for them fyom that point forward.

 

[50cent]

Don't need stats to realize what turned the game was the 2 minute drive that included a series of open sets and Tony Romo passes.
Once Dez and Witten got going the rest was easy.

This team is not good enough to run to win. They have to pass to win.
Balance is always the desire but it's also why the defense takes away one side of the game from you.

The Murray 15 carry stat is cute but pointless. Of course when we are ahead and running the ball to win the clock we tend to fare well. Same as all teams when they have big leads.

Murray and Dunbar making it through a game without either being nicked up is a minor miracle. And that has been another limiting factor for the run game.

Where is your proof that we can't win with the run? Last I checked, when we did commit to the run before just using it to run out the clock, we've been successful at doing so. Just throwing out a statement that we can't isn't right. We've tended to close out games this year with the pass with a lead. Like I said before, we've had the lead in he second half in almost every game and still rank amongst the worst in attempts. The PHILOSOPHY and reality don't add up for this team.

 

[TheCount]

I'm curious as to what the point of taking the long run out of the equation is meant to prove. Isn't that how running the ball works? Does anyone really think a team that averages 5 yards a carry does that by getting 5 yards every time they try to run it?

 

[50cent]

not to pick too much on you here but we need to stop with the cowboys of the 90s talk. FOREVER.
this is a different era of football in every way.

running the ball works ONLY when you make first downs.
3 runs and punting isn't good for the defense any more than 3 passes and a punt is.
whether clock stops or not you get 30 seconds between plays and that's it so 2 minutes of rest for the defense.

what matters is first downs. that buys time for the defense and wins field position battles.

no team goes into games saying we want to suck running the football.

the best rushing team in football? Washington. that 4 win Oakland team we just beat is 4th best.
running is a good way to score field goals in this league.

so while every one wants to be able to both run and pass if i can only have one give me the pass.

Not to pick on you too much but am I understanding you correctly when you say 3 runs and no first are equivalent to 3 passes and a punt? This isn't sound logic to me. Even if you don't gain a yard on three straight run plays, the clock is running which literally means that's less playing time on the field for the defense.

Couple that with the 30 seconds in between and your looking at at least an extra 1:30-2:00 minutes per possession of extra TOP on offense with even unsuccessful runs.

Stop the clock on 1,2 or even all 3 passes with incompletions and that literally means more time on the field for the defense of GAMETIME even with your :30 sec rest between plays.

Let's not act like our passing game has been so proficient that it eats up clock to preserve our defense. This passing attack and it's inconsistencies have led to far too many stopped clock situations on unsuccessful 2nd and 3rd down pass plays, leaving precious TOP on the board for opposing offenses to do more damage to a banged up def.

Running the ball more unsuccessfully helps keep a poor defense off the field better than incompletions, sacks & penalties that stop the clock will ever do. That's assuming you believe that every one of runs translates into lost yards like some make it out.

 

[jterrell]

Not to pick on you too much but am I understanding you correctly when you say 3 runs and no first are equivalent to 3 passes and a punt? This isn't sound logic to me. Even if you don't gain a yard on three straight run plays, the clock is running which literally means that's less playing time on the field for the defense.

Couple that with the 30 seconds in between and your looking at at least an extra 1:30-2:00 minutes per possession of extra TOP on offense with even unsuccessful runs.

Stop the clock on 1,2 or even all 3 passes with incompletions and that literally means more time on the field for the defense of GAMETIME even with your :30 sec rest between plays.

Let's not act like our passing game has been so proficient that it eats up clock to preserve our defense. This passing attack and it's inconsistencies have led to far too many stopped clock situations on unsuccessful 2nd and 3rd down pass plays, leaving precious TOP on the board for opposing offenses to do more damage to a banged up def.

Running the ball more unsuccessfully helps keep a poor defense off the field better than incompletions, sacks & penalties that stop the clock will ever do. That's assuming you believe that every one of runs translates into lost yards like some make it out.

Time of Possession is largely a meaningless stat. See basically any good college team.

Rest time doesn't change whether the clock is stopped or not. And time the defense has to rest in between series and whether the defense has the lead or not DOES matter.
Shortening the game versus inferior QBs is just bad strategy.

The inconsistency of this team's offense is hardly limited to it's passing offense.
The run offense is even worse.

Would you runt he ball on 3rd and 9? Of course not because it's stupid to worry about 30 seconds of clock over getting an actual first down 99% of the time.

 

[dstovall5]

I'm curious as to what the point of taking the long run out of the equation is meant to prove. Isn't that how running the ball works?

It shows how we can be very inconsistent running the ball, and I believe it's part of the reason we struggle moving the chains. For example, if a RB has 16 carries for 90 yards, that sounds great right? Well not if 60 of that came on one play, that means on the other 15 carries he's struggling to move the ball and only has 30 yards. That means he's being inefficient and he's most likely causing his team into 3rd and long situations. This offense has a MAJOR problem with moving the ball, that much is obvious.

Does anyone really think a team that averages 5 yards a carry does that by getting 5 yards every time they try to run it?

Obviously not, but there's a difference between a consistent 5.0YPC and an inconsistent 5.0YPC. One puts there team into more 3rd and long situations, while the other has more 3rd and short. I just think this team's running game is far too inconsistent in games, and it hurts us just as much as they're helping. And no I'm not saying that was the case yesterday.

 

[50cent]

Time of Possession is largely a meaningless stat. See basically any good college team.

Rest time doesn't change whether the clock is stopped or not. And time the defense has to rest in between series and whether the defense has the lead or not DOES matter.
Shortening the game versus inferior QBs is just bad strategy.

The inconsistency of this team's offense is hardly limited to it's passing offense.
The run offense is even worse.

Would you runt he ball on 3rd and 9? Of course not because it's stupid to worry about 30 seconds of clock over getting an actual first down 99% of the time.

No disrespect but my jaw dropped when you said TOP is meaningless thencompared it to NCAA football. Rest time does change. 30 secs of rest while the clock is running literally means :30 less secs of GAMETIME. :30 sec with the clock stopped means someone's offense or defense is on the field longer thus potentially creating fatigue.

If you stop me with a run at 14:30 in the game, my next play is at 14:00 with rest. If there were an incomplete pass at 14:30, my next play would be at 14:30 with rest. Times those extra :30s by the difference in plays between teams (let's say 10 play difference) and that's 5 extra minutes my awful defense is exposed to not inferior QBS BUT THE LIKES OF MANNING, RIVERS, BREES, etc. Thus giving them an extra 5 minutes to catch up, extend a lead or just flat out run the score up (see NO)!

Now keep in mind there have been games with a 15+ discrepancy in numbers if plays. Are you suggesting that playing an extra 5-15 minutes of GAMETIME doesn't have an affect on fatigue/conditioning?

Of course I wouldn't run on third and 9 typically ( well timed draw) but would you pass on 3rd and 2 100% of the time? Because we literally do it and even if we don't get it on a run, the clock is moving and not being stopped with an incomplete which happens often!

 

[dstovall5]

Of course I wouldn't run on third and 9 typically ( well timed draw) but would you pass on 3rd and 2 100% of the time? Because we literally do it and even if we don't get it on a run, the clock is moving and not being stopped with an incomplete which happens often!

We're effective with our passing game on 3rd and short, so I don't see why that's a problem. 3rd and long is another story though ...

 

[50cent]

No, it's called common sense, look it up.

It's obvious our offense is potent when we have a solid running game going smoothly and actually getting positive gains. But that's not what happens every game. You don't continue running the ball as much when it's being ineffective, creating 3rd and long situations which then puts your passing game in tight spots.

And what makes no sense? That I believe when we're running the ball effectively, that we should stick with it, but when we're not we should let out passing game carry us, what's so hard about that to comprehend? Lol.

You keep saying our run game puts us in 3rd and long situations but you have yet to provide proof that this happens. Please show me where the run has put us in 3rd and long situations. The. Please compare it to how many times penalties on passing plays or sacks on 2nd down have played into said 3rd and long situations.

I need context! PLEASE and not a small sample size either. Like the entire season breakdown if you're gonna keep misleading people. Saying it seems like and then making it a fact without proof isn't the gospel it's and opinion.

 

[Lazyking]

Without Dunbar, the Cowboys have to really focus on Murray's Strengths. None of this run it out wide plays.. I think a running game is part scheme, part runner and part timing.

 

[ScipioCowboy]

Lately, there seems to be another trend going around here as well. Whenever I express an opinion, no matter what it is, there's a bunch of posters who express the opposite opinion. I'm sick of this trend. It needs to stop.

 

[Lazyking]

Lately, there seems to be another trend going around here as well. Whenever I express an opinion, no matter what it is, there's a bunch of posters who express the opposite opinion. I'm sick of this trend. It needs to stop.

I hate that. I'm always right.

 

[dstovall5]

Lately, there seems to be another trend going around here as well. Whenever I express an opinion, no matter what it is, there's a bunch of posters who express the opposite opinion. I'm sick of this trend. It needs to stop.

Nothing wrong with a good discussion on topics regarding the Dallas Cowboys, it is a discussion board after all ... Or am I mistaken?

With so many different kinds of people, there's obviously going to be conflicting opinions of one another. Which then creates discussion ... Without that you wouldn't have these lovely forum boards.

 

[dstovall5]

Without Dunbar, the Cowboys have to really focus on Murray's Strengths. None of this run it out wide plays.. I think a running game is part scheme, part runner and part timing.

Yah I just seen he was out for the year, man what is up with our luck? We have such horrible luck with injuries.

 

[JD_KaPow]

As clearly noted by our recent trend in W's, the real key is to utilize a balanced attack on offense

Absolutely. We won the Vikings game because we ran so much (54 pass plays/9 run plays). We won the Giants game because we ran so much (42/20). And we lost the Lions game because we refused to just tote the rock (30/26).

The OP's post was ridiculous, but no more ridiculous than this.

 

[JD_KaPow]

It shows how we can be very inconsistent running the ball, and I believe it's part of the reason we struggle moving the chains. For example, if a RB has 16 carries for 90 yards, that sounds great right? Well not if 60 of that came on one play, that means on the other 15 carries he's struggling to move the ball and only has 30 yards. That means he's being inefficient and he's most likely causing his team into 3rd and long situations. This offense has a MAJOR problem with moving the ball, that much is obvious.

Taking away the longest run is a terrible way to try to get at this. All run games are inconsistent to some extent. If you look at the stats generated by people who actually try to take a sophisticated look at this (see Football Outsiders' running stats for example), our run game is pretty much middle of the pack in all their numbers. In other words, when we run, we're roughly average in our effectiveness. That may overstate the case a bit (defenses play differently against a team that runs so rarely, so if we started running more, our effectiveness may slip), but probably not much. We're not unusually inconsistent: our success rates are, just like everything else, around middle of the pack.