FWST Just Chill: 'Boys didn't abandon the run but the running game has not been good

[InmanRoshi]

Less I be accused of "cherry picking data" when I accuse Garrett of abandoning the run when he gets spooked on the road in tight games, how about every close (10 points or less) road game in the past two years... win or loss.

And because I'm lazy I'll even skew this in your favor by just using pass attempts, and dismissing Romo's sacks and scrambling plays as called passing plays.

2009
@Green Bay - 39 pass atttempts, 11 rush attempts

@Philly - 34 pass attempts, 20 rush attempts

@Kansas City - 34 pass attempts, 23 rush attempts

@Denver - 42 pass attempts, 25 rush attempts

2008
@Pittsburgh - 36 pass attempts, 24 rush attempts

@Washington - 27 pass attempts, 26 rush attempts (obviously the outlier, as it's the only close road game where we had anything resembling a balanced attack, probably because this was Romo's first game back from the month long injury when he was still wearing his hand splint).

@Arizona - 38 pass attempts, 21 rush attempts.

Total:
250 pass plays, 150 run plays.



Nope, no pattern here. Nothing to see here. Everyone move along. Just figments of your imagination.

But, hey, he was really "committed to the run" in that 2 TD blowout at home against the Panthers, I'll give him that.

 

[RoadRunner]

Less I be accused of "cherry picking data" when I accuse Garrett of abandoning the run when he gets spooked on the road in tight games, how about every close (10 points or less) road game in the past two years... win or loss.

And because I'm lazy I'll even skew this in your favor by just using pass attempts, and dismissing Romo's sacks and scrambling plays as called passing plays.

2009
@Green Bay - 39 pass atttempts, 11 rush attempts

@Philly - 34 pass attempts, 20 rush attempts

@Kansas City - 34 pass attempts, 23 rush attempts

@Denver - 42 pass attempts, 25 rush attempts

2008
@Pittsburgh - 36 pass attempts, 24 rush attempts

@Washington - 27 pass attempts, 26 rush attempts (obviously the outlier, as it's the only close road game where we had anything resembling a balanced attack, probably because this was Romo's first game back from the month long injury when he was still wearing his hand splint).

@Arizona - 38 pass attempts, 21 rush attempts.

Total:
250 pass plays, 150 run plays.



Nope, no pattern here. Nothing to see here. Everyone move along. Just figments of your imagination.

But, hey, he was really "committed to the run" in that 2 TD blowout at home against the Panthers, I'll give him that.

Hahaha, that's what we call ownage right there.

 

[kramskoi]

...between Bob Sturm's analysis of seasons past/present and Football Outsiders, the verdict is in and the Cowboys don't run the ball enough...it's undeniable now...you can argue in the face of facts but Garrett's tendencies are slowing coming into focus...

...and i don't say this because i don't want to see him and the offense hit top gear...it is what it is...

...from the standpoint of yardage, the Cowboys are losing ground both in rushing and overall offense...BUT, Football Outsiders has them clinging quite tenaciously around 4th overall in league offense...i don't know how they did'nt slip after that egg last sunday but they persist...they've slowly slipped from 4th to 11th on CHFF's Offensive Hog Index however...and it's a steady erosion that was only briefly interrupted by the Austin explosion...the numbers are waning once again...Williams in particular is going to have to lift this offense and loosen up Austin again...Crayton too must step up...both he and Williams are nowhere in DYAR per Football Outsiders...both barely above replacement level [36/28]...the Cowboys don't end their post-season drought with this type of performance...

...the biggest difference i see between this offense and New Orleans is the complimentary receivers, all of whom have good hands, run good routes and produce good DYAR [all above 55 DYAR]...Colston, Meachem, Henderson, and Moore are arguably the most productive unit in the NFL right now and it shows...it is the biggest reason why they don't know what to do with Reggie Bush...their receiver bunch is so good they don't need him...imagine having a problem like that!

...Witten [who's DYAR has slipped from nearly 200 the past two seasons to around 75 now] needs to become more than a simple check-down guy...this offense is supposed to be Romo friendly, and by that i take it to mean that protection would be much better this year...it has'nt and what the offense has given up [Witten] to keep Romo upright has'nt paid dividends, either in the passing game or running game...and Bennett [-38 DYAR] has been simply a dismal afterthought...Romo too has missed more open "would be" big-gainers for my money...

...why are they slipping?...offensive line play, both running and pass protection...if you look at New England, who also likes to run the shotgun offense, they are ranked 1st in total offense and the gap between them and Indy/NO is growing by the week...New England is the best 6-3 team in the league right now...by FO's estimation, the league's best team overall and but for the meltdown at Indy last week they were set to prove it...their trip to New Orleans next week will surely be one not to miss...

...Jones brought back Hudson Houck but the results so far have been mixed and with Columbo done he has his work cut out for him because December looms...we are seeing the same blocking/protection issues rearing its ugly head again...the line simply has to play better down the stretch than in seasons past...the defense in its present form is good enough to get these guys deep into the playoffs...surrendering less than 17 ppg should allow a supposedly vaunted Cowboys offense to shine...

 

[T-RO]

Just CHILL: The Cowboys didn't abandon the run but the running game has not been good lately

Clarence Hill:
Watch the game, please.

You are asking way too much of most fans, Clarence. Asking them to watch in a sober state and truly observe what is going on....absurd.

 

[Future]

You think blocking might have to do with it?

And the two games we ran the ball we lost, and played a down-to-the-wire game against a previously winless team.

I'm all for balance, and ultimately I want 50/50. But I do not want to become a running team. We are, and should be a pass first team.

What? We won against Carolina and should have beaten the Giants. I think we don't know if blocking has anything to do with it because they don't get enough of a chance to wear on a DLine and punish them.

 

[NextGenBoys]

Less I be accused of "cherry picking data" when I accuse Garrett of abandoning the run when he gets spooked on the road in tight games, how about every close (10 points or less) road game in the past two years... win or loss.

And because I'm lazy I'll even skew this in your favor by just using pass attempts, and dismissing Romo's sacks and scrambling plays as called passing plays.

2009
@Green Bay - 39 pass atttempts, 11 rush attempts

@Philly - 34 pass attempts, 20 rush attempts

@Kansas City - 34 pass attempts, 23 rush attempts

@Denver - 42 pass attempts, 25 rush attempts

2008
@Pittsburgh - 36 pass attempts, 24 rush attempts

@Washington - 27 pass attempts, 26 rush attempts (obviously the outlier, as it's the only close road game where we had anything resembling a balanced attack, probably because this was Romo's first game back from the month long injury when he was still wearing his hand splint).

@Arizona - 38 pass attempts, 21 rush attempts.

Total:
250 pass plays, 150 run plays.



Nope, no pattern here. Nothing to see here. Everyone move along. Just figments of your imagination.

But, hey, he was really "committed to the run" in that 2 TD blowout at home against the Panthers, I'll give him that.

Ok, and why did you leave out Philly week 2 last year, and not to mention Cincy last year, which coincidentally was our 2nd highest rushing output of the year? *Edit* My fault I didn't read that correctly, didnt know you were talking only road games.

And your assessment of the Washington game last year is off a bit. Romo had 22 passes and Barber had 13 carries before the final two drives, yet Romo ended up with 27 passes and Barber ended up with 24 carries because we were up and milked the clock and won the game.

That is and has been our identity. We're going to pass to set up the run. No one *****es when it works to our advantage.

 

[InmanRoshi]

That is and has been our identity. We're going to pass to set up the run. No one *****es when it works to our advantage.

Hardly anyone *****es when we rack up 12 penalties and win either, just because winning is a great deoderant not because 12 penalties in a game is great way to go about doing things.

There are definitely negative tendencies to this coaching staff that you can count on. First, we're going to commit a mindboggling amount of penalties. Second, if the game is close Jason Garrett is going to freak the F out and start throwing the ball like a stoned junior college freshman playing Madden.

Now, you can claim that its not a big deal, or that the positives of this coaching staff outweighs the bad in the grand scheme of things (fwiw, I make this argument for Romo all the time) ... that's fine. But to deny these tendencies exist is ridiculous. They're well established, documented and undeniable going on 3 years.

BTW, the "positive outweighs the negative" argument could be perfectly valid considering where we rank in total offense. But personally, I think Garretts "freak out" tendency could be our undoing in the playoffs, especially against the Saints or in a bad weather game in January. We're not going beat the Saints in a shootout, especially in New Orleans, and I don't think Garrett will be able to help himself. (Just like I didn't think he could help himself going into last week... http://cowboyszone.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3070988&postcount=32 ) He'll probably gameplan that we're going to run the ball. Probably spend all week preparing for it. Probably start off with the intention of running the ball. Then as the game progresses and in the heat of the moment he'll promptly unravel, lose his shizz and we're chucking and ducking all over the field... to our demise.

 

[dboyz]

Less I be accused of "cherry picking data" when I accuse Garrett of abandoning the run when he gets spooked on the road in tight games, how about every close (10 points or less) road game in the past two years... win or loss.

And because I'm lazy I'll even skew this in your favor by just using pass attempts, and dismissing Romo's sacks and scrambling plays as called passing plays.

2009
@Green Bay - 39 pass atttempts, 11 rush attempts

@Philly - 34 pass attempts, 20 rush attempts

@Kansas City - 34 pass attempts, 23 rush attempts

@Denver - 42 pass attempts, 25 rush attempts

2008
@Pittsburgh - 36 pass attempts, 24 rush attempts

@Washington - 27 pass attempts, 26 rush attempts (obviously the outlier, as it's the only close road game where we had anything resembling a balanced attack, probably because this was Romo's first game back from the month long injury when he was still wearing his hand splint).

@Arizona - 38 pass attempts, 21 rush attempts.

Total:
250 pass plays, 150 run plays.



Nope, no pattern here. Nothing to see here. Everyone move along. Just figments of your imagination.

But, hey, he was really "committed to the run" in that 2 TD blowout at home against the Panthers, I'll give him that.

This really ignores the point of the article though. You can't just look at the total runs and passes at the end of the game. You have to look at the situations. I challenge anyone to go through the play by play and say when they should have run instead of pass. Example. 1st down run to Barber and loss of 1. 2nd and 11. We passed and got sacked so now it's 3rd and 19 an obvious passing situation. Sure you could argue that we should have run on 2nd down but was passing really unreasonable. The real problem was that we didn't block up the run and we didn't block the pass. When you don't do that, pass-run ratio really is meaningless.

I think Clarence is dead on.

 

[iceberg]

Aren't most teams one-dimensional on occasion? You want to cite 4 games from the past two seasons and pretend like it's the norm?? Nevermind that each one of those teams has a stout run defense. And Choice had a pretty durned good game against the Steelers, even if it wasn't all on the ground. Why don't you mention the game against the Ravens where Choice had 90+ yards rushing?? And weren't we the number one rushing offense for the first 4 weeks or so. By your definition, that's a substantial body of evidence.

this is why i quit listening to the closet-coaches. they see only what they see and facts have no bearing on the end result.

 

[TheCount]

That is and has been our identity. We're going to pass to set up the run. No one *****es when it works to our advantage.

I don't really think that qualifies as an identity because if you pass and end up behind, there is no setting up the run, just more passing as we've seen. The only time the run becomes a factor is when we're ahead. As soon as we end up behind, if the run game isn't clicking we just start flinging it.

 

[InmanRoshi]

I don't really think that qualifies as an identity because if you pass and end up behind, there is no setting up the run, just more passing as we've seen. The only time the run becomes a factor is when we're ahead. As soon as we end up behind, if the run game isn't clicking we just start flinging it.

Exactly, there is no "pass to set up the run", because a) no defensive coordinator puts a priority over stopping our running attack over our passing attack and b) Garrett doesn't consider running the football to be a vital ingredient to winning, other than to wind down the clock on and already decided game. We pass to set up the pass.

If that's our identity, so be it .. teams have won like that in the past, but we need to own up to it and quit deluding ourselves otherwise. We should be using the Colts model of developing smaller, quicker more technically percise offensive lineman who can pass protect rather than spending money on these these big, slow footed, brauling behmouths like Flozell, Colombo and Bigg. Also, no need to use a bruiser like Barber so much if we're a finesse team. Andy Reid knows he's a finesse pass-first offense, and he utilizes RBs like Westbrook and McCoy to suit it.

 

[Alexander]

If that's our identity, so be it .. teams have won like that in the past, but we need to own up to it and quit deluding ourselves otherwise. We should be using the Colts model of developing smaller, quicker more technically percise offensive lineman who can pass protect rather than spending money on these these big, slow footed, brauling behmouths like Flozell, Colombo and Bigg. Also, no need to use a bruiser like Barber so much if we're a finesse team. Andy Reid knows he's a finesse pass-first offense, and he utilizes RBs like Westbrook and McCoy to suit it.

Great points. What is the issue here is that Garrett apparently wants to field an offense that can do it all and he just decides which way to go. Sorry, identities cannot be that vague. If that's what he wants, we need better WRs and linemen.

 

[InmanRoshi]

Great points. What is the issue here is that Garrett apparently wants to field an offense that can do it all and he just decides which way to go. Sorry, identities cannot be that vague. If that's what he wants, we need better WRs and linemen.

Also, it's kind of pointless to use a brusing, power back like Barber as your primary back when your primary running play is a finesse shotgun draw.

If this is what our offense is, the only time Barber should be on the field is short yardage and goalline situations. That's no knock on Barber, but he just doesn't fit this offense.

 

[Doomsday101]

The theme of this week has undoubtedly been the lack of running success from Sunday’s loss in Green Bay, and it’s prompted questions about a lack of commitment to the run.

Naturally, Tony Romo squashed those notions on Thursday when asked how important it is to re-establish the running game against Washington.

“It’s important every week, but when people talk about it’s time to run the ball . . . it’s simply a matter of each game is different,” Romo said. “If a team is consistently going to put an eighth guy in the box, you’d be dumb to consistently run the ball 35 times into it.

“It’s all different. You want to be able to do everything well so when a game calls for 45 passes, you do that well. When a game calls for 45 runs, you do that well. At the end of the season, it balances well.”

He said “people” were saying it’s time to run the ball. Wonder who he might be referring to?

 

[dboyz]

Also, it's kind of pointless to use a brusing, power back like Barber as your primary back when your primary running play is a finesse shotgun draw.

If this is what our offense is, the only time Barber should be on the field is short yardage and goalline situations. That's no knock on Barber, but he just doesn't fit this offense.

Our primary running play is not the shotgun draw although we do run draws a lot and often effectively. It's interesting back in the 90s we had a gigantic line (for the time) and a powerful and quick runner (Emmitt) and the staple running play of our offense was the lead draw.

 

[Alexander]

The theme of this week has undoubtedly been the lack of running success from Sunday’s loss in Green Bay, and it’s prompted questions about a lack of commitment to the run.

Naturally, Tony Romo squashed those notions on Thursday when asked how important it is to re-establish the running game against Washington.

“It’s important every week, but when people talk about it’s time to run the ball . . . it’s simply a matter of each game is different,” Romo said. “If a team is consistently going to put an eighth guy in the box, you’d be dumb to consistently run the ball 35 times into it.

“It’s all different. You want to be able to do everything well so when a game calls for 45 passes, you do that well. When a game calls for 45 runs, you do that well. At the end of the season, it balances well.”

He said “people” were saying it’s time to run the ball. Wonder who he might be referring to?

He also took the argument to the extreme. It doesn't prove a single thing other than deflect attention to what "people" are talking about.

Who exactly is suggesting running it 35 times into an 8-man front? Even a heavy running team isn't going to average 35 rushing plays.

I think most "people" are disturbed by the fact that we ran the ball just 14 times in the entire game, which was very close. "People" are disturbed that our defense was left out to dry when we didn't even give them but minutes to recoup before they were right back on the field. "People" are disturbed that this is not the first time Garrett has shown a tendency to slip into passing first when things are not perfect. That just shows a lack of commitment or faith in the running game and an overinflated sense of confidence in the passing game. All offseason that was supposed to be the direction we took--use the run more. Establish more of that as an identity and rely less on the pass to dictate the tempo of the offense.

It is an excuse and undoubtedly part of the unified front being presented to the media. Good for him for repeating the party line.

But when the [strike]defensive coordinator[/strike] head coach also suggests that a little more ball control is a good thing for the team in general, that tends to shoot this defense out of the water.

 

[Doomsday101]

He also took the argument to the extreme. It doesn't prove a single thing other than deflect attention to what "people" are talking about.

Who exactly is suggesting running it 35 times into an 8-man front? Even a heavy running team isn't going to average 35 rushing plays.

I think most "people" are disturbed by the fact that we ran the ball just 14 times in the entire game, which was very close. "People" are disturbed that our defense was left out to dry when we didn't even give them but minutes to recoup before they were right back on the field. "People" are disturbed that this is not the first time Garrett has shown a tendency to slip into passing first when things are not perfect. That just shows a lack of commitment or faith in the running game and an overinflated sense of confidence in the passing game. All offseason that was supposed to be the direction we took--use the run more. Establish more of that as an identity and rely less on the pass to dictate the tempo of the offense.

It is an excuse and undoubtedly part of the unified front being presented to the media. Good for him for repeating the party line.

But when the [strike]defensive coordinator[/strike] head coach also suggests that a little more ball control is a good thing for the team in general, that tends to shoot this defense out of the water.

I agree Romo used an extreme analogy, I think many here are taking an extreme view as well.

Things like how defense are defending you plays a big part in play calling the down and distance plays a big part.

Running to say we ran is not going to cut it. Dallas had big plays they failed to execute those plays which were wide open for the taking we missed on them had they made those plays I seriously doubt we are having this conversations.

I sure as heck do not want to be a team that runs on 1st, 2nd and pass on 3rd like Carolina. I want to attack the defense and use the run as part of that attack; I don’t want us to go into a shell when we see opportunities to attack teams. In the GB we had some wide-open plays we failed to make

 

[InmanRoshi]

this is why i quit listening to the closet-coaches. they see only what they see and facts have no bearing on the end result.

I know. They're everywhere.

Take this guy for example...

"I certainly understand balance," Jerry Jones said on Thursday. "But I'd sure like to see (Felix) with the ball more."
....

"We need to get him in situations outside, or where he has a little space, and we'll see some of that," Jones said. "It's not a frustrating thing. It's a tactical thing."

http://www.***BANNED-URL***/sharedc...wboys/stories/112009dnspocowdate.3e76723.html

 

[Alexander]

Things like how defense are defending you plays a big part in play calling the down and distance plays a big part.

When they are blitzing like crazy, the solution isn't always to rely on perfect execution to burn them with a big play in the air, especially in longer developing plays. You can pick and choose those spots. Effective chunks of yardage in the teeth of a blitz will cause it to die down. Shorter passes, quick hitting runs might not be sexy, but they can be effective and also borrow time while giving the defense something to think about. A defense that is pinning their ears back isn't going to stop until there is a reason to. The Packers were a pent-up team that was frustrated after not blitzing much most of the season and they came into this game with the intent to pressure. Early on, we ran fairly well with Barber, but I don't think Garrett's gameplan was changed by the flow of the football game nearly as much as he is stating. I believe he intended to beat the blitz with big plays--confidence crushers. I don't believe he had any intention of trying to go toe-to-toe with them.

Passing more and especially setting yourself up in the shotgun isn't going to do much to change the defensive posture. If throwing was the best way to beat Green Bay, fine. There are better ways to do it than to be so obvious about it. Garrett just tends to get impatient and believes strongly in explosive plays. Most of the time, that creates a higher degree of difficulty to execute them. If it works, great. If not, we will have more games like this until Garrett adjusts or we simply get the perfect execution he appears to crave.

 

[Alexander]

I know. They're everywhere.

Take this guy for example...

:laugh2: