Garrett is seriously playcalling like a scolded child

[parchy]

I don't think he knows why he does the things he does sometimes. It's like he's only responding to the criticism.

So he takes a lot of heat for us being totally absent in the running game last week, and deservedly so. He responds with that garbage non-response of a quote during the week, and now here we are... he flops so hard to the other side that we're almost running to our detriment at times. It's like he has no idea what balance is sometimes. You either ride the run to death or you forget about it.

This exact issue popped up last year after the Washington loss at home. We run 11 times in that game in a losing effort and the media is all over Garrett's jock. Remember where this is going? We run 38 times in a win over the Bengals the next week. This week's ratio, 14 to 33, is similar. I'm glad we've won both bounce-back games, but does anyone else see a disturbing trend? It's like he's going "not running enough, eh? I'LL show YOU."

My question is why is he forgetting about it in the first place? Why has the Wildcat been elbowed out of the offense, especially in the red zone? What will it take for him to get this group back up to 2007 production?

 

[ShiningStar]

I don't think he knows why he does the things he does sometimes. It's like he's only responding to the criticism.

So he takes a lot of heat for us being totally absent in the running game last week, and deservedly so. He responds with that garbage non-response of a quote during the week, and now here we are... he flops so hard to the other side that we're almost running to our detriment at times. It's like he has no idea what balance is sometimes. You either ride the run to death or you forget about it.

This exact issue popped up last year after the Washington loss at home. We run 11 times in that game in a losing effort and the media is all over Garrett's jock. Remember where this is going? We run 38 times in a win over the Bengals the next week. This week's ratio, 14 to 33, is similar. I'm glad we've won both bounce-back games, but does anyone else see a disturbing trend? It's like he's going "not running enough, eh? I'LL show YOU."

My question is why is he forgetting about it in the first place? Why has the Wildcat been elbowed out of the offense, especially in the red zone? What will it take for him to get this group back up to 2007 production?

maybe he is out thinking himself instead of going back to basics, which in this case, going back to what worked.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

I'm not a big Garrett believer, but the criticism is going overboard.

I kept thinking yesterday that maybe we ran as much as we did because Romo was hurt and they didn't want to expose him to more hits, especially with Doug Free making his first start.

 

[baj1dallas]

maybe he is out thinking himself instead of going back to basics, which in this case, going back to what worked.

or maybe he thought the Commanders had the worst run defense in the league and were missing starters on the defensive line, and that we could pick up chunks or 5 and 8 yards a carry running straight up the middle, and that Marion Barber wouldn't fumble the ball in the red zone...

 

[iceberg]

I'm not a big Garrett believer, but the criticism is going overboard.

I kept thinking yesterday that maybe we ran as much as we did because Romo was hurt and they didn't want to expose him to more hits, especially with Doug Free making his first start.

once you plant the seed, reality has no bearing.

 

[Doomsday101]

I agree that Garrett went overboard in a reponse to the critics which is a mistake to begin with. Too hell with the critics, this offese was putting up points before the GB game, we had a bad game there was no reason to try and be something we are not. Dallas looked like Carolina out there yesterday. Romo is the main key for this offense get him going early and mix in the run

 

[Chief]

or maybe he thought the Commanders had the worst run defense in the league and were missing starters on the defensive line, and that we could pick up chunks or 5 and 8 yards a carry running straight up the middle, and that Marion Barber wouldn't fumble the ball in the red zone...

 

[parchy]

I'm not a big Garrett believer, but the criticism is going overboard.

I kept thinking yesterday that maybe we ran as much as we did because Romo was hurt and they didn't want to expose him to more hits, especially with Doug Free making his first start.

I don't know, maybe, but we came out with the run-heavy stuff before DHall kicked Romo in the back. It was obviously part of the gameplan. And like Mickey said, we were running all game and got zero points from it. Then Romo kind of had to throw on that last drive and we take seven.

 

[iceberg]

I agree that Garrett went overboard in a reponse to the critics which is a mistake to begin with. Too hell with the critics, this offese was putting up points before the GB game, we had a bad game there was no reason to try and be something we are not. Dallas looked like Carolina out there yesterday. Romo is the main key for this offense get him going early and mix in the run

many dallas fans and media are the epitomy of semi-football knowledge and a desire for instant gratification. while i'm guilty of the 1st one, i know better than to think every "single" game is a playbook on what to fix and how to fix it.

too many conditions are there in any given game to simply pull out the "idiots guide to coaching" and follow it.

 

[Stautner]

maybe he is out thinking himself instead of going back to basics, which in this case, going back to what worked.

How much more basic could Garrett have got yesterday. Run left, run right. That's pee wee football basic.

I love that we established the run, but Garrett failed to take advantage of it. The way we were running was perfect for setting up some play action passes, but Garrett was predictable when he ocassionally called a pass rather than calling a play action when the defense expected us to keep ramming it down their throat. We had the Skins off balance and failed to capitalize because we didn't attack with other weapons when they started digging in.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

Oh yeah, I think Wade or Jerry or whoever had an influence to run more than we did last week. But maybe we ran it more than we would have once Tony did get kneed in the back.

We all have to hope Garrett wasn't calling the game the way he did out of spite, anyway. That would be incredibly selfish and spiteful, and I can't see him doing that.

 

[Doomsday101]

many dallas fans and media are the epitomy of semi-football knowledge and a desire for instant gratification. while i'm guilty of the 1st one, i know better than to think every "single" game is a playbook on what to fix and how to fix it.

too many conditions are there in any given game to simply pull out the "idiots guide to coaching" and follow it.

I just think it is a wise move to get Romo going early in the game with the high precentage passes so that he can get into a groove. There are some reason why Dallas may have went into such a run mode as they did yesterday namely Free getting his 1st start but in the end when Dallas needed the points we went back to the type of offense plays that have put us at 7-3 on the season. What I saw yesterday was something I would expect to see in a Panthers game

 

[iceberg]

I just think it is a wise move to get Romo going early in the game with the high precentage passes so that he can get into a groove. There are some reason why Dallas went into such a run mode as they did yesterday namely Free getting his 1st start but in the end when Dallas needed the points we went back to the type of offense plays that have put us at 7-3 on the season. What I saw yesterday was something I would expect to see in a Panthers game

for whatever reason, it does take romo a bit to get into a groove, if we can ever get him on one. yesterday he was either throwing darts or air balloons.

 

[Gaede]

I'm not a big Garrett believer, but the criticism is going overboard.
.

Yeah, I think so too. He's becoming a scapegoat/whipping boy for everything wrong with the team.

Don't get me wrong, I think he sucked against the Packers and said so all week. I didn't have a chance to see the game against the Skins, so I have no idea what happened, but I've got to believe that there's more than one reason we only scored 7 points against such a crappy team.

 

[joseephuss]

Romo made a bunch of bad throws yesterday. If he makes those throws, then Dallas converts more 3rd downs and perhaps scores more points. That and the Barber fumble really limited the teams chances of scoring points.

 

[NinePointOh]

Remember where this is going? We run 38 times in a win over the Bengals the next week. This week's ratio, 14 to 33, is similar.

What game did you watch? 14 to 33 isn't even close to the pass-run ratio. Romo attempted 27 passes, was sacked once, and scrambled twice for positive yardage -- that's 30 passing plays and 31 rushing plays (since two of our 33 attempts were scrambles).

And that's without counting the multiple "kill, kill" hand-offs that were called pass plays Romo audibled into runs.

Garrett ran the ball because it was moving the offense down the field. The passing game wasn't, and that had very little to do with not calling enough pass plays. When we called passes, Romo was missing receivers and receivers were dropping passes or not getting open. The problem was execution and perhaps which specific passing plays were called, but not the pass-run ratio.

 

[Stautner]

What game did you watch? 14 to 33 isn't even close to the pass-run ratio. Romo attempted 27 passes, was sacked once, and scrambled twice for positive yardage -- that's 30 passing plays and 31 rushing plays (since two of our 33 attempts were scrambles).

And that's without counting the multiple "kill, kill" hand-offs that were called pass plays Romo audibled into runs.

Garrett ran the ball because it was moving the offense down the field. The passing game wasn't, and that had very little to do with not calling enough pass plays. When we called passes, Romo was missing receivers and receivers were dropping passes or not getting open. The problem was execution and perhaps which specific passing plays were called, but not the pass-run ratio.

The ratio only evened out when we were forced to throw to try to catch up late in the game.

 

[baj1dallas]

What game did you watch? 14 to 33 isn't even close to the pass-run ratio. Romo attempted 27 passes, was sacked once, and scrambled twice for positive yardage -- that's 30 passing plays and 31 rushing plays (since two of our 33 attempts were scrambles).

And that's without counting the multiple "kill, kill" hand-offs that were called pass plays Romo audibled into runs.

Garrett ran the ball because it was moving the offense down the field. The passing game wasn't, and that had very little to do with not calling enough pass plays. When we called passes, Romo was missing receivers and receivers were dropping passes or not getting open. The problem was execution and perhaps which specific passing plays were called, but not the pass-run ratio.

plays <50 yards don't count.

 

[YosemiteSam]

I don't think he knows why he does the things he does sometimes. It's like he's only responding to the criticism.

So he takes a lot of heat for us being totally absent in the running game last week, and deservedly so. He responds with that garbage non-response of a quote during the week, and now here we are... he flops so hard to the other side that we're almost running to our detriment at times. It's like he has no idea what balance is sometimes. You either ride the run to death or you forget about it.

This exact issue popped up last year after the Washington loss at home. We run 11 times in that game in a losing effort and the media is all over Garrett's jock. Remember where this is going? We run 38 times in a win over the Bengals the next week. This week's ratio, 14 to 33, is similar. I'm glad we've won both bounce-back games, but does anyone else see a disturbing trend? It's like he's going "not running enough, eh? I'LL show YOU."

My question is why is he forgetting about it in the first place? Why has the Wildcat been elbowed out of the offense, especially in the red zone? What will it take for him to get this group back up to 2007 production?

I think my post from another thread is appropriate here. I will link rather than repost.

I recommend Jerry hire a consultant behind the scenes. (definitely not openly like Washington did) Since after what happen earlier, Dan Reeves isn't an option, but Mike Shanahan or Mike Holmgren are both great offensive minds.

 

[YosemiteSam]

The ratio only evened out when we were forced to throw to try to catch up late in the game.

That would be incorrect. See the link in my post above.