Garrett's system equal opportunity QB killer

[gimmesix]

All quarterbacks throw bad passes. I figure everyone here know that, but based on some previous threads, I thought it needed to be said.

Knowing that all quarterbacks throw bad passes, offensive coaches play chess on the field to get the guys the QB is throwing to as open as possible. That's why you see plays like the one Philadelphia ran at the goal line that got McCoy wide open. It's also why a lot of teams Dallas has faced uses picks. The more open space, the easier the pass should be.

My main problem with Garrett is he doesn't seem to see the need to do things to cross up defenses and get his players wide open. He'd rather line our guys up against theirs and throw to the man who is most expected based on alignment to beat his man. So our players on offense have always got to be better than theirs on defense. When they are not, like Austin against Boykin last night, the QB has to throw into too many tight windows and eventually you are going to have mistakes. Creating mismatches by alignment and open space by movement eliminates some of those opportunities for mistakes.

Football is a game of strategy and Garrett seems to prefer to have his troops march in a straight line instead of employ guerrilla tactics with a few Jap plays thrown in for good measure. It saddens me to think that his scheme is returning for another year.

 

[JPostSam]

garrett didn't make orton throw the ball behind austin.

if orton leads austin, it's a 15-20 yard gain.

i mean, there are plenty of issues with garrett, but orton's last pass is not one of them.

 

[blindzebra]

We run combo routes all the time...Escobar's TD was one.

As for those illegal pick plays? Seems that anytime we do it we get the PI call against us.

 

[links18]

I don't know whose fault it was, but there was plenty of time on the clock; we had one time out, we only needed to get into FG range for Money Bailey and we had four downs to do it, yet the ball was thrown into tight coverage for an INT on the first play of the drive. It seems like they could have taken their time, called something safer to get Orton into a rhythm and get a drive going. The whole thing seemed panicked. It also seems like we have seen this script many times before.

 

[joseephuss]

A simple slant or in route is a safe play.

Dallas finished 8th in completion percentage and 8th in interception percentage, so they must be doing some things alright.

 

[Richmond Cowboy]

T

I don't know whose fault it was, but there was plenty of time on the clock; we had one time out, we only needed to get into FG range for Money Bailey and we had four downs to do it, yet the ball was thrown into tight coverage for an INT on the first play of the drive. It seems like they could have taken their time, called something safer to get Orton into a rhythm and get a drive going. The whole thing seemed panicked. It also seems like we have seen this script many times before.

To me it seems that any time we are down by any number of points we go into panic mode and abandon the running game. It could be 0-3 with 12 minutes left in the first quarter and this happens.

 

[Zman5]

T

To me it seems that any time we are down by any number of points we go into panic mode and abandon the running game. It could be 0-3 with 12 minutes left in the first quarter and this happens.

We even do it when we are winning by 14 points. How ridiculous is that we were winning by 23 points at the half, yet GB had more run attempts than us in the 2nd half?

 

[Boyzmamacita]

I don't know whose fault it was, but there was plenty of time on the clock; we had one time out, we only needed to get into FG range for Money Bailey and we had four downs to do it, yet the ball was thrown into tight coverage for an INT on the first play of the drive. It seems like they could have taken their time, called something safer to get Orton into a rhythm and get a drive going. The whole thing seemed panicked. It also seems like we have seen this script many times before.

We could've even surprised them with a run on first down. They were lulled to sleep on our running game by then. Might've been a good time to try it. Plenty of time was on the clock.

 

[gimmesix]

We run combo routes all the time...Escobar's TD was one.

As for those illegal pick plays? Seems that anytime we do it we get the PI call against us.

Then we need to run them better. I'm tired of seeing other teams' players get wide-open because of the design of the play while we throw into tight windows. The Escobar route was one of the few that we've had where a player had no one around him, and it was because of a blown coverage.

We do little to get double-coverage off Dez, instead choosing to let it happen and throw to the receiver with one-on-one coverage, which again is often tight.

I'm certainly not saying other QBs don't have to throw into tight coverage. No matter what you run there are going to be times when that happens. But some coaches understand that you can actually do things that make coverage more difficult. Bill Parcells, for instance, knew when and how to throw in a play design that would absolutely fool the defense. Garrett seems to only have a couple of those in his playbook and uses them about that often.

 

[links18]

We could've even surprised them with a run on first down. They were lulled to sleep on our running game by then. Might've been a good time to try it. Plenty of time was on the clock.

Whatever happened to the lead draw?

 

[links18]

We could've even surprised them with a run on first down. They were lulled to sleep on our running game by then. Might've been a good time to try it. Plenty of time was on the clock.

Whatever happened to the lead draw?

 

[sbark]

Notice the route Garretts scheme had Austin running on the Orton int............and the route Austin ran on romo's int in the G.Bay loss were very similar. Not square in routes that create separation, not slants that the use the body to shield the defender off the ball.......virtually a short post route that should be thrown out in front, but since being run so close to LOS, has to be thrown on a rope to avoid a safety making a play.........., but with tight coverage allows the corner to run under the ball as Will Sheilds did on a ball without zip, or be in good position to pik off on a ball that isn't put where the wr is set up to take a big hit from a safety..............to me its a route primed for a cb to tease the QB into throwing the ball.

 

[Clove]

Philly was so innovative, they only scored 2 points more than us, and the only reason that was, was because we went for two. By the way, on the two pointer, why not throw it up instead of a low back pass? Anyways, the only prob I had with Garrett last night was the fact that he went conservative in the red zone with Orton. That caused us to make 3's instead of 7 points.

 

[links18]

We could've even surprised them with a run on first down. They were lulled to sleep on our running game by then. Might've been a good time to try it. Plenty of time was on the clock.

Whatever happened to the lead draw?

 

[joseephuss]

Then we need to run them better. I'm tired of seeing other teams' players get wide-open because of the design of the play while we throw into tight windows. The Escobar route was one of the few that we've had where a player had no one around him, and it was because of a blown coverage.

We do little to get double-coverage off Dez, instead choosing to let it happen and throw to the receiver with one-on-one coverage, which again is often tight.

I'm certainly not saying other QBs don't have to throw into tight coverage. No matter what you run there are going to be times when that happens. But some coaches understand that you can actually do things that make coverage more difficult. Bill Parcells, for instance, knew when and how to throw in a play design that would absolutely fool the defense. Garrett seems to only have a couple of those in his playbook and uses them about that often.

Again you don't finish the 8th best in completion percentage and fewest interceptions if the play designs are as bad as you think.

 

[gimmesix]

garrett didn't make orton throw the ball behind austin.

if orton leads austin, it's a 15-20 yard gain.

i mean, there are plenty of issues with garrett, but orton's last pass is not one of them.

Didn't say Orton didn't make a bad pass. Rather, Garrett's scheme, which lacks creativity, forces the QBs to throw in tighter windows, which makes a bad pass turn into an interception. It was left up to Austin to beat Boykin one-on-one and Orton to not be off at all on his throw, instead of Garrett having receivers cross to rub off a defender, etc.

This offense, with the weapons Dallas has got, should be one of the most explosive offenses in the league. Instead it leaves a lot to be desired because the scheme does little to take full advantage of its assets.

 

[gimmesix]

Again you don't finish the 8th best in completion percentage and fewest interceptions if the play designs are as bad as you think.

You do if you have a high-caliber quarterback who has overcome a lot of the scheme's deficiencies over the years. Give Romo an offense with some degree of creativity and you'll see some truly remarkable numbers.

 

[JPostSam]

the eagles caught passes with our defenders standing right next to them.

the lions caught passes with our defenders standing right next to them.

all across the league, teams are throwing to guys even when they're covered -- and passing yardage is through the roof.

yes, better designed plays -- plays that help receivers get open -- will create even more yardage and cut down on interceptions. but if you don't throw it to a guy becaus there's a defender within 3 feet of him, you'll only complete about 6 passes per game... if you can still throw it after the beating you've gotten from the 18 sacks you absorbed.

 

[JPostSam]

Notice the route Garretts scheme had Austin running on the Orton int............and the route Austin ran on romo's int in the G.Bay loss were very similar. Not square in routes that create separation, not slants that the use the body to shield the defender off the ball.......virtually a short post route that should be thrown out in front, but since being run so close to LOS, has to be thrown on a rope to avoid a safety making a play.........., but with tight coverage allows the corner to run under the ball as Will Sheilds did on a ball without zip, or be in good position to pik off on a ball that isn't put where the wr is set up to take a big hit from a safety..............to me its a route primed for a cb to tease the QB into throwing the ball.

despite my comment about the interception being orton's fault instead of garrett's fault, i agree that this was a big issue throughout the season.

 

[blindzebra]

Notice the route Garretts scheme had Austin running on the Orton int............and the route Austin ran on romo's int in the G.Bay loss were very similar. Not square in routes that create separation, not slants that the use the body to shield the defender off the ball.......virtually a short post route that should be thrown out in front, but since being run so close to LOS, has to be thrown on a rope to avoid a safety making a play.........., but with tight coverage allows the corner to run under the ball as Will Sheilds did on a ball without zip, or be in good position to pik off on a ball that isn't put where the wr is set up to take a big hit from a safety..............to me its a route primed for a cb to tease the QB into throwing the ball.

Austin rounds off routes a lot. He also does not fight for the ball.