George: Is the Dallas Cowboys' offense too Tony Romo-friendly or too Tony Romo-reliant?

[Alexander]

Pretty much. The offensive scheme is purely on talent and execution. The problem is that you're rarely going to get a bunch of NFL players all executing flawlessly in perfect harmony. It's one of those schemes that's great and unbeatable in theory, but in the real world not so much.

I don't even know how to reply to that quote of his. The real life case study is pretty much the perfect antagonist to that whole quote.

I think Linehan gets one more year, and I wouldn't be surprised if they hamstring Garrett a little on the OC game plan.

We have a lot of young talent on this team but we avoid even contributing veterans like the plague. Hardy is one of the only vets we actually gave any money. I understand the point, you don't want progress stoppers and you need to manage the cap, youth is always the #1 priority, but if you can bring a guy in and improve your football team you do it.

NE, Arizona, etc are examples of teams that aren't afraid to spend a little bit more than a Gachkar signing, to bring in guys that fit their scheme and will improve their performance on the field.

As often as you want to rely on building through the draft, and you should, you just can't ignore glaring holes and expect them to all be plugged through 1-4 solid players you get from a draft class. We're attempting to plug flats with Scotch tape.

Excellent post.

 

[Staubacher]

Garrett is the master of claptrap.

When he says "we" believe in our offense, he's either talking to his own reflection in the mirror, or the voices in his head.

I notice it's always "we" when excuse making with him.

Does "we" get the 6 mil a year he gets for bringing nothing to the table? I'm sure Tony Robbins coming in once a week would be cheaper.

 

[fifaguy]

Knowing how Garrett is, we know he won't change.

I guess the fun part is the shell game that will filched upon the fan base to make it appear otherwise.

One would think that the one thing that a coach who was a career backup QB could do well was to utilize the QB's on his bench.

 

[Alexander]

One would think that the one thing that a coach who was a career backup QB could do well was to utilize the QB's on his bench.

You would think.

But if you remember, Garrett's hallmark game against the Packers, his muse was his wife who told him to throw it high and deep to Harper.

 

[sbark]

"I think our offense is flexible enough really to adapt to anybody," Cowboys coach Jason Garrett said Monday. "That's one of the things we like about our offense is that we can feature a guy or protect a guy if need be, not only at the quarterback position but at any position. That's what we try to do. We believe in our system of football on offense."

......so a pick or a rub play inside a scheme doesn't help "feature a guy"...or even protect a guy (namely the QB facing a house blitz)........a person in motion doesn't feature, a bunch set doesn't, all the sets a Sean Peyton runs doesn't help feature a guy...............

 

[Aven8]

Talent is a subjective thing.

I think we rely too much on "pure" talent.

Kind of Al Davis-ish.

Bigger. Taller. Stronger. Faster.

We don't go to players and find out what they do best and fit the system around it.

There are countless examples of coaches having that level of flexibility.

And those teams can cope with a league where your fourth string player is pretty much the same as their's.

We are so rigid, it really shows.

We don't sign veterans. Ever. Look at Arizona for a clinic on that.

We also do not show much flexibility in scheme.

Romo was the flexibility.

Without him, well.

There you go.

The not signing vets needs to change. You don't need a whole team of them, just a few.

 

[Alexander]

The not signing vets needs to change. You don't need a whole team of them, just a few.

Pretty much.

Take a good strong look at the Cardinals roster from when they ended camp through the season.

They have a strong pro personnel department.

We have Judd Garrett.

 

[CyberB0b]

Hey, the offense did great this year.

28th in yards per game
26th in 3rd down conversions
31st in points per game
32nd in turnover difference, by a large margin
22nd in penalties

This offense works. Period.

 

[DandyDon1722]

Yup it's elite QB "friendly" that's all. The QB has to be so good as to overcome the putrid system.

Wow - that's as good of insight as I'eve ever read.

 

[JW82]

The entire offense is Tony Romo. He finally had a solid running game last year and put up one of the best seasons in NFL history.

Garrett has just firmly held on to that cape and prayed he didn't get hurt.

Yup. Funny thing is the Garrett "timing" offense only works when it has Tony pulling 3 ninja moves so receivers can finally disregard the planned route and get open.

 

[jordan4vols]

Well let's see the Bengals, Broncos, Steelers, Colts, and Texans have all won with back up qbs with all of them battling for playoff spots. We were in the worst division in football and couldn't manage anything. In fact one of our inept backups is now performing well for Texans. So it seems to me Garrett and this coaching staff is the problem.

 

[DallasCowboys2080]

Did anyone in the media ask a follow up to that ridiculous answer from Garrett? Or were they entranced by his Princeton degree on the wall and his signed Springsteen photo?

lapdawgs all of them.

 

[percyhoward]

For whatever reason, the Cowboys haven't figured out how to adjust their Romo-friendly offense to fit the skill set of their backup quarterbacks.

This assumes that the Cowboys figured out how to match their offense to Romo in the first place. It assumes Romo himself isn't the offense. Look at Romo's career passer rating by quarter.

1st 82.4
2nd 98.2
3rd 102.5
4th/OT 101.8

How much of our offensive success do we owe to that week's game plan, and how much of it is based on in-game adjustments to the plan? How much of what Romo learns about defensive tendencies and exploitable mismatches happens on the field in the 1st quarter, as opposed to during the week in the film room? How good would this offense be if 1st-quarter Romo were as good as the 2nd-4th quarter version?

That stuff may have nothing to do with the coaches or the offenses the team has built, and it could be that Romo is simply a slow starter. But when a playoff team goes 1-10 without its starting QB just one year later, it makes you wonder how much of that success is attributable to the rest of the team, coaches, and organization. How much is scheme as opposed to improvisation, preparation as opposed to reaction?

This wasn't check-down Weeden the Cowboys became used to earlier this season before they cut him Nov. 17. Weeden completed eight passes of 10 or more yards down the field, including two for touchdowns.

Meanwhile, this may be the high point of Brandon Weeden's career from a PR standpoint. Look at Weeden's downfield passing against the league's two worst pass defenses -- #31 Ten and #32 NO. (Remember, in the game against the Saints, there was no Dez.) Then compare those two games to Weeden's other games.

Passer rating on 10+ yard targets
vs NO (wk 4) 122.3
vs Ten (wk 16) 148.3
vs everyone else 55.5

Weeden's downfield success isn't unique to his games with the Texans. It's unique to his games against really, really bad defenses. Over his last 18 starts his passer rating has reached higher than the 80's only four times -- against pass defenses ranked 29th, 29th, 31st, and 32nd. If you miss that fact by ignoring which defenses Weeden faced, and just blend them all together, it can lead you to a conclusion that may be totally wrong about Weeden, but may be 100% correct about our offensive scheme having little to do with our success.

 

[Beast_from_East]

"I think our offense is flexible enough really to adapt to anybody," Cowboys coach Jason Garrett said Monday. "That's one of the things we like about our offense is that we can feature a guy or protect a guy if need be, not only at the quarterback position but at any position. That's what we try to do. We believe in our system of football on offense."

How on God's green earth can he say that - TODAY - after all that has transpired this season? How??

1-10 without Romo

Flexible offense my arse

 

[Staubacher]

Yup. Funny thing is the Garrett "timing" offense only works when it has Tony pulling 3 ninja moves so receivers can finally disregard the planned route and get open.

And if he can't he breaks his back or his ribs or his lung or his collarbone and the team is lost without him.

 

[Staubacher]

The Detroit playoff game last year is a good example. Their game plan completely destroyed ours in the first half.

This assumes that the Cowboys figured out how to match their offense to Romo in the first place. It assumes Romo himself isn't the offense. Look at Romo's career passer rating by quarter.

1st 82.4
2nd 98.2
3rd 102.5
4th/OT 101.8

How much of our offensive success do we owe to that week's game plan, and how much of it is based on in-game adjustments to the plan? How much of what Romo learns about defensive tendencies and exploitable mismatches happens on the field in the 1st quarter, as opposed to during the week in the film room? How good would this offense be if 1st-quarter Romo were as good as the 2nd-4th quarter version?

That stuff may have nothing to do with the coaches or the offenses the team has built, and it could be that Romo is simply a slow starter. But when a playoff team goes 1-10 without its starting QB just one year later, it makes you wonder how much of that success is attributable to the rest of the team, coaches, and organization. How much is scheme as opposed to improvisation, preparation as opposed to reaction?


Meanwhile, this may be the high point of Brandon Weeden's career from a PR standpoint. Look at Weeden's downfield passing against the league's two worst pass defenses -- #31 Ten and #32 NO. (Remember, in the game against the Saints, there was no Dez.) Then compare those two games to Weeden's other games.

Passer rating on 10+ yard targets
vs NO (wk 4) 122.3
vs Ten (wk 16) 148.3
vs everyone else 55.5

Weeden's downfield success isn't unique to his games with the Texans. It's unique to his games against really, really bad defenses. Over his last 18 starts his passer rating has reached higher than the 80's only four times -- against pass defenses ranked 29th, 29th, 31st, and 32nd. If you miss that fact by ignoring which defenses Weeden faced, and just blend them all together, it can lead you to a conclusion that may be totally wrong about Weeden, but may be 100% correct about our offensive scheme having little to do with our success.

 

[Beast_from_East]

So unless we have a superstar elite QB to change all the plays at the line, we end up kicking FGs all game

This is considered a QB friendly offense?

Wow.......Garrett has gone delusional

 

[Staubacher]

So unless we have a superstar elite QB to change all the plays at the line, we end up kicking FGs all game

This is considered a QB friendly offense?

Wow.......Garrett has gone delusional

His comments today were as bad as I have ever heard. What an arrogant you know what who doesn't care about anyone or anything other than himself. Basically a middle finger to the fans who had to endure this wretched season.

 

[Hoofbite]

Weeden's downfield success isn't unique to his games with the Texans. It's unique to his games against really, really bad defenses. Over his last 18 starts his passer rating has reached higher than the 80's only four times -- against pass defenses ranked 29th, 29th, 31st, and 32nd. If you miss that fact by ignoring which defenses Weeden faced, and just blend them all together, it can lead you to a conclusion that may be totally wrong about Weeden, but may be 100% correct about our offensive scheme having little to do with our success.

Now it all makes sense. Dude probably looked like a 1st ballot HoF every day in practice against this secondary.

 

[percyhoward]

The Detroit playoff game last year is a good example. Their game plan completely destroyed ours in the first half.

I remember Romo talking about how hard it was to be patient in that game, waiting for an opportunity and not forcing anything.