Ground & Pound

[Doomsday101]

It's really not. Cowboys defense was on the field something like 1.5 more players per game in 2015 compared to 2014.

So unless Elliott is so good he's going to be even better than Murray was in 2014, people should really stop perpetuating this storyline that Elliott is somehow going to drastically reduce the number of plays the defense plays in a game.

True but Romo return will be big in helping convert. Dallas is just as likely to pass on 3rd and short with Romo back there than running the ball. What Elliott and the run game can do is keep Dallas in down and distance situations that favor the Cowboys

 

[Sydla]

True but Romo return will be big in helping convert. Dallas is just as likely to pass on 3rd and short with Romo back there than running the ball. What Elliott and the run game can do is keep Dallas in down and distance situations that favor the Cowboys

Yes, a good running game can obviously help in that area. I have said that Elliott's biggest benefit is on the offensive side of the ball.

But this idea that he's so important for the defense is more myth than reality.

 

[Doomsday101]

Yes, a good running game can obviously help in that area. I have said that Elliott's biggest benefit is on the offensive side of the ball.

But this idea that he's so important for the defense is more myth than reality.

Yes and no, 2014 showed Dallas being able to convert 3rd downs by a large margin and Murray along with Romo was a big reason for it. Anytime we can convert and keep the chains moving the less the defense is out on the field. I will say defense still has to do their part in stopping drives and creating turnover as they did in 2014 season.

 

[Sydla]

Yes and no, 2014 showed Dallas being able to convert 3rd downs by a large margin and Murray along with Romo was a big reason for it. Anytime we can convert and keep the chains moving the less the defense is out on the field. I will say defense still has to do their part in stopping drives and creating turnover as they did in 2014 season.

In theory, all that makes sense. But it's not backed up by any real evidence.

So yes, in theory, when Dallas lost Romo last year, we couldn't convert 3rd downs and thusly the defense should have been on the field more than 2014 and therefore, that's why the defense seemed more ineffective in 2015 as opposed to 2014.

The only problem is the theory didn't hold true. Despite the Cowboys struggling on 3rd downs last year, the defense averaged only a little more than 1 play a game on the field in 2015 compared to the 2014 defense where Romo was converting 3rd downs like mad.

 

[waldoputty]

It's really not. Cowboys defense was on the field something like 1.5 more players per game in 2015 compared to 2014.

So unless Elliott is so good he's going to be even better than Murray was in 2014, people should really stop perpetuating this storyline that Elliott is somehow going to drastically reduce the number of plays the defense plays in a game.

Some of us think Elliott is a faster Murray who fumbles less (particularly at critical times), has superior vision and blocks better.
We may also have 4 probowl OL instead of 3 in 2014.
That is why we think our O is going to save the D in 2016 as well as protect Romo from injury (knock knock).

 

[Doomsday101]

In theory, all that makes sense. But it's not backed up by any real evidence.

So yes, in theory, when Dallas lost Romo last year, we couldn't convert 3rd downs and thusly the defense should have been on the field more than 2014 and therefore, that's why the defense seemed more ineffective in 2015 as opposed to 2014.

The only problem is the theory didn't hold true. Despite the Cowboys struggling on 3rd downs last year, the defense averaged only a little more than 1 play a game on the field in 2015 compared to the 2014 defense where Romo was converting 3rd downs like mad.

I hear that but when watching the games and using basic common sense, if a team moves the chains getting 1st downs keeping drives alive instead of punting and going 3 and out then common sense says the defense is spending less time. As Mark Twain once said their are lies, damn lies and statistic.

I would add in 2014 Dallas was 2nd in 3rd down conversions with 47% in 2015 Dallas was 26th at 34.5% that is a big drop especially when you consider most games were decided by 7 points or less

 

[wileedog]

Some of us think Elliott is a faster Murray who fumbles less (particularly at critical times), has superior vision and blocks better.
We may also have 4 probowl OL instead of 3 in 2014.
That is why we think our O is going to save the D in 2016 as well as protect Romo from injury (knock knock).

Maybe, but there is no way they are going to give Elliot anything close to 450 touches like Murray had in 2014.

 

[waldoputty]

Maybe, but there is no way they are going to give Elliot anything close to 450 touches like Murray had in 2014.

right, there is morris and dmc
morris can be a closer.

 

[Sydla]

Some of us think Elliott is a faster Murray who fumbles less (particularly at critical times), has superior vision and blocks better.
We may also have 4 probowl OL instead of 3 in 2014.
That is why we think our O is going to save the D in 2016 as well as protect Romo from injury (knock knock).

One, it's going to be tough for a rookie to drop an 1,800 yard season like Murray did. Despite his flaws, that 2014 season was a great season for a RB. So to expect Elliott to better than that is probably a stretch.

Two, you can continue to say what you said in that last sentence and believe it but actual evidence suggests otherwise. That is, unless of course, Elliott has a season that dwarfs all seasons ever by a TB.

 

[wileedog]

right, there is morris and dmc
morris can be a closer.

Who are both at this point in their careers a big step down from Murray in 2014, and will offset whatever superior production you believe you are going to get from Elliot.

 

[Sydla]

I hear that but when watching the games and using basic common sense, if a team moves the chains getting 1st downs keeping drives alive instead of punting and going 3 and out then common sense says the defense is spending less time. As Mark Twain once said their are lies, damn lies and statistic.

I would add in 2014 Dallas was 2nd in 3rd down conversions with 47% in 2015 Dallas was 26th at 34.5% that is a big drop especially when you consider most games were decided by 7 points or less

Common sense isn't common if it can't be verified. You can try to write off stats as meaningless here but they aren't.

And your last paragraph is actually proving my point. In 2014 the Cowboys were 2nd in third down conversions. In 2015, they were 26th. And yet the defense in 2015 was only on the field for a little over one more play a game. That's it. Using the logic you and others are trying to trot out, the Cowboys defense should have been on the field for way more plays per game than in 2014. But they weren't.

The defense is going to sink or swim based on how they play, not on what the offense likely does.

 

[Doomsday101]

One, it's going to be tough for a rookie to drop an 1,800 yard season like Murray did. Despite his flaws, that 2014 season was a great season for a RB. So to expect Elliott to better than that is probably a stretch.

Two, you can continue to say what you said in that last sentence and believe it but actual evidence suggests otherwise. That is, unless of course, Elliott has a season that dwarfs all seasons ever by a TB.

I would add in 2014 Dallas was 2nd in 3rd down conversions with 47% in 2015 Dallas was 26th at 34.5% that is a big drop especially when you consider most games were decided by 7 points or less

This would be obvious evidence. 12.5% drop in 3rd down conversions. 2014 defense had less talent but when an offense is able to put together long drives of 10 or more plays it allows the defense time and the ability to stay fresh. On the other hand if a defense has to be on the field for 10 plus plays then offense then comes out and goes 3 and out forcing defense right back on the field it will cause defense to wear down. Philly knows this, with Chips hurry up offense the Philly defense was gassed late in games.

 

[Doomsday101]

Common sense isn't common if it can't be verified. You can try to write off stats as meaningless here but they aren't.

And your last paragraph is actually proving my point. In 2014 the Cowboys were 2nd in third down conversions. In 2015, they were 26th. And yet the defense in 2015 was only on the field for a little over one more play a game. That's it. Using the logic you and others are trying to trot out, the Cowboys defense should have been on the field for way more plays per game than in 2014. But they weren't.

The defense is going to sink or swim based on how they play, not on what the offense likely does.

I agree defense has to do their part but it does not take a rocket scientist to figure out if offense is on the field putting together long drives the defense is sitting. The longer they can stay on the bench between possessions the fresher they remain as opposed to offense being forced to punt and putting defense right back out there.

 

[Sydla]

I agree defense has to do their part but it does not take a rocket scientist to figure out if offense is on the field putting together long drives the defense is sitting. The longer they can stay on the bench between possessions the fresher they remain as opposed to offense being forced to punt and putting defense right back out there.

Again, in theory all that makes sense. But now apply that theory to the Cowboys in 2014 and 2015.

As it pertains to the Cowboys, is that in 2014 they were sustaining drives and in 2015 they weren't. And the end result was the defense spent roughly the same amount of time on the field in both years. There was no wide gap in time or plays played between the two years. In fact, if they had generated similar turnovers as they had in 2014, the 2015 defense probably would have been on the field on average less than the 2014 team. Think about that for second.

In the end, even if Elliott can have a Murray-esque season, the time the defense will spend on the field in 2016 probably won't be much different than 2014 or 2015.

 

[Doomsday101]

Again, in theory all that makes sense. But now apply that theory to the Cowboys in 2014 and 2015.

As it pertains to the Cowboys, is that in 2014 they were sustaining drives and in 2015 they weren't. And the end result was the defense spent roughly the same amount of time on the field in both years. There was no wide gap in time or plays played between the two years. In fact, if they had generated similar turnovers as they had in 2014, the 2015 defense probably would have been on the field on average less than the 2014 team. Think about that for second.

In the end, even if Elliott can have a Murray-esque season, the time the defense will spend on the field in 2016 probably won't be much different than 2014 or 2015.

Theory nothing I showed you the difference in conversion percentage, it makes a difference every team is looking at their 3rd down conversions as a critical stat in doing so the offense keeps drives alive and last time I checked if the offense is on the field that means defense is sitting. Dallas had several games where the outcome was less than 7 points and extending drives or the lack of the ability to extend drives made a big difference. I don't know were some of these stupid stats come from likely by those who never played the game. If you do as a defender you know damn well that after coming off the field the best thing you can have is an offense who can keep drives alive while you are trying to get rested before going back out on the field. When offense is constantly punting the defense is having to go right back out there and it takes it's toll. I'm not putting this all on Elliott, the fact is with a healthy Romo and a good running game the offense should be able to extend drives and in doing so defense gets time on the bench with a chance to stay fresh instead of being worn down.

 

[Sydla]

Theory nothing I showed you the difference in conversion percentage, it makes a difference every team is looking at their 3rd down conversions as a critical stat in doing so the offense keeps drives alive and last time I checked if the offense is on the field that means defense is sitting. Dallas had several games where the outcome was less than 7 points and extending drives or the lack of the ability to extend drives made a big difference. I don't know were some of these stupid stats come from likely by those who never played the game. If you do as a defender you know damn well that after coming off the field the best thing you can have is an offense who can keep drives alive while you are trying to get rested before going back out on the field. When offense is constantly punting the defense is having to go right back out there and it takes it's toll. I'm not putting this all on Elliott, the fact is with a healthy Romo and a good running game the offense should be able to extend drives and in doing so defense gets time on the bench with a chance to stay fresh instead of being worn down.

You have to be trolling now.

You showed me the difference in conversions. And then I showed you the fact that the difference in conversion percentages did not translate over to the amount of plays the defense faced in 2014 compared to 2015.

How are you missing this?

2014 offensive 3rd down conversion rate = 2nd in the NFL
2015 offensive 3rd down conversion rate = 26th in the NFL

2014 defensive snaps = 950
2015 defensive snaps = 967

So while there was a large difference in offensive third down conversion rates, in terms of saying that a better conversion rate will lead to less snaps for the defense, it doesn't work.

A 24 slot drop in 3rd down conversion resulted in the defense playing 17 more snaps in the 2015 season, just over one more snap per game.

You keep talking in theories........... yes, in theory if the defense is on the sidelines they can rest and will be fresh. However, as it pertains to the Cowboys and this season compared to 2015 and 2014, it's unlikely that the problem the defense has is the offense putting them on the field too long.

 

[Bleu Star]

I was being silly, because it is silly to use these stats to argue an obvious point.
Elliott did have some >200 yard rushing games.
One was against Oregon in the BCS.

However, with our OL and Elliott with Morris, it may be possible to beat a D into submission.
I recall we absolutely demoralized the vaunted Seattle D at Seattle in 2014 even without Elliott.
I do think Elliott is significantly better than Murray, but we dont want to burn him out like we did to Murray.

I think it may be possible to get 300 yards or more rushing in a few games IF WE WANTED TO.
That could happen if the other side has to worry about Romo passing (nickel) and has a fairly small DL.
After pounding over and over again, a D can give in and/or be on stretchers.

I knew exactly where you were going with that post and I agree here as well. We are now setup to dictate our own rules to defenses. That's going to be incredibly fun to watch!

 

[Bleu Star]

It's really not. Cowboys defense was on the field something like 1.5 more players per game in 2015 compared to 2014.

So unless Elliott is so good he's going to be even better than Murray was in 2014, people should really stop perpetuating this storyline that Elliott is somehow going to drastically reduce the number of plays the defense plays in a game.

When Zeke the Freak hits a couple of home runs, I will be right there with a towel waiting to catch the dribble as you slobber all over the television screen. I got your back.

 

[Bleu Star]

I hear that but when watching the games and using basic common sense, if a team moves the chains getting 1st downs keeping drives alive instead of punting and going 3 and out then common sense says the defense is spending less time. As Mark Twain once said their are lies, damn lies and statistic.

I would add in 2014 Dallas was 2nd in 3rd down conversions with 47% in 2015 Dallas was 26th at 34.5% that is a big drop especially when you consider most games were decided by 7 points or less

Right... It's not rocket science. BELL COW > RBBC

 

[Sydla]

And I just completely missed someone saying it's possible this team could rush for 300 yards in a few games if they wanted to.

LOL. I get being excited but hahahahahaha. 300 yard rushing games are rare in the NFL. And yet we could drop a few in one season?