How can anyone defend these coaches?

[coult44]

Did Demarco Murray look healthy to you because he didn't to me? In my opinion we don't run the ball as much because either the coaches don't have the confidence in the run, or they see something in the defense that makes them want to throw the ball.

JG has always been quick to abandon the run. That's exactly whats going on right now. The problem is EVERY FREEKIN PERSON IN THE WORLD KNOWS WHAT WE ARE GOING TO DO....The Vikings have AD for RB and Ponder at QB. With that being said, it would be easy for anyone to say they are going to run more than pass, or it would be easy for them to even abandon the pass and run it down your throat. When it's easier for us to abandon the run, than it is for them to abandon the pass, SOMETHING IS SERIOUSLY WRONG!!!

 

[jobberone]

Jimmy was the best coach I have ever seen, and yes I watched Tom Landry for years.

Well, he's not the best coach I've ever seen. Not by long shot. But he was a very good coach and had good enough sense to walk away with his rep virtually intact. You do know you're comparing him with someone who reinvented the shotgun and made it really work, made the 4-3 what it is today, invented the flex which although defunct lives on as gap control, made motion what it is today, and I'm probably forgetting some others. He also served as HC, OC and DC. Who can you name who ever did that and did it successfully? What did Jimmy do for the game?

 

[big dog cowboy]

What did Jimmy do for the game?

HOW 'BOUT THEM COWBOYS!!!

 

[BigStar]

I thought hey got paid to analyze film for hours on end until we have a gameplan that actually put as at an advantage? No? Yes, how dare I question "this" process? I am sooo out there, yaw is a joke as casual fans btw...

 

[jobberone]

HOW 'BOUT THEM COWBOYS!!!

Okay. That's a great one I forgot. Give yourself a star and a pat on the back just don't get a big head over it.

 

[Idgit]

When it's easier for us to abandon the run, than it is for them to abandon the pass, SOMETHING IS SERIOUSLY WRONG!!!

It's easier to abandon because it's not effective and it was putting us behind the chains on second downs, which is what has been killing our third down conversions the last few weeks.

And it's not like the play action wasn't effective, despite the running game not working at all. If you can use play action, convert on third downs by throwing to Beasley, and utilize the dump off passes to the backs like long handoffs, and still pass effectively, then how much does it really matter if you don't run it much? It doesn't. Obviously, you're not going to have lopsided numbers like today's numbers every week, but when MIN is as bad as they are in the secondary, take advantage of that by throwing it. Aside from the drops and some of the drive-killing penalties, we were pretty effective throwing the ball today.

 

[coult44]

It's easier to abandon because it's not effective and it was putting us behind the chains on second downs, which is what has been killing our third down conversions the last few weeks.

And it's not like the play action wasn't effective, despite the running game not working at all. If you can use play action, convert on third downs by throwing to Beasley, and utilize the dump off passes to the backs like long handoffs, and still pass effectively, then how much does it really matter if you don't run it much? It doesn't. Obviously, you're not going to have lopsided numbers like today's numbers every week, but when MIN is as bad as they are in the secondary, take advantage of that by throwing it. Aside from the drops and some of the drive-killing penalties, we were pretty effective throwing the ball today.

It never fails, if 98% of everyone absolutely sees something that was "ridiculously dumb", or made absolutely no sense whatsoever, you show up to defend it. Unbelievable. Sure, screens, dump offs, quick slants, etc, are different types of passes that act like running plays in certain situations. However, in NO WAY do they totally replace the use of a running game. There is no way you can tell if the running game is being effective or not when used like it was today. There is no way you can make the determination based on the amount of times we ran the ball today. DM showed some burst and even had run close to 30 yards today before the SUDDENLY stopped giving him the ball. As the famous line go's, "stupid is, as stupid does"

 

[Plankton]

Well, he's not the best coach I've ever seen. Not by long shot. But he was a very good coach and had good enough sense to walk away with his rep virtually intact. You do know you're comparing him with someone who reinvented the shotgun and made it really work, made the 4-3 what it is today, invented the flex which although defunct lives on as gap control, made motion what it is today, and I'm probably forgetting some others. He also served as HC, OC and DC. Who can you name who ever did that and did it successfully? What did Jimmy do for the game?

Hank Stram with the Chiefs.

As far as what Johnson did for the game, he brought forth the concept of having a rotation of defensive line players to keep the team fresh. Johnson also brought more of a speed based approach to defense, largely going in the face of what had been a power/size approach around the league. He also changed the approach to the draft with working with Mike McCoy to develop the trade chart, and to accumulate picks to utilize more of a "fishnet" approach to player acquisition.

 

[CowboyStar88]

It's easier to abandon because it's not effective and it was putting us behind the chains on second downs, which is what has been killing our third down conversions the last few weeks.

And it's not like the play action wasn't effective, despite the running game not working at all. If you can use play action, convert on third downs by throwing to Beasley, and utilize the dump off passes to the backs like long handoffs, and still pass effectively, then how much does it really matter if you don't run it much? It doesn't. Obviously, you're not going to have lopsided numbers like today's numbers every week, but when MIN is as bad as they are in the secondary, take advantage of that by throwing it. Aside from the drops and some of the drive-killing penalties, we were pretty effective throwing the ball today.

What? There was 2 run plays that I can think if that were not good. They were not good play designs and the RB you had in there Dunbar is a space running back. I am more concerned with the design. These guys just don't put our players in position to win. There was no reason to bail on the run game and if by chance Murray was hurt again you need to get Dunbar the ball more than 2 handoffs. That's just pathetic

 

[iceberg]

Jerruh loves you...keep making him rich...

you're here.

you're talking cowboys.

if talking cowboys is part of the problem, then welcome to being part of the problem.

 

[Idgit]

What? There was 2 run plays that I can think if that were not good. They were not good play designs and the RB you had in there Dunbar is a space running back. I am more concerned with the design. These guys just don't put our players in position to win. There was no reason to bail on the run game and if by chance Murray was hurt again you need to get Dunbar the ball more than 2 handoffs. That's just pathetic

Here are the rushing attempts for the game, posted by EPL0c0 in another thread:

1st Quarter:
Murray: 2 carries, 25yds
Dunbar: 1 carry, -3yds
Randle: 1 carry, 3yds
,
2nd Quarter:
Murray: 1 carry, 6yds
Dunbar: 0 carries
Randle: 0 carries

3rd Quarter:
Murray: 1 carry, 0yds
Dunbar: 2 carries, -3yds
Randle: 0 carries

I don't know about the problem being poor play design, but we certainly weren't abandoning anything that had been particularly successful in the few limited attempts we had.

 

[Idgit]

It never fails, if 98% of everyone absolutely sees something that was "ridiculously dumb", or made absolutely no sense whatsoever, you show up to defend it. Unbelievable. Sure, screens, dump offs, quick slants, etc, are different types of passes that act like running plays in certain situations. However, in NO WAY do they totally replace the use of a running game. There is no way you can tell if the running game is being effective or not when used like it was today. There is no way you can make the determination based on the amount of times we ran the ball today. DM showed some burst and even had run close to 30 yards today before the SUDDENLY stopped giving him the ball. As the famous line go's, "stupid is, as stupid does"

I'm not sure what other ridiculously dumb things you're talking about, but that's what message boards are all about. I'm ok with 98% of anybody disagreeing with me if it's on a topic I'm right about. And I'm ok with being wrong on topics and having it explained to me by somebody who knows better. I'm not ok with going along with everybody else with a bad argument just because the numbers are against me.

I don't care if the running game was effective or not. We won without it today, and that's all that matters to me. I don't think this week was a trend, nor do I think we got away from something that looked like it was going to be really effective for us.

More than anything, I just wanted us to get away from running into a brick wall on first downs. When that wasn't working, I wanted to switch to high percentage passes and then run it on second and manageable to see if we could move the chains, or at least keep the third down conversion in likely territory. But reflexively complaining about the number of running *attempts* without regard for the actual context of the game is silly. Disregarding the fact that other plays accomplish things you'd otherwise like to do with your running game is silly.

 

[CowboyStar88]

Here are the rushing attempts for the game, posted by EPL0c0 in another thread:

1st Quarter:
Murray: 2 carries, 25yds
Dunbar: 1 carry, -3yds
Randle: 1 carry, 3yds
,
2nd Quarter:
Murray: 1 carry, 6yds
Dunbar: 0 carries
Randle: 0 carries

3rd Quarter:
Murray: 1 carry, 0yds
Dunbar: 2 carries, -3yds
Randle: 0 carries

I don't know about the problem being poor play design, but we certainly weren't abandoning anything that had been particularly successful in the few limited attempts we had.

So 4 carries weren't successful and you stop running the ball? I've never heard that before. Of course you are going to have unsuccessful running plays just as you would passing plays, but that doesn't mean you just stop running there's no defending that at all.

 

[Idgit]

So 4 carries weren't successful and you stop running the ball? I've never heard that before. Of course you are going to have unsuccessful running plays just as you would passing plays, but that doesn't mean you just stop running there's no defending that at all.

What's to defend? They won the game. It's not like we weren't passing it effectively.

And you need to keep things in the context of the game. The fourth quarter, for example, we had three possessions, total. The first of which we moved the chains once, and then promptly got put into 1st and 20 by Witten's OPI then couldn't convert. The second was a three-and-out because of Bernardeau's mutual hands-to-the-face call. The third was our game-winning drive that nobody should be complaining about at all.

Sometimes the game plays out where you don't run the ball very much and you still win. Just be happy that's what happened today instead of complaining about it.

 

[coult44]

It's easier to abandon because it's not effective and it was putting us behind the chains on second downs, which is what has been killing our third down conversions the last few weeks.

And it's not like the play action wasn't effective, despite the running game not working at all. If you can use play action, convert on third downs by throwing to Beasley, and utilize the dump off passes to the backs like long handoffs, and still pass effectively, then how much does it really matter if you don't run it much? It doesn't. Obviously, you're not going to have lopsided numbers like today's numbers every week, but when MIN is as bad as they are in the secondary, take advantage of that by throwing it. Aside from the drops and some of the drive-killing penalties, we were pretty effective throwing the ball today.

How many times did it put us behind the chains on 2nd down? When was it uneffective???

 

[Idgit]

How many times did it put us behind the chains on 2nd down? When was it uneffective???

If only there were game logs somewhere for these sorts of questions, coult....

 

[dallasdave]

Well, he's not the best coach I've ever seen. Not by long shot. But he was a very good coach and had good enough sense to walk away with his rep virtually intact. You do know you're comparing him with someone who reinvented the shotgun and made it really work, made the 4-3 what it is today, invented the flex which although defunct lives on as gap control, made motion what it is today, and I'm probably forgetting some others. He also served as HC, OC and DC. Who can you name who ever did that and did it successfully? What did Jimmy do for the game?

Well since I saw both Tom and Jimmy coach and build teams I think I am a good judge of both. First I want to say Tom was a good coach but Jimmy Johnson was the best coach of all time Cowboys or anywhere else, yeah I said that and I meant it. Now Why do I say that? When Jimmy Johnson was coaching at Miami I saw what he did and loved it, build a championship team. I said I love this guy and I wish he would coach the Cowboys. Not only did he build championship teams he gave them attitude. When Jimmy had his players walk off the plane in army uniforms to play the Sooners, I loved it, what attitude what swagger. Then he comes to Dallas and inherits the worst team in the league and four years later we are winning Superbowls and he built the team that won 3 Super Bowls. Compare all the years Tom coached the Cowboys to the ones Jimmy did and give an honest answer, who produced the most for the Cowboys. Don't get me wrong I liked Tom, but the team had gone to hell in the 80's and something had to be done. Jimmy did it, and did it well indeed. Jimmy was the only coach to win Superbowls and a National Championship in college. Jimmy knew how to get the most out of players and could handle head cases, Tom could not (Hollywood Henderson and Duane Thomas are examples). Jimmy said all players are not treated the same, people that produce get special treatment. Guess what ? The cream did rise to the top. I could go on and on but Jimmy is , how shall I put it? "The best there is,the best there was, and the best there ever will be". FOOTNOTE #1 Bret Hart.

 

[Stash]

I'm not sure what other ridiculously dumb things you're talking about, but that's what message boards are all about. I'm ok with 98% of anybody disagreeing with me if it's on a topic I'm right about. And I'm ok with being wrong on topics and having it explained to me by somebody who knows better. I'm not ok with going along with everybody else with a bad argument just because the numbers are against me.

I don't care if the running game was effective or not. We won without it today, and that's all that matters to me. I don't think this week was a trend, nor do I think we got away from something that looked like it was going to be really effective for us.

More than anything, I just wanted us to get away from running into a brick wall on first downs. When that wasn't working, I wanted to switch to high percentage passes and then run it on second and manageable to see if we could move the chains, or at least keep the third down conversion in likely territory. But reflexively complaining about the number of running *attempts* without regard for the actual context of the game is silly. Disregarding the fact that other plays accomplish things you'd otherwise like to do with your running game is silly.

Trying to defend this obvious mistake is 'silly'.

Nobody is buying any of what you're trying to sell.

Even the guy currently in charge isn't trying to defend it.

You should stop.

 

[Stash]

So 4 carries weren't successful and you stop running the ball? I've never heard that before. Of course you are going to have unsuccessful running plays just as you would passing plays, but that doesn't mean you just stop running there's no defending that at all.

No, there isn't.

And nobody outside of one person is trying.

Even the man responsible for it isn't.

 

[Idgit]

Trying to defend this obvious mistake is 'silly'.

Nobody is buying any of what you're trying to sell.

Even the guy currently in charge isn't trying to defend it.

You should stop.

And you should try to address the argument, rather than arguing I shouldn't make it just because it's unpopular.