I'm not one to complain about play calling... BUT...

[dbair1967]

Maybe it wasn't evident from my post, but the safeties were playing deep all game, not just on that one play.

No they werent. There was no deep safety help on that deep ball to Roy Williams before halftime, and it was obvious we were gonna pass then.

And thats just one example.

Ultimately though the QB has to READ the defense, and thats what Romo failed to do on that play. The coordinator calls the plays, but the QB ultimately decides where to go with it.

 

[Doomsday]

Juke, I think in Garrett's mind that was going for the killshot... He's always saying how "we're going to stay aggressive". Which I guess to him means going down the field.

But I'm with you. Getting the ball run down your throat is the most demoralizing way to lose. I thought everyone knew that. Garrett even saw us do that with Emmitt a million times. So I don't know why he didn't keep doing it when we were clearly having success with it and Tony already had two INTs.

My problem is you cant just decide, OK now I am going to go for the kill shot. He has to go for the kill shot after he forces the defense to make adjustments. The Giants were determined to play the pass and had their safeties back the whole game, he should of just kept feeding the three headed monster. You cant go for the kill until after you make them adjust.

Garrett has been preaching that they are going to "take what defenses are giving them" this year. You hear him, Tony and Witten all saying the same thing. Which is awesome but it all starts with the play calling.

 

[dbair1967]

I was at the game, which means I could actually see where the safeties were lining up every play. They were selling out to stop the deep pass, which makes sense considering what happened the prior weekend.

Then you missed a few, because I just pointed out one that was very obvious to everyone.

 

[Idgit]

My problem is you cant just decide, OK now I am going to go for the kill shot. He has to go for the kill shot after he forces the defense to make adjustments. The Giants were determined to play the pass and had their safeties back the whole game, he should of just kept feeding the three headed monster. You cant go for the kill until after you make them adjust.

Garrett has been preaching that they are going to "take what defenses are giving them" this year. You hear him, Tony and Witten all saying the same thing. Which is awesome but it all starts with the play calling.

You can't know with certainty what the defense is going to do in advance. Testing them deep in the first series after you just rammed a ball 80+ yards into the endzone calling nothing but running plays is a perfectly legitimate play call, period. This debate is silly.

 

[dbair1967]

What I'm saying is calling a play designed to go deep there, regardless of other options was a huge mistake.

No, it wasnt.

The mistake was by the player. Not the call. If 5 WR's all ran 50 yds down the field, you'd have a point. But when there were clearly other options available it doesnt make sense.

Romo should have either 1) thrown it away 2) checked down to another receiver or 3) ran it

 

[dbair1967]

I see now that you're simply attacking a claim that I never made. I said the safeties (meaning either one or both) were playing deep all game. Sometimes both, sometimes one.

When you have safeties playing literally 30 yards off the ball, you don't go for the kill shot, because that's exactly what they're trying to prevent.

And if you can't understand that, then I am really sorry.

Thats not entirely true either. Really good QB's can look safety coverage off. Romo never did that on that play.

 

[dbair1967]

This is getting a bit silly. The coaches call the plays, the players run them. Romo made a huge mistake by throwing without seeing the safety. Garrett made a huge mistake by calling a deep route (which quite likely was the #1 read on that play) at that point in the game.

So as I mentioned in other posts, the next time one of our RB's fumble the ball, you'll be criticizing Garrett just the same because it was a poor call that caused the fumble, ruight?

 

[CATCH17]

Thats not entirely true either. Really good QB's can look safety coverage off. Romo never did that on that play.

We had 1 deep route and the Safety was 25 yards downfield.


That would have to be one hell of a look off for that safety to go somewhere else.

We could've ran a flee flicker on that play and it wouldn't have mattered. That Safety wasn't moving.

That play is 100% Romo's fault.

 

[kmd24]

Here's my problem with the play call: Garrett calls play action and they linebackers and safety don't even flinch. He guessed wrong.

It is not debatable. They didn't bite.

If you look at the play from the backfield, just prior to the handoff, you can see that the Giants have conceded the run.

It doesn't matter how many points we scored. It doesn't matter how many times we ran the ball versus passing the ball.

The question I am asking myself is, given what had transpired up to that point in the game, should Garrett have reason to believe that we would be successful with a long play action pass? I think the answer is no. The Giants were playing predominately to prevent passes down the field, and Romo was 12-24 with 2 INT's and 114 yards to that point.

Then I ask the flip side of that question. Should he expect success in the running game? I think the answer is yes. The Cowboys had 190 yards rushing at that point, had just come off a drive with runs of 56, 10, and 15 yards, and the Giants were, for the most part conceding the run.

Then I look at strategy. You are on the +46 with a 4 point lead. What should your priority be? I think you need to at least be looking for a field goal attempt, and you need about 10-15 more yards for a reasonable attempt.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

Here's my problem with the play call: Garrett calls play action and they linebackers and safety don't even flinch. He guessed wrong.

It is not debatable. They didn't bite.

If you look at the play from the backfield, just prior to the handoff, you can see that the Giants have conceded the run.

It doesn't matter how many points we scored. It doesn't matter how many times we ran the ball versus passing the ball.

The question I am asking myself is, given what had transpired up to that point in the game, should Garrett have reason to believe that we would be successful with a long play action pass? I think the answer is no. The Giants were playing predominately to prevent passes down the field, and Romo was 12-24 with 2 INT's and 114 yards to that point.

Then I ask the flip side of that question. Should he expect success in the running game? I think the answer is yes. The Cowboys had 190 yards rushing at that point, had just come off a drive with runs of 56, 10, and 15 yards, and the Giants were, for the most part conceding the run.

Then I look at strategy. You are on the +46 with a 4 point lead. What should your priority be? I think you need to at least be looking for a field goal attempt, and you need about 10-15 more yards for a reasonable attempt.

There were two other Cowboy receivers going out into patterns on that play.

It was Romo's choice on where he wanted to go with the ball.

It was not Garrett's fault that Romo did not properly read the defense.

That is not debatable.

 

[theogt]

Thats not entirely true either. Really good QB's can look safety coverage off. Romo never did that on that play.

He didnt see the safety at all for some reason, so he didn't think he had to.

 

[Da Hammer]

at first i placed as much blame on the playcalling as i did on Romo but after seriously thinkin about it... well Red is a moron and should have ran the ball down the giants throat till both teams were puking but Romo in the end was the main culprit of the game. his decisions killed us and well we did put up quite a bit of points with Red's offense this game. Until Romo gets his head out of his *** which is likely never, well we are going to continue to have important games where this will happen. that deep pass to hurd was one of the dumbest passes i have ever seen....

 

[MichaelWinicki]

at first i placed as much blame on the playcalling as i did on Romo but after seriously thinkin about it... well Red is a moron and should have ran the ball down the giants throat till both teams were puking but Romo in the end was the main culprit of the game. his decisions killed us and well we did put up quite a bit of points with Red's offense this game. Until Romo gets his head out of his *** which is likely never, well we are going to continue to have important games where this will happen. that deep pass to hurd was one of the dumbest passes i have ever seen....

Geez I didn't see Garrett out there attempting the pass.

I'll have to re-watch the game.

 

[jay cee]

So scoring less pts in one half is not performing better?

They had 3 scoring drives in the first and 2 in the second. Not sure I understand your logic.

My logic includes the turnovers by the offense.

The offense scored 3 fewer points, but they cut their turnovers (interceptions) in half. They also cut down on their points given up from 7 to 0.

 

[Idgit]

at first i placed as much blame on the playcalling as i did on Romo but after seriously thinkin about it... well Red is a moron and should have ran the ball down the giants throat till both teams were puking but Romo in the end was the main culprit of the game. his decisions killed us and well we did put up quite a bit of points with Red's offense this game. Until Romo gets his head out of his *** which is likely never, well we are going to continue to have important games where this will happen. that deep pass to hurd was one of the dumbest passes i have ever seen....

This was the result of seriously thinking about it?

 

[nalam]

Here's my problem with the play call: Garrett calls play action and they linebackers and safety don't even flinch. He guessed wrong.

It is not debatable. They didn't bite.

If you look at the play from the backfield, just prior to the handoff, you can see that the Giants have conceded the run.

It doesn't matter how many points we scored. It doesn't matter how many times we ran the ball versus passing the ball.

The question I am asking myself is, given what had transpired up to that point in the game, should Garrett have reason to believe that we would be successful with a long play action pass? I think the answer is no. The Giants were playing predominately to prevent passes down the field, and Romo was 12-24 with 2 INT's and 114 yards to that point.

Then I ask the flip side of that question. Should he expect success in the running game? I think the answer is yes. The Cowboys had 190 yards rushing at that point, had just come off a drive with runs of 56, 10, and 15 yards, and the Giants were, for the most part conceding the run.

Then I look at strategy. You are on the +46 with a 4 point lead. What should your priority be? I think you need to at least be looking for a field goal attempt, and you need about 10-15 more yards for a reasonable attempt.

+1 , Exactly what I said in page 12

 

[jay cee]

I agree. It is almost silly, don't call any play because that player just may throw an int or fumble the ball. I don't think that is a mindset I want to see out of an OC. Face it any call that comes to the field if not executed can lead to a turn over that does not make the call a bad call.

Of course the coach has to call plays, and the players have to execute. And they can also call plays that give their players the best chance to succeed.

I don't see how anyone can disagree with that.

Is there anything a coach can do to put their players in a better position to succeed?

I asked that question twice earlier, and still have not gotten a response.

IMO, it's obvious.

If it's only about execution, then no coach would ever get fired.

 

[Doomsday101]

Of course the coach has to call plays, and the players have to execute. And they can also call plays that give their players the best chance to succeed.

I don't see how anyone can disagree with that.

Is there anything a coach can do to put their players in a better position to succeed?

I asked that question twice earlier, and still have not gotten a response.

IMO, it's obvious.

If it's only about execution, then no coach would ever get fired.

Looking to hit a play down field off play action again is not a bad play but this is not a situation where the coaches want the QB to throw that pass no matter what you are still expected to make the reads and based off the reads will help determine where you go with the ball.

Dallas was not going to abandon the pass and that was not the last pass of the game. Romo made a mistake however the players mistake does not make the call a bad call.

Is there anything a coach can do to put their players in a better position to succeed? yes show some confidence in your QB have him throw on a 1st down instead of putting him in a position where it is a must pass situation when the defense knows you have to throw it.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

This was the result of seriously thinking about it?

Ouch!

 

[jay cee]

Looking to hit a play down field off play action again is not a bad play but this is not a situation where the coaches want the QB to throw that pass no matter what you are still expected to make the reads and based off the reads will help determine where you go with the ball.

Dallas was not going to abandon the pass and that was not the last pass of the game. Romo made a mistake however the players mistake does not make the call a bad call.

Is there anything a coach can do to put their players in a better position to succeed? yes show some confidence in your QB have him throw on a 1st down instead of putting him in a position where it is a must pass situation when the defense knows you have to throw it.

That is a good example. Just like running the ball more until the defense comes up to stop the run.