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

:hammer: to everything Juke and some others said.

Want to score a lot of points? Just get like Mike Martz and call a billion pass plays. You'll get lots of yards and even points, but you won't win many games because of turnovers, hits on your QB, and a tired defense.

I get the feeling that even if we knew we could win with just three boring running plays, Garrett would still call some tricked-up pass plays just because... Well, who knows. Just because he wants to.
 
Chocolate Lab;2957063 said:
:hammer: to everything Juke and some others said.

Want to score a lot of points? Just get like Mike Martz and call a billion pass plays. You'll get lots of yards and even points, but you won't win many games because of turnovers, hits on your QB, and a tired defense.

I get the feeling that even if we knew we could win with just three boring running plays, Garrett would still call some tricked-up pass plays just because... Well, who knows. Just because he wants to.
I dunno CL, on the list of people to bash for this loss (and there are many deserving)
I'd put Jason further down the list than Romo, Hamlin, Scandrick, Campo et al.
 
Coach Cupcake said the reason we lost was turnovers...duh!!!

Romo was off and still making bad decisions. I am like everyone else on the board -- how do you not run the ball until the midgets stop it. Crazy. Get 7 yards a run and go away from it because it is too easy... I am tired of ******** coaches and players in Dallas.:mad:

And how bad was Barber hurt on that long run...looked like a pulled muscle.
 
On the NFL channel the guys were talking about how Dallas lead the league last year in sacks with 59, but that after two games this year we don't even have one. We went from first to last....

Our defense seems a step or two slow and out of position. Is it the scheme, the players, coaching....or all the above?
 
Disturbed;2957078 said:
On the NFL channel the guys were talking about how Dallas lead the league last year in sacks with 59, but that after two games this year we don't even have one. We went from first to last....

Our defense seems a step or two slow and out of position. Is it the scheme, the players, coaching....or all the above?
Maybe we do miss Greg Ellis. Go figure.
 
windward;2957085 said:
Maybe we do miss Greg Ellis. Go figure.
Not Greg in particular, but we absolutely miss a 3rd OLB rusher. At the end of the game, Ware and Spencer (and Ratliff, too) were just gassed. This is why we need a Curtis Johnson or Butler to come through somehow at least by later in the year. It's also why B-Will blowing his knee out really, really stinks.
 
Chocolate Lab;2957095 said:
Not Greg in particular, but we absolutely miss a 3rd OLB rusher. At the end of the game, Ware and Spencer (and Ratliff, too) were just gassed. This is why we need a Curtis Johnson or Butler to come through somehow at least by later in the year. It's also why B-Will blowing his knee out really, really stinks.
An excellent point. I'm intigued about this Curtis Johnson fella and want to see if the hype is legit or not.
 
Chocolate Lab;2957063 said:
:hammer: to everything Juke and some others said.

Want to score a lot of points? Just get like Mike Martz and call a billion pass plays. You'll get lots of yards and even points, but you won't win many games because of turnovers, hits on your QB, and a tired defense.

I get the feeling that even if we knew we could win with just three boring running plays, Garrett would still call some tricked-up pass plays just because... Well, who knows. Just because he wants to.

Speaking of trick plays, that end around almost cost us Patrick Crayton. We went 13 for 29 in the air, this insanity needs to stop against tougher teams.
 
Chocolate Lab;2957063 said:
:hammer: to everything Juke and some others said.

Want to score a lot of points? Just get like Mike Martz and call a billion pass plays. You'll get lots of yards and even points, but you won't win many games because of turnovers, hits on your QB, and a tired defense.

I get the feeling that even if we knew we could win with just three boring running plays, Garrett would still call some tricked-up pass plays just because... Well, who knows. Just because he wants to.

I see your point, and I'm anti-Martz.

But Martz did win a SB as an OC. I'm not sayin...I'm just sayin.
 
rcaldw;2955850 said:
Let me get this right. We put up THIRTY ONE FREAKING POINTS tonight, and you think the offensive coordinator didn't do his job?

We put up 31 points with 4 TURNOVERS, 3 by our consistently underwhelming QB in big time situations. And you blame the offensive coordinator?

How about blaming the stupid head coach who couldn't inspire his way out of a wet paper bag. Remember him? Defensive guru?

31 POINTS PUT UP BY AN OFFENSE THAT HAD STINKING QB PLAY TONIGHT.

33 points against us.

Who you blaming?

:bravo: :bravo:
 
rcaldw;2955850 said:
Let me get this right. We put up THIRTY ONE FREAKING POINTS tonight, and you think the offensive coordinator didn't do his job?

We put up 31 points with 4 TURNOVERS, 3 by our consistently underwhelming QB in big time situations. And you blame the offensive coordinator?

How about blaming the stupid head coach who couldn't inspire his way out of a wet paper bag. Remember him? Defensive guru?

31 POINTS PUT UP BY AN OFFENSE THAT HAD STINKING QB PLAY TONIGHT.

33 points against us.

Who you blaming?

It's not that simple either.

With the location of our turnovers, we're lucky we didnt give up 50. The defense did a great job of holding them to only FG's.
 
There was nothing wrong with the play calling...execution by the QB was the problem on offense.
They did not need Romo to be brilliant that day,just drive the bus and Romo drove it off a cliff.He stunk.
The defense stunk as bad.Zero turnovers/sacks in 2 games?...
 
The reason we ran all over them was that they were selling out to stop the deep pass. They had no desire to stack the box, from what I can tell (but I haven't had the stomach to re-watch). They reviewed the Tampa game and didn't want Romo throwing long balls.

Which makes the post route call and throw so much more questionable.

Go with what works until it doesn't work anymore.
 
Some teams develop a killer instinct; this one seems to have developed a suicide instinct.

:bang2:
 
I dont know any other team in the league where the coordinator gets more blame for the QB's dumb plays than here.

Every play call is thrown under the bus if it doesnt work, and the blame goes back to the coordinator. I'm sorry folks, but the coordinator does not tell the QB WHERE to throw the football. There's this really underrated QB skill called "reading a defense". Its one area where Romo really needs to improve.

I even see people critical of a reverse to Patrick Crayton, even though it gained 20 yds and almost scored a TD. ARE YOU FREAKING KIDDING? Somebody says Garrett is Mike Maartz like, are you kidding? Maartz was a pass happy guy who had major protection weaknesses in his scheme, NONE of Romo's dumb plays the other night came on plays where the protection was faulty or poor. In fact Romo has had pretty much superb pass protection in both games on virtually every drop back.

The coordinator didnt lose the game for us the other night. The QB and the defense which folded like a house of cards on the final drive did.

Romo can be just about as good as any QB in the league, unfortunately he has days when he can be just about as bad as any QB in the league. He threw three terrible picks the other night and his accuracy has been off in both games now. That is not the fault of the coordinator. Romo is not Quincy Carter and doesnt need to be hidden, at some point he has to get his head out of his arse and quit making dumb plays. Every time he does it he says "I know I have to get better" but he eventually reverts back to this same stupid crap.

Scoring 65 pts (31+ in both games) and having a total of 840 yds of offense should be plenty enough to be 2-0. Most coordinators around the league would be praised for that.
 
NextGenBoys;2963542 said:
It's not that simple either.

With the location of our turnovers, we're lucky we didnt give up 50. The defense did a great job of holding them to only FG's.

The only time we held them to a FG was after Jones' fumble. They ran one (and really two) of Romo's picks back for TDS. They scored a TD after the 2nd pick (before halftime) They also scored a TD after the 3rd pick, they drove over 70 yds for that one.

So the defense saved 4pts from that.
 
dbair1967;2963763 said:
I dont know any other team in the league where the coordinator gets more blame for the QB's dumb plays than here.

Trying to find who to blame is silly. Every single player and coach needs to see what he can do better.

Garrett got outcoached by Sheridan, plain and simple. Two plays tell the story, and they are the first and third interception.

On the first one, the Giants not only had the right defense called in the huddle, they knew which defensive audible to call to counter Romo's audible. They were better prepared for that situation.

On the third one, Garrett thought he had set Sheridan up with the 12 formation for a big play action pass, but the presnap positioning of Jermaine Phillips tells you that Sheridan didn't care if they ran out of that formation.

On offense, Kevin Gilbride decided to keep in extra protection to give Eli extra time to challenge our corners. He used the fact that we were focusing on the run to pull our safeties up and get one-on-one situations for Smith and Manningham. It was a successful strategy that Phillips was unable to counter.

Several players need to do better, but that does not absolve the coaches from observing what their players have done throughout the course of the game and adjusting. When you just gashed their defense for 83 yards on 5 carries on the previous drive, with three carries over 10 yards and the other two carries from inside the 5, why dial up a deep pass when the opponent has yet to bring the safeties up?

I object to the remark that Garrett didn't tell Romo where to throw the ball on the third interception. The first option on that play is Hurd deep. Romo missed the safety, and he needs to improve that. But it doesn't give Garrett a pass for taking a risk and thinking he was going to outsmart a coordinator that was one step ahead of him all night.

We scored 31, but who's to say it wouldn't have been 38 or more if we had kept running the ball?
 
theogt;2963570 said:
The reason we ran all over them was that they were selling out to stop the deep pass. They had no desire to stack the box, from what I can tell (but I haven't had the stomach to re-watch). They reviewed the Tampa game and didn't want Romo throwing long balls.

Which makes the post route call and throw so much more questionable.

Go with what works until it doesn't work anymore.

There are multiple routes called on passing plays. Just like the famous Aikman to Harper throw in the NFC Championship game. 386 F flat. (I think that was it) Someone is running a 3 route (a short out), someone is running a 6 route (Irvin on the hitch on that play), and Harper on the post (an 8 route). A back is heading to the flat. The very reason why Irvin switched sides with Harper on the play is because Aikman had selected the hitch the two previous times they had run the play. In other words, Aikman could have thrown that post 3 times if he wanted to. The only time he threw it, however, was when the coverage dictated it.

It wasn't just a post that was called. Romo looked for the post. He didn't see the safety just camping back there (which was his responsibility). That one isn't on Garrett, that is on Romo. He probably (I certainly don't know this for sure, but it is likely) (actually I am certain. I can't remember the last time I only saw 1 receiver out on a pattern) had 2 or 3 other routes being run on that very same play. He selected the deep one.
 
kmd24;2963832 said:
Garrett got outcoached by Sheridan, plain and simple. Two plays tell the story, and they are the first and third interception.

This is blatantly wrong IMO. If he were outcoached as bad as you intimate, we wouldnt have had 31 pts, nearly 400 yds and over 250 yds rushing.

On the first one, the Giants not only had the right defense called in the huddle, they knew which defensive audible to call to counter Romo's audible. They were better prepared for that situation.

And again, did Romo have to throw it there? No. Further, it looked more like a bad throw to me than a bad read, as he either underthrew the deeper guy or overthrew the short pattern.

On the third one, Garrett thought he had set Sheridan up with the 12 formation for a big play action pass, but the presnap positioning of Jermaine Phillips tells you that Sheridan didn't care if they ran out of that formation.

And again, Garrett doesnt throw the pass for Romo. There are other people in the pattern, Romo never once looked at anyone else.

On offense, Kevin Gilbride decided to keep in extra protection to give Eli extra time to challenge our corners. He used the fact that we were focusing on the run to pull our safeties up and get one-on-one situations for Smith and Manningham. It was a successful strategy that Phillips was unable to counter.

Whats this have to do with Romo throwing 3 bad picks?

Several players need to do better, but that does not absolve the coaches from observing what their players have done throughout the course of the game and adjusting. When you just gashed their defense for 83 yards on 5 carries on the previous drive, with three carries over 10 yards and the other two carries from inside the 5, why dial up a deep pass when the opponent has yet to bring the safeties up?

Its called setting people up, most good play callers do that. That said, once AGAIN Garrett doesnt throw the ball for Romo or tell him which guy to throw it to.

I object to the remark that Garrett didn't tell Romo where to throw the ball on the third interception. The first option on that play is Hurd deep. Romo missed the safety, and he needs to improve that. But it doesn't give Garrett a pass for taking a risk and thinking he was going to outsmart a coordinator that was one step ahead of him all night.

You can object all you want, but you'd be wrong and just looking for a scapegoat. The QB made a poor read, period. There were other guys in the pattern, Romo never looks anywhere else on that play. His mind was made up before he ever took the snap.

We scored 31, but who's to say it wouldn't have been 38 or more if we had kept running the ball?

Or if the QB hadnt turned it over 3 times.

We only threw 29 times. We've had nearly a 50/50 run/pass balance in both games. Thats great balance.
 
Juke99;2955611 said:
The Cowboys averaged almost 9 yards per carry. The Giants couldn't stop the run at all.

Yet, the Cowboys threw as may passes as they had rushing attempts on a night when Romo stunk.

John Madden always said, when he coached, he'd run a play until the other team proved they could stop it.

This SHOULD have been an ugly win with the Cowboys running the ball twice as much as passing it...

But of course, Garrett got pass happy again.

Yep, the defense blew it when we needed them to step up...BUT really, if the Cowboys were the Steelers, they would have passed the ball 15 times and run it 45.

Muhast;2955704 said:
What about the Cowboys continued refusal to play press coverage. How many years have we complained about this? There is no point rushing that many players if we are going to stand 10 yards off the wr's on 3rd and 4. They will throw slants all day. If you are going to cover like that, you simply don't blitz. You HAVE to drop the lb's back in coverage to make up for it.

Juke99;2955732 said:
I was flipping out watching this game.

They slashed the Giants every time they ran the ball. It's like they couldn't win ugly because they had to put on a big show in the new stadium...ya know, entertainment vs football.

It should have been an ugly, grind out the yardage, control the clock kinda game.


:hammer: :hammer: :hammer:
 
Back
Top