Interesting OL Stat...

[Zimmy Lives]

no they don't they just judge the players on run and pass blocking junk like that tangible stuff they can grab

but I imagine on somethings they may have to guess who's responsibility it was so its accuracy can legitimately be questioned

Thanks! I wish we could sit in on Cowboys coaches meetings to learn about the players.

 

[Zaxor]

Thanks! I wish we could sit in on Cowboys coaches meetings to learn about the players.

lol you and everyone else on the forum

 

[jterrell]

While that sometimes applies to individual games, it loses meaning when applied over the course of an entire season. After so many games of the same result, one after another, you start to run out of mitigating circumstances, and begin to reach the conclusion that we just can't run the ball in the red zone.

10 extra touchdowns adds up to an extra 70 points over the course of a season. What would have to happen in each individual game for those TD to have been scored, (the circumstances surrounding each touchdown) don't change that fact.

No matter any other arguments made here the problem is this:
Rushing TD stats ONLY argue whether one scored or did not score rushing TDs. To make any larger argument you have to pull in other stats. Rushing TDs are only PART of the picture for scoring, part of the picture for 3rd down success, part of the picture for time of possession, part of the picture for RZ performance. and yet, you are trying to make it apply in soem universal law that doesn't exist. Of course if you magically give us 9 more TDs we'd be better. But again we'd have been better no matter HOW we got 9 more TDs. If Roger Goodell just awarded us those TDs (and let's not put it past him) it would have the same overall effect statistically.

One could easily say the Giants would have won 12 games and walked away with this crappy division in 2011 had they simply been able or willing to run the ball between the 20s.

Dallas GOT into the red zone via the run FAR more frequently than the Giants. Your argument seems to be with Jason Garrett more than the OL.

We were a quicker, second-level blocking line in 2011. We were not the powerful line of past seasons. There are metrics saying we were one of the best blocking lines in all of football once we got the second level area. Losing Gurode and Bigg certainly effected us in short yardage.. except we have been bad in short yardage for years. As have many teams. So much so that teams often pass now on 3rd and 2 or less.
SOOOO... we go out and get a guy who is really good at immediate POC blocking, Livings, but terrible at 2nd level blocking... and the signing gets laughed at and mocked!

http://footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol

Really though the thing here is this.... All of this argument is pointless. We signed a plus short yardage OG in Livings and the best blocking FB in FA. We ALREADY addressed RZ rushing. And we brought in Bill Callahan to help be a running game coordinator!!!

 

[burmafrd]

No matter any other arguments made here the problem is this:
Rushing TD stats ONLY argue whether one scored or did not score rushing TDs. To make any larger argument you have to pull in other stats. Rushing TDs are only PART of the picture for scoring, part of the picture for 3rd down success, part of the picture for time of possession, part of the picture for RZ performance. and yet, you are trying to make it apply in soem universal law that doesn't exist. Of course if you magically give us 9 more TDs we'd be better. But again we'd have been better no matter HOW we got 9 more TDs. If Roger Goodell just awarded us those TDs (and let's not put it past him) it would have the same overall effect statistically.

One could easily say the Giants would have won 12 games and walked away with this crappy division in 2011 had they simply been able or willing to run the ball between the 20s.

Dallas GOT into the red zone via the run FAR more frequently than the Giants. Your argument seems to be with Jason Garrett more than the OL.

We were a quicker, second-level blocking line in 2011. We were not the powerful line of past seasons. There are metrics saying we were one of the best blocking lines in all of football once we got the second level area. Losing Gurode and Bigg certainly effected us in short yardage.. except we have been bad in short yardage for years. As have many teams. So much so that teams often pass now on 3rd and 2 or less.
SOOOO... we go out and get a guy who is really good at immediate POC blocking, Livings, but terrible at 2nd level blocking... and the signing gets laughed at and mocked!

http://footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol

Really though the thing here is this.... All of this argument is pointless. We signed a plus short yardage OG in Livings and the best blocking FB in FA. We ALREADY addressed RZ rushing. And we brought in Bill Callahan to help be a running game coordinator!!!

You think that is enough to make up our putrid running stats? As was pointed out we were right at the bottom of the league in Rushing TDs. Only 5 as I recall.

We have not had a rushing game capable of getting that 1 yard when we really have needed it since the 90's. In the Red Zone its a lot harder to pass when the Defense knows you are no threat to run the ball. And we have been no threat at all inside the 10.

 

[Risen Star]

You think that is enough to make up our putrid running stats? As was pointed out we were right at the bottom of the league in Rushing TDs. Only 5 as I recall.

We have not had a rushing game capable of getting that 1 yard when we really have needed it since the 90's. In the Red Zone its a lot harder to pass when the Defense knows you are no threat to run the ball. And we have been no threat at all inside the 10.

The field shrinks in the red zone. Defenses no longer have to respect something deep. So they get more nosey around the line of scrimmage. Our offensive coordinator can no longer create movement with deception. This puts all the onus on the offensive line and you get what you got. They're one of the worst OLs in the entire league.

 

[CCBoy]

"Specialty cases that remove the bulk of play during that game?"

Our backs scored 3 red zone TD the entire season.

These are season splits:
Murray
17 red zone carries, 2.1 YPC, 1 TD

Bradshaw
24 red zone carries, 3.8 YPC, 9 TD

We did not run well in the red zone, even when Murray was helathy.


Broaden the view to total touchdowns, then. We were 12th in the league.

You can bring in rainfall totals for an isolated desert region all you wish. You can change the totals to reflect a ten year or even fifty year cycle all day. Additionally you can add in a comparative study of the entire world's desert surfaces, by definition...and unless you deal with the grasp that it involves a lack of water, then you are playing in that sand...not a solution.

A better offensive line will naturally cure running problems. That includes both running and passing the ball...period. You can ignore that simple fact all you care to, but you are just foolishly gearing up for a series of dust storms and are little more than a tumbleweed through it.

The passing totals was depending upon Miles Austin injured most of the season; Murray not playing even a half of a full season; and Tony Romo severly hurt for much of it as well. Maybe injuries affected and continually changed even the offensive line that is getting your ire now. But no, you say it all boils down to just Red Zone blocking...but that is having an agenda and explaining away actual affecting reasons for the sake of just ignoring those.

Just to quit playing the Red Zone game of yours...it is just simple facts, that if you use the RUN in walking the ball down the field, then teams HAVE to respect that same RUN once you reach the Red Zone. That just does NOT change once a team reaches *(echo chamber effect added) ...THE.....RED......ZONE!

The running game improved just by the addition of Demarco Murray. Don't further throw in a case study of cloud formation in that damned desert as well. And then quote a single sighting of a cumulus nimbus as your cause...further.

The team's current window on the offensive line has been under scrutiny for the past three seasons...and has to be developed through. That IS the point, and not even the burro life of migrant strays in that desert. Hey, someone probably has a soft spot for mustang burroes as well....go figure.

 

[CCBoy]

The field shrinks in the red zone. Defenses no longer have to respect something deep. So they get more nosey around the line of scrimmage. Our offensive coordinator can no longer create movement with deception. This puts all the onus on the offensive line and you get what you got. They're one of the worst OLs in the entire league.

First, the field doesn't shrink, only the amount that can be used in play development changes.

As to worst, you would have to prove that case as well...and not by cliche and stereotyped application.

I see real intent here...instead of an Irish Revoluation's: 'Blame in on the Kelly's'....you plug in a convenient, blame it on Jerry. You go, as if one was studying offensive productions, they have been rather high in league for the past three seasons. The defensive results lagged. And the disclaimer tacked on to the 'blame it on Jerry' verse going about, would be ignored if that part of play had given the team but two more wins squadered in this past season. As the COWBOYS would have won the NFC East...end of discussion.

 

[percyhoward]

We were not the powerful line of past seasons.

Ya think?