Is Garrett Holding The Playbook Back?

[peplaw06]

Romo's runs aren't likely called running plays. Doesn't change the numbers really but just thought it was worth pointing out.

Understood. But we have 136 rushing attempts this season, so I wanted to be sure i got all of them in there. Had to go find the splits for each player who had had a carry. I also wouldn't put too much stock in the fact that Crayton is twice as likely to have a running play called for him in the 1st half as opposed to the 2nd, but figured I'd throw it in there.

 

[TonyRomo#9]

maybe in a second half in which we are leading, keeping the normal balance
of 55%pass 45% run.. isn't my idea of good game planning..

especially when we have been dominate in running the ball this season when we actually do it.. sorry if you disagree, but i think if your rushing for 200 yrds a game, you might want to move the balance, up to 50/50, or even you know a little more runs then passes.. instead of getting close to a andy reid like 60/40 pass/run..

but when something is really working, garrett loves to do something else, he thinks he is outsmarting someone..

 

[TonyRomo#9]

this week he will probably use miles austin as a decoy all game, thats what he loves to do..

 

[juck]

In the standings, New York flew home with the W. In every sport, that's all that actually matters, but the final score was 33-31.

I can identify two occasions where Dallas vomited six points into Giants hands deep in Cowboy territory after two fluke plays caused by poor ball management, which had nothing to do with the three points surrendered by our defense at the conclusion of the game. I'm interested in knowing what you considered were actual causes or reasons for the two-point loss?

Fluke plays? I would say terrible passes from 9.Romo is why we lost that game any way u cut it.Do u agree?

 

[peplaw06]

maybe in a second half in which we are leading, keeping the normal balance
of 55%pass 45% run.. isn't my idea of good game planning..

especially when we have been dominate in running the ball this season when we actually do it.. sorry if you disagree, but i think if your rushing for 200 yrds a game, you might want to move the balance, up to 50/50, or even you know a little more runs then passes.. instead of getting close to a andy reid like 60/40 pass/run..

but when something is really working, garrett loves to do something else, he thinks he is outsmarting someone..

What second half are you talking about? There's only one where we had even a semblance of a comfortable lead, and that was against Tampa.

Ever think the reason we're dominant in the run game is because we are such a threat to pass it? Nah, those can't have anything to do with each other... I happen to think it's all working pretty well considering we were the number 1 offense, and now are number 2 to New Orleans.

 

[peplaw06]

this week he will probably use miles austin as a decoy all game, thats what he loves to do..

Just like he did last week.

Irrationality rules the day with you doesn't it?

 

[khiladi]

For the amount of hype that the two tight end formation received during camp as compared to the results it's gotten, do you think JG is waiting for the Eagles game (or even later) to show some stuff?

What we know: The running game is exceptional

What hasn't happened:

All the mismatches it was supposed to provide in the passing game.
The explosion of Martellus Bennett.

Regardless of his play calling, Garrett is clever. If he is holding back for late season surprises, he's playing a dangerous game because it might not matter.

The two-tight end formation that was spoken about is something Garrett deployed all last year, especially late in the year and it didn't provide this team any offense. In fact, Garrett often deployed it only to provide extra pressure to Romo, when he was getting killed. He rarely ran any passing formations out of it.

 

[khiladi]

One more point:

The running game is the product of Hudson Houck, who finally had time to get his style of play going. Even with the exceptional running game, Garrett hasn't shown any ability to take advantage in the passing game, which is his specialty. It has been dreaful.

 

[TonyRomo#9]

Just like he did last week.

Irrationality rules the day with you doesn't it?

no, last week austin hadn't proven the need to pay attention to him, garrett loves to use dynamic players as decoys.. ala felix jones in washington last year..

 

[khiladi]

no, last week austin hadn't proven the need to pay attention to him, garrett loves to use dynamic players as decoys.. ala felix jones in washington last year..

You know what's pretty pathetic.

37 81 45.7

22 60 36.7

The first is the Giants third down conversion rate, while the second is the Cowboys. While Dallas may be the number two offense in the league in yards, there third down conversion rate is pretty average, meaning they don't sustain drives like the 'lower' offenses in the league, despite their exceptional running game. The Giants have 129 first downs, while the Cowboys have 105 first downs. So racking up yards doesn't tell the whole story, especially considering the Cowboys are pretty average in red-zone scoring. What use is all this 'yardage' if they aren't scoring or sustaining drives.

Miles Austin has 15 catches for 331 yards, leading the team in reception yards. No way in hell he sustains those numbers, unless of course he goes down as the greatest WR ever.

 

[peplaw06]

no, last week austin hadn't proven the need to pay attention to him, garrett loves to use dynamic players as decoys.. ala felix jones in washington last year..

You can't be serious. Was TO a decoy? How about Witten?

 

[DallasEast]

Fluke plays? I would say terrible passes from 9.Romo is why we lost that game any way u cut it.Do u agree?

Of course not. Romo had a bad night, but the final score was 33-31, which was a two-point margin of victory for the Giants.

Fluke plays.

First fluke play:

• A terrible pass from Romo hits the back of Witten's foot
• 99% of the time the ball bounces to the ground incomplete
• On this occasion, the ball kicks up into the trailing linebacker's hands, who didn't have to even break stride
• After the refs overturned the INT-for-TD, the ball was placed at the Dallas 28-yard line
• The defense held and the Giants kicked the field goal, i.e. three points

Easy math. Rare occurrence = fluke play. However, Romo's not your buddy, so let's erase those three fluke points for that reason.

Fluke play #2:

Felix Jones fumbled on the kickoff return. Turnovers normally occur on kick returns when the ball is knocked out of the returner's arms. If so, it wouldn't be deemed a fluke.

Did anyone cause the fumble? Nope. Ball just slipped out and was placed on the Dallas 27-yard line. The defense held again and New York kicked the field goal, i.e. three points.

Again, easy math.

Yep. Poor throwing Tony was the sole reason for the two-point loss. He's a bad, bad man. Bad Tony. Bad.

 

[Idgit]

Of course not. Romo had a bad night, but the final score was 33-31, which was a two-point margin of victory for the Giants.

Fluke plays.

First fluke play:

• A terrible pass from Romo hits the back of Witten's foot
• 99% of the time the ball bounces to the ground incomplete
• On this occasion, the ball kicks up into the trailing linebacker's hands, who didn't have to even break stride
• After the refs overturned the INT-for-TD, the ball was placed at the Dallas 28-yard line
• The defense held and the Giants kicked the field goal, i.e. three points

Easy math. Rare occurrence = fluke play. However, Romo's not your buddy, so let's erase those three fluke points for that reason.

Fluke play #2:

Felix Jones fumbled on the kickoff return. Turnovers normally occur on kick returns when the ball is knocked out of the returner's arms. If so, it wouldn't be deemed a fluke.

Did anyone cause the fumble? Nope. Ball just slipped out and was placed on the Dallas 27-yard line. The defense held again and New York kicked the field goal, i.e. three points.

Again, easy math.

Yep. Poor throwing Tony was the sole reason for the two-point loss. He's a bad, bad man. Bad Tony. Bad.

Giants also had a TD reception that fell into the receiver's chest while he was lying on his back in the back of the end zone.

I'm a big believer in 'the harder you work, the luckier you get,' but the Giants were pretty lucky that week--on top of all of the big Dallas mistakes.

 

[DallasEast]

Giants also had a TD reception that fell into the receiver's chest while he was lying on his back in the back of the end zone.

I'm a big believer in 'the harder you work, the luckier you get,' but the Giants were pretty lucky that week--on top of all of the big Dallas mistakes.

The ball fell right for him (I think it was Manningham), but that was still a planned play. I wouldn't label that play as a fluke or weird accident. More like a receiver having a little luck fall his way in the form of an intended pass while practically laying flat on his back.

 

[TonyRomo#9]

You can't be serious. Was TO a decoy? How about Witten?

umm... yes.. TO was used as a decoy alot. just ask him..

jason witten isn't schemed to get alot of catches, he happens to be Romo's safety net, so he gets the ball to him alot.. garrett, doesn't sit and say, lets get witten open.. infact ive never seen tape where someone was taking heat off witten, it is allways witten taking safety attention of WRs.

witten just happens to be a HOF TE who gets open alot, and has great chemistry with Romo, so nomatter how hard garrett tries, he can't screw that connection up.. though im sure he has tried..

 

[juck]

Of course not. Romo had a bad night, but the final score was 33-31, which was a two-point margin of victory for the Giants.

Fluke plays.

First fluke play:

• A terrible pass from Romo hits the back of Witten's foot
• 99% of the time the ball bounces to the ground incomplete
• On this occasion, the ball kicks up into the trailing linebacker's hands, who didn't have to even break stride
• After the refs overturned the INT-for-TD, the ball was placed at the Dallas 28-yard line
• The defense held and the Giants kicked the field goal, i.e. three points

Easy math. Rare occurrence = fluke play. However, Romo's not your buddy, so let's erase those three fluke points for that reason.

Fluke play #2:

Felix Jones fumbled on the kickoff return. Turnovers normally occur on kick returns when the ball is knocked out of the returner's arms. If so, it wouldn't be deemed a fluke.

Did anyone cause the fumble? Nope. Ball just slipped out and was placed on the Dallas 27-yard line. The defense held again and New York kicked the field goal, i.e. three points.

Again, easy math.

Yep. Poor throwing Tony was the sole reason for the two-point loss. He's a bad, bad man. Bad Tony. Bad.

Wake Up!
3rd-10, DAL242:46B. Johnson intercepted T. Romo for 34 yard touchdown
{Theres 7 instantly.}

1:21K. Phillips intercepted T. Romo for no gain{Fluke?yea bad pass=yes}

A3rd pick from the 46 of NYG late in 3rd as well.

So two point loss? But if u add 7 to our score we have a FIVE point win.Thanks to #9.

 

[peplaw06]

umm... yes.. TO was used as a decoy alot. just ask him..

jason witten isn't schemed to get alot of catches, he happens to be Romo's safety net, so he gets the ball to him alot.. garrett, doesn't sit and say, lets get witten open.. infact ive never seen tape where someone was taking heat off witten, it is allways witten taking safety attention of WRs.

witten just happens to be a HOF TE who gets open alot, and has great chemistry with Romo, so nomatter how hard garrett tries, he can't screw that connection up.. though im sure he has tried..

That's crazy talk.

38 TDs over 3 years is a hell of a good decoy. There's a difference between using one skill player to take attention from other ones while still getting that guy the ball, and using someone strictly as a decoy.

 

[DallasEast]

Wake Up!

I'm woke, but you're not. In fact, you're in a full-fledged hate Romo coma. I presumed incorrectly that this could be a discussion based upon the Giants capitalizing on enough fluke plays to eck out a two-point margin of victory.

What your [strike]I-hate-Romo[/strike] subconscious prevents you from acknowledging is that New York (even after accomplishing what you're arguing about during the game) had to overcome a one-point deficit with less than four minutes remaining in the game.

Again. One point. Less than four minutes beginning from their 25-yard line.

A field goal (i.e. three points) could win the game. That was the situation when the tail end of their drive was situated at Dallas 19 with less than 20 seconds left in the game.

Field Goal (3 points) minus 1-point deficit equals 2 points. Easy math (for most). So. Let's look at your Romo rage.

3rd-10, DAL242:46B. Johnson intercepted T. Romo for 34 yard touchdown
{Theres 7 instantly.}

I (not you obviously) can give the Giants defense credit for making an easy interception and an easier turnover/touchdown conversion off a bad Romo pass. I've taken that into account. I am not arguing points which the New York Giants earned by countering the Cowboys efforts during the game. That's Football 101. Why you're arguing that point, I do not know.

The definition of a created turnover is when the defense pressures the offense into making a mistake, positions itself correctly by reading the offense or both.

Created turnovers are commonplace in football. Turnovers which the team possessing the ball simply hands over to the opposing team in good or gosh darn excellent position are called fluke plays.

Now, let's return to another thrilling episode of http://i356.***BLOCKED***/albums/oo4/DallasEast1701/ihatesyoutonyromo.png ...

1:21K. Phillips intercepted T. Romo for no gain{Fluke?yea bad pass=yes}

Fluke play? Yes. I already said that.

Bad pass? Yes. Again, I already said that.

Me thinks you still do not understand both the incredible improbability of an interception occurring of a pass ricocheting off the bottom of a player's foot into a defensive player's hands deep (key word 'deep') in the opponent's territory and the difference of a field goal (not a touchdown) being the only result.

GOOOOOAAAAALLLLLL!!! That was probably understood, yes?

A3rd pick from the 46 of NYG late in 3rd as well.

See Jack.

See Jack run.

See Jack run back to the same argument of the Giants defense positioning themselves (brilliantly I may add) to take advantage of Romo's bad judgment, which his debater isn't even arguing with him about.

So two point loss?

Yes! Yes, you almost GOT it! Think "Field goal gift wrapped in excellent range"! I've got faith in youuuuuu!

But if u add 7 to our score we have a FIVE point win.

dang.

Thanks to #9.

You really do hates him, dontcha?

 

[DandyDon1722]

Dallas East...didn't want to quote it but good reply. I simply do not understand the Romo hate, under performance is one thing, the hate is another.

By the way, I was surprised by this thread and some of the reaction. I just asked the question about the playbook, but got dogged by some guys (Jobberone & Michael) for being stupid...you know, the John Q Public response. We know nothing...they know everything.

I thought the playbook was a legitimate question. I don't know if we've used everything or not, but I thought it was a valid post. I'm too damn sensitive!

 

[juck]

Romo will be a backup in 2 years.We got the wrong 9,the right one is in Weesy-ana.I am forced to root for him cause he is the QB of my team.We will draft a real QB eventually.No matter how U put it DallasEast,Romo chokes when it counts most.He just isnt a big game athlete.Someday U will stop drinking the Koolaid.His stats are padded from playing weaker teams in NON do or die games.He is like the GF that hangs around and gives u some good times but when u really need her she splits.I now watch him expecting him to make a major mistake in a big game.Sad.At least I wont be let down anymore.lol.