JG Offense Versus Top 5 Defenses

skinsscalper

Well-Known Member
Messages
9,146
Reaction score
5,693
gbrittain;2584516 said:
18th in points, 13th in yards.

Since you are so hung up on 18th in terms of points. Do you think Dallas possibly scores another 10 points per game that Romo missed?

I would say very likely. That would rank Dallas as the #10 defense in the NFL.

You can poo poo it all you want but dont you think every offense that played this year would have scored less points than they did had they played the top 5 defenses in the NFL 8 times?

A serious question. Maybe I am overrating this aspect. But how many additional points do think Dallas would have scored had they had Romo those 3 games and not played half their schedule against the top rated defenses in the NFL.

No one knows, but surely you can speculate. No difference. 1 point per game? Give me something. Or do you think teams should score as much against the top defenses in the NFL as they do the mid to bottom rated defenses?

Can't be sure, but one thing is certain, our turnover ratio would have plummeted a couple more points.

It's funny how so many people forget how awful we were playing BEFORE Romo got hurt.
 

Cochese

Benched
Messages
7,360
Reaction score
0
Everlastingxxx;2584518 said:
Did he win a Super Bowl? That was my only statement. Even still, Garrett had the WRs running 15-20 yrd routes with the old man in there. What other animated smilies can you add to your next post?


This was beyond stupid and shows me he has no hope of ever learning. He cant even put his friend in a good position to do well.
 

wileedog

Well-Known Member
Messages
11,356
Reaction score
2,393
gbrittain;2584516 said:
18th in points, 13th in yards.

We were #3 in yards and #2 in points the year before with mostly the same players. We still played the Eagles and Giants twice, and the Bears and Patriots. Plus it was Romo's first full year as a starter.

This year we even dumped a bunch of draft picks to bring in another WR mid year.

I'm sorry, because we played the Steelers and Ravens and Brad Johnson (who was Garretts choice at backup QB) was in for 3 games doesn't remotely explain that kind of decline.
 

gbrittain

Well-Known Member
Messages
5,126
Reaction score
67
skinsscalper;2584515 said:
In the end points are all that matter. Empty yardage doesn't win games. I don't care how many garbage yards we pile up (consequently making this offense look better than it really is). Yardage without out points are nothing but time killers.

13th in yards and 18th in points? Hmmm I wonder which one has a more direct correlation to our winning percentage?

Hmm, I wonder if Dallas would have scored more with a healthy Romo and not having to play half their games against the top 5 rated defenses in the NFL.

Only 30 points separates Dallas from the #18 position in points scored to the #10 position in points scored. I am pretty sure Romo for 3 more games puts us in the top 10.

Do you concede that the top 10 offenses in scoring this year had a easier schedule than the Cowboys?

Do you concede that playing half your games against the 5 best defenses in the NFL probably cost the Cowboys some points?
 

gbrittain

Well-Known Member
Messages
5,126
Reaction score
67
wileedog;2584525 said:
We were #3 in yards and #2 in points last year with mostly the same players. We still played the Eagles and Giants twice, and the Bears and Patriots. Plus it was Romo's first full year as a starter.

This year we even dumped a bunch of draft picks to bring in another WR mid year.

I'm sorry, because we played the Steelers and Ravens and Brad Johnson (who was Garretts choice at backup QB) was in for 3 games doesn't remotely explain that kind of decline.

Sorry, but the Giants and Philly did not have near the defense statistically last year that they do this year. Chicago was average at best last year. New England was ranked top 5. None of that evem remotely equates to what Dallas had to do this year.
 

Maikeru-sama

Mick Green 58
Messages
14,548
Reaction score
6
dbair1967;2584379 said:
when one watches the games without looking for a scapegoat, its easy to see a QB that cant avoid mistakes and missed way too many open people this yr, WR's that run the wrong routes (or no routes at all), a 40+ million dollar RB that fumbles too much and ended up the 3rd best RB on the team and and OL that was amazingly inconsistent

Yep.

However, a competent Offensive Coordinator would have scaled back the Offense.

Do people really think Tony Romo and the offense would struggle as much as they did in the hands of a "proven" Offensive Playcaller?

The fact of the matter is Jason Garrett has been called out by his Quarterback, quite a few of his receivers and even players from other teams.

The guy is quite simply in over his head and he never proved he was up to the job in the first place.
 

wileedog

Well-Known Member
Messages
11,356
Reaction score
2,393
gbrittain;2584534 said:
Sorry, but the Giants and Philly did not have near the defense statistically last year that they do this year. Chicago was average at best last year. New England was ranked top 5. None of that evem remotely equates to what Dallas had to do this year.

Green Bay was also the #2 defense. The Giants D carried them to the Superbowl. The Eagles were #6, which is as about as close you get to #5, no?

Yeah the schedule was somewhat easier, but more talent was added, especially getting rid of Julius and adding Roy, and yet we dropped from one of the best offenses in the league to middle of the pack. No, I don't think that is all because we happened to play the Steelers and Ravens this year.

As was pointed out we scored the same average points against those defenses as other teams did. Except we are not an average offense, we are one that starts 8 out of 11 players who have been to a Pro Bowl. We should be scoring on the best defenses in the league better than other teams and we didn't.
 

peplaw06

That Guy
Messages
13,699
Reaction score
413
skinsscalper;2584515 said:
In the end points are all that matter. Empty yardage doesn't win games. I don't care how many garbage yards we pile up (consequently making this offense look better than it really is). Yardage without out points are nothing but time killers.

13th in yards and 18th in points? Hmmm I wonder which one has a more direct correlation to our winning percentage?

So is the OC definitely the one to blame for the difference? I mean IMO the OC is trying to get yards, and get them any way he can to put you in position to score. So we're 13th in yards.... again playing a Top 5 defense in 8 games.

There are any number of things that can account for the 13th to 18th difference between yards and points.

It could be that the team turns the ball over when their in scoring range.... seems we have a QB who is a little careless with the ball.

It could be that those Top 5 defenses that we played 8 times tighten up in the red zone, forcing us to get FGs rather than TDs.

It could be that there are crucial drops or penalties in the red zone.... Seems we have a WR notorious for drops and I think we were the most penalized team in the league.

It could be that our defense doesn't score points off of turnovers like some teams do... remember those points count as points scored by the 17 teams ahead of us.

It could be that the OC makes some bad play calls inside the red zone or on 3rd downs in FG range. I give you that.

The point is there are so many issues that this offense had, and many of them things that he cannot personally control. Are you (and all you other JG haters out there) absolutely certain that it was Garrett and only Garrett that was responsible? Somehow I doubt it.
 

peplaw06

That Guy
Messages
13,699
Reaction score
413
Maikeru-sama;2584550 said:
Yep.

However, a competent Offensive Coordinator would have scaled back the Offense.

Do people really think Tony Romo and the offense would struggle as much as they did in the hands of a "proven" Offensive Playcaller?

The fact of the matter is Jason Garrett has been called out by his Quarterback, quite a few of his receivers and even players from other teams.

The guy is quite simply in over his head and he never proved he was up to the job in the first place.
Hmmm... the players on an underachieving offense are calling out the OC? All at the same time that the media is asking them why they failed this season? You mean they don't sit there and say, "it's my fault?" You don't say.

I think that says more about our players than the OC. And it ain't good.
 

gbrittain

Well-Known Member
Messages
5,126
Reaction score
67
peplaw06;2584575 said:
Hmmm... the players on an underachieving offense are calling out the OC? All at the same time that the media is asking them why they failed this season? You mean they don't sit there and say, "it's my fault?" You don't say.

I think that says more about our players than the OC. And it ain't good.

Remember how much better Julius was going to be without BP holding him back. HA HA!
 

ajk23az

Through Pain Comes Clarity
Messages
7,953
Reaction score
422
Everlastingxxx;2584518 said:
Did he win a Super Bowl? That was my only statement. Even still, Garrett had the WRs running 15-20 yrd routes with the old man in there. What other animated smilies can you add to your next post?

His defense won a SB not him. Just because he has won a SB doesn't mean he is a good QB.

Brad Johnson's 2003 Stats (The year he won the SB)

TD-26
INTs-21
YARDS-3811
62.1 completion %
sacked 20 times
6 fumbles

Benched after 4 games the next year (2004) :laugh2:
 

khiladi

Well-Known Member
Messages
37,042
Reaction score
37,633
Most of the yardage in games such as Baltimore came during prevent, or when Dallas was running hurry-up and Garrett's effects on the offense were nullified. For example, against Philly, the two drives that resulted in fumbles, the one by Romo and the one by Barber, were all hurry-up and Dallas was pushing the envelope. In one drive, 20 plus yards was simply gained by that ridiculous option-toss by Witten to TO, that was not even planned. out of the 298 yards against Philly, when the game was still somewhat in hand, I'd say that over 100 came on those two drives alone, which puts one at less than 200 yards the rest of the game. By half-time the game was over, and Philly pretty much sealed the deal. It is called useless yards. Against the Ravens, Baltimore went prevent at the end, allowing Dallas to move the ball. It doesn't take a genius to understand, our offense usually moved the ball in those games in the final few minutes. Like I said, our offense is inconsistent because of our OC. One week, Romo in hurry-up will move the ball and score, the next week it'll end in a TO.

In fact, if one analyzes the games it is more stain on Garrett than anything else. Martz also puts up big yardage by the way, but he sucks as an OC. He can't score at all against good teams.
 

peplaw06

That Guy
Messages
13,699
Reaction score
413
khiladi;2584602 said:
Most of the yardage in games such as Baltimore came during prevent, or when Dallas was running hurry-up and Garrett's effects on the offense were nullified. For example, against Philly, the two drives that resulted in fumbles, the one by Romo and the one by Barber, were all hurry-up and Dallas was pushing the envelope. In one drive, 20 plus yards was simply gained by that ridiculous option-toss by Witten to TO, that was not even planned. out of the 298 yards against Philly, when the game was still somewhat in hand, I'd say that over 100 came on those two drives alone, which puts one at less than 200 yards the rest of the game. By half-time the game was over, and Philly pretty much sealed the deal. It is called useless yards. Against the Ravens, Baltimore went prevent at the end, allowing Dallas to move the ball. It doesn't take a genius to understand, our offense usually moved the ball in those games in the final few minutes. Like I said, our offense is inconsistent because of our OC. One week, Romo in hurry-up will move the ball and score, the next week it'll end in a TO.

In fact, if one analyzes the games it is more stain on Garrett than anything else. Martz also puts up big yardage by the way, but he sucks as an OC. He can't score at all against good teams.

So let's hold it against a guy because he gains yardage against soft defenses? Makes sense.

Or let's hold it against him because we're running the hurry up... Was it not still his offense?

Why is it our OCs fault that one week the hurry up results in a score and the next it ends in a turnover? Does Garrett make Romo throw bad passes, or make a WR run a bad route, or make the OL miss blocks allowing DL to get to Romo and cause fumbles?

Again, there are a lot of reasons that a team can get yardage but fails to score points. See above.
 

khiladi

Well-Known Member
Messages
37,042
Reaction score
37,633
peplaw06;2584609 said:
So let's hold it against a guy because he gains yardage against soft defenses? Makes sense.

Or let's hold it against him because we're running the hurry up... Was it not still his offense?

Why is it our OCs fault that one week the hurry up results in a score and the next it ends in a turnover? Does Garrett make Romo throw bad passes, or make a WR run a bad route, or make the OL miss blocks allowing DL to get to Romo and cause fumbles?

Again, there are a lot of reasons that a team can get yardage but fails to score points. See above.

That is not what I said. What i said is this team gains yardage in hurry-up mode and Romo is making plays on his feet buying time. What this means is Garrett essentially becomes a non-factor and Romo is calling plays on the fly. Once again, our yardage comes when the coaching of Garrett is reduced to a minimum and Romo is buying time while TO free-lances trying to get open. That play wher Witen chucked it to TO, it was free-lancing.

It doesn't take a genius to understand such a simple point. It even happens with soft defenses as well.

Romo said it, TO said it, and even Roy is implying Garrett can't coach, and he's seen his share of bad coaches...
 

peplaw06

That Guy
Messages
13,699
Reaction score
413
khiladi;2584614 said:
That is not what I said. What i said is this team gains yardage in hurry-up mode and Romo is making plays on his feet buying time. What this means is Garrett essentially becomes a non-factor and Romo is calling plays on the fly. Once again, our yardage comes when the coaching of Garrett is reduced to a minimum and Romo is buying time while TO free-lances trying to get open. That play wher Witen chucked it to TO, it was free-lancing.

It doesn't take a genius to understand such a simple point. It even happens with soft defenses as well.

Romo said it, TO said it, and even Roy is implying Garrett can't coach, and he's seen his share of bad coaches...

Yeah, most teams gain some yardage in hurry up mode.

But hurry up mode doesn't mean Romo is making plays on his feet or TO is free-lancing. You're just making crap up. Garrett would still be a factor, because it's still his offense right. Does Garrett coach the offense the hurry up, or do you think they just know what they're doing because those 11 guys are drawing plays in the dirt out there? You think that's how the throw back Witten pass was drawn up. Ha. It doesn't take a genius. Double ha.

and see this post re: players speaking out about the coach

http://cowboyszone.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2584575&postcount=49
 

khiladi

Well-Known Member
Messages
37,042
Reaction score
37,633
peplaw06;2584619 said:
Yeah, most teams gain some yardage in hurry up mode.

But hurry up mode doesn't mean Romo is making plays on his feet or TO is free-lancing. You're just making crap up. Garrett would still be a factor, because it's still his offense right. Does Garrett coach the offense the hurry up, or do you think they just know what they're doing because those 11 guys are drawing plays in the dirt out there? You think that's how the throw back Witten pass was drawn up. Ha. It doesn't take a genius. Double ha.

and see this post re: players speaking out about the coach

http://cowboyszone.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2584575&postcount=49

Yes, they do. Because they are usually down and have to play catch-up, because their offense has been inconcistent throughout. Further, the defense is usually playing prevent in those situations, which inflates the yardage statistics. That is the reason this offense has supposed big numbers against great defenses. If hurry-up was successful all the time, teams would run it all the time. They don't. Garrett was so inept, this offense could only really score during hurry-up.

Further, Witten specifically did say that play came on the fly and it was never drawn up. And while Garrett may be a 'factor', none of that negates the fact that Garrett becomes less of a factor in hurry-up mode. That is just a fact. It doesn't take a genius to understand that in no-huddle, Romo was calling the signals. Everybody who is everybody knwos it is Tony Romo that kept the plays alive with his feet to buy time.
 

peplaw06

That Guy
Messages
13,699
Reaction score
413
khiladi;2584634 said:
Actually, Witten specifically did say that play came on the fly and it was never drawn up. And while Garrett may be a 'factor', none of that negates the fact that Garrett becomes less of a factor in hurry-up mode. That is just a fact. It doesn't take a genius to understand that in no-huddle, Romo was calling the signals. Everybody who is everybody knwos it is Tony Romo that kept the plays alive with his feet to buy time.

It just screams agenda to say that the OFFENSIVE Coordinator is less of a factor in the hurry up OFFENSE.

Oh, but "everybody who is everybody" knows it's Romo calling signals and keeping the plays alive with his feet...................... :rolleyes:

What about Romo calling the audibles at the line of scrimmage when we're not running no-huddle. Why isn't he as successful then? And why wouldn't he use his feet when he calls plays from the huddle? Was it Romo or Garrett who checked out of just about every run called against Washington at home? Lemme guess, that's Garrett's fault huh? How come when the audibles at the LOS work out, it's credit Romo, and when they don't it's blame Garrett?
 

khiladi

Well-Known Member
Messages
37,042
Reaction score
37,633
peplaw06;2584645 said:
It just screams agenda to say that the OFFENSIVE Coordinator is less of a factor in the hurry up OFFENSE.

Oh, but "everybody who is everybody" knows it's Romo calling signals and keeping the plays alive with his feet...................... :rolleyes:

What about Romo calling the audibles at the line of scrimmage when we're not running no-huddle. Why isn't he as successful then? And why wouldn't he use his feet when he calls plays from the huddle? Was it Romo or Garrett who checked out of just about every run called against Washington at home? Lemme guess, that's Garrett's fault huh? How come when the audibles at the LOS work out, it's credit Romo, and when they don't it's blame Garrett?

Yes, it does scream agenda, and that is the get rid of Garrett agenda, of which I'm glad to say I fully and a supporter. Further, Your whole argument is predictaed upon the erroneous assumption that I think that we are always successful in the no-huddle. I didn't say we were always successful when we run the no-huddle. If you had paid attentio to what I stated in the very beginning, you would have read the following:

It doesn't take a genius to understand, our offense usually moved the ball in those games in the final few minutes. Like I said, our offense is inconsistent because of our OC. One week, Romo in hurry-up will move the ball and score, the next week it'll end in a TO.

This offensive system is effectively street-ball. It is successful when Romo is pushing the nevelope, buying time with his feet. But that also is a problem, because there is no system and it leads to inconcsistency and TOs. Garret has no system. Teams know what he is doing and everybody laughs at his game-planning.

All your telling me is that the offense wasn't successful. Whoppity-freakin do. I never said Romo was faultless, what i stated is that this team, and those games, we ran no-huddle when Romo buys time and makes plays with his feet. We live and die by Romo.
 

peplaw06

That Guy
Messages
13,699
Reaction score
413
khiladi;2584652 said:
Yes, it does scream agenda, and that is the get rid of Garrett agenda, of which I'm glad to say I fully and a supporter. Further, Your whole argument is predictaed upon the erroneous assumption that I think that we are always successful in the no-huddle. I didn't say we were always successful when we run the no-huddle.
First, that's not what my argument is predicated on, but nice try.

Second, you mean you didn't say this......

this offense could only really score during hurry-up.

If you had paid attentio to what I stated in the very beginning, you would have read the following: It doesn't take a genius to understand, our offense usually moved the ball in those games in the final few minutes. Like I said, our offense is inconsistent because of our OC. One week, Romo in hurry-up will move the ball and score, the next week it'll end in a TO.
I paid attention, I read that. i responded to it. And it makes no sense. It's way too vague first of all. What games? We only moved the ball against the Giants in the hurry up at the end of the game, OK. And I responded to the lunacy of your bolded sentence too. Are you blaming garret for the turnovers?



This offensive system is effectively street-ball. It is successful when Romo is pushing the nevelope, buying time with his feet. But that also is a problem, because there is no system and it leads to inconcsistency and TOs. Garret has no system. Teams know what he is doing and everybody laughs at his game-planning.
Again, ridiculous.

All your telling me is that the offense wasn't successful. Whoppity-freakin do. I never said Romo was faultless, what i stated is that this team, and those games, we ran no-huddle when Romo buys time and makes plays with his feet. We live and die by Romo.
I'm surprised you can spell right now. You're obviously drunk.
 

khiladi

Well-Known Member
Messages
37,042
Reaction score
37,633
First, that's not what my argument is predicated on, but nice try.

Yes, it is...

Second, you mean you didn't say this......

And how does that contradict my point? The offense only did really score in hurry-up, during those games.

I paid attention, I read that. i responded to it. And it makes no sense. It's way too vague first of all. What games? We only moved the ball against the Giants in the hurry up at the end of the game, OK. And I responded to the lunacy of your bolded sentence too. Are you blaming garret for the turnovers?

There is nothing vague about it, so keep trying. The contention is quite simple. We moved the ball primarily in hurry-up, whether it was the Eagles game in which Romo committed a fumble and Barber committed a fumble, or in the end of games. Against the Ravens, 14 f our points came in the 4th quarter. For quarters 2 and 3, we had 4 first downs, 3 5 and outs, 2 2 and outs, and a couple of 5 and outs. Absolutely pathetic play-calling.

We were down 16-7 in the 4th. One of the TDs in the 4th, it was no-huddle a couple of plays and a little less than 2 minute drive. Tony Romo was operating purely out of the shot-gun. The drive before that, again 3 of the plays of the 6 play drive were no huddle and a 3 minute drive. This team was operating in hurry up.

Like I said, garret can't call a game worth crap.

And yes, I blame Garrett for the turn-overs. Turn-overs happen when your pressing and the offense is out-of-sync. You also reign in QBs with a running game, not trying to have him constantly make plays down field.
 
Top