Jon Kitna Just Comical

[jobberone]

I used to believe the same thing but this doesn't seem to be the case at all. JG could still run play action passes even absent a running game prior to this season. This is an excerpt from Johnathan Bales' article on that topic,

"Want jaw-dropping evidence that the Cowboys don’t embrace analytics and are unwilling to adapt to new information? Last year, Romo ranked last in the NFL in play-action percentage, attempting a play-action pass on just 10.0 percent of his dropbacks despite totaling a 109.1 passer rating on those passes.

In 2013, Romo ranks last in the NFL in play-action percentage, attempting a play-action pass on just 10.3 percent of his dropbacks despite totaling a 121.2 passer rating on those passes.

What the hell?

All kinds of success on play-action, yet the rate has increased 0.3 percent points? With that sort of improvement, we’ll only need to wait just over 37 years until the Cowboys reach THE LEAGUE AVERAGE in play-action percentage.

Oh, but the Cowboys can’t run the ball, you say, so why use play-action? First, Romo’s ridiculous play-action success is reason enough to increase the rate. But more important, play-action efficiency isn’t correlated with rushing success.

Defenders play situations, not past rushing efficiency, so the Cowboys don’t need a strong running game for play-action to work. If they implemented more of a scientific approach to decision-making over the faith-based approach they currently utilize, they’d probably know that."

I appreciate the research and his analysis but it is wrong. When teams just tee off on you and you are trying to play action then you just lose time for the QB to throw and more lost for the QB to see the field. Teams really have to believe you are going to run. I'm sorry but his analysis is wrong PRIOR to this year. As our running game improved they have down a good bit more play action and it has worked. Earlier in the year we didn't run as well. I'm very happy to see us able to run the ball consistently and be able to use the play action pass.

 

[visionary]

And honestly, every player in the league knows Garrett's system... They all have picked it up.

Post of the day

 

[jobberone]

I think certain plays we go to too much and teams are ready for it. There's little doubt of that IMO. There are a couple of others that they are reading in certain downs, distance and game situations when shown a certain defensive formation. Teams are baiting and we are biting at times.

 

[CyberB0b]

That is actually a very astute observation.

There is no plan going forward concerning the QB- if there is, we don't have a clue yet as to what it is. Hopefully the team does...

There's never been a plan since Aikman went down. Romo was dumb luck.

 

[BigStar]

Costanza was one of the best characters to ever be created.
So complexly simple.
You are very right about him.
And Jason Alexander was brilliant playing him.

I appreciate the research and his analysis but it is wrong. When teams just tee off on you and you are trying to play action then you just lose time for the QB to throw and more lost for the QB to see the field. Teams really have to believe you are going to run. I'm sorry but his analysis is wrong PRIOR to this year. As our running game improved they have down a good bit more play action and it has worked. Earlier in the year we didn't run as well. I'm very happy to see us able to run the ball consistently and be able to use the play action pass.

I understand that PA can't be run "consistently" without a competent running game, but his statistics show a blatant unwillingness to embrace the concept more so. It is working when it is called, the running game's success doesn't correlate with the high QB rating that results when the play is called. Bales' primary theme was that this O doesn't embrace analytics when compared to other more progressive O's. He used that statistic to back it up. You did speak of the down and distance predicting our play calling, and Bales touches on that as well. We aren't modernizing the play calling, so to speak.

This discrepancy in actual running success vs. success off of PA was showed during the NO blowout showing Brees' success running it without a running game. NO embraces the concept without successfully running as well. They posted the statistic and the commentators spoke briefly of this surprising statistic.

 

[CyberB0b]

I appreciate the research and his analysis but it is wrong. When teams just tee off on you and you are trying to play action then you just lose time for the QB to throw and more lost for the QB to see the field. Teams really have to believe you are going to run. I'm sorry but his analysis is wrong PRIOR to this year. As our running game improved they have down a good bit more play action and it has worked. Earlier in the year we didn't run as well. I'm very happy to see us able to run the ball consistently and be able to use the play action pass.

A linebacker's first step is always down hill. Every play. They read the linemen and if they see run blocking, like on a play action, they will continue. They can't help it.

 

[jobberone]

A linebacker's first step is always down hill. Every play.

That is not what l was taught nor how i played If it is play action you hope they bite as well as the safeties. The Mike should be able to in general read his keys and recognize pass...mostly.

 

[Sarge]

Let's be honest and use a little common sense here - if it ever comes down to us using our 3rd string QB, it's not gonna matter much.

 

[jobberone]

I understand that PA can't be run "consistently" without a competent running game, but his statistics show a blatant unwillingness to embrace the concept more so. It is working when it is called, the running game's success doesn't correlate with the high QB rating that results when the play is called. Bales' primary theme was that this O doesn't embrace analytics when compared to other more progressive O's. He used that statistic to back it up. You did speak of the down and distance predicting our play calling, and Bales touches on that as well. We aren't modernizing the play calling, so to speak.

This discrepancy in actual running success vs. success off of PA was showed during the NO blowout showing Brees' success running it without a running game. NO embraces the concept without successfully running as well. They posted the statistic and the commentators spoke briefly of this surprising statistic.

I am not sure our defense can be used for an example. And I agree if u get a or the safeties to bite then u can run it. Over the last few years I have seen just ignore our attempts. But I agree Garrett doesn't use It eno7gh nor the running game. I can see why he and Callahan move away from the run but I don't always agree with it. Defenses show looks and give trends and Garrett is too predictable with his responses.

 

[BigStar]

I am not sure our defense can be used for an example. And I agree if u get a or the safeties to bite then u can run it. Over the last few years I have seen just ignore our attempts. But I agree Garrett doesn't use It eno7gh nor the running game. I can see why he and Callahan move away from the run but I don't always agree with it. Defenses show looks and give trends and Garrett is too predictable with his responses.

Good point, esp when it used against this defense but they were talking about the Saints O success using PA without the successful running game over the course of several seasons not just that night. When I saw that, I thought about it longer and it does seem to hold true. As Bob just said, the D can't help their innate tendency to react to a PA, even if the running game is non existent. They still tend to react, albeit not as hard if a running game is working. I think a lot of it is tied in to get the LBs, the Mike as you referenced mainly, to bite to open the underneath, and pick route type options, not necessarily to set up for a shot down field.

 

[WoodysGirl]

Let's be honest and use a little common sense here - if it ever comes down to us using our 3rd string QB, it's not gonna matter much.

Winner, winner, Christmas dinner.

 

[khiladi]

It's not just your complaining in this thread that is bringing out the pop guns. It's you are talking nonsense under the guise of logic. You are so far off base with every single thing you're arguing in this thread it has people flabbergasted.

Garrett runs his own variant of the vertical offense which is what Norv did as well both being schooled by Ernie. The reason you haven't seen the play action pass until this year is no one was buying. We had NO run game. You actually have to be able to at least make the other team believe you can run before the play action is successful. You cannot run a successful vertical offense without running the ball, have TWO outside threats that can stretch the field (and have a QB which has the time to throw it deep on occasion), and have a QB and receivers who know what to do. We've had the QB and that's it. So that's why you haven't seen a lot of play action nor enough under center play. Now I'm sure you'll lay all that at Garrett's feet but it doesn't all belong there.

As far as bringing Kitna in.....well he'll know and be able to communicate with the rest of the offense. Being able to run the vertical offense is one thing both mentally and physically. But most teams have their own terminology for play calling even with comparable offensive schemes. Having a guy who can play reasonably well as the third QB for the LAST game of the season AND knows what the heck is being said to him and can communicate that with the coaches and players is important.

Garrett's got his problems for sure and he may need to go but find something factual to gig him on.

Oh, and Merry Christmas.

Merry Christmas to you as well..

As far as your comment, sorry I'm not buying it. When your last in the league in play action pass, you simply can't sustain an argument that it is because people aren't buying. Especially when you've consistently been blasted throughout your tenure for not running and getting away from the run, especially when we had games where Murray was running well.

This, as well as the above mentioned fact, you don't have to be successful running for play action to work, because the intent is to get the DB to freeze for a brief second.

 

[khiladi]

I get it. I guess I just don't understand even small optimism. But I guess if all you do is follow the Cowboys you probably don't realize that there isn't really a dominant team out there aside from the Seahawks at home. Everyone is beatable. But no one should fear the Panthers or Aint's on the road. Even the 49ers.

But I get it. Its almost a bit looney to even expect this team to even win Sunday. But I guess i'm looney lol. I don't know if they'll win but i'm excited about the game and if we pull that victory out? My optimism will increase.

In regards to how we beat the Deadskins....I don't feel anyone should be ashamed about that. I don't hear the 9ers crying about how they almost lost to the Falcons who actually is the worst team in the NFL or one of them anyway.

I have optimism in the team, not the management.

 

[links18]

Let's be honest and use a little common sense here - if it ever comes down to us using our 2nd string QB, it's not gonna matter much.

Fixed.

 

[The Quest for Six]

What's the big deal, it's one game, Kitna knows the offense, he's going to stand on the sidelines and hold a clipboard for the day and get a game check and then he can go back to teaching........nobody Dallas brings in will know the offense, so this is much a do about nothing....

 

[khiladi]

What's the big deal, it's one game, Kitna knows the offense, he's going to stand on the sidelines and hold a clipboard for the day and get a game check and then he can go back to teaching........nobody Dallas brings in will know the offense, so this is much a do about nothing....

Does Kitna really know the offense? He's been teaching high school the last two years. We also timing-based, meaning rhythm with WRs. TWill and Beasley haven't played with him. And if he's just going to run some basic plays, then couldn't we have a gotten some young buck to hand the ball off based upon our vast knowledge and football competence, you know because Garrett is always prepared and has many a connection.

Of course it isn't a big deal in terms of stop gap, it is a big deal when you claim your team is moving forward in terms of new culture and discipline and being prepared. I though Eob Ryan was fired for sleeping in meetings?

 

[WV Cowboy]

Our DC is 73, and our backup QB is 41 ??

I've always said it is a young man's game!!

 

[jobberone]

I understand that PA can't be run "consistently" without a competent running game, but his statistics show a blatant unwillingness to embrace the concept more so. It is working when it is called, the running game's success doesn't correlate with the high QB rating that results when the play is called. Bales' primary theme was that this O doesn't embrace analytics when compared to other more progressive O's. He used that statistic to back it up. You did speak of the down and distance predicting our play calling, and Bales touches on that as well. We aren't modernizing the play calling, so to speak.

This discrepancy in actual running success vs. success off of PA was showed during the NO blowout showing Brees' success running it without a running game. NO embraces the concept without successfully running as well. They posted the statistic and the commentators spoke briefly of this surprising statistic.

Are you looking at 2012 stats or 2013. We haven't used play action much and have been in the lower half of the league. They've only been doing these stats for two years now. Romo's comp rate is 6 pts less and he only has 81 drop backs for play action. He has thrown 6 out of 35 TDs with play action. That's a sixth of the TDs this year on 14% of passing attempts. The YPA is only slightly better at 7.8 to 7.1 although nothing to sneeze at. I don't know how long the TDs were for but my guess would be around the GL.

So I don't know what you're arguing for or against. Half the NFL plays that way with a couple of teams around 100 attempts then the rest graduated between 120 and 213. There are good QBs at the bottom of that list and good ones at the top. RGIII is number two on the list with 30% and that didn't work out too well.

I don't know what the number of play actions passes are the last 5 games but it appears to be increasing; but that is anecdotal.

 

[BigStar]

Are you looking at 2012 stats or 2013. We haven't used play action much and have been in the lower half of the league. They've only been doing these stats for two years now. Romo's comp rate is 6 pts less and he only has 81 drop backs for play action. He has thrown 6 out of 35 TDs with play action. That's a sixth of the TDs this year on 14% of passing attempts. The YPA is only slightly better at 7.8 to 7.1 although nothing to sneeze at. I don't know how long the TDs were for but my guess would be around the GL.

So I don't know what you're arguing for or against. Half the NFL plays that way with a couple of teams around 100 attempts then the rest graduated between 120 and 213. There are good QBs at the bottom of that list and good ones at the top. RGIII is number two on the list with 30% and that didn't work out too well.

I don't know what the number of play actions passes are the last 5 games but it appears to be increasing; but that is anecdotal.

I am definitely for incorporating it more so as a way to expand the passing offense and to not become so predictable. It just seems to fit more modern passing games as a way to keep the D on it's heels while also opening up the seems with quicker TEs such as Graham, etc. Brees is great at the quick PA and that is what I am speaking of more accurately. Not the long, built up PAs that were the norm, the quick snap, fake, and pitch to the open man for moderate or even short passes. It would help with the line though they have been pretty good in protection this season and allow for quicker routes across the middle to become more common for receivers other than Beas and Witten.

Appreciate the effort on your post.

 

[jobberone]

I am definitely for incorporating it more so as a way to expand the passing offense and to not become so predictable. It just seems to fit more modern passing games as a way to keep the D on it's heels while also opening up the seems with quicker TEs such as Graham, etc. Brees is great at the quick PA and that is what I am speaking of more accurately. Not the long, built up PAs that were the norm, the quick snap, fake, and pitch to the open man for moderate or even short passes. It would help with the line though they have been pretty good in protection this season and allow for quicker routes across the middle to become more common for receivers other than Beas and Witten.

Appreciate the effort on your post.

Nice civil post. I don't disagree with any of this. I'm not sure we should use it 30% of the time but I'd like to see more if for no other reason than we should be running the ball better to do that and protecting better as well. The problem with this team is not the 3rd rated offense but the 25th rated defense and horrible pass defense. But this team needs to score as many points as it can under those circumstances.