Let's be critically honest about this offense

[northerncowboynation]

Yep and all those little plays the underneath dump off's to Zeke the comback routes by Gallup and Cooper, Swaim catching and rumbling for a first, the OL blocking both for the run and the pass - everything works as one cohesive unit. They win and lose as a team. But this is how it goes today - we win it's only because of Zeke, we lose, it's only because of Dak.

Exactly! For years It's been "we cant's win because our defense sucks" particularly the last few years of Romo's career. The losses were all on the defense. Now our defense looks solid, not great but solid enough and we lose because of our QB. IMO some fans will never be satisfied.

 

[northerncowboynation]

23 teams with records of one game over .500 or worse. Welcome to the PLF, Parity Football league. 5 teams out of 32 playing consistent football.

 

[Nexx]

Luckily, you don’t need to be a tier 1 team on November 19th to have a chance. Look at the giants twice, the ravens, etc. just in the last decade.

They’re trending in a positive direction. Let’s wait and see what happens.

Both the Giants and Ravens had great Defenses so check there. Both had strong running games so check there. Both had QBs who if they needed, could carry the team in big game situations, a big X there.

 

[LatinMind]

The offense could only score 22 against one of the worst defenses in the NFL giving up 27 ppg.

Yes, the defense has improved and seems to be the strength of the team but the name of the game is points. And it is not a shut down defense.

Elliott is playing great and the OL seems to be better; however, our run game is like bringing a knife to a gunfight. Scoring in the low 20's isn't going to get it done.

The reality is that the Cowboys have beaten two 2nd tier non playoff teams with losing records that are pretty evenly matched with them as the scores would indicate. And it is great to put two wins back to back and away at that; however, this team is not a tier 1 team.

Probably not, but you have to start somewhere. Dallas was caught in a weird transition in player turnover. With Romo's retirement, Wittens, Dez basically becoming a average player all in a short period of time. Dallas is literally the youngest team in the nfl, so there will be growing pain. iN 2016 the team suprised people but the OL was a rock in 2017 injuries and susp never let the team get any chemistry. Some will call that a excuse but its really not. Then this offseason the FO really screwed the team over with how they handled it. But trading for Cooper and inserting Filo was a very good starting point in righting a wrong. Then theres this offseason where this team will have around 70mil in cap room.

We read crying posts about Dallas not signing FAs, they tried the last 2 season. They wanted JPP but NY didnt let him reach FA, and tried with Watkins this past offseason good thing they failed to signed him.

People forget the majority of this team is 4yrs NFL exp or less. Dallas has only 16 players with over 4 yrs exp.

 

[IheartRomo]

Dak isn't on the same level as Eli, and Garrett isn't in the same stratosphere as Coughlin.

Even in his prime I never viewed Eli as a great QB. With the rule changes favoring offense, not sure you need a Rodgers or Brady to win anymore.

Can’t argue with Garrett vs Coughlin though. It’s hard to imagine Garrett not getting overwhelmingly out coached in the playoffs as he always has. We’d have to overcome his coaching in 4 straight games which is difficult to envision for sure.

 

[Vintage]

LOLLLL wow.

The original post said that our offense is broken because we only scored 22 vs the Falcons.

I pointed out how silly it was to reach such a conclusion based on a game in which we essentially screwed ourselves out of 5 points that the offense should’ve had.

Beasley dropping a surefire TD (which had never happened and will never happen again in his career) doesn’t mean the offense sucks.

Maher missing a PAT has nothing to do with the offense.

Are you really this remedial?

Your rebuttal was stupid. If you’re going to re-tally the Falcons D’s performance, why wouldn’t you re-tally EVERYTHING to get the true read?

We should only re-tally to include plays the Falcons D got lucky on? Why? Why not ALSO include the ones they got screwed on?

Because it destroys your weak little argument, that’s why. LOL!

You wanted to add non scored points to actual scored points.
I said why aren’t you doing that for everyone they played against.
You then come back with a point I actually agree with, which is subtracting out points their defense isn’t responsible for.... but irrelevant because I was responding to your post about adding the aforementioned imaginary points.

Then, your accusing me of coming up with an inaccurate way of doing this. Well, duh. This was your show to begin with. I was merely trying to get consistency from it. Never claimed it was the perfect way. Rather, a way to keep it an apples to apples comparison; if we are to add imaginary points, then do across the board. Not just for “Go Cowboys!”

 

[Praxit]

...so you guys have accounted for all variables? Let me know when the final analysis comes out. .....

 

[Nav22]

You wanted to add non scored points to actual scored points.
I said why aren’t you doing that for everyone they played against.
You then come back with a point I actually agree with, which is subtracting out points their defense isn’t responsible for.... but irrelevant because I was responding to your post about adding the aforementioned imaginary points.

Then, your accusing me of coming up with an inaccurate way of doing this. Well, duh. This was your show to begin with. I was merely trying to get consistency from it. Never claimed it was the perfect way. Rather, a way to keep it an apples to apples comparison; if we are to add imaginary points, then do across the board. Not just for “Go Cowboys!”

You’d still have to account for everything.

Let’s say the Cowboys were aided by 4 takeaways and scored 30+ on the Falcons because all 4 of the takeaways gave the Cowboys offense the ball inside the Falcons 10.

Could I say “the offense is fixed because we scored 30+”? Of course not.

Just like you can’t say “the offense is broken” because of the screwy plays that cost us 5 points yesterday.

Context matters. The offense played well yesterday, especially in the 2nd half. Zero turnovers and should’ve scored 27.

 

[Runwildboys]

Even in his prime I never viewed Eli as a great QB. With the rule changes favoring offense, not sure you need a Rodgers or Brady to win anymore.

Can’t argue with Garrett vs Coughlin though. It’s hard to imagine Garrett not getting overwhelmingly out coached in the playoffs as he always has. We’d have to overcome his coaching in 4 straight games which is difficult to envision for sure.

I've never considered Eli a great QB either, but he's capable....or was.

 

[CouchCoach]

I've never considered Eli a great QB either, but he's capable....or was.

He was just like Aikman, executed the plays but he had a better deep ball than Aikman. Both had good run games and defenses.

The Giants realized he was a QB that could take them places, if they surrounded him just as the Cowboys did Aikman. They didn't stop at the QB and think they'd accomplished anything. Manning has two rings because of the teams, Brees and Rodgers have one because of the lack of the teams around them. And they still haven't learned in GB and put more on the QB than any team in the league.

 

[CouchCoach]

Bease dropped a TD, something he'll do 1 out 100 times. DAL missed an XP and that's 27.
If you are controlling the clock, snapping it on 10 every play and generally playing 1984 Bears ball you aren't going to run it up very often.

But if you lead essentially the entire game and get the W that's all that matters.

We kinda all hate this style and execution based old school ball but it is what it is and if it wins, it wins.
I'll gladly toast when a new style in brought in the door.
But I'll celebrate victories when they come regardless because I can only control my attitude toward the games.

Why do posters want to keep adding points off missed plays by Beasley and the PK? How does the outcome change if you apply that to ATL with a drop close to the goal line with Julio and Sanu and what happens if Ridley doesn't tip that ball into LVE's hands?

The offense scored 22 points. Yes, they had missed opportunities but so did the Falcons and Eagles the previous week.

 

[waving monkey]

common sense but the homers like @Nav22 @Tommy @silvrNblue @waving monkey don't want to hear it after a win. lollipops and rainbows around here today..

we patched up the oline, rb, and #1 receiver issues yet the qb is still holding us back from reaching our potential. we should have put 35+ on that scrub mash unit yesterday. especially after what they did to us last season.

You are right Zordon there are a type of fan that at least on game day want to celebrate a victory. It' our/my entertainment not a job.
This is still a game dont over think it.

 

[Runwildboys]

Why do posters want to keep adding points off missed plays by Beasley and the PK? How does the outcome change if you apply that to ATL with a drop close to the goal line with Julio and Sanu and what happens if Ridley doesn't tip that ball into LVE's hands?

The offense scored 22 points. Yes, they had missed opportunities but so did the Falcons and Eagles the previous week.

Exactly. If only the Redcoats had hidden in the woods...

 

[beware_d-ware]

The reality is that the Cowboys have beaten two 2nd tier non playoff teams with losing records that are pretty evenly matched with them as the scores would indicate. And it is great to put two wins back to back and away at that; however, this team is not a tier 1 team.

Who are the tier 1 teams? In the NFC, I think the Rams and the Saints are a cut or 4 above the rest and would handily beat any other NFC team 9 out of 10 games. In the AFC, you can never count the Patriots out and the Chiefs are burning defenses to the ground. I think their own lack of a defense will come back to bite them, but they can flat-out outgun most teams they play. But I think that's your NFL "Final Four" pretty easily: Rams, Saints, Patriots, Chiefs.

After that, I think that's your big step down. Maybe the Bears and Chargers are like a "tier 1.5", but I think they would still get roasted by Brees and Mahomes. The Cowboys are in that second tier IMO, with teams who can make the playoffs but aren't real contenders. We did lose to teams like the Panthers, Texans and Seahawks who are on that level, but we were competitive with all 3, and with Zeke clicking and Vander Neck's emergence, things might be different if we played them again. I would say that's a fair level of competition for us, where a game with those teams could go either way.

But we're not a Super Bowl team at all - and how many are? Everyone thought the Eagles were lined up for another title run this year, and now they're sub-.500. In a league of 32 teams, it's hard enough to get on top of the pile, and the parity structure of the league makes it even more difficult to keep contending year after year. If you don't have a top 3 coach or a top 3 QB, you're not going to consistently contend anyway, and going on a run a couple of times a decade is about the best you can hope for. We had our runs in 2014 and 2016, now we're just hanging around the middle 2/3rds of the NFL, winning some and losing some and basically waiting for "our year" to get hot again.

 

[JBond]

I don't know I have watched SB winners come in with top defenses and win it all. Saying we have to score this many points in post season? I don't think that is true. Meantime you got to get to post season 1st and this team has dug themselves a hole so right now Skins game is the only one I care about.

Skins will be playing with a backup QB. We should handle them. I was impressed by the defense against Atlanta. I expected to get smoked. My point is the top teams are scoring point at an all-time pace. I believe Dallas can win the division because the rest of the teams are really bad with the exception of the Eagles who have a SB hangover. They could get hot. The Saints and the Rams are the teams I measure us against. How do we compete with the 35 point a game teams in the playoffs on the road? A playoff birth will be enough to secure the red headed genius for another year and may lock us into a $100 million dollar QB I like, but is not a $100 million QB.

 

[ConstantReboot]

We’re a run first team because we can’t throw.

We were a run first team in 2014 too and Romo still lit it up because he could throw.

We’re playing football like we’re the modern day 90s Cornhuskers right now.

No were not Catch17. We turned into a run-oriented by design. Not because Dak can't throw the ball. Why do you think we drafted Fredbeard, Martin and T. Smith?

It was our DNA first and foremost to run the ball since 2014. Murray was running the ball and Romo benefited from it. The run helped set up the pass. Which allowed Romo to have an MVP type of season.

Romo didn't get MVP because we ran the ball so much that some credited Murray for Romo's success.

So your point that we run first because we can't throw is not true. We run first because our team is designed the run the ball first.

 

[JBond]

In the evolution of today’s NFL, you can be a mediocre team offenseively and win some games but you will be like this Cowboys team- 5-5, having beaten a few mediocre to below mediocre teams.

Teams that are seriously competitive for playoff success all have top tier offenses. To take it a step further- those teams are coached by HCs who are adaptive, aggressive and creative. Three words you would never remotely associate with Jason Garrett.

(In Denny Green voice) “Garrett and this offense are who we thought they were!”

The flexible coaches that coach to players strengths are a hot commodity. I remember beating Andy Reid to death over his pass happy philosophy. Seems the NFL rules are made for that guy and his proteges.

 

[JBond]

No were not Catch17. We turned into a run-oriented by design. Not because Dak can't throw the ball. Why do you think we drafted Fredbeard, Martin and T. Smith?

It was our DNA first and foremost to run the ball since 2014. Murray was running the ball and Romo benefited from it. The run helped set up the pass. Which allowed Romo to have an MVP type of season.

Romo didn't get MVP because we ran the ball so much that some credited Murray for Romo's success.

So your point that we run first because we can't throw is not true. We run first because our team is designed the run the ball first.

Run first is not going to win playoff games. Look at playoff stats the last three years.

 

[ConstantReboot]

We are a run first team because we HAVE to not because we WANT to.
Yes we need new coaches that I can agree with. Dak.... No so sure. He's a reason why we are a run first team instead of balanced team.

We run the ball because WE ARE DESIGNED TO. Dak was not around in 2014. Yet we ran the ball to set up the pass back then. So we run the ball because our offense is built that way. You think we drafted Fredbeard, Martin and T. Smith for pass protection? No they were drafted to block so we can run the ball. Even before Dak was around.

So this thing about us running the ball because we can't pass is a silly argument. We run the ball because that's what our offense does first. The run comes first before the pass.

 

[ConstantReboot]

Run first is not going to win playoff games. Look at playoff stats the last three years.

Go tell that to Jerry and Garrett. The design of the offense is built that way.