More aggressive offense next year

[MichaelWinicki]

Fair enough. So then what is it you suggest? (no flame, honest question).

Stash nailed it... become less predictable on first down.

Take advantage of defenses stacking the box and using run blitzes.

More pass attempts on first down would help keep the 1st down defense more honest which would allow the running game more room on 1st down.

 

[percyhoward]

Running the ball effectively has a wider impact than just offensive rankings. It was critical to keeping a mediocre defense off the field and fresh which, in turn, made them even more effective than the previous year's group.

The 2014 Cowboys' defense faced only 10 fewer possessions, but allowed almost 100 fewer points. That defense was more effective than the previous year's group.

In 2013, teams like the Dolphins, Jets, and Titans all had better defenses than the Cowboys. In 2014, all of those teams' offenses made huge improvements in TOP, and none of those teams' "rested" defenses approached the kind of season that the Dallas defense had. Teams like the Colts and Ravens saw their TOP go way down, but their "tired" defenses were just as good as the year before, and they had more successful seasons because their offenses were more productive, despite being on the field less. They just scored more quickly and more often.

There's more than one formula for success -- or failure.

All rankings are per-drive. 2014 rank (2013 rank)
PA = points allowed

Dallas
Offense TOP 7th (21st) +14
Defense PA 16th (30th) +14

Tennessee
Offense TOP 10th (28th) +18
Defense PA 28th (18th) -10

Miami
Offense TOP 11th (25th) +14
Defense PA 23rd (12th) -11

Indianapolis
Offense TOP 25th (13th) -12
Defense PA 11th (13th) +2

Jets
Offense TOP 15th (24th) +9
Defense PA 24th (17th) -7

Baltimore
Offense TOP 27th (18th) -9
Defense PA 10th (7th) -3

 

[skinsscalper]

Stash nailed it... become less predictable on first down.

Take advantage of defenses stacking the box and using run blitzes.

More pass attempts on first down would help keep the 1st down defense more honest which would allow the running game more room on 1st down.

Fair enough.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Which is precisely what this team needs to put together and what is precisely more difficult by spending 10+ million on skill position players on offense...

We are paying one skill position other than QB on offense. I would keep Dez over Murray too wouldn't you?

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Stash nailed it... become less predictable on first down.

Take advantage of defenses stacking the box and using run blitzes.

More pass attempts on first down would help keep the 1st down defense more honest which would allow the running game more room on 1st down.

Coaches need to figure out why their play action looks weren't holding LB and S better. Teams absolutely sold out when Martin pulled to the weakside. As an aside the thought of DMC on THOSE cutback lanes is intriguing. OTOH, when we would run playaction it fooled no one from the very beginning. I'm thinking of Eric Reid running under that crossing route in game 1.

I don't think the offensive coaching was seamless. Our pass protection wasn't very good either for as much as we love to laud the OL. Romo got beat up pretty bad.

 

[Bowdown27]

Truthfully I think we still run the same offense just w subs more. Mcfadden draft pick etc. switching in and out. But my concern is more w special teams. Harris rarely put us in a good position to have a short field. I hope we upgrade that asap. That can change our offense quickly

 

[MichaelWinicki]

Coaches need to figure out why their play action looks weren't holding LB and S better. Teams absolutely sold out when Martin pulled to the weakside. As an aside the thought of DMC on THOSE cutback lanes is intriguing. OTOH, when we would run playaction it fooled no one from the very beginning. I'm thinking of Eric Reid running under that crossing route in game 1.

I don't think the offensive coaching was seamless. Our pass protection wasn't very good either for as much as we love to laud the OL. Romo got beat up pretty bad.

Good point about the pass protection.

I'm wondering how much of it had to do with the youth of the interior of the OL.

 

[gimmesix]

Personally I think the offense ran the ball too often.

I think it cost the offense being as potent as it could have been.

I do think there were times when we were just stubborn about it to prove we're going to be a running team, when we could have taken advantage of teams daring us to pass on first down. I'd like to see more balance in those early downs between run and pass.

 

[gimmesix]

It was aggressive when we had one on one matchup's, like 4th and 1 and throwing bombs in the playoffs. Stop it. Running the ball like we did, as many times as we did got us there.

And I agree with this too. I think there were times when we got too cute instead of simply pounding the ball in short-yardage situations. (Frankly, the last throw to Dez that ended our season should have been a run because taking a shot there was a risk and left too much time on the clock anyway.) There is a balance and Dallas achieved it for the most part, but that doesn't mean there isn't room for improvement.

 

[gimmesix]

Coaches need to figure out why their play action looks weren't holding LB and S better. Teams absolutely sold out when Martin pulled to the weakside. As an aside the thought of DMC on THOSE cutback lanes is intriguing. OTOH, when we would run playaction it fooled no one from the very beginning. I'm thinking of Eric Reid running under that crossing route in game 1.

I don't think the offensive coaching was seamless. Our pass protection wasn't very good either for as much as we love to laud the OL. Romo got beat up pretty bad.

It appeared to me that the main issue with our play-action on first down is that we primarily did the same thing: Only one receiver goes out and he goes deep. To me, that is not what play-action does for you. The safeties and linebackers are the ones who get eaten up by play-action and we didn't go after them. Witten or Escobar down the seam would have made more sense than Dez going deep on the outside against a corner whose job was to make sure he didn't get beat deep.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

It appeared to me that the main issue with our play-action on first down is that we primarily did the same thing: Only one receiver goes out and he goes deep. To me, that is not what play-action does for you. The safeties and linebackers are the ones who get eaten up by play-action and we didn't go after them. Witten or Escobar down the seam would have made more sense than Dez going deep on the outside against a corner whose job was to make sure he didn't get beat deep.

I think Dez became too much of the passing game.

 

[percyhoward]

In a year when Dallas led the NFL in RB rushing yards, Romo had a 102.0 rating with play action, and a 115.6 rating without it.

This comes after Romo's rating was 18 and 21 points higher with play action than without it the previous two seasons.

Effect of Play Action on Passer Rating, 2014
Brees +31.0
Luck +27.6
Ryan +11.9
Brady +10.2
Rodgers +9.3
Fitzpatrick +5.6
Wilson +5.1
Rthlisbrgr +3.9
Romo -13.6
PManning -19.3

3 of Romo's 5 INT on play-action passes came in week 1.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

Again, you're confusing cause and effect. Merely throwing fewer passes is not what made us a better team. First, we became a better team -- mainly because of OL improvements made through the draft -- and this resulted in more leads and fewer pass attempts. Teams don't throw as often when they're not behind as often. They also don't throw as often when they've got an OL that can impose its will on defenses. Try using the "less Romo" formula with the 2012 OL and see what happens.

Also, I'd like to see your evidence that Romo's performance level drops after a high number of attempts in a game. The only splits I could find were for 31+ attempts, and there's no drop in his performance compared to the top quarterbacks in the league. The numbers below are for each QB's last 5 full seasons. The split includes the 31st pass attempt of the game, and all subsequent attempts. Maybe you have data that shows that Romo blows the roof off with attempts 31-35?

after 30 attempts in a game
Rodgers 224 of 337 2989 30 7 115.4
PManning 490 of 758 5587 48 21 96.2
Brady 400 of 648 4605 36 13 93.3
Brees 573 of 904 6517 51 26 91.8
Romo 278 of 445 3251 24 13 90.4

on attempts 1-30 of a game
Rodgers 1337 of 2004 16796 138 29 109.5
Romo 1486 of 2246 17853 126 44 100.9
PManning 1598 of 2331 18477 149 48 105.0
Brees 1666 of 2389 18862 143 58 102.9
Brady 1479 of 2302 17807 132 31 101.4

difference in passer rating after 30 attempts
Rodgers +5.9
Brady -8.1
PManning -8.8
Romo -10.5
Brees -11.1

Rodgers is known for his risk aversion, and taking a lot of sacks late in close games. His record in 4th-qtr comebacks and game-winning drives reflects this more than his passer rating would. But the norm for the rest of these QB after 30 attempts is that their rating drops 8-11 points. If you're still throwing after 30 attempts, it's more likely that the outcome of the game is still in doubt, and also more likely that your team is behind. By no means is it a given, but certainly more likely.

It's also important to note that, while the effect on Romo's rating is in line with that of Brees, Manning, and Brady after 30 attempts, the situations his team is in during these attempts are quite different over the last five seasons. After 30 attempts, Romo has been much more likely to be trailing in the game, and much less likely to be playing with a comfortable lead than any of these other players. So one would expect Romo's rating to drop noticeably compared to the league's elite QB after 30 attempts, but it doesn't.

games entering 4th qtr leading by more than one score
Brady 38
PManning 35
Rodgers 35
Brees 28
Romo 18

games entering 4th qtr trailing
Romo 46
Brees 34
Brady 28
PManning 28
Rodgers 27

So you're showing a dropoff of -10.5 in QB rating *after* 30 attempts and you're claiming that my assertion that Romo becomes less effective as he starts to throw more is incorrect?

Mmmmmkay.

So thank you for proving my point.

We ran the ball more last year and stuck with the run even when it wasn't working. As Garrett said after the win against the Eagles, you have to stick with the run even when it's ugly early on. Romo is best at throwing intermediate and deeper pass patterns, but it's going to be more difficult to pull off if you're throwing every down and the opposing team knows you're going to throw. And if you start throwing more, odds are you are throwing more dink and dunk in order to move the ball.
Also, what are Romo's stats when the team is tied or has the lead by less than a TD in the 4th quarter? It's a blatant attempt by you to cherry pick your analytics.

The team got better in large part because we ran the ball far more often and we balanced out the offense. We had Murray who was averaging 5.1 yards per carry for his *career* before this season and yet we refused to give him the ball. This year we did...and we got better because we started using a productive player instead of ignoring using a productive player.

And because Murray is a tailback, using this productive player allowed the team to balance out the offense and control the clock and keep the defense off the field. The defense 'got better' because they weren't on the field all of the time. The defense was also better because they were healthy and the metrics show that teams that tend to have less injuries on defense tend to run the ball a higher percentage of the time in the 1st and 3rd quarters.

It would be a horrendous decision to have Romo throw the ball more often with the logic that because he was so efficient last season that more Romo would equate to more offense and more victories. Instead, it would be worse for the team and worse for Romo. In all likelihood last season was the absolute best that Romo is likely to ever perform. That's not meant to be a negative at all. I think he should have been league MVP. But more Romo is less efficient Romo and makes for a lesser defense.

It's like the KC game in 2013 where we threw the ball 51 times and ran it 9 times in a game that we were neck-and-neck with the Chiefs. Had we balanced the offense, I'd like to think we win that game because the offense would have a better chance of performing better in the 3rd and 4th quarter. But since the Chiefs *knew* we were not running the ball, the defense could key in on the pass and it took away our play-action throws which Romo is excellent at. It has nothing to do with trailing in the game when a big reason why the team is trailing is because they've thrown the ball too much to begin with.





YR

 

[50cent]

The 2014 Cowboys' defense faced only 10 fewer possessions, but allowed almost 100 fewer points. That defense was more effective than the previous year's group.

In 2013, teams like the Dolphins, Jets, and Titans all had better defenses than the Cowboys. In 2014, all of those teams' offenses made huge improvements in TOP, and none of those teams' "rested" defenses approached the kind of season that the Dallas defense had. Teams like the Colts and Ravens saw their TOP go way down, but their "tired" defenses were just as good as the year before, and they had more successful seasons because their offenses were more productive, despite being on the field less. They just scored more quickly and more often.

There's more than one formula for success -- or failure.

All rankings are per-drive. 2014 rank (2013 rank)
PA = points allowed

Dallas
Offense TOP 7th (21st) +14
Defense PA 16th (30th) +14

Tennessee
Offense TOP 10th (28th) +18
Defense PA 28th (18th) -10

Miami
Offense TOP 11th (25th) +14
Defense PA 23rd (12th) -11

Indianapolis
Offense TOP 25th (13th) -12
Defense PA 11th (13th) +2

Jets
Offense TOP 15th (24th) +9
Defense PA 24th (17th) -7

Baltimore
Offense TOP 27th (18th) -9
Defense PA 10th (7th) -3

What one man eats doesn't make another poop. Comparing us to other teams is useless. A nice barometer, but useless in overall success. There are so many factors that go into decreased TOP. As well as our increase in TOP. I wonder what our defense had looked like in 2013 if Murray hadn't avg only 15 carries/gm. I for one was on that give Murray the ball more in 2013 and think it would have helped our top and defense, which would change our numbers. A different OC cant be factored into your equation either. So what If the pass ratio wasn't 70-30. That might factor into our 2014 results. At the end of the day our personnel, dictates we run more regardless of what other teams do. 2015, may be different with additions and subtractions, but again Romo needs the run more than those other teams mentioned.

 

[CATCH17]

It's the same crap every year with this offense.

It was masked heavily with our ability to run the ball but we just need to to do some things that get the ball in Dez's hands quick.

 

[reddyuta]

the problem is the Defense ,without our run game churning out 1st downs the Defense would be brutally exposed as we will see more punts and change of possessions.

 

[percyhoward]

So you're showing a drop off of -10.5 in QB rating *after* 30 attempts and you're claiming that my assertion that Romo becomes less effective as he starts to throw more is incorrect?

You haven't even made an assertion about Romo. Since Manning, Brees, and Brady are equally less effective after 30 attempts, all you end up with is a statement about quarterbacks with a lot of attempts.

Nothing wrong with "less is more," but that's just smart football with this OL, and it's got nothing to do with Romo.

 

[sureletsrace]

Patriots have gronk on a long term contract, and dollar for dollar he makes a lot more sense than dez

And I'd imagine that getting Dez on a long term contract is of utmost importance to the Cowboys. Why does he "dollar for dollar make more sense"?

 

[Galian Beast]

The 2014 Cowboys' defense faced only 10 fewer possessions, but allowed almost 100 fewer points. That defense was more effective than the previous year's group.

In 2013, teams like the Dolphins, Jets, and Titans all had better defenses than the Cowboys. In 2014, all of those teams' offenses made huge improvements in TOP, and none of those teams' "rested" defenses approached the kind of season that the Dallas defense had. Teams like the Colts and Ravens saw their TOP go way down, but their "tired" defenses were just as good as the year before, and they had more successful seasons because their offenses were more productive, despite being on the field less. They just scored more quickly and more often.

There's more than one formula for success -- or failure.

All rankings are per-drive. 2014 rank (2013 rank)
PA = points allowed

Dallas
Offense TOP 7th (21st) +14
Defense PA 16th (30th) +14

Tennessee
Offense TOP 10th (28th) +18
Defense PA 28th (18th) -10

Miami
Offense TOP 11th (25th) +14
Defense PA 23rd (12th) -11

Indianapolis
Offense TOP 25th (13th) -12
Defense PA 11th (13th) +2

Jets
Offense TOP 15th (24th) +9
Defense PA 24th (17th) -7

Baltimore
Offense TOP 27th (18th) -9
Defense PA 10th (7th) -3

These averages may be misleading. I'm sure if we looked at the games in which the defense was on the field longer, we would find that they were exposed more. There were games this year when the defense simply collapsed.

 

[Galian Beast]

We are paying one skill position other than QB on offense. I would keep Dez over Murray too wouldn't you?

I don't see it that way. I don't want to pay any of these skill players more than they are worth. Trading them is often the best way to get good value from them.

In this case we should have signed Dez long term, overpaid him slightly, and franchised and traded Murray.