CFZ Much better game by run defense

[superonyx]

Not really. Like the Vikings stupidly did, they got away from the run.

when the Giants put in that backup RB, he kept gashing us.

the reason the packers came back so easily was because they stuck with the run. If any other team does that, the defense is toast. That and if they target Anthony Brown.

The vikings were getting smoked. We scored every time we had the ball. I'm not sure I can call them stupid for getting away from the run when we were up 3 scores most of the game.

 

[gimmesix]

....it was obvious, DQ was scheming them wrong. Rushing QB was focus, to now on ball carrier.

I think he made a poor choice against Green Bay, trying to go bigger and keeping Parsons at linebacker. He went away from the things that had made us successful, which was mainly attacking and creating disruption. That may make us a little susceptible to the runs at times, but the disruption makes up for it.

 

[Streifenkarl]

Yah, I will take early leads over scoring slowly. We can drag it out after we get a lead for my taste. Let the boys tee off with a big lead.

Being too aggressive can be an issue as well though. As MM helped keep the Giants in the game with his dumb in game management early.

Gotta balance it out of course. But in the end I'm more for the slow but controlled approach.

 

[superonyx]

The Giants had 4 oline starters out. They were playing the backups. 3.6 ypc with a backup oline ain't bad.

Oh thats right. We can't count the success stopping the run because the Giants had some starters out.
I always forget cowboys fans can't be count success until we come here first.

3.6ypc sucks regardless of excuses. Especially when many of your runs come from the QB which always have high ypc numbers.

 

[gimmesix]

Not really. Like the Vikings stupidly did, they got away from the run.

when the Giants put in that backup RB, he kept gashing us.

the reason the packers came back so easily was because they stuck with the run. If any other team does that, the defense is toast. That and if they target Anthony Brown.

The Giants succeeded running the ball only temporarily when they switched it up by putting two backs in the game. We soon figured it out, stuffed that run and forced them back to the pass. Other than during that switch-up, we controlled their running attack.

We were much better against the run against the Giants than the Vikings. However, I do agree that neither stuck with the run and we'll have to wait and see how we do when some team does.

 

[gimmesix]

The Giants had 4 oline starters out. They were playing the backups. 3.6 ypc with a backup oline ain't bad.

Right. I acknowledged that. They still had Barkley, though, and we controlled him.

 

[CowboyRoy]

Gotta balance it out of course. But in the end I'm more for the slow but controlled approach.

So if Pollard is racing down the sidelines you want him to step out of bounds?

 

[Risen Star]

The Giants had 4 oline starters out. They were playing the backups. 3.6 ypc with a backup oline ain't bad.

Exactly.

This run defense sucks until further notice.

 

[Risen Star]

We will win the next 3

Colts 19
Cowboys 16

Cowboys 20
Texans 19

Cowboys 13
Jaguars 13

 

[Plankton]

They didn't get jail-sexed this week like they had against Chicago and Green Bay, but they weren't exactly facing a healthy offensive line on Thursday. It will be interesting to see how well they hold up against the Colts with Jonathan Taylor, the Texans with Dameon Pierce, the Eagles with Miles Sanders and Hurts and of course, the Titans with Derrick Henry. Those will be some serious tests for this defensive front on the ground.

 

[5Stars]

I know Dallas was getting some praise for its run defense against Minnesota, but as some of us have pointed out, it was more of a matter of the Vikings not running as much as they should have despite Cook averaging 6.6 yards per carry against us.

Against New York, the Giants also chose to pass more than I thought they would. They essentially wanted to do like Chicago (which I expected) and put pressure on the free defender to choose between getting after the QB or covering the target in the flat. (I thought Jones would run more in those situations, but I do think we did a better job of contain than we did against the Bears.) However, when they did try to run, they weren't successful overall.

Barkley averaged 3.6 per carry (after averaging 5.8 against us the first time), and really the only success they had was late in the game when they were playing catch-up and ran a couple of times with two backs on the field and using Barkley as a decoy.

Hope we can duplicate that effort against Indy. They've got a good back, but haven't had a consistent run game. We get them to abandon it, and they don't have a shot IMO.

Nice. I hope the Cowboys jump on them from the get go score wise so that will make them have to pass to catch up, and that won't happen.

Them Cowboys are gonna ride some them Colts right out the stayjum...

 

[Acceptablename]

Well you can

Dude , seriously. When did being a fan mean you can never criticize your team’s players? No team has a perfect roster. Actually , the cowboys lost their last two playoff games because they couldn’t stop the run.

I don’t think fans can’t fairly analyze and criticize their team but being full of it and obviously prejudice against the player is what most of the old fans find ridiculous. End it happens over and over every season and that’s tired and lame.

 

[LACowboysFan1]

The Giants had 4 oline starters out. They were playing the backups. 3.6 ypc with a backup oline ain't bad.

Also, without their two starting corners.

Nice to win, but the game was way too close early against a team with that many players out...

 

[Streifenkarl]

So if Pollard is racing down the sidelines you want him to step out of bounds?

No need to nitpick, you know exactly how it was meant.

 

[LACowboysFan1]

I'm still hoping that we make addressing DT a priority next offseason. We've got several rotational pieces, but I don't think we have a difference-maker at the spot. If we get a player who can regularly blow up the interior, it will take the defense to the next level.

When Dallas has won a SB, invariably they had a DT (or two) that could not only stuff the run but rush the passer. Lilly, White, Pugh, even Lett and Hennings.
Rams won the SB largely because Aaron Donald just refused to be blocked and took over the last few mintues of the game.

And those guys are rare, not saying it's easy to find one, but I agree, if he's available when Dallas picks this next draft, they need to get him....

 

[CowboyRoy]

No need to nitpick, you know exactly how it was meant.

Its definitely an exaggeration but it proves a point.

You like lots of 3rd downs? Not easy to go 4 for 4 on 3rd down every time you score. IM perfectly happy with scoring in 4 plays.

The defense isnt going to complain that you are putting up points.

 

[FVSTONE]

I know Dallas was getting some praise for its run defense against Minnesota, but as some of us have pointed out, it was more of a matter of the Vikings not running as much as they should have despite Cook averaging 6.6 yards per carry against us.

Against New York, the Giants also chose to pass more than I thought they would. They essentially wanted to do like Chicago (which I expected) and put pressure on the free defender to choose between getting after the QB or covering the target in the flat. (I thought Jones would run more in those situations, but I do think we did a better job of contain than we did against the Bears.) However, when they did try to run, they weren't successful overall.

Barkley averaged 3.6 per carry (after averaging 5.8 against us the first time), and really the only success they had was late in the game when they were playing catch-up and ran a couple of times with two backs on the field and using Barkley as a decoy.

Hope we can duplicate that effort against Indy. They've got a good back, but haven't had a consistent run game. We get them to abandon it, and they don't have a shot IMO.

BARKEY WHO???????

 

[gimmesix]

When Dallas has won a SB, invariably they had a DT (or two) that could not only stuff the run but rush the passer. Lilly, White, Pugh, even Lett and Hennings.
Rams won the SB largely because Aaron Donald just refused to be blocked and took over the last few mintues of the game.

And those guys are rare, not saying it's easy to find one, but I agree, if he's available when Dallas picks this next draft, they need to get him....

It's definitely what made us reach on Trysten Hill, so I'm absolutely not asking for a repeat of that. But if you want to get one of those guys, you either have to go get them or get really lucky.

 

[gimmesix]

Its definitely an exaggeration but it proves a point.

You like lots of 3rd downs? Not easy to go 4 for 4 on 3rd down every time you score. IM perfectly happy with scoring in 4 plays.

The defense isnt going to complain that you are putting up points.

This is why Pollard needs to get the most carries, the breakaway threat. I know some took issue with Pollard getting more carries than Elliott against the Giants since Elliott was having the better game, but we've established that Pollard is a threat to score on any play from anywhere on the field. We've got to give him those chances. Even without those, though, it's nice to have that ability to methodically move the ball and help keep the defense off the field.

 

[CowboyRoy]

This is why Pollard needs to get the most carries, the breakaway threat. I know some took issue with Pollard getting more carries than Elliott against the Giants since Elliott was having the better game, but we've established that Pollard is a threat to score on any play from anywhere on the field. We've got to give him those chances. Even without those, though, it's nice to have that ability to methodically move the ball and help keep the defense off the field.

I have no problem with the hot hand either. But Pollard needs to get his 15 carries and 5 catches. Zeke can have the rest. If thats 20 carries so be it. IN that case we are probably blowing them out and he's getting mop up duty.