Old Timer's View

[Chuck 54]

Everyone seems to have their "morning after" threads, but unlike the "morning after pill," the emotional pain of Monday night's unfortunate encounter in our beloved Cowboys home stadium against our most hated rival, the Commanders, nothing we can say or post or look forward to can erase the reality of that ugly loss. Nevertheless, ...

The Obvious

• Linehan had his first real hiccup as playcaller. Despite fumbles by two running backs, our run game was as good or better than it's been all year. As a team, our three running backs averaged 6.6 yards per carry. Mysteriously, Linehan never strayed from his game plan to run successfully on first down and then play-action on 2nd down. Even early in the game, Murray was chewing up 4,5,6 yards with a few 10 yard runs, but Linehan must have seen something in the game film that convinced him play-action was the key to success. How else can one explain continually dropping back to pass when Romo wasn't seeing the blitz, wasn't getting the ball out, and even when given time, wasn't finding open receivers? How else can one explain Murray's first handoff from Weeden going for 51 yards for first and goal at the 6, his next handoff gaining 2 yards, but then deciding to pass on 2nd and 3rd down to come away with a disappointing FG rather than powering it into the end zone when we were clearly moving their DL. How else can one explain a run for 8 yards on first down in overtime and then dropping back to pass the next 3 downs when Romo was clearly not in command against the defensive pressure? No, this was clearly a case when film study and bright minds playing X's and O's all week and during the game overshadowed a common sense approach that could be called by anyone outside of the brain trust watching the game.
• The defense under-performed, finally. The LBs, in my opinion had a very poor game, though Durrant had a good first half and a series or two in the 2nd half. Most of the time, they were taking poor angles and not making plays when they saw what was happening in front of them. McClain ended up with good stats, but he was not as aggressive as needed, and standing in the middle watching McCoy take off on the QB draw, he froze and never attacked, just stood a yard in the end zone and waited for the TE block that came from the side when he could have stepped forward and made a play. Carr was again lost in coverage at times. Orlando Scandrick deserves every dollar he is paid and part of what all the other DB's earn. What struck me is that we didn't play our usual game of clogging all running lanes and keeping the QB in the pocket, a scheme that worked against some very mobile QBs in previous games. Instead, it seemed we were so determined to get sacks and hits that we left our lanes and allowed some untimely running gains and the QB to hurt us with his legs. 3 sacks don't look as good on paper in a loss where the defense was undisciplined, does it?
• This game was not lost on two fumbles or the gambling, max blitzes by the Commanders or by a defense that at times tackled poorly and made mistakes, or by Dez dropping a TD pass. While all of that is true, this game was lost because our offensive coaches out-coached themselves and refused to stray from the plan, handing Murray the ball only 19 times in a game that was close from kickoff to final whistle.

The Not-So-Obvious

• The blitzing of the Skins is not why Romo was hit or why we lost. If we'd continued to run the ball with draws and pitch-outs, those max blitzes would have been backed off. No one wants all those guys standing up in the tackle box when your OL fires off on a running play. That's how you give up huge plays when a blitzer is pushed to the side and the RB breaks open. Romo is not a QB to stand there in the face of a hit to deliver the last second throw to the hot receiver and slow down the blitzing...that's no comment on him courage, he's tough as nails, but that has never been who he is, and with his back, it never will be. He sees a guy unblocked, he's going to try to scramble or collapse to the ground. He did not react to the blitzes well. The OL couldn't have blocked any better....there were no "olay's"...everyone was on a man. They were bringing more guys than we had blockers. In my opinion, that is not the time to go max protection, which is the mistake Romo made. Pulling in your TE's and RB's and having only 2 options for a pass is not ideal. You need that TE or RB burning the blitz and giving you a quick short outlet to get the ball out of your hands. The more guys he pulled in when he saw blitz, the more he played into their hands because they could just bring another guy and eventually Tony has only his wideouts, who are split quite wide out!
• We tried to pressure and sack Colt McCoy in so many ways that we gave up the running yards in the 2nd half that we were stifling in the first half. Colt McCoy? Do you really care whether or not you sack him? If we'd stayed the course and continued to focus on shutting down the run game since their OL is not a strength, they would have needed to go to McCoy more and more, which is what we wanted. Sometimes we have been at our best this year only rushing 3-4 guys, keeping the QB in the pocket, and putting everyone else in coverage with safeties refusing to give up the big play.
• Ultimately, in a very close game that was there for the taking, we spent the second half allowing the Skins to run the ball by getting out of position, which then made their short passing attack more effective. At the same time, we spent the entire game, especially the 2nd half, running the ball less than we could have and should have and dropping back to pass more often than ever, playing right into the hands of the only thing the Skins defense is actually very good at, blitzing. We never really ran the ball enough to make them respect the play-action pass, we just assumed they'd see our film and go for it. I'm sure they loved seeing us pass more than we ran.

And Now?

• Dallas is still 6-2 at the halfway mark; it's not 7-1, but if you can't go 4-4 or better in the 2nd half, you're not a playoff team anyway. For this week, we're still in first place, and we got a serious wake up call and lesson.
• Another starting LB lost for the season---no one's crying for us because we've been pretty lucky in season so far----NEXT!
• Cross your fingers that Leary's groin injury isn't serious...otherwise, the OL gets weaker and the depth at two positions is gone.
• I want to see Free back with Parnell back at short yardage TE....that's unstoppable on short yardage.
• Tony Romo is a franchise QB and does a lot of special things, but his whole career and last night proves once again that while he can win in crunch time, he's not a guy who can take a team on his back and carry it----get back to running the freakin' ball and the team identity!
• Stop talking about trades! We have a much better team than we ever imagined and a better record than any sane person expected, and we have a running game that can be depended on. However, the playoffs are our goal this year---we all know our defense is not championship caliber. We need our money in FA and we need our draft picks for next year. No way we should trade for a veteran just to fill a gap at WLB or any other spot. You maybe do that if you're a championship team on a run, and if you think we're a SB team this year just because we won 6 games in a row, you just might be delusional.

I'm so glad we have a short week and another game; this would be a painful entry into a bye week.
Go Cowboys!!!!

 

[Wood]

Nice write up. I agree with most of it. McClain has regressed two weeks in row so that is worth watching to see which direction he goes rest of season. Its also painfully obvious by now that when Dallas tries to make Romo the lead dog they are .500 team. When they make Murray the focus they are that 6-1 team. Romo averaged 2.2 yards per completion on blitzes. That won't work.

 

[Doc50]

Everyone seems to have their "morning after" threads, but unlike the "morning after pill," the emotional pain of Monday night's unfortunate encounter in our beloved Cowboys home stadium against our most hated rival, the Commanders, nothing we can say or post or look forward to can erase the reality of that ugly loss. Nevertheless, ...

The Obvious

• Linehan had his first real hiccup as playcaller. Despite fumbles by two running backs, our run game was as good or better than it's been all year. As a team, our three running backs averaged 6.6 yards per carry. Mysteriously, Linehan never strayed from his game plan to run successfully on first down and then play-action on 2nd down. Even early in the game, Murray was chewing up 4,5,6 yards with a few 10 yard runs, but Linehan must have seen something in the game film that convinced him play-action was the key to success. How else can one explain continually dropping back to pass when Romo wasn't seeing the blitz, wasn't getting the ball out, and even when given time, wasn't finding open receivers? How else can one explain Murray's first handoff from Weeden going for 51 yards for first and goal at the 6, his next handoff gaining 2 yards, but then deciding to pass on 2nd and 3rd down to come away with a disappointing FG rather than powering it into the end zone when we were clearly moving their DL. How else can one explain a run for 8 yards on first down in overtime and then dropping back to pass the next 3 downs when Romo was clearly not in command against the defensive pressure? No, this was clearly a case when film study and bright minds playing X's and O's all week and during the game overshadowed a common sense approach that could be called by anyone outside of the brain trust watching the game.
• The defense under-performed, finally. The LBs, in my opinion had a very poor game, though Durrant had a good first half and a series or two in the 2nd half. Most of the time, they were taking poor angles and not making plays when they saw what was happening in front of them. McClain ended up with good stats, but he was not as aggressive as needed, and standing in the middle watching McCoy take off on the QB draw, he froze and never attacked, just stood a yard in the end zone and waited for the TE block that came from the side when he could have stepped forward and made a play. Carr was again lost in coverage at times. Orlando Scandrick deserves every dollar he is paid and part of what all the other DB's earn. What struck me is that we didn't play our usual game of clogging all running lanes and keeping the QB in the pocket, a scheme that worked against some very mobile QBs in previous games. Instead, it seemed we were so determined to get sacks and hits that we left our lanes and allowed some untimely running gains and the QB to hurt us with his legs. 3 sacks don't look as good on paper in a loss where the defense was undisciplined, does it?
• This game was not lost on two fumbles or the gambling, max blitzes by the Commanders or by a defense that at times tackled poorly and made mistakes, or by Dez dropping a TD pass. While all of that is true, this game was lost because our offensive coaches out-coached themselves and refused to stray from the plan, handing Murray the ball only 19 times in a game that was close from kickoff to final whistle.

The Not-So-Obvious

• The blitzing of the Skins is not why Romo was hit or why we lost. If we'd continued to run the ball with draws and pitch-outs, those max blitzes would have been backed off. No one wants all those guys standing up in the tackle box when your OL fires off on a running play. That's how you give up huge plays when a blitzer is pushed to the side and the RB breaks open. Romo is not a QB to stand there in the face of a hit to deliver the last second throw to the hot receiver and slow down the blitzing...that's no comment on him courage, he's tough as nails, but that has never been who he is, and with his back, it never will be. He sees a guy unblocked, he's going to try to scramble or collapse to the ground. He did not react to the blitzes well. The OL couldn't have blocked any better....there were no "olay's"...everyone was on a man. They were bringing more guys than we had blockers. In my opinion, that is not the time to go max protection, which is the mistake Romo made. Pulling in your TE's and RB's and having only 2 options for a pass is not ideal. You need that TE or RB burning the blitz and giving you a quick short outlet to get the ball out of your hands. The more guys he pulled in when he saw blitz, the more he played into their hands because they could just bring another guy and eventually Tony has only his wideouts, who are split quite wide out!
• We tried to pressure and sack Colt McCoy in so many ways that we gave up the running yards in the 2nd half that we were stifling in the first half. Colt McCoy? Do you really care whether or not you sack him? If we'd stayed the course and continued to focus on shutting down the run game since their OL is not a strength, they would have needed to go to McCoy more and more, which is what we wanted. Sometimes we have been at our best this year only rushing 3-4 guys, keeping the QB in the pocket, and putting everyone else in coverage with safeties refusing to give up the big play.
• Ultimately, in a very close game that was there for the taking, we spent the second half allowing the Skins to run the ball by getting out of position, which then made their short passing attack more effective. At the same time, we spent the entire game, especially the 2nd half, running the ball less than we could have and should have and dropping back to pass more often than ever, playing right into the hands of the only thing the Skins defense is actually very good at, blitzing. We never really ran the ball enough to make them respect the play-action pass, we just assumed they'd see our film and go for it. I'm sure they loved seeing us pass more than we ran.

And Now?

• Dallas is still 6-2 at the halfway mark; it's not 7-1, but if you can't go 4-4 or better in the 2nd half, you're not a playoff team anyway. For this week, we're still in first place, and we got a serious wake up call and lesson.
• Another starting LB lost for the season---no one's crying for us because we've been pretty lucky in season so far----NEXT!
• Cross your fingers that Leary's groin injury isn't serious...otherwise, the OL gets weaker and the depth at two positions is gone.
• I want to see Free back with Parnell back at short yardage TE....that's unstoppable on short yardage.
• Tony Romo is a franchise QB and does a lot of special things, but his whole career and last night proves once again that while he can win in crunch time, he's not a guy who can take a team on his back and carry it----get back to running the freakin' ball and the team identity!
• Stop talking about trades! We have a much better team than we ever imagined and a better record than any sane person expected, and we have a running game that can be depended on. However, the playoffs are our goal this year---we all know our defense is not championship caliber. We need our money in FA and we need our draft picks for next year. No way we should trade for a veteran just to fill a gap at WLB or any other spot. You maybe do that if you're a championship team on a run, and if you think we're a SB team this year just because we won 6 games in a row, you just might be delusional.

I'm so glad we have a short week and another game; this would be a painful entry into a bye week.
Go Cowboys!!!!

Very well said. I hope Linehan & JG are reading this.

Pro football is about adjustments, and we just didn't make any.

 

[bark]

Pretty agree with all you said op

 

[Brooksey]

Everyone seems to have their "morning after" threads, but unlike the "morning after pill," the emotional pain of Monday night's unfortunate encounter in our beloved Cowboys home stadium against our most hated rival, the Commanders, nothing we can say or post or look forward to can erase the reality of that ugly loss. Nevertheless, ...

The Obvious

• Linehan had his first real hiccup as playcaller. Despite fumbles by two running backs, our run game was as good or better than it's been all year. As a team, our three running backs averaged 6.6 yards per carry. Mysteriously, Linehan never strayed from his game plan to run successfully on first down and then play-action on 2nd down. Even early in the game, Murray was chewing up 4,5,6 yards with a few 10 yard runs, but Linehan must have seen something in the game film that convinced him play-action was the key to success. How else can one explain continually dropping back to pass when Romo wasn't seeing the blitz, wasn't getting the ball out, and even when given time, wasn't finding open receivers? How else can one explain Murray's first handoff from Weeden going for 51 yards for first and goal at the 6, his next handoff gaining 2 yards, but then deciding to pass on 2nd and 3rd down to come away with a disappointing FG rather than powering it into the end zone when we were clearly moving their DL. How else can one explain a run for 8 yards on first down in overtime and then dropping back to pass the next 3 downs when Romo was clearly not in command against the defensive pressure? No, this was clearly a case when film study and bright minds playing X's and O's all week and during the game overshadowed a common sense approach that could be called by anyone outside of the brain trust watching the game.
• The defense under-performed, finally. The LBs, in my opinion had a very poor game, though Durrant had a good first half and a series or two in the 2nd half. Most of the time, they were taking poor angles and not making plays when they saw what was happening in front of them. McClain ended up with good stats, but he was not as aggressive as needed, and standing in the middle watching McCoy take off on the QB draw, he froze and never attacked, just stood a yard in the end zone and waited for the TE block that came from the side when he could have stepped forward and made a play. Carr was again lost in coverage at times. Orlando Scandrick deserves every dollar he is paid and part of what all the other DB's earn. What struck me is that we didn't play our usual game of clogging all running lanes and keeping the QB in the pocket, a scheme that worked against some very mobile QBs in previous games. Instead, it seemed we were so determined to get sacks and hits that we left our lanes and allowed some untimely running gains and the QB to hurt us with his legs. 3 sacks don't look as good on paper in a loss where the defense was undisciplined, does it?
• This game was not lost on two fumbles or the gambling, max blitzes by the Commanders or by a defense that at times tackled poorly and made mistakes, or by Dez dropping a TD pass. While all of that is true, this game was lost because our offensive coaches out-coached themselves and refused to stray from the plan, handing Murray the ball only 19 times in a game that was close from kickoff to final whistle.

The Not-So-Obvious

• The blitzing of the Skins is not why Romo was hit or why we lost. If we'd continued to run the ball with draws and pitch-outs, those max blitzes would have been backed off. No one wants all those guys standing up in the tackle box when your OL fires off on a running play. That's how you give up huge plays when a blitzer is pushed to the side and the RB breaks open. Romo is not a QB to stand there in the face of a hit to deliver the last second throw to the hot receiver and slow down the blitzing...that's no comment on him courage, he's tough as nails, but that has never been who he is, and with his back, it never will be. He sees a guy unblocked, he's going to try to scramble or collapse to the ground. He did not react to the blitzes well. The OL couldn't have blocked any better....there were no "olay's"...everyone was on a man. They were bringing more guys than we had blockers. In my opinion, that is not the time to go max protection, which is the mistake Romo made. Pulling in your TE's and RB's and having only 2 options for a pass is not ideal. You need that TE or RB burning the blitz and giving you a quick short outlet to get the ball out of your hands. The more guys he pulled in when he saw blitz, the more he played into their hands because they could just bring another guy and eventually Tony has only his wideouts, who are split quite wide out!
• We tried to pressure and sack Colt McCoy in so many ways that we gave up the running yards in the 2nd half that we were stifling in the first half. Colt McCoy? Do you really care whether or not you sack him? If we'd stayed the course and continued to focus on shutting down the run game since their OL is not a strength, they would have needed to go to McCoy more and more, which is what we wanted. Sometimes we have been at our best this year only rushing 3-4 guys, keeping the QB in the pocket, and putting everyone else in coverage with safeties refusing to give up the big play.
• Ultimately, in a very close game that was there for the taking, we spent the second half allowing the Skins to run the ball by getting out of position, which then made their short passing attack more effective. At the same time, we spent the entire game, especially the 2nd half, running the ball less than we could have and should have and dropping back to pass more often than ever, playing right into the hands of the only thing the Skins defense is actually very good at, blitzing. We never really ran the ball enough to make them respect the play-action pass, we just assumed they'd see our film and go for it. I'm sure they loved seeing us pass more than we ran.

And Now?

• Dallas is still 6-2 at the halfway mark; it's not 7-1, but if you can't go 4-4 or better in the 2nd half, you're not a playoff team anyway. For this week, we're still in first place, and we got a serious wake up call and lesson.
• Another starting LB lost for the season---no one's crying for us because we've been pretty lucky in season so far----NEXT!
• Cross your fingers that Leary's groin injury isn't serious...otherwise, the OL gets weaker and the depth at two positions is gone.
• I want to see Free back with Parnell back at short yardage TE....that's unstoppable on short yardage.
• Tony Romo is a franchise QB and does a lot of special things, but his whole career and last night proves once again that while he can win in crunch time, he's not a guy who can take a team on his back and carry it----get back to running the freakin' ball and the team identity!
• Stop talking about trades! We have a much better team than we ever imagined and a better record than any sane person expected, and we have a running game that can be depended on. However, the playoffs are our goal this year---we all know our defense is not championship caliber. We need our money in FA and we need our draft picks for next year. No way we should trade for a veteran just to fill a gap at WLB or any other spot. You maybe do that if you're a championship team on a run, and if you think we're a SB team this year just because we won 6 games in a row, you just might be delusional.

I'm so glad we have a short week and another game; this would be a painful entry into a bye week.
Go Cowboys!!!!

We needed to give Dunbar and Randle another 10+ carries last night. In past years we were never afraid to pass it 40x times and run it 20x, so we shouldn't be afraid to run it 40x and pass it 20x.

Last night we should have run it 40 times.

 

[punchnjudy]

The Not-So-Obvious

• The blitzing of the Skins is not why Romo was hit or why we lost. If we'd continued to run the ball with draws and pitch-outs, those max blitzes would have been backed off. No one wants all those guys standing up in the tackle box when your OL fires off on a running play. That's how you give up huge plays when a blitzer is pushed to the side and the RB breaks open. Romo is not a QB to stand there in the face of a hit to deliver the last second throw to the hot receiver and slow down the blitzing...that's no comment on him courage, he's tough as nails, but that has never been who he is, and with his back, it never will be. He sees a guy unblocked, he's going to try to scramble or collapse to the ground. He did not react to the blitzes well. The OL couldn't have blocked any better....there were no "olay's"...everyone was on a man. They were bringing more guys than we had blockers. In my opinion, that is not the time to go max protection, which is the mistake Romo made. Pulling in your TE's and RB's and having only 2 options for a pass is not ideal. You need that TE or RB burning the blitz and giving you a quick short outlet to get the ball out of your hands. The more guys he pulled in when he saw blitz, the more he played into their hands because they could just bring another guy and eventually Tony has only his wideouts, who are split quite wide out!

I think that basic approach, along with screens to Murray or Dunbar, is the only one that will allow Tony to make it until January. Trying to connect downfield...I don't see that working out well in the long run. Even if they were just calling quick slants against heavy blitzes, I'd be worried about Tony taking too many shots, mostly from him looking for the second/third option. If Dallas called a lot of those routes, I'd also be worried about a backer dropping off and picking Tony off. With this personnel...especially if Leary is good to go...I think the simpler approach actually works just fine.

 

[VACowboy]

Good stuff. I agree with everything you said.

I do not understand, in a three-point game, with the way the Dallas run game was ripping the Washington D, why our RBs didn't get 40 carries. If the coaches are worried about wearing Murray out but don't trust his backups enough to play them, the team needs better backup RBs. The only other thing I can imagine is that the coaches saw on tape how crappy Washington's secondary was and wanted to go after it. You'd think that after a half of futility on third down, though, with Romo getting the snot knocked out of him, you'd at least try something different.

I gotta say, that counter play they ran on Weeden's first snap was fantastic. I come from the double wing school of offense, so I'd like to see a little more misdirection in the running game. That play was beautiful.

 

[Hoov]

The Not-So-Obvious

• The blitzing of the Skins is not why Romo was hit or why we lost. If we'd continued to run the ball with draws and pitch-outs, those max blitzes would have been backed off. No one wants all those guys standing up in the tackle box when your OL fires off on a running play. That's how you give up huge plays when a blitzer is pushed to the side and the RB breaks open. Romo is not a QB to stand there in the face of a hit to deliver the last second throw to the hot receiver and slow down the blitzing...that's no comment on him courage, he's tough as nails, but that has never been who he is, and with his back, it never will be. He sees a guy unblocked, he's going to try to scramble or collapse to the ground. He did not react to the blitzes well. The OL couldn't have blocked any better....there were no "olay's"...everyone was on a man. They were bringing more guys than we had blockers. In my opinion, that is not the time to go max protection, which is the mistake Romo made. Pulling in your TE's and RB's and having only 2 options for a pass is not ideal. You need that TE or RB burning the blitz and giving you a quick short outlet to get the ball out of your hands. The more guys he pulled in when he saw blitz, the more he played into their hands because they could just bring another guy and eventually Tony has only his wideouts, who are split quite wide out!

Thank you for this post. It was a great one from top to bottom. I agree 100%. In addition I wanted to reply to this paragraph and essentially the bolded part.

I beleive you are correct here and this is something that could be looked at as a weak spot in Romo's game. What was most upsetting to me was that Romo's 3rd down handling of the blitz looked totally reminiscent of previous "melt downs" for lack of a better word though i use it because cowbays fans will know what i am talking about. When he gets flustered with pressure and cannot scramble away things always seem to progress from bad to worse - there is a snowball effect if you will where the game just spirals out of control. And last night it was happening again - you could feel that the cowboys were doomed everytime the Commanders blitzed on 3rd and long.

I understand that all QB's have bad games, but it was frustarting to me to see that even with an improved O Line and a great running game he looked like the same old Tony when the Commanders brought those blitzes. So better players around him will only go so far.

You cant get your blockers to "do a better job" if they bring 7 on 5, when that happens generally the QB will need to stand in there and make the throw in the face of pressure and take a hit. Your point about Tony not doing that is well taken - and i agree that it is not a toughness isssue. I also agree that at his age and with his back you would not want him to do that too many times a game.

So now, moving forward you can bet that other teams will try this. Though i'm sure not as often and as effective as washington does.

But if Tony is not going to be that guy to stand in there and make the quick throw to burn them then the team will have to find another way to help Tony here. Maybe they need to have an audible to a screen play so he can change to that when he feels a big blitz coming or they can change to a run, however im not sure how many drives you can sustain by changing to a run everytime the opponent shows blitz on 3rd and 10. I just hope they do something because like you suggested i dont think romo will have success against this type of pass defense otherwise. The waiting for something to develop is a recipe for disaster - but its what he typically does in this type of situation and better lineman or a better run game wont make a difference here.

 

[landroverking]

Three points from the OP.

The fumbles were a 6 to 10 point swing

And in OT we missed the boat not running.
D missed tackles like crazy.

 

[Chuck 54]

Agreed, tackling was poor at all three levels of defense. Should be a fun film session with Marinelli.

However, the single easiest factor in the loss to fix during the game for success was to simply run the ball more. After getting so many carries in previous games, there's just no good reason to give Murray only 19 carries vs a weak divisional foe in a tight game while also struggling in your passing game.

 

[RS12]

This old timer says having no pass rush will lead to an early playoff exit. Lawrence better be all that because they have nothing as far as a consistent pass rush.

 

[waving monkey]

thanks for your your analysis and effort good write up

 

[DogFace]

I agree too

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

And in OT we missed the boat not running.
.

Still shaking my head. An Emmitt Smith led team runs and runs and probably breaks one for (Murray) game winning TD. Ok, we dont know that.
But the reason why we dont know that is because we didnt try it.


Drives me nuts.