Our offense symbolized in one picture

[CF74]

Blah blah blah.

None of that proves anything.

The bottom line is- if this offense was as ineffective or predictable as threads like this one make it out to be, there is no way we'd be 8-4 right now.

I'm not saying the offense is perfect- but it's certainly not as bad as some of the fans on here like would like to believe.

It proves we are just a few hairs above .500 right now but closer to middle of the pack... lol

 

[Proximo]

It proves we are just a few hairs above .500 right now but closer to middle of the pack... lol

Huh? 8-4 is considered "just a few hairs above. .500"? That's news to me.

 

[Idgit]

"Romo is not clutch" isn't exactly the same thing as a player saying he knew what we were going to do before we did it. One of those things is a very real problem that you can actually do something about.

'A player saying he knew what we were going to do before we did it' doesn't mean all that much if the things we do still end up scoring points at a higher rate than most of the other teams in the league. We were in the top 5 in this category (points/offensive series) last year, and are currently sitting at 6th through last week. Very real problems typically translate into problems on the field and are measurable.

Players say things all the time. Point in fact, one of the players we'll be facing this weekend says he's 'kind of a black unicorn' from the planet Jupiter.

 

[TheCount]

'A player saying he knew what we were going to do before we did it' doesn't mean all that much if the things we do still end up scoring points at a higher rate than most of the other teams in the league. We were in the top 5 in this category (points/offensive series) last year, and are currently sitting at 6th through last week. Very real problems typically translate into problems on the field and are measurable.

Players say things all the time. Point in fact, one of the players we'll be facing this weekend says he's 'kind of a black unicorn' from the planet Jupiter.

Right, the ole comfort blanket - statistics. You're right, our offense is great, nothing to improve and players lie. Don't know what I was thinking.

I've watched the game just like you have, and context is important. If you've watched the games, you know the team can be extremely predictable. And sure, you can get away with it most of the time because you've got some supreme talent, but at some point, you've got to scheme.

 

[Idgit]

Right, the ole comfort blanket - statistics. You're right, our offense is great, nothing to improve and players lie. Don't know what I was thinking.

I've watched the game just like you have, and context is important. If you've watched the games, you know the team can be extremely predictable. And sure, you can get away with it most of the time because you've got some supreme talent, but at some point, you've got to scheme.

Yep. The old comfort blanket of having reasons to believe things you choose to believe. That old standby.

I didn't say that we weren't predictable. I asked how much it matters if you're productive. When you say 'at some point, you've got to scheme,' I assume you mean 'at some point you have to be unpredictable.' And my questions would be, 'why do you have to be less predictable if you're productive, anyway?'

 

[Dave_in-NC]

Yep. The old comfort blanket of having reasons to believe things you choose to believe. That old standby.

I didn't say that we weren't predictable. I asked how much it matters if you're productive. When you say 'at some point, you've got to scheme,' I assume you mean 'at some point you have to be unpredictable.' And my questions would be, 'why do you have to be less predictable if you're productive, anyway?'

While I agree with you to a point, there is some thing to be said for changing things up to. It seems against the lesser teams we can push our will and be just fine. But against the stronger teams I don't see that happening. It certainly isn't the best time to figure it out but they need to change some things up once in a while. We are talented enough on offense to do more than we are, as long as it's not a total flip flop where we become pass happy again.

 

[Wolfpack]

I was hoping this was going to be one of those MS paint threads when I saw the title.

 

[dallasfan4lizife]

Huh? 8-4 is considered "just a few hairs above. .500"? That's news to me.

Were it not for about 4-5 plays total, this team could easily be 5-7 or 4-8.

 

[BAZ]

I am fond of neapolitan ice cream.

 

[Kevinicus]

Yep. The old comfort blanket of having reasons to believe things you choose to believe. That old standby.

I didn't say that we weren't predictable. I asked how much it matters if you're productive. When you say 'at some point, you've got to scheme,' I assume you mean 'at some point you have to be unpredictable.' And my questions would be, 'why do you have to be less predictable if you're productive, anyway?'

The question shouldn't be, "have they been productive?" It should be, "can they be MORE productive?" And if so, how much? Some of us think the answers are yes, and quite a bit. And we thought that for quite a while now.

 

[Apollo Creed]

I am fond of neapolitan ice cream.

Shocking.

 

[Staubacher]

Romo punked the best defensive player in the game for a TD. He won in a place only one other team has won in 3 years. He led last quarter victory drives 4 times so far this year. His QB rating and performance is up there with the elites of the league.

There's not enough hate in the world to explain that away

 

[BotchedLobotomy]

Shocking.

Shocking that it has avoided the Mods so far.

 

[Proximo]

Were it not for about 4-5 plays total, this team could easily be 5-7 or 4-8.

LOL. And conversely, we could very well be 9-3 or 10-2 had it not been for a select few negative plays.

 

[Beast_from_East]

Every time you open a can or tin of Neapolitan ice cream, you get the exact same order of ice cream.

You know where the vanilla will be, and that the chocolate and strawberry are on the outside.

Compare this to our offense. When looking at our offense, you know exactly where Dez will be ( *Don't laugh, but he is our Chocolate). You know where Witten will be ( *again this isn't being racial, but he is our Vanilla) in the middle. T. Will is our Strawberry on the other side until he can further prove himself without body catches.

Opposing defenses look at our arrangement and know exactly where everyone will be, and what they do. We essentially tell the defense, "Hey look, this is what we do, this is how we align ourselves, and you will have to beat us".

At no point the Chocolate and Vanilla swap places, and at no point does the Strawberry swap places with the Vanilla.

This is the problem with our offense. One day we can hope that we will open this can of ice cream, and see chocolate in the middle, with vanilla on the outside.


Sorry guys, it is late and I am hungry.

Good analogy..................I think it goes back to this "nameless, faceless opponent" stuff Garrett says. We are going to line up and run the same plays against everybody we face and it is up to them to stop it. That is what we did in the 90s, every team knew what was coming and there was nothing really complicated about our offense, we were just better and it didn't matter if you knew what the play was or not.

That does not work so well when you play teams of equal or greater talent...................that is probably why Garrett has such a terrible record against teams over 500 since he became head coach.

 

[TheCount]

Yep. The old comfort blanket of having reasons to believe things you choose to believe. That old standby.

I didn't say that we weren't predictable. I asked how much it matters if you're productive. When you say 'at some point, you've got to scheme,' I assume you mean 'at some point you have to be unpredictable.' And my questions would be, 'why do you have to be less predictable if you're productive, anyway?'

Stats don't win games. "Productive" to you is statistics, I'm talking about in-context football, not fantasy football.

It's the difference between knowing that a guy going for 60 yards and a touchdown might have had just as good a game as a guy that went for 150 yards and 2 touchdowns.

I've had enough of the stat peeping, I really have. It's all we've had to be proud of as fans for years, and I'm sick of it.

 

[texbumthelife]

It's been talked about for years, pretty much since Garrett took over, that his system is built on lining up and out-executing the other team. It is supposed to be less reliant on playmakers and more reliant on timing and continuity. The problem is, defenses have evolved to the point where they're often quicker than offenses and when the offense is so vanilla, they begin to read plays and beat players to the ball. I think this is the biggest reason for Dez Bryant's lack of seperation and why teams seem to be so succesful blitzing us. The offensive system (sans the zone run blocking) needs to be canned. Its garbage.

 

[Blackspider214]

Can you explain how we've ended up 8-4 and have one of the best offenses in the league if we're soooo predictable that every defense knows exactly what we're doing?

Are you arguing we are not predictable? We have been predictable for years now. We are as innovative as using a string a can for a telephone. We rely solely on individuals winning their matchups. If they don't, you will see a very bad offense. If they do, it can look good. There is no in between with this team. We never use the middle of the field and schematically speaking, we suck.

We got to 8 wins by beating up on some very bad teams. Besides Seahawks.

 

[Beast_from_East]

Are you arguing we are not predictable? We have been predictable for years now. We are as innovative as using a string a can for a telephone. We rely solely on individuals winning their matchups. If they don't, you will see a very bad offense. If they do, it can look good. There is no in between with this team. We never use the middle of the field and schematically speaking, we suck.

We got to 8 wins by beating up on some very bad teams. Besides Seahawks.

Exactly.....................its like in the 90s our offense was very basic as well but we were so good they couldn't stop us.

Like you said, this works if you have more talent and are better than the opposing team...................that is why Garrett's record against sub 500 teams if fantastic, we very rarely lose to a scrub team. On the flip side, when we play teams with equal or greater talent, then you have to rely on scheme and play design to get an advantage.

Our offense does neither, that is why we constantly lose to teams with winning records...............Garrett usually only has 1 win a season against a team that finishes above 500.............there is a reason for this, its not just an accident.

 

[Proximo]

Are you arguing we are not predictable? We have been predictable for years now. We are as innovative as using a string a can for a telephone. We rely solely on individuals winning their matchups. If they don't, you will see a very bad offense. If they do, it can look good. There is no in between with this team. We never use the middle of the field and schematically speaking, we suck.

We got to 8 wins by beating up on some very bad teams. Besides Seahawks.

Have you actually read my posts in this thread?

You're missing my point- this offense is not near as bad as many of the fans on this board make it out to be. In fact, it's not only not bad, but rather one of the better offenses in the league. I'm not saying it's perfect. But the ridiculous hyperbole, like "we are as innovative as using a string and a can for a telephone", is just complete BS.

Are you arguing that we're not one of the better offenses in the league?