CFZ Philosophical Difference Might Have Been Option Routes

[Creeper]

I don't want to call you dumb man but this is a dumb statement. Of course routes matter. Not just the routes themselves but the precision of the routes.. A 10 yard in that is rounded off is different from one that is cut sharply. It also bears stating that in modern offenses HOW the route is run is predicated on how the defense plays. If it's zone you sometimes have to round the route off so as not to get too close to the DB and give him an easy path to the ball. If it's man you have to get into the DB's body and cut sharp to create separation. If you round it off against man the DB stays in your hip pocket. You have to attack him and force him to open his hips then cut sharply to create the separation you need.

To your point about Dak playing poorly. Yes there are games where Dak plays poorly.. But there are games where his numbers look bad but he isn't the one playing poorly. The receivers dropped ten balls in the Denver game last year. TEN!! Looking at the stat sheet from that game you would say Dak sucked that day.. But did he? He hit guys in the hands time and again and they let him down. I'm not saying he was great that day.. but a lot of the offense's failure in that game was on people not named Dak. Remember the Tampa playoff game? The receivers dropped Dak's first three passes.. so he started out 0-3 and the announcers talking about how he was "struggling." But he wasn't struggling. His receivers were.. He had put the ball into their hands on three straight passes and had nothing to show for it. Football is a team game.. so usually when a team loses there's a helluva lot more than one guy to blame. Sam with wins. The simple minds keep wanting to go to one guy in both instances.. and those simple minds will always be wrong.

I am not as dumb as I look! But again, I am not saying routes don't matter in football. Of course they matter, and of course the receiver's route running matters. My comment is more about Dak than scheme or receivers. I freely admit Dak's receivers have let him down at times during the year. We all saw the Noah Brown tip into the hands of the Jags DB for a pick 6 that cost the game. Not Dak's fault, not even 1% Dak's fault.

But there are times when Dak is playing poorly, when he is sailing balls over the heads of receivers, throwing dump offs in the dirt, or otherwise throwing behind his receivers where the receiver could have been Jerry Rice and it would not have mattered. We can debate how often it happened but but not that it never happened. We all saw it. Dak's inconsistency is not in a narrow range either. He can play really badly, or he can be magnificent (Washington, and then Tampa Bay were his two extremes) And Good Dak and Bad Dak do not have a pattern either. Bad Dak can play an entire game or just a few series. Bad Dak has been known to come out late in the season, while Good Dak dominates the first 8 games.

But as stupid as it may sound to you, I am convinced when Bad Dak is in the game, the receivers, the routes, the scheme, whatever is not the problem. The goal of the new OC should be to find out what brings out Bad Dak and figure out how to minimize he playing time.

 

[xwalker]

I am not as dumb as I look! But again, I am not saying routes don't matter in football. Of course they matter, and of course the receiver's route running matters. My comment is more about Dak than scheme or receivers. I freely admit Dak's receivers have let him down at times during the year. We all saw the Noah Brown tip into the hands of the Jags DB for a pick 6 that cost the game. Not Dak's fault, not even 1% Dak's fault.

But there are times when Dak is playing poorly, when he is sailing balls over the heads of receivers, throwing dump offs in the dirt, or otherwise throwing behind his receivers where the receiver could have been Jerry Rice and it would not have mattered. We can debate how often it happened but but not that it never happened. We all saw it. Dak's inconsistency is not in a narrow range either. He can play really badly, or he can be magnificent (Washington, and then Tampa Bay were his two extremes) And Good Dak and Bad Dak do not have a pattern either. Bad Dak can play an entire game or just a few series. Bad Dak has been known to come out late in the season, while Good Dak dominates the first 8 games.

But as stupid as it may sound to you, I am convinced when Bad Dak is in the game, the receivers, the routes, the scheme, whatever is not the problem. The goal of the new OC should be to find out what brings out Bad Dak and figure out how to minimize he playing time.

There are some passes that are bad; However, many passes that appear to be are actually due to the receiver not being where Dak expected him.

Intermediate/deep and even short sidelines passes are in the air long enough for the receiver to take more than 1 step after the pass is out of Dak's hand.

While the ball is in the air, if the receiver takes 2 steps upfield when Dak expects him to take 2 steps horizontally, then it's going to "look" like a bad pass.

Same on high or low passes. If the WR stayed horizontal when Dak expected him to cut upfield, then the pass will be high because Dak was throwing to a spot further down field.

It was the same with Romo. Many passes that appeared to be bad were due to Dez running the route incorrectly.

 

[xwalker]

I am not as dumb as I look! But again, I am not saying routes don't matter in football. Of course they matter, and of course the receiver's route running matters. My comment is more about Dak than scheme or receivers. I freely admit Dak's receivers have let him down at times during the year. We all saw the Noah Brown tip into the hands of the Jags DB for a pick 6 that cost the game. Not Dak's fault, not even 1% Dak's fault.

But there are times when Dak is playing poorly, when he is sailing balls over the heads of receivers, throwing dump offs in the dirt, or otherwise throwing behind his receivers where the receiver could have been Jerry Rice and it would not have mattered. We can debate how often it happened but but not that it never happened. We all saw it. Dak's inconsistency is not in a narrow range either. He can play really badly, or he can be magnificent (Washington, and then Tampa Bay were his two extremes) And Good Dak and Bad Dak do not have a pattern either. Bad Dak can play an entire game or just a few series. Bad Dak has been known to come out late in the season, while Good Dak dominates the first 8 games.

But as stupid as it may sound to you, I am convinced when Bad Dak is in the game, the receivers, the routes, the scheme, whatever is not the problem. The goal of the new OC should be to find out what brings out Bad Dak and figure out how to minimize he playing time.

I watched video reviews by three ex NFL QBs of the Cowboys offense in the 49ers game.

They had mixed opinions on the fault for the INTs; However, ALL of them were in agreement that there were significant problems with the routes in that game. Both the route combinations and route running details.

 

[xwalker]

I am not as dumb as I look! But again, I am not saying routes don't matter in football. Of course they matter, and of course the receiver's route running matters. My comment is more about Dak than scheme or receivers. I freely admit Dak's receivers have let him down at times during the year. We all saw the Noah Brown tip into the hands of the Jags DB for a pick 6 that cost the game. Not Dak's fault, not even 1% Dak's fault.

But there are times when Dak is playing poorly, when he is sailing balls over the heads of receivers, throwing dump offs in the dirt, or otherwise throwing behind his receivers where the receiver could have been Jerry Rice and it would not have mattered. We can debate how often it happened but but not that it never happened. We all saw it. Dak's inconsistency is not in a narrow range either. He can play really badly, or he can be magnificent (Washington, and then Tampa Bay were his two extremes) And Good Dak and Bad Dak do not have a pattern either. Bad Dak can play an entire game or just a few series. Bad Dak has been known to come out late in the season, while Good Dak dominates the first 8 games.

But as stupid as it may sound to you, I am convinced when Bad Dak is in the game, the receivers, the routes, the scheme, whatever is not the problem. The goal of the new OC should be to find out what brings out Bad Dak and figure out how to minimize he playing time.

We all know that Dak is not on the level with Mahomes, but he is good enough to win with the correct scheme/receiving options and with an effective running game.

The 92 or 93 Cowboys would have lost that game if they ran the ball like Zeke did, despite having Aikman and Irvin. That's basically what happened when Emmitt held out the 1st two games of 93.

 

[Aven8]

Stop routes

Recently a couple items have reappeared suggesting Amari Cooper was not a fan of the constant stop routes, and ignored the play call, leading to a 9 route which got a touchdown against the Eagles. He then mentioned it to reporters. Some speculated this caused a riff with the former leadership (OC), which could have lead to his departure.

So If McCarthy was opposed to Cooper being traded, that could be part of it too.

Of course Mike didn’t want to get rid of Coop. But he’s a coach. He doesn’t have to fight the cap.

 

[nalam]

Moores choice routes were terrible. Often times the WR would go into more defensive traffic. I won't repeat the curl route nonsense. But you can just blame the QB, it's easier. But the plays where Dak didn't throw an awful ball, there's plenty of evidence illustrating the route confusion. I encourage the All 22, it's amazing what you pick up seeing the whole field.

Another example of poor coaching is that Prescott specifically ranks high in play action plays. Makes me question scheme when we played the 49ers, we didn't run a playaction play until well into the 3rd quarter.
It's been a recurring problem with OCs in Dallas going back to 2007. Abandon or completely ignore situational play success, same as the running game.

Dak does well when play action is working , I think most QBs are . But that cant happen unless a strong run game is there or threat of run game.
I think that is what Mac is bringing in , if so , I think we will do well. With Quinn’s D maturing and ball control , short passing offense ( hopefully turnover less prone ) we will win more games , but may not set offensive records. That is ok.