Questioning offensive philosophy

[VACowboy]

(I posted this in another forum as well.)

This is heresy, but...

I do not and will never understand an offense (like Garrett's--and many others) that doesn't take every opportunity to help itself succeed. Why does Garrett hardly ever use play action or any other type of ball fake (other than the draw)? I think RG3 is a star in the making, but every play in Shanahan's offense sets up several others and makes his QB's job a lot easier. Romo's skill and athleticism is perfect for play passes and boot action. Instead, the Cowboys line up in the I and Romo passes from a straight seven step drop. I don't get it. Am I wrong? Can anyone set me straight?

 

[Idgit]

However you want to slice it, the team did 3 or 4 things in the first quarter this week that statistically get you beat an overwhelming percent of the time. Giving up special teams touchdowns. Going down 0-3 early in TO differential. Down by 10 points or more in the first quarter.

I'm not commenting on your offensive philosophy comment one way or another, except to say that I don't think it's related at all to why we got our butt kicked on Sunday. We got our butt kicked because we did several of the things that get teams beat early, and we weren't able to overcome them to get back to our game plan on the road against a good defense.

I know people want to look for other contributing factors: QB play, play calling, the defensive coordinator not being good enough. But the bottom line is that teams in the NFL are competitive. If you make big mistakes that put your team into low-probability situations, the probability that you're going to pull off a win drops dramatically. No coaching philosophy is going to overcome that. If Garret's to be faulted, it's for not building a team capable of avoiding the mistakes that get you beat.

 

[VACowboy]

My OP isn't a comment on the Seattle game. I've had this question for a couple years.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

You and I have talked about this before, VA, but I wish we could run the Shanahan/Kubiak offense. I get Houston games in my area and they usually don't play at the same time we do, so I see at least parts of their games quite a bit. And it is amazing how often Schaub -- who isn't half as good as Romo -- finds guys running open. I mean, wide, wide open. Why, because they run the ball effectively and play action off of it. I bet Romo's numbers would be absolutely insane in that offense and just as importantly, with less risk because so many throws are very high-percentage with big windows.

 

[Dallas4ever]

However you want to slice it, the team did 3 or 4 things in the first quarter this week that statistically get you beat an overwhelming percent of the time. Giving up special teams touchdowns. Going down 0-3 early in TO differential. Down by 10 points or more in the first quarter.

I'm not commenting on your offensive philosophy comment one way or another, except to say that I don't think it's related at all to why we got our butt kicked on Sunday. We got our butt kicked because we did several of the things that get teams beat early, and we weren't able to overcome them to get back to our game plan on the road against a good defense.

I know people want to look for other contributing factors: QB play, play calling, the defensive coordinator not being good enough. But the bottom line is that teams in the NFL are competitive. If you make big mistakes that put your team into low-probability situations, the probability that you're going to pull off a win drops dramatically. No coaching philosophy is going to overcome that. If Garret's to be faulted, it's for not building a team capable of avoiding the mistakes that get you beat.

Well said. I would agree with most of it. I still feel that we didn't adjust very well to what they were doing on either side of the ball.

 

[Zordon]

You and I have talked about this before, VA, but I wish we could run the Shanahan/Kubiak offense. I get Houston games in my area and they usually don't play at the same time we do, so I see at least parts of their games quite a bit. And it is amazing how often Schaub -- who isn't half as good as Romo -- finds guys running open. I mean, wide, wide open. Why, because they run the ball effectively and play action off of it. I bet Romo's numbers would be absolutely insane in that offense and just as importantly, with less risk because so many throws are very high-percentage with big windows.

the only difference btw arian foster and demarco murray is the oline. the texans have an outstanding line.

 

[Idgit]

My OP isn't a comment on the Seattle game. I've had this question for a couple years.

As far as boots go, it's easier said that done when the other team's intent on keeping a QB who's more effective on the roll in the pocket. We probably also don't want to expose the QB any more than we have to on designed plays.

As to play action v. draw, it's probably because the draws work because the threat of the pass is credible. With Murray, now, I'd expect to see more play action--and I agree that we underuse it--but I hardly think that's a significant problem with the offense. Garret does a nice job of playing to Romo's strength, and Romo's very good at taking advantage of what the other team gives you. If the offense's objective is to put the defense in difficult positions as to how they're going to defend our skill players and then take advantage of the best match-ups, the misdirection play are going to necessarily take a back seat.

Romo's great at selling the draw, though. With the matchup advantages we should have with Dez and Witten, you'd think play action would have a role, too.

 

[VACowboy]

You and I have talked about this before, VA, but I wish we could run the Shanahan/Kubiak offense. I get Houston games in my area and they usually don't play at the same time we do, so I see at least parts of their games quite a bit. And it is amazing how often Schaub -- who isn't half as good as Romo -- finds guys running open. I mean, wide, wide open. Why, because they run the ball effectively and play action off of it. I bet Romo's numbers would be absolutely insane in that offense and just as importantly, with less risk because so many throws are very high-percentage with big windows.

Yeah. We can dream...

Hate Shanahan. Love his offense.

 

[VACowboy]

the only difference btw arian foster and demarco murray is the oline. the texans have an outstanding line.

They also play in completely different offenses.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

the only difference btw arian foster and demarco murray is the oline. the texans have an outstanding line.

But for the most part, they have a bunch of no-names -- it's not like they run the same plays with vastly more talented personnel. The difference is that the scheme and philosophy is completely different.

 

[Zordon]

They also play in completely different offenses.

true but they are very similar runners. my point is the main reason demarco doesn't have his production is the oline.

 

[Zordon]

But for the most part, they have a bunch of no-names -- it's not like they run the same plays with vastly more talented personnel. The difference is that the scheme and philosophy is completely different.

yeah i get your point man. i live in austin so i catch a lot of their games too. the fluidity and execution of their offense is on another level. when they were down on the goal line against jacksonville they didn't waste any time getting a touchdown. unlike us, where it takes 2 or 3 bobbled plays before we get it.

i think jason needs to put our receivers in motion more. if they are getting jammed at the line move them around, call more bootlegs and misdirection plays. the offense is the weakness of the team right now.

 

[TwoCentPlain]

Garrett has been the OC here for how many years? 5? Nothing has changed.

Screen passes? Not even in the playbook. Teams know and don't even have to worry about a screen. Garrett blamed it on not having the right type of OL before. Get new OL who are mobile and still no screen passes. Either Romo can't throw screens or Garrett hates the screen pass. No other reason. How many times does Romo even roll out?

I see some teams use a WR in the backfield. I think GB used Cobb there sometimes.

Garrett had a chance to add a wrinkle to the offensive plan last Sunday with Beasley. Give Seattle something they never saw before. Nothing from Garrett. Same old stuff. Well, it worked last week so it will work this week philosophy.

Garrett is to offensive coordinating what Dave campo was to defensive backfield coordinating. 3rd and 2, let's have Newman 10 yards off the line of scrimmage philosophy.

 

[TwoDeep3]

However you want to slice it, the team did 3 or 4 things in the first quarter this week that statistically get you beat an overwhelming percent of the time. Giving up special teams touchdowns. Going down 0-3 early in TO differential. Down by 10 points or more in the first quarter.

I'm not commenting on your offensive philosophy comment one way or another, except to say that I don't think it's related at all to why we got our butt kicked on Sunday. We got our butt kicked because we did several of the things that get teams beat early, and we weren't able to overcome them to get back to our game plan on the road against a good defense.

I know people want to look for other contributing factors: QB play, play calling, the defensive coordinator not being good enough. But the bottom line is that teams in the NFL are competitive. If you make big mistakes that put your team into low-probability situations, the probability that you're going to pull off a win drops dramatically. No coaching philosophy is going to overcome that. If Garret's to be faulted, it's for not building a team capable of avoiding the mistakes that get you beat.

http://sportdfw.com/2012/09/13/is-ja...-play-calling/

After reading this, considering my limited football knowledge. I'd say there is more to this than what you suggest.

To be sure this team made fatal mistakes. And yet put together a drive of 95 yards to pull within 10-7. Then suddenly they could do nothing on offense.

If these numbers are correct then there is something wrong here that cannot be fixed by correcting special teams play.

If Garrett is so evident in his play calling, something that has been said many many times, by opposing players and here and other places by fans, and sometimes journalists alike, then the problem lies in the offensive play calling.

The combination of being physically intimidated married with a vanilla play calling offers results like we saw.

We've had five seasons with Garrett at the helm of play calling, and while we have enjoyed success at times, there hasn't been a season where people didn't feel he makes poor decisions and is far too predictable.

Read the chart. I'm certain in your advanced understanding of professional football you might be amazed at the suggestions it makes.

 

[erod]

I thought we got away from the run too quickly, but....

There is nothing Garrett can do to playcall away four drops by Witten and two by Dez at key moments. He made the calls, but the players didn't make the plays.

Nor can he mask Doug Free and Tyron Smith getting destroyed on the edges.

 

[TwoDeep3]

Garrett has been the OC here for how many years? 5? Nothing has changed.

Screen passes? Not even in the playbook. Teams know and don't even have to worry about a screen. Garrett blamed it on not having the right type of OL before. Get new OL who are mobile and still no screen passes. Either Romo can't throw screens or Garrett hates the screen pass. No other reason. How many times does Romo even roll out?

I see some teams use a WR in the backfield. I think GB used Cobb there sometimes.

Garrett had a chance to add a wrinkle to the offensive plan last Sunday with Beasley. Give Seattle something they never saw before. Nothing from Garrett. Same old stuff. Well, it worked last week so it will work this week philosophy.

Garrett is to offensive coordinating what Dave campo was to defensive backfield coordinating. 3rd and 2, let's have Newman 10 yards off the line of scrimmage philosophy.

ninja - he calls naked screens which get blown up.

Did you forget the one to Felix where he couldn't juke the linebacker and was killed three yards behind the line of scrimmage?

Or last year where the first play of the game during the first six games was a naked screen to dez that failed.

His designs aren't world shaking.

 

[jblaze2004]

(I posted this in another forum as well.)

This is heresy, but...

I do not and will never understand an offense (like Garrett's--and many others) that doesn't take every opportunity to help itself succeed. Why does Garrett hardly ever use play action or any other type of ball fake (other than the draw)? I think RG3 is a star in the making, but every play in Shanahan's offense sets up several others and makes his QB's job a lot easier. Romo's skill and athleticism is perfect for play passes and boot action. Instead, the Cowboys line up in the I and Romo passes from a straight seven step drop. I don't get it. Am I wrong? Can anyone set me straight?

this is why I want garret gone. Its like we forgot the basics. Why can't we run playaction? where are the screeens, heck throw in a trick play like the steelers. We do nothing but run an outdated offense. lucky we have romo, witten, miles, dez and murray or we would look terrible. Half the plays are because romo has to make and outstanding play or a wr has to make a great catch. Why do we never have nobody hardly wide open? Very rare to see one of our guys wide open. Look vs seattle, Our guys were catching the ball and getting hit. Nobody could really catch and run.

Garrett playcalling is very suspect. I watch houston and the skins offense. they have less talent but look at them scoring points on top of points with a rookie qb. They run alot of plays that look like the same play but are different. They run alot of different plays from the same formation and same look that is crazy. I hate that we play them on thanksgiving because if we lose because we played rg3 how we played russell wilson and mike vick with a soft zone and basically a 3 or 4 man rush. We better hope for a big day from murray or jones. or romo play out his mind yet again. I can only imagine how good this offense could really look with a better coordinator.

 

[jblaze2004]

I wish we would use dez something like how gb uses cobb. They have him lining up everywhere to get there playmaker the ball. You can't tell me we cannot get the ball in dez hands more. Instead we seem to love to get the ball in witten hands. I know he is a probowls and maybe a future hall of famer but man lets get our playmakers the ball and let them make plays.

 

[Idgit]

http://sportdfw.com/2012/09/13/is-ja...-play-calling/

After reading this, considering my limited football knowledge. I'd say there is more to this than what you suggest.

To be sure this team made fatal mistakes. And yet put together a drive of 95 yards to pull within 10-7. Then suddenly they could do nothing on offense.

If these numbers are correct then there is something wrong here that cannot be fixed by correcting special teams play.

If Garrett is so evident in his play calling, something that has been said many many times, by opposing players and here and other places by fans, and sometimes journalists alike, then the problem lies in the offensive play calling.

The combination of being physically intimidated married with a vanilla play calling offers results like we saw.

We've had five seasons with Garrett at the helm of play calling, and while we have enjoyed success at times, there hasn't been a season where people didn't feel he makes poor decisions and is far too predictable.

Read the chart. I'm certain in your advanced understanding of professional football you might be amazed at the suggestions it makes.

Bad link.

Unless he's able to start calling plays where the TEs and WRs actually catch the balls that hit them in the hands, I'm not going to worry about the play calling. We had way too many open receivers dropping big balls or not being where they were supposed to be for me to worry about play calling.

And, God knows, the fact that a lot of our fans ***** about something is not evidence that anything in particular is wrong. Because our fans ***** about literally everything.

 

[TwoDeep3]

Bad link.

Unless he's able to start calling plays where the TEs and WRs actually catch the balls that hit them in the hands, I'm not going to worry about the play calling. We had way too many open receivers dropping big balls or not being where they were supposed to be for me to worry about play calling.

And, God knows, the fact that a lot of our fans ***** about something is not evidence that anything in particular is wrong. Because our fans ***** about literally everything.

http://sportdfw.com/2012/09/13/is-jason-garrett-too-predictable-an-analysis-of-his-play-calling/

Try this.

And do you ignore the comments by people like Ray Lewis who claimed they knew exactly what play was being run? Suggesting this is merely fans seems to diminish the comments by more than one defensive player who has made statements like the one Lewis made.