Ray Lewis says Cowboys Offense doesn't scare anyone

The defense and tackling sucked. That said we did hold them to FGs, and a guy had to kick six of them without a miss to beat us. We will improve as the year goes along.
 
The offense isn't even top 10 so far. Nobody is scared. Especially when you also have a defense that's bottom of the nfl to go with it. They've been playing good defenses unlike last year.
 
Last edited:
if the rams had only scored td on two of all the field goals they kicked the score would of been 43 to 30 so there is that in the secondhalf this game with the rams was not close at all
 
birdwells1 said:
That execution excuse is a throw down for coach's who offense gets stagnant. The Rams had misses and miscues also. I was at the game and the Rams offense was more diverse than the Cowboys, the verticle passing game doesn't work as well as teams who use rub routes, crossing routes, legal pick plays. This is what the Patriots, Falcons, Rams, Washington and Steelers use, they don't rely on "players winning individual battle" they scheme them to win battles.

People get down on Dez but if you put him in Pittsburgh you'd see his numbers reflect Browns numbers. This year the few time they've run Dez on crossing routes he's been successful but the just don't do it enough.
Click to expand...

This is evident in the number of times receivers for these teams, even the #1 stud, catches passes on the run with no one even near him.

I never understood why everyone on this board was clamoring that Dak had to learn to throw the 20 yard passes this offseason. I'd be fine with 90% of his passes being less than 10, as long as the receiver is on the move and he's not forcing it to one guy. That long developing vertical game is what makes teams inconsistent.
 
TheHerd said:
This is evident in the number of times receivers for these teams, even the #1 stud, catches passes on the run with no one even near him.

I never understood why everyone on this board was clamoring that Dak had to learn to throw the 20 yard passes this offseason. I'd be fine with 90% of his passes being less than 10, as long as the receiver is on the move and he's not forcing it to one guy. That long developing vertical game is what makes teams inconsistent.
Click to expand...

Absolutely, the way to beat man coverage is to run crossing routes, don't run to man coverage run away from it. That's what the good OCs do, they don't settle for the number 1 wr being used as a decoy. OBJ also runs lots of crossing routes. When Dez scored in Arizona? Crossing route.
 
Idgit said:
Our fans complete inability to evaluate offensive production in context despite it constantly being pointed out to them?
Click to expand...

I really don't think its an inability to evaluate the offense...............its pretty simple to evaluate. Like you said, we don't use schemes to trick anybody, we run basic plays that pretty much everybody has seen and we rely on execution for the play to work. Now last year we sent 6 players on offense to the probowl, that is over half of the offensive starters. So yea, our offense was pretty effective because over half the starters were playing at such a high level that it didn't matter that the defense pretty much knew what the plays were, they couldn't stop them.

So what is the problem with this type of offense? It relies more on talent than scheme to work effectively. You really do need more than half of your starters to be playing at a probowl level for this style of offense to work, because when you play teams with equal or even greater talent and they pretty much know what plays you are running, it does not work so good. Now we still have pretty good talent on offense, so its not terrible, but this is no longer considered a top offense.

As a result, this year we are 13th in scoring offense.............that is not going to get it done when your defense is 26th in points allowed.
 
Zman5 said:
I never said we shouldn't run so I don't know why you keep bring this up. I'm saying we need to change the overall scheme for both pass and run. Not how much we should run or pass.
Click to expand...
i keep saying it because thats the scheme and we not doing it well
a good run game opens up everything else
 
birdwells1 said:
That execution excuse is a throw down for coach's who offense gets stagnant. The Rams had misses and miscues also. I was at the game and the Rams offense was more diverse than the Cowboys, the verticle passing game doesn't work as well as teams who use rub routes, crossing routes, legal pick plays. This is what the Patriots, Falcons, Rams, Washington and Steelers use, they don't rely on "players winning individual battle" they scheme them to win battles.

People get down on Dez but if you put him in Pittsburgh you'd see his numbers reflect Browns numbers. This year the few time they've run Dez on crossing routes he's been successful but the just don't do it enough.
Click to expand...

It's not an excuse by any definition, since the coaches are as much responsible for getting execution correct as they are for their schemes. I'd also suggest no excuse is necessary for an offense that scores at a higher rate than all but 6 other teams when it gets the ball, against a sample that includes some pretty good defenses.

WAS and PIT are both underperforming the Cowboys offense fairly significantly so far. Rams are #1 overall, NE #2, and ATL #4. Dallas, as I said above, is #7. The issue isn't the offense.
 
Beast_from_East said:
Just curious Idgit, but shouldn't a head coach that has been on the job for 8 years already have some of these problems addressed?
Click to expand...

Fair question. I'd say, 'yes,' for sure. But also recognize that there's a lot to address, and everything it relative in the NFL. The LBs are a problem because our top two players were out injured and we were relying heavily on a player who is not all the way back. The tackling problems are unusual for Marinelli's teams, so, while it's maddening, it's also the kind of thing you frequently see teams clean up during a season. The fact that we can't find a second S who can play has driven me nuts for years, and, yes, that's on Garrett and the organization.
 
visionary said:
Denver HC "built" in 1 year what we've been

Trying


To


Build


For


6


Years


It's a process
Click to expand...

DEN hasn't won anything with it's new HC yet. But, even if they had, that's a silly way to look at things. It's not always our guy against the field. Winning championships in the NFL is hard, and not all the factors required to do so are in a head coach's hands. The fact that some of the 31 teams outperform us from year to year doesn't mean we has a coaching problem.
 
Beast_from_East said:
I really don't think its an inability to evaluate the offense...............its pretty simple to evaluate. Like you said, we don't use schemes to trick anybody, we run basic plays that pretty much everybody has seen and we rely on execution for the play to work. Now last year we sent 6 players on offense to the probowl, that is over half of the offensive starters. So yea, our offense was pretty effective because over half the starters were playing at such a high level that it didn't matter that the defense pretty much knew what the plays were, they couldn't stop them.

So what is the problem with this type of offense? It relies more on talent than scheme to work effectively. You really do need more than half of your starters to be playing at a probowl level for this style of offense to work, because when you play teams with equal or even greater talent and they pretty much know what plays you are running, it does not work so good. Now we still have pretty good talent on offense, so its not terrible, but this is no longer considered a top offense.

As a result, this year we are 13th in scoring offense.............that is not going to get it done when your defense is 26th in points allowed.
Click to expand...

I don't buy the argument that our offense is necessarily any more reliant on talent than anybody else's. But even if I did, the organization drafts and the coaches develop the players, so they get credit, either way.

If you want a good example of why sophisticated isn't always better, though, look at our last two defensive systems. Fat Rob's multiples defense everybody was all excited about when he got here was all the rage. Except it didn't work. We scrapped it in favor of a simplified defense that's based on technique and execution and hustling to the ball. It's not rocket science, and it's not good enough, but it's a good example of how 'more complicated' doesn't always mean 'better.'
 
TheCount said:
It's worth listening to his thoughts, and it's thoughts he and others have echoed before.

His criticism is that the coaches aren't creating mismatches. Defenders don't have to think much when going against our offense because it's just the basics, so a defender can react quicker because they aren't confused by what we do.

He's not wrong.
Click to expand...
been that way for years. Garrett is saying if we could do it when we were winning superbowls we can do it now. Big problem we don't have that Oline, Defense or Aikman, Irving and Smith.

I remember Garrett saying it shouldn't matter if the defense knows what your doing. If u execute the play correctly u should win.
 
This is the same boring offense that Peyton Peyton played in his entire career in Indy. Unfortunately, for us we don't have Peyton Manning, or Marvin Harrison.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Staff online

Members online

... and 75 more.
Total: 7,007 (members: 175, guests: 6,832)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
464,094
Messages
13,788,567
Members
23,772
Latest member
BAC2662
Back
Top