Red Exploitation

[Hoofbite]

wasn't red the one that campaigned to get Johnson and keep him as our backup?

Obviously that would have worked out better if only Brad had executed.

 

[Dough Boy]

If execution was so important, you wouldn't have high paid OCs. Also, if coaching was so important, you wouldn't have ridiculously paid players.

The same reason players make more than OC's. They are both important. Play calling is important. In my mind, execution is vastly under-rated.

Big time players make big time plays in big time moments.

Riddle me this: last year's SB, the winning td in the corner to Holmes. Good call or great execution by both Holmes and Rothlisberger.

 

[Arch Stanton]

The same reason players make more than OC's. They are both important. Play calling is important. In my mind, execution is vastly under-rated.

Big time players make big time plays in big time moments.

Riddle me this: last year's SB, the winning td in the corner to Holmes. Good call or great execution by both Holmes and Rothlisberger.

Everyone knows execution is overrated.

 

[CF74]

Yeah, but amigo, "one" doesn't mean "synonymous."

Sorry to break that to you.

I don't normally slip in definitions, poor choice of words. My point was simply that they go hand in hand, not that they are literally the same thing...

 

[ENGCowboy]

I think that Garrets game planning isn't the issue I think its more his playbook for this year was a little unbalanced in itself. I think that next season we will see an even more devastating offense because he will learn from his mistake this year. I think we had 2 plays at most 5 that were runs from an I formation that weren't draws. I dont have anything against the draw but sometimes you've just got to force your will on the D line especially when you have the biggest O line in the NFL.

I know its sad but looking forward to next season already!

 

[CF74]

I could not decipher what the example was supposedly about and don't wish to belabor the point.

I don't blame you Captain and I respect your decision as well as all that you bring to this forum. You are an asset to this board and are under appreciated amongst the youngsters around here. I have no desire to discredit or attack anything you post and I hope others follow suit. I have made up my mind to refrain from being negative and putting other people down when they don't see my view. I also understand how individuals can get worn down from a constant barrage of nonsense and fall into the trap of sarcasm, it comes with the territory. My only desire is to see the Cowboys win games and play above their level, and of course chew the fat with fellow fans...

 

[Dough Boy]

I don't blame you Captain and I respect your decision as well as all that you bring to this forum. You are an asset to this board and are under appreciated amongst the youngsters around here. I have no desire to discredit or attack anything you post and I hope others follow suit. I have made up my mind to refrain from being negative and putting other people down when they don't see my view. I also understand how individuals can get worn down from a constant barrage of nonsense and fall into the trap of sarcasm, it comes with the territory. My only desire is to see the Cowboys win games and play above their level, and of course chew the fat with fellow fans...

I second that motion.

 

[CF74]

I haven't even begun to read through this thread

Placing even a "majority" of blame on either is ridiculous cause none are free from it.

Essentially the play calling is infallible and the players fail to execute is what I gather.

Bingo. Execution AND Play Calling have been the culprit in our demise.

I'm just trying to bridge the gap between the two crowds of thought....

 

[Hostile]

I don't normally slip in definitions, poor choice of words. My point was simply that they go hand in hand, not that they are literally the same thing...

Yet that is exactly what you claimed that I said was nonsense.

Do you concede that?

 

[CF74]

Yet that is exactly what you claimed that I said was nonsense.

Do you concede that?

I had to look up the word to see my error. Essentially I used the wrong word in my illustration. Oh course on a literal sense I concede that, it just wasn't my intentions...:

 

[Hostile]

I haven't even begun to read through this thread and don't know what point you are referring to. Just saw the nonsense about execution being the main culprit and I think its absolutely ridiculous.

If execution was so important, you wouldn't have high paid OCs. Also, if coaching was so important, you wouldn't have ridiculously paid players.

There's a reason Norv Turner usually puts out a pretty good offense. There's a reason Wade Phillips coaches some pretty good defenses.

They are good at what they do.

Players and coaches are both responsible but I think coaching errors are far less excusable than player errors.

Players have far more to go up against then their coordinators and IMO that means OCs and DCs have far fewer excuses.

Placing even a "majority" of blame on either is ridiculous cause none are free from it.

Aw, so you admit no one pointed full blame on execution as you previously declared with toothbrush and rifle in hand.

 

[Hostile]

I had to look up the word to see my error. Essentially I used the wrong word in my illustration. Oh course on a literal sense I concede that, it just wasn't my intentions...:

Welcome to the "wall of ignorance."

:wink2:

 

[Doomsday101]

Essentially the play calling is infallible and the players fail to execute is what I gather.

Bingo. Execution AND Play Calling have been the culprit in our demise.

I'm just trying to bridge the gap between the two crowds of thought....

Playcalling is important but players can actually overcome a poor call but a great call can't overcome poor execution.

 

[CF74]

Welcome to the "wall of ignorance."

:wink2:

All right pilgrim, inquiring minds wanna know if Lord Garrett is infallible in your deductions?:stetson:

 

[Direwolf63]

Gentlemen,

It doesn't matter how brilliant a play caller is on the sidelines, if the players can't execute what is called, the play will fail.

If, on the other hand, your players can execute at a high level, play calling becomes less important. Plays will work whatever is called.

The Cowboys of the early 90's were a perfect example. The offense only had about half a dozen or so running plays. But the plays were executed with military precision and couldn't be stopped. You didn't need to be a brilliant play-caller to feed the ball to Emmitt Smith in heavy doses, then play action to Micheal Irvin or Jay Novacek every once in a while. Super Bowls were won doing this.

There are no extremes here but, to me, execution outweighs play-calling by a pretty good margin.

 

[Doomsday101]

Gentlemen,

It doesn't matter how brilliant a play caller is on the sidelines, if the players can't execute what is called, the play will fail.

If, on the other hand, your players can execute at a high level, play calling becomes less important. Plays will work whatever is called.

The Cowboys of the early 90's were a perfect example. The offense only had about half a dozen or so running plays. But the plays were executed with military precision and couldn't be stopped. You didn't need to be a brilliant play-caller to feed the ball to Emmitt Smith in heavy doses, then play action to Micheal Irvin or Jay Novacek every once in a while. Super Bowls were won doing this.

There are no extremes here but, to me, execution outweighs play-calling by a pretty good margin.

I agree. I knew what the offense was going to do in the 90's there was nothing fancy about it. Dallas would take 11 play drives handing the ball off to smith at times and there was nothing the other team could do about it.

 

[Hostile]

All right pilgrim, inquiring minds wanna know if Lord Garrett is infallible in your deductions?:stetson:

Hell no. No one is.

That doesn't change the fact that the expectations of him on this forum by a very vocal minority are ridiculously high. I should shut up because they don't get it?

You know me better than that.

 

[CF74]

Gentlemen,

It doesn't matter how brilliant a play caller is on the sidelines, if the players can't execute what is called, the play will fail.

If, on the other hand, your players can execute at a high level, play calling becomes less important. Plays will work whatever is called.

The Cowboys of the early 90's were a perfect example. The offense only had about half a dozen or so running plays. But the plays were executed with military precision and couldn't be stopped. You didn't need to be a brilliant play-caller to feed the ball to Emmitt Smith in heavy doses, then play action to Micheal Irvin or Jay Novacek every once in a while. Super Bowls were won doing this.

There are no extremes here but, to me, execution outweighs play-calling by a pretty good margin.

We aren't the 90's Cowboys and we don't have a specific set of plays that we use over and over. This team is still seeking it's identity on the offensive side of the ball other then the draw is set up by the pass. Aside from that we are still, "Getting Better," as Romo would say it.

 

[Hostile]

Gentlemen,

It doesn't matter how brilliant a play caller is on the sidelines, if the players can't execute what is called, the play will fail.

If, on the other hand, your players can execute at a high level, play calling becomes less important. Plays will work whatever is called.

The Cowboys of the early 90's were a perfect example. The offense only had about half a dozen or so running plays. But the plays were executed with military precision and couldn't be stopped. You didn't need to be a brilliant play-caller to feed the ball to Emmitt Smith in heavy doses, then play action to Micheal Irvin or Jay Novacek every once in a while. Super Bowls were won doing this.

There are no extremes here but, to me, execution outweighs play-calling by a pretty good margin.

I really don't think your examples are extremes RXP. Do we have an Emmitt Smith? Do we have anyone even close to that level?

If not, then we have to spread the ball around to multiple options because we cannot ride one horse until the other team collapses.

I love our weapons, but there is not one guy on this Offense who is so good that he can't be stopped the way Emmitt and that O-line carried our 90's teams.

Anyone who thinks we have those kinds of horses is not paying attention.

 

[Direwolf63]

We aren't the 90's Cowboys and we don't have a specific set of plays that we use over and over. This team is still seeking it's identity on the offensive side of the ball other then the draw is set up by the pass. Aside from that we are still, "Getting Better," as Romo would say it.

We aren't the '90's Cowboys, but the principles I talked about still apply.

I've heard many coaches talk about how the Colts offense is relatively simple in concept. But when you have a field general like Peyton Manning executing it, it is still almost impossible to stop.