Red Exploitation

[CF74]

Sometimes it is sometimes it is not. Coaches can't play the game for players.

No it's a 50/50 proposition.

MMMM........That statement could cause a range war......





Craig

I hope so. I'm tired of people saying it's only one or the other when clearly it is both...

While I see where you are going. At the end of the day... "run the correct route", "block your man", etc etc... has nothing to do with playcalling or coaching. At some point you have to put it on the players.

I concur but when you keep failing in specific areas and excelling at others, you have to look at the top. We've seen this time and again under the new regime...

 

[AMERICAS_FAN]

Execution is a 50/50 proposition in the success of the play.

Play Calling is a 50/50 proposition in the success of the play.

Coaching is ultimately responsible for the two.


Do I need to explain further?

Dude, you're arguing against a wall of ignorance. Good luck! :laugh2:

 

[Hostile]

Dude, you're arguing against a wall of ignorance. Good luck! :laugh2:

Actually you both probably are not understanding the word "synonymous." Which means "the same thing."

Play calling and execution and coaching are not the same thing. They are symbiotic or, "reliant upon each other," but they are not synonymous.


Forgive me, just breaking down the wall of ignorance.

 

[Doomsday101]

No it's a 50/50 proposition.


I hope so. I'm tired of people saying it's only one or the other when clearly it is both...



I concur but when you keep failing in specific areas and excelling at others, you have to look at the top. We've seen this time and again under the new regime...

If it was 50/50 players would not be making more money than any HC in the NFL. Hell Garrett is making 3 mill Tony Romo blows that out of the water. Players play the game and you can put up the best plays and game plan but if the players fail to execute they will not win. Coaches do play a big part but even the best coaches out there will get beat

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

I concur but when you keep failing in specific areas and excelling at others, you have to look at the top. We've seen this time and again under the new regime...

For me, before I change an offensive philosophy that is working and working very well. Honestly I would change players before I change philosophy.

Out with Roy if he doesnt do his job this year.
Out with Crayton maybe and slide OTree in there.
Martellus may be a lifetime blocker because he doesnt run the right routes and then drops passes.

 

[CF74]

Yep, you do. It stops way short of actually being what you claimed.

I'm not denying that execution is a problem but I am saying that sometimes the coaches are not giving us the edge we need in certain games, specifically in the heat of the battle adjustments.

We execute well against weaker teams and we pad our stats but when faced with stiffer competition we either get completely shut out or we fold. This has been the trend or pattern for 3 years now.

It's not ALL execution and it is not ALL on the coaches, it's both. And play calling has to hide your weaknesses and give you an edge or at least provide the element of surprise in critical situations.


Example: 1st and goal from the 2. We lined up in goal line formation, we only had 1 WR out wide once, we had 2 or 3 TE's in, and we ran the ball 4 times. They knew it was coming all 4 times.

One could easily say, well we just couldn't execute even though we had ran the ball all the way down the field in that same drive. The O-line just couldn't EXECUTE the final push.

We could also say, where was the element of surprise? And if something fails 3 times in a row, why try it again? Play calling was also an issue here. Had we lined up 3 or 4 WR's out wide, we may have had a better chance of running it in the 4rth time or even better than that, on the 3rd try.

The O-line is big and it gets gassed and sometimes it needs the coaches to step in and give them an edge. It also needs depth because these big ole guys wear down towards the end of the season...

 

[CF74]

Actually you both probably are not understanding the word "synonymous." Which means "the same thing."

Play calling and execution and coaching are not the same thing. They are symbiotic or, "reliant upon each other," but they are not synonymous.


Forgive me, just breaking down the wall of ignorance.

When they become ONE, they will be unstoppable.

 

[Hostile]

When they become ONE, they will be unstoppable.

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

Sorry to break that to you.

 

[Dough Boy]

When they become ONE, they will be unstoppable.

Execution and play calling are not the same thing. One can compliment the other (in either direction) but to call them the same is a misnomer.

For the record, execution is far more important than play calling. Play calling can only take you so far, execution is the most critical aspect to winning a football game; that and the lack of penalties. In my mind, penalties were a far greater factor (in determining wins & losses) than any other aspect of the 2009 Cowboys. If they clean up the penalties, this team would be unstoppable.

For the record, penalties effect play calling. Not many good plays for 3rd and 25. With Dallas run game and off line, if we keep away from negative plays and penalties, I think Romo can complete a high % of 3rd and avg yardage plays. Avg yardage on 3rd down being defined as 6 yds are fewer.

 

[Hostile]

I'm not denying that execution is a problem but I am saying that sometimes the coaches are not giving us the edge we need in certain games, specifically in the heat of the battle adjustments.

How do you know this? If this is just your theory, then please simply own it.

We execute well against weaker teams and we pad our stats but when faced with stiffer competition we either get completely shut out or we fold. This has been the trend or pattern for 3 years now.

I was not aware that the Eagles were a weaker team. Can you help me discover when this happened?

It's not ALL execution and it is not ALL on the coaches, it's both. And play calling has to hide your weaknesses and give you an edge or at least provide the element of surprise in critical situations.

Yes, it is both, and both does not mean "synonymous."

Example: ~clipped~

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

 

[Hostile]

Execution and play calling are not the same thing. One can compliment the other (in either direction) but to call them the same is a misnomer.

For the record, execution is far more important than play calling. Play calling can only take you so far, execution is the most critical aspect to winning a football game; that and the lack of penalties. In my mind, penalties were a far greater factor (in determining wins & losses) than any other aspect of the 2009 Cowboys. If they clean up the penalties, this team would be unstoppable.

For the record, penalties effect play calling. Not many good plays for 3rd and 25. With Dallas run game and off line, if we keep away from negative plays and penalties, I think Romo can complete a high % of 3rd and avg yardage plays. Avg yardage on 3rd down being defined as 6 yds are fewer.

I would like to welcome you to "the wall of ignorance."

:wink2:

 

[Hoofbite]

If everything is about execution, who the **** needs an offensive coordinator?

 

[Dough Boy]

I would like to welcome you to "the wall of ignorance."

:wink2:

Blissfully ignorant I am!!!

 

[Hostile]

If everything was about execution, who the **** needs an offensive coordinator?

I don't remember anyone claiming it is all about execution, but thanks for jumping to that conclusion and proving an earlier point I made.

Mucho apreciado amigo.

 

[Dough Boy]

If everything was about execution, who the **** needs an offensive coordinator?

One would have to conclude that a play must be called first before it could be executed...

FYI: Peyton Manning has been running the same plays since he joined the league. You don't think D-coordinators know what they are going to run. They do; he and that Off just out execute them.

Why do you think he and Harrison (before he left) and now Wayne run plays at full speed hours before the game. To get their timing down on that day. Not to rehearse the plays that they already know.

 

[Dough Boy]

I don't remember anyone claiming it is all about execution, but thanks for jumping to that conclusion and proving an earlier point I made.

Mucho apreciado amigo.

I agree. Its not all about execution. But in my mind, execution is more important than play calling. Play calling is the most over-hyped theory in football. Does play calling matter. Yes - no question about that. Running the right route, catching the ball, blocking your man to give the QB time to find the open man... Those things matter - if you are into winning that is

 

[Hostile]

I agree. Its not all about execution. But in my mind, execution is more important than play calling. Play calling is the most over-hyped theory in football. Does play calling matter. Yes - no question about that. Running the right route, catching the ball, blocking your man to give the QB time to find the open man... Those things matter - if you are into winning that is

Babe Laufenberg quoted Ernie Zampese about play calling as an easy scapegoat and it was so true. Ernie said a 6 year old can blame play calling if a play fails.

Oh for some 7 year olds...

 

[Dough Boy]

Babe Laufenberg quoted Ernie Zampese about play calling as an easy scapegoat and it was so true. Ernie said a 6 year old can blame play calling if a play fails.

Oh for some 7 year olds...

Yup. Biggest cop out ever.

 

[Hoofbite]

I don't remember anyone claiming it is all about execution, but thanks for jumping to that conclusion and proving an earlier point I made.

Mucho apreciado amigo.

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.

 

[burmafrd]

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