Scott Linehan & The Running Game

[khiladi]

Not me. I think Garrett is a very good OC, but due to inexperience, wasn't ready to wear both OC and HC hats. I think being involved too deeply in the offense diverted his attention from decisions that should have had his full focus at critical points of games. I DO think offense will be improved for two reasons.

1--- the OC and the OC only, while Garrett is the HC and only the HC

2---The addition of Zac Martin

Seriously, Garrett is in a no-win situation here. If the offense improves, it's a big "I told you so" and Linehan gets all the credit. If the team doesn't win, he gets the blame. Luckily (for him) Jerry Jones makes the decisions around Valley Ranch.

He's in a no-win situation because of his own performance and the very reason the organization has no lack of direction, with Jerry provided all sorts of experienced consultants to try and rectify the situation. The guy had total control of the offense for 5 of the last 7 years he has been here. It was taken away, because it needed to be taken away. He was hired specifically because he was suppose to be the offensive genius mastermind that was innovative. Now, suddenly that's not his forte, his forte his his 'presence'.

 

[Wolfpack]

Now, suddenly that's not his forte, his forte his his 'presence'.

Don't forget clapping.

 

[Rockport]

There seems to be the notion that Scott Linehan will help the running game, or run more, or whatever.

I have two issues with the idea. First off, why would Scott Linehan even have to be brought in for the team to run more frequently? The team had a good average last year so the only thing left to help would be the willingness to run. In order for Scott Linehan to even be hired with the intent of running more you have to first believe that Jason Garrett wants to run more, which in spite of all the lip service he has paid to the topic hasn't actually manifested itself on the field.

Beyond that, if Garrett wanted to run more then why doesn't he just run more? He is the HC and if he wants more running why does he need someone else to be brought in to get it?

Secondly, the numbers just don't back up the idea that Linehan is more run-oriented.

Over his past 5 years in Detroit few teams have less rushing attempts than the Lions. Dallas is actually one of them but Detroit has run 250 additional places in that span and Dallas only nudges out Detroit by about 40 rushing attempts. Same goes for the other teams that have fewer attempts. They have far fewer total plays.

As a percentage of plays called NOBODY ran less than Scott Linehan did in Detroit. Nobody dropped back to pass more. Detroit is #1 in dropbacks over that 5 year span.

Consider this: Of the 5 highest passing attempt totals in a single season, Matthew Stafford occupies spots #1 and #5.

I know some people will argue that Detroit has a weak OL, no RBs, or whatever else. Detroit has not averaged less than 4.0 YPC and they're 4th in sack % since 2009. The OL cannot be that bad. In terms of the RB, who would expect any RB to produce enough to be noteworthy when you don't run. Furthermore, what happens if Murray doesn't hold up? Entire plan to increase running just goes out the window?

You have to go all the way back to 2002 and 2003 to find a time when Linehan could be a run-oriented playcaller.

Here are the ranks of Linehan's teams since 2002 in terms of passes attempted and rushes attempted.

2002 - R: 8 / P: 13
2003 - R: 7 / P: 15
2004 - R: 28 / P: 8
2005 - R: 17 / P: 10
2006 - R: 23 / P: 3
2007 - R: 24 / P: 9
2008 - Omitted (Fired after week 4)
2009 - R: 24 / P: 6
2010 - R: 24 / P: 3
2011 - R: 31 / P: 1
2012 - R: 25 / P: 1
2013 - R: 14 / P: 5

I'd love for the team to run more but I have little confidence they will do so. Scott Linehan has been the most pass happy coordinator over the past 5 seasons and outside of 2013, you have to dig pretty deep find a season in which he could be considered modestly interested in running.

I'd welcome it, but I don't expect it at all.

A big factor in determining the success of an offensive coordinator is his ability to adapt the offense to the strengths of his players. So past run vs pass breakdowns are really irrelevant. Detroit has a 10 ft alien WR which is a overwhelming strength against most defences and their offense is designed around getting him the ball.

 

[Rockport]

If we're able to run short yardage and goal line better, that's great. Otherwise, I don't really care if we run it more often or not, unless we're talking about closing out games because we're playing better on defense. But, for the record, I think people are fooling themselves if they expect a lot more running from Linehan. If we run it more, it'll be incremental.

I do think we'll use Dunbar in the passing/screen game a lot, though, which should be fun to see.

And if we don't run it effectively then we will not be a consistently effective offense. Being able to control the line of scrimmage offensively and defensively is what wins consistently in the NFL.

 

[Idgit]

And if we don't run it effectively then we will not be a consistently effective offense. Being able to control the line of scrimmage offensively and defensively is what wins consistently in the NFL.

It's not. Throwing effectively and defending the pass effectively is what wins. Those things have very little to do with running the ball effectively. You do need to pass protect, though, and pressure the passer, so we can agree on that at least.

 

[rpntex]

He's in a no-win situation because of his own performance and the very reason the organization has no lack of direction, with Jerry provided all sorts of experienced consultants to try and rectify the situation. The guy had total control of the offense for 5 of the last 7 years he has been here. It was taken away, because it needed to be taken away. He was hired specifically because he was suppose to be the offensive genius mastermind that was innovative. Now, suddenly that's not his forte, his forte his his 'presence'.

First off, you're clueless if you believe any offensive coordinator has "total control" when he is not also the HC. While Phillips probably didn't make any play calls, his team philosophy still had some impact on the offense Garrett called. Furthermore, supposedly (although it didn't seem that way) Garrett had the offense "taken away" from him last season, and only last season. What's more, the change to Callahan was a serious regression in offensive efficiency, which is one of the main reasons the play calling hierarchy was changed after the bye week. But..for the sake of argument, let's stipulate that he had TOTAL control of the offense from the time he walked in the doors at VR.

2007---League-wide, Dallas ranked:
Rushing YPG-18th
Passing YPG-2nd
Total YPG-3rd
Yards per play-3rd
Scoring PPG-2nd
3rd down conversion pct-10th

2008---League-wide, Dallas ranked:
Rushing YPG-21st
Passing YPG-9th
Total YPG-13th
Yards per play-9th
Scoring PPG-18th
3rd down conversion pct-9th

2009---League-wide, Dallas ranked:
Rushing YPG-7th
Passing YPG-6th
Total YPG-2nd
Yards per play-1st (tie)
Scoring PPG-14th
3rd down conversion pct-14th

2010---League-wide, Dallas ranked:
Rushing YPG-16th
Passing YPG-6th
Total YPG-7th
Yards per play-7th
Scoring PPG-7th
3rd down conversion pct-10th

2011---League-wide, Dallas ranked:
Rushing YPG-18th
Passing YPG-7th
Total YPG-15th
Yards per play-11th
Scoring PPG-10th
3rd down conversion pct-11th

2012---League-wide, Dallas ranked:
Rushing YPG-31st
Passing YPG-3rd
Total YPG-15th
Yards per play-6th
Scoring PPG-11th
3rd down conversion pct-5th

2013---League-wide, Dallas ranked:
Rushing YPG-24th
Passing YPG-14th
Total YPG-5th
Yards per play-16th
Scoring PPG-7th
3rd down conversion pct-25th

In Garrett's first six seasons with this offense, almost every aspect of his offense ranked in the top half of the league in every major statistical category. The few that weren't up there were rushing rankings, and who can say they're surprised by that? Take a closer look and you'll see a drop in just about every statistical category once he became head coach, lending credence to my statement that he just was not (and still is not) ready to wear both the coordinator and head coach hats. The offensive production was clearly better when his job was to focus on the offense and offense alone.

Garrett did an excellent job as OC when it was all he had to worry about. Nobody is arguing that a lot of his head coaching decisions were terrible, but I believe he will get better when he only has to worry about that one aspect of the job, and can leave the offense to someone else.

 

[Rockport]

It's not. Throwing effectively and defending the pass effectively is what wins. Those things have very little to do with running the ball effectively. You do need to pass protect, though, and pressure the passer, so we can agree on that at least.

Theres Nothing else to say except that you're totally wrong.

 

[Idgit]

Theres Nothing else to say except that you're totally wrong.

We can do this dance again, where you say I'm wrong, and I say the data makes it pretty clear I'm not, and you say you don't care about data, you care about what your eyes tell you, and I say I don't care what your eyes tell you because your eyes confuse 'cause' with 'effect.' If you really want to.

But I'm not wrong. And you can tell I'm not wrong by looking at the resources NFL teams put into effective running games, and comparing those resources with the resources they put in effective passing games and in stopping the pass. And it doesn't really matter that 30 year old platitudes might indicate the opposite.

 

[Rockport]

We can do this dance again, where you say I'm wrong, and I say the data makes it pretty clear I'm not, and you say you don't care about data, you care about what your eyes tell you, and I say I don't care what your eyes tell you because your eyes confuse 'cause' with 'effect.' If you really want to.

But I'm not wrong. And you can tell I'm not wrong by looking at the resources NFL teams put into effective running games, and comparing those resources with the resources they put in effective passing games and in stopping the pass. And it doesn't really matter that 30 year old platitudes might indicate the opposite.

I'm mind melding myself.

 

[Hoofbite]

First off, you're clueless if you believe any offensive coordinator has "total control" when he is not also the HC. While Phillips probably didn't make any play calls, his team philosophy still had some impact on the offense Garrett called. But..for the sake of argument, let's stipulate that he had TOTAL control of the offense from the time he walked in the doors at VR.

2007---League-wide, Dallas ranked:
Rushing YPG-18th
Passing YPG-2nd
Total YPG-3rd
Yards per play-3rd
Scoring PPG-2nd
3rd down conversion pct-10th

2008---League-wide, Dallas ranked:
Rushing YPG-21st
Passing YPG-9th
Total YPG-13th
Yards per play-9th
Scoring PPG-18th
3rd down conversion pct-9th

2009---League-wide, Dallas ranked:
Rushing YPG-7th
Passing YPG-6th
Total YPG-2nd
Yards per play-1st (tie)
Scoring PPG-14th
3rd down conversion pct-14th

2010---League-wide, Dallas ranked:
Rushing YPG-16th
Passing YPG-6th
Total YPG-7th
Yards per play-7th
Scoring PPG-7th
3rd down conversion pct-10th

2011---League-wide, Dallas ranked:
Rushing YPG-18th
Passing YPG-7th
Total YPG-15th
Yards per play-11th
Scoring PPG-10th
3rd down conversion pct-11th

2012---League-wide, Dallas ranked:
Rushing YPG-31st
Passing YPG-3rd
Total YPG-15th
Yards per play-6th
Scoring PPG-11th
3rd down conversion pct-5th

2013---League-wide, Dallas ranked:
Rushing YPG-24th
Passing YPG-14th
Total YPG-5th
Yards per play-16th
Scoring PPG-7th
3rd down conversion pct-25th

I think some of your numbers are mistaken. Looks like total yardage for the last couple years has what is actually the rank for total points in it's place.

More importantly, I think you're overlooking the fact that a team's rankings are just as likely to be a result of increased or decreased production across the league as they are to be a result of increased or decreased production by that particular team.

For example, here are the total yardage ranks (total yards) for the seasons of 2010 to 2012.

2010: 7th (5828)
2011: 11th (6008)
2012: 6th (5994)

Rank-wise 2011 is the worst of the 3 seasons but that's not actually the case. In fact, it's the complete opposite.

In Garrett's first six seasons with this offense, almost every aspect of his offense ranked in the top half of the league in every major statistical category. The few that weren't up there were rushing rankings, and who can say they're surprised by that?

Simply being in the "top half" would impress me if Brandon Weeden was his starting QB the whole time. Any team with a QB who is at least "good" should find themselves in the top half because passing accounts for the bulk of an offense's performance.

Take a closer look and you'll see a drop in just about every statistical category once he became head coach, lending credence to my statement that he just was not (and still is not) ready to wear both the coordinator and head coach hats. The offensive production was clearly better when his job was to focus on the offense and offense alone.

No, what you see is fluctuation from year to year. 2009 is the best the team has had in terms of total yards and yards/play, but after deducting defensive and special team scoring from the point totals it's also Garrett's lowest scoring season. You don't even have to deduct anything if you don't want to, it's just flat out the lowest.

After removing defensive and special teams scoring:

2007: 427 points
2008: 348 points
2009: 340 points
2010: 345 points
2011: 362 points
2012: 348 points
2013: 397 points (I don't believe this number is actually reflective solely of the offense's ability for certain reasons but that's another issue)​

Total scoring has increased (if ever so slightly) since he took the reigns.

Just some randoms:

2007: Highest point total, yet lower total yards/game (365.6) than both 2011 (375.5) and 2012 (374.5)
2008: Lowest pass yards/game (236.8)
2008: Most turnovers (33)
2008: Tied lowest yards/play (2010 the other).
2009: Highest rushing YPG (131.4)
2009: Highest yardage total (6390)
2009: Fewest total points (340)
2009: Second lowest redzone TD percentage (50.88%)
2010: Second highest redzone TD percentage (59.57%)
2011: Higher rushing YPG (112.9) than 2007 (109.1) and 2008 (107.6)
2011: Lowest redzone TD percentage (49.02%)
2012: Lowest rushing YPG (79.0)
2012: Highest pass yards/game (295.1)
2012: Highest 3rd down conversion percentage over his tenure in Dallas (43.87%).
2012: Most offensive snaps.
2013: Lowest 3rd down conversion percentage over his tenure in Dallas. (35%)
2013: Least turnovers (20)
2013: Fewest number of offensive snaps (957) AND fewest total yards (5458)
2013: 2nd highest point total (397).
2013: Highest redzone TD percentage (68.63%)​

The numbers are all over the map. What ya looking for, points? Take 2007 or 2013, but make sure not to touch 2009. You want yardage? Take 2009 but stay clear of 2013 and 2008. Protect the ball? Pick just about any year but 2007, 2008, and 2012 and you'll come out about the same. Take 2013 if you want the absolute least. Redzone efficiency? Better go with 2013 or 2010 (59.57%). 2011 and 2009 probably not the way to go.

Garrett did an excellent job as OC when it was all he had to worry about. Nobody is arguing that a lot of his head coaching decisions were terrible, but I believe he will get better when he only has to worry about that one aspect of the job, and can leave the offense to someone else.

He's done more or less the same since taking over.

Dallas has actually been pretty consistent over Garrett's entire span. Sandwiched in between the two highest point total seasons is a span of 5 seasons where the total offensive scoring ranged from 340 to 362. Yards per play are relatively similar aside from the season's where Romo missed significant time (go figure), and the oddity of 2009 where the team moved the ball the most but scored the least.

Furthermore, supposedly (although it didn't seem that way) Garrett had the offense "taken away" from him last season, and only last season. What's more, the change to Callahan was a serious regression in offensive efficiency, which is one of the main reasons the play calling hierarchy was changed after the bye week.

That's false. The team ran fewer plays than any other season yet didn't see any sort of drop in scoring. The redzone improvement is an increase in efficiency and even though I think they were given some prime opportunities that nobody should ever expect, the improvement holds up even if you censor those opportunities.

Dallas was previously a team that could rack up tons of yards but couldn't translate that to points. At least in 2013 they were just about opposite. That's increased efficiency.

As for Garrett getting back into the play calling role, that happened because he never wanted to give up that role in the first place. Why things went sour so quickly with Bill, who knows? This is the very same team who avoiding disclosing who the real playcaller was going to be just a year ago so nobody should expect to find out why another switch is being made.

Just a quick question. You claim that Jason's best years were as an OC with Wade's philosophy playing a role. Additionally, you've also claimed that Jason was overburdened with too much responsibility and that the team's offense suffered because of it (it didn't).

If Jason's best came under Wade's philosophy and Jason's worst is a product of being overburden, does anyone actually know who Jason Garrett the OC really is?

Here we are 7 years deep and you're saying he was better when strictly an OC (based on his only time as an OC under Wade's influence) and worse when saddled with too much work..........so what kind of OC is Jason Garrett? If everything he's done - both good and bad - is simply attributable to circumstance, how can anyone say whether or not Jason is actually good or bad? When will people find out?

 

[percyhoward]

2007: 427 points
2008: 348 points
2009: 340 points
2010: 345 points
2011: 362 points
2012: 348 points
2013: 397 points

The number of drives vary from year to year, so that will affect total scoring. Use points per drive.

​

 

[burmafrd]

It's not. Throwing effectively and defending the pass effectively is what wins. Those things have very little to do with running the ball effectively. You do need to pass protect, though, and pressure the passer, so we can agree on that at least.

that is where the stats guys consistently blow it. What won the SB this year? It was NOT the passing game for the hags; it was the D shutting down the Denver wrs from YAC. AFTER THE CATCH.

 

[JBS]

Funny how the good teams are transitioning into a more run heavy offense. .. the passing Teams are slowly changing.

If you look closely, you will see den, ne, and even NO and sd are slowly but surely running the ball more and more.

Pay close attention to the stats from the first half of last year and the second half last year and you'll see the jump in rushing attempts. .

Then add in sf, philly, Seattle, and it's pretty obvious how important it is to run the ball

 

[Idgit]

that is where the stats guys consistently blow it. What won the SB this year? It was NOT the passing game for the hags; it was the D shutting down the Denver wrs from YAC. AFTER THE CATCH.

Yep. I'd agree with that. We were specifically talking about the lines there, but that SEA team won because you can't throw against them effectively.

 

[Doomsday101]

Yep. I'd agree with that. We were specifically talking about the lines there, but that SEA team won because you can't throw against them effectively.

You can't run on them either. New Orleans has a great passing game they also had the 2nd ranked pass defense in the league. In the playoff game between NO and Seattle what happened? NO held seahawks to 108 passing on 18 attempts and 0 TD and NO sacked Wilson 3 times but NO weakness was they could not stop the run. NO ranked 19th vs the run they gave up over 4.6 a carry and so the Seahawks ran the ball right down their throat with Lynch getting 28 carries for 148 and 2 TD. Running game still matters and can still win games for teams.

 

[Idgit]

You can't run on them either. New Orleans has a great passing game they also had the 2nd ranked pass defense in the league. In the playoff game between NO and Seattle what happened? NO held seahawks to 108 passing on 18 attempts and 0 TD and NO sacked Wilson 3 times but NO weakness was they could not stop the run. NO ranked 19th vs the run they gave up over 4.6 a carry and so the Seahawks ran the ball right down their throat with Lynch getting 28 carries for 148 and 2 TD. Running game still matters and can still win games for teams.

I'd agree you can't run on them. Offensively, a running game matters if it helps you avoid situations where you're passing ineffectively, which is exactly what's going on in SEA. It's a huge lift when your team plays effective pass defense like that.

 

[Doomsday101]

I'd agree you can't run on them. Offensively, a running game matters if it helps you avoid situations where you're passing ineffectively, which is exactly what's going on in SEA. It's a huge lift when your team plays effective pass defense like that.

Seahawks are a running team they threw less than any team in the NFL, Lynch is a major part of that offense. As for defense check the top rated defense in the league they are very good run and pass not one or the other. Without lynch sorry I don't think Wilson carries them. I think passing does matter but when people say running can't win game? BS it does and it has and Seahawks have shown it.
New orleans plays great pass defense as I mentioned they held seahawks to 108 passing but New Orleans run defense was ranked 19th in the NFL and the seahawks ran that ball right at them and New Orleans could not stop them. Lynch 148 2 TD yet New Orleans being a top ranked pass defense did not help them.

 

[Idgit]

Seahawks are a running team they threw less than any team in the NFL, Lynch is a major part of that offense. As for defense check the top rated defense in the league they are very good run and pass not one or the other. Without lynch sorry I don't think Wilson carries them. I think passing does matter but when people say running can't win game? BS it does and it has and Seahawks have shown it.
New orleans plays great pass defense as I mentioned they held seahawks to 108 passing but New Orleans run defense was ranked 19th in the NFL and the seahawks ran that ball right at them and New Orleans could not stop them. Lynch 148 2 TD yet New Orleans being a top ranked pass defense did not help them.

I'm not sure how much we're disagreeing, but it's passing game efficiency differential that wins football games. The SEA do it by being hard to pass against effectively, and they can lean on their run offense to hold serve and avoiding having to make risky plays with their own passing offense. That's a recipe for winning a lot of games. The Saints game, you mention, for example. You can beat a team running the ball if you can hold Drew Brees to 147 yards passing on 3.9 YPA and less than 50 yards receiving all day to his WR corps...combined.

The Seahawks win because you can't pass against them. Also, they sometimes run the ball.

 

[Doomsday101]

I'm not sure how much we're disagreeing, but it's passing game efficiency differential that wins football games. The SEA do it by being hard to pass against effectively, and they can lean on their run offense to hold serve and avoiding having to make risky plays with their own passing offense. That's a recipe for winning a lot of games. The Saints game, you mention, for example. You can beat a team running the ball if you can hold Drew Brees to 147 yards passing on 3.9 YPA and less than 50 yards receiving all day to his WR corps...combined.

The Seahawks win because you can't pass against them. Also, they sometimes run the ball.

lol, New orleans has a great pass defense ranking 2nd in the league what they could not do is stiop the run Seahawks are not a great passing team they are a running team they win because of their ability to run the ball. yes they can stop the pass they can stop the run that is what good championship defense do they stop the opposing team be it on the ground or in the air.

In the game between NO and Seahawks Brees threw for 309 1 TD no ints and sacked only once. Teams can run and win games in this league, not every team is built the same way Seahawks lean on the run and pass effectively defensively again they play both run and pass very well they really have few weakness on defense to expliot.

 

[Idgit]

lol, New orleans has a great pass defense ranking 2nd in the league what they could not do is stiop the run Seahawks are not a great passing team they are a running team they win because of their ability to run the ball. yes they can stop the pass they can stop the run that is what good championship defense do they stop the opposing team be it on the ground or in the air.

In the game between NO and Seahawks Brees threw for 309 1 TD no ints and sacked only once. Teams can run and win games in this league, not every team is built the same way Seahawks lean on the run and pass effectively defensively again they play both run and pass very well they really have few weakness on defense to expliot.

We talking about the same game?

http://scores.espn.go.com/nfl/boxscore?gameId=331202026