Strange Stats

[Jongb35]

Here are a few strange stats I uncovered after reviewing the '09 regular season film:

1. The Cowboys ran only four (FOUR!) play-action passes all season with 1-4 yards-to-go.

The number of plays on the season in that range: 132. Thus, Dallas ran play-action on just 3.03% of plays in situations with just 1-4 yards to go for a first down (situations with a legitimate threat of a run). I wouldn't call myself an offensive mastermind, but that just doesn't seem efficient.

With 10 yards remaining, however, the Cowboys dialed up 54 play-action passes (40.90% of all play-action passes came on this 'distance-to-go'), making it the most frequent 'distance-to-go' for all play-action passes (relative to the number of overall plays from that distance).

Perhaps these figures are at least a partial cause of the Cowboys' lackluster success rate on play-action passes.

2. 34 of Tony Romo's 79 audibles (43.04%) were to draw plays.

Since 44 of the 79 checks were run plays, an incredible 34-of-44 (77.27%) run plays (which followed an audible) were draws. While this seems over-the-top, my analysis of Romo's audibles showed that the Cowboys averaged 5.8 yards-per-carry on these runs.

Nonetheless, the Cowboys would likely have even more success on these runs if the draw rate decreased. In a previously article, I explained why checking to a run play might be successful:

One possible explanation for the lower productivity in the passing game after checks is that defenses are more prepared to defend the pass after an audible. They may assume an audible by the opposing quarterback means he sees an opportunity for a big play, probably a pass, thus making them more likely to effectively defend the pass.

Before we place all the blame on Romo for the disproportionate draw rate, note that, in almost all circumstances, Romo does not actually choose the "new" play. The majority of the checks (75-of-79, in fact), are "kill" calls. I explained how "kill" calls work in a previous article:

Sometimes Romo will actually call an entirely new play at the line of scrimmage, while other times he will simply signal for the team to check into the second play which was called in the huddle (the team often calls two plays in the huddle, planning to run the first unless Romo checks out).

The latter scenario is marked by a phrase many of you have probably heard the Dallas’ quarterback yelling on television, “Kill, Kill, Kill!” When you hear this, Romo sees something in the defense that makes him believe the first play called in the huddle will be unsuccessful. The second play, which is the one run after the “Kill” call, is generally dissimilar to the original call to combat whatever problem Romo noticed.

Thus, on all but four plays in 2009, the Cowboys offense ran a play which was originally called by offensive coordinator Jason Garrett. If the exorbitant rate of draws-after-checks is to continue, Romo is not the only person to blame.


3. Romo threw the most off-target passes to Patrick Crayton and Roy Williams, missing on 28.4% of throws to both receivers.

The chart to the right lists the off-target passes, attempts, and off-target percentage of throws to all Cowboys' 2009 pass-catchers. In my in-depth analysis of Romo's off-target passes, I noted that I consider a pass to be 'off-target' if:

1. Romo missed a receiver who was relatively open

2. Romo was giving his best effort to acquire a completion.

Thus, spikes, throw-aways, and passes that were on-target but knocked away by a defender did not constitute ‘off-target passes.’

Of course, the percentages are not comparable among players at different positions, as Romo is more likely to be off-target to wide receivers than tight ends or running backs.

 

[Tricericon]

Here are a few strange stats I uncovered after reviewing the '09 regular season film:

1. The Cowboys ran only four (FOUR!) play-action passes all season with 1-4 yards-to-go.

The number of plays on the season in that range: 132. Thus, Dallas ran play-action on just 3.03% of plays in situations with just 1-4 yards to go for a first down (situations with a legitimate threat of a run). I wouldn't call myself an offensive mastermind, but that just doesn't seem efficient.

I tend to agree.

With 10 yards remaining, however, the Cowboys dialed up 54 play-action passes (40.90% of all play-action passes came on this 'distance-to-go'), making it the most frequent 'distance-to-go' for all play-action passes (relative to the number of overall plays from that distance).

True, but 1st and 10 is seen as a "running down". How many of those PA passes were on 1st and 10?

Perhaps these figures are at least a partial cause of the Cowboys' lackluster success rate on play-action passes.

2. 34 of Tony Romo's 79 audibles (43.04%) were to draw plays.

Since 44 of the 79 checks were run plays, an incredible 34-of-44 (77.27%) run plays (which followed an audible) were draws. While this seems over-the-top, my analysis of Romo's audibles showed that the Cowboys averaged 5.8 yards-per-carry on these runs. Nonetheless, the Cowboys would likely have even more success on these runs if the draw rate decreased.

True, the less you use a play the higher the success rate is likely to be. On the other hand, if you aren't using it you get no benefit. You must strike the correct balance between using it too much and not using it enough, and I'm not complaining about 5.8 per attempt.

In a previously article, I explained why checking to a run play might be successful:

Before we place all the blame on Romo for the disproportionate draw rate, note that, in almost all circumstances, Romo does not actually choose the "new" play. The majority of the checks (75-of-79, in fact), are "kill" calls. I explained how "kill" calls work in a previous article:

Thus, on all but four plays in 2009, the Cowboys offense ran a play which was originally called by offensive coordinator Jason Garrett. If the exorbitant rate of draws-after-checks is to continue, Romo is not the only person to blame.

Is "blame" the right word for a play that gets 5.8 per attempt?

3. Romo threw the most off-target passes to Patrick Crayton and Roy Williams, missing on 28.4% of throws to both receivers.

The chart to the right lists the off-target passes, attempts, and off-target percentage of throws to all Cowboys' 2009 pass-catchers. In my in-depth analysis of Romo's off-target passes, I noted that I consider a pass to be 'off-target' if:

1. Romo missed a receiver who was relatively open

2. Romo was giving his best effort to acquire a completion.

Thus, spikes, throw-aways, and passes that were on-target but knocked away by a defender did not constitute ‘off-target passes.’

Of course, the percentages are not comparable among players at different positions, as Romo is more likely to be off-target to wide receivers than tight ends or running backs.

I think this is a consequence of having more practice reps with Witten & Austin. Additionally, Austin (and Witten?) is a much better route runner than Williams (and Crayton?) and more likely to be where Romo expects him to be.

 

[jobberone]

Interesting stuff. I wonder what plays P Manning audibles into.

 

[AdamJT13]

What's the source for the number of play-action passes and especially the audibles?

I'm wondering how anyone not with the team would even know whether an audible was live.

 

[Jongb35]

What's the source for the number of play-action passes and especially the audibles?

I'm wondering how anyone not with the team would even know whether an audible was live.

I collected all stats, and 75 of the 79 audibles were "kill" calls. The Cowboys would gain no strategic advantage from having "dummy" kill calls as they are not true audibles, but rather checks to the second called play. We can safely assume at least 75/79 of the audibles were real.

 

[Rampage]

I've been wondering why we run so little play-action on short yardage yet run it all the time on 3rd and long.

 

[pancakeman]

It seemed to me like, given how many draws they ran, the offense was just set up as a show-pass unit.

 

[Future]

I've been wondering why we run so little play-action on short yardage yet run it all the time on 3rd and long.

jason garrett is an idiot...

 

[AdamJT13]

I collected all stats, and 75 of the 79 audibles were "kill" calls. The Cowboys would gain no strategic advantage from having "dummy" kill calls as they are not true audibles, but rather checks to the second called play. We can safely assume at least 75/79 of the audibles were real.

That's not necessarily true. If an opponent was playing a "kill" call heavily one way or another, Romo easily could tell the players in the huddle that any "kill" on that play is a dummy call.

And I would be extremely surprised if Romo called only four audibles all season that were not "kill." I'd be surprised if there weren't at least that many in every game.

 

[Jongb35]

That's not necessarily true. If an opponent was playing a "kill" call heavily one way or another, Romo easily could tell the players in the huddle that any "kill" on that play is a dummy call.

And I would be extremely surprised if Romo called only four audibles all season that were not "kill." I'd be surprised if there weren't at least that many in every game.

There is no way to play a "kill" call heavily because the call gives away no information about the play-call. It isn't a typical audible which contains actual information about the play. There is no advantage to having a dummy "kill" call because the word itself is meaningless to a defense. Further, the Cowboys run/pass balance on "kill" calls was good, meaning a defense wouldn't favor one type of play more than another anyway.

And there isn't really much I can say about the four real audibles...I'm not saying I am immune from error when entering info into my database, but there is simply no way I am off of that number by more than one or two.

 

[67CowboysFan]

There is no way to play a "kill" call heavily because the call gives away no information about the play-call. It isn't a typical audible which contains actual information about the play. There is no advantage to having a dummy "kill" call because the word itself is meaningless to a defense. Further, the Cowboys run/pass balance on "kill" calls was good, meaning a defense wouldn't favor one type of play more than another anyway.

And there isn't really much I can say about the four real audibles...I'm not saying I am immune from error when entering info into my database, but there is simply no way I am off of that number by more than one or two.

There was a NY Giant on NFLN last week (can't remember his name right now) that said the exact opposite. He told how and what adjustments they would make when Romo called kill.

 

[AdamJT13]

There is no way to play a "kill" call heavily because the call gives away no information about the play-call. It isn't a typical audible which contains actual information about the play. There is no advantage to having a dummy "kill" call because the word itself is meaningless to a defense. Further, the Cowboys run/pass balance on "kill" calls was good, meaning a defense wouldn't favor one type of play more than another anyway.

And there isn't really much I can say about the four real audibles...I'm not saying I am immune from error when entering info into my database, but there is simply no way I am off of that number by more than one or two.

Given that you apparently are not a member of the organization and don't know anything about the specific play calls or audibles, I think you are very wrong on both counts. But feel free to think whatever you want.

 

[SaltwaterServr]

but there is simply no way I am off of that number by more than one or two.

Don't buy any hats without elastic bands.

 

[Jongb35]

Given that you apparently are not a member of the organization and don't know anything about the specific play calls or audibles, I think you are very wrong on both counts. But feel free to think whatever you want.

Perhaps. Send over your play breakdowns from '09 and we can compare.

 

[AdamJT13]

Perhaps. Send over your play breakdowns from '09 and we can compare.

If I tried to break down all of the audibles, I'd have the same problem you do. I don't know our audible system, I don't know the play calls, and I don't know when audibles are live or dummy calls, so it would be presumptuous and arrogant of me to think that I could ascertain them with any great accuracy without having that knowledge.