The hate against Tony Romo, Jason Garrett, and our offense

[Bleu Star]

I don't fault running only 10 times. We were down to one running back, a rookie running back at that. Choice was effective but he isn't a workhorse and in today's NFL you have to have two backs to run the ball 30-35 times. We didn't have that luxury. Plus Choice was catching screen passes. That is a heavy load for any running back.

How exactly do you know this? It's not like he has played all season for us... You feed the hot hand and you keep feeding it until it cools off... then you kill em with a play fake...

Choice had 297 attempts from scrimmage as a Junior and 261 as a senior... That breaks down to about 25 per game over a 10-12 game season depending on whether or not they go to a bowl game.

The guy is fresh and ready. Let's look at his last 7 games...

Date Opp. Att Yds Lg TD
11/02 NYG 5 27 12 0
11/16 WAS 1 6 6 0
11/23 SF 6 18 8 0
11/27 SEA 11 57 27 0
12/07 PIT 23 88 22 0
12/14 NYG 9 91 38 1
12/20 BAL 17 90 29 1

I'm no rocket scientist but it seems to me he is a RB built to carry the load... and he gets hotter when given more opportunities to make a play... So you feed him until he proves you wrong. He had 17 runs from scrimmage against the Ravens. I would prefer to have seen that up around 25 to help balance out the ridiculously predictably passing we were doing and keep the Ravens guessing.

 

[bootsy]

Nobody was saying we needed to run the ball to Choise 30-35 times, nor did anyone say that was the magic number to beat the Baltimore Ravens.

I didn't say you did say Choice should run it 30-35 times. I said most teams rotate their running backs and end up with 30-35 carries a game.

The problem IS the ratio. Without effectively running the ball consistently (we were effective, just not consistent because as soon as running for 30 yards we'd try and air it out) you CANNOT set up the play-action pass. When you can't set up the play-action pass, the opposing defense can keep playing the pass all day and dare you to beat them with the run when THEY KNOW you're not going to run it because your offensive coordinator is a "genius."

The ratio again is the problem. You can't run Choice like that especially when he was also catching passes out of the backfield as well. Isn't that what most were complaining about Barber and using him too much. In this case we had no choice(pun intended) because he was our only healthy back. If you run Choice like that then he would have nothing left for the second half. The reason the ratio is 10/17 is because Garrett and the coaching staff knew they were down to one back and had to pass more than run. My problem is the choice of pass plays and that is why we didn't have the lead going into halftime and probably why we didn't win the game.

 

[bootsy]

How exactly do you know this? It's not like he has played all season for us... You feed the hot hand and you keep feeding it until it cools off... then you kill em with a play fake...

Choice had 297 attempts from scrimmage as a Junior and 261 as a senior... That breaks down to about 25 per game over a 10-12 game season depending on whether or not they go to a bowl game.

The guy is fresh and ready. Let's look at his last 7 games...

Date Opp. Att Yds Lg TD
11/02 NYG 5 27 12 0
11/16 WAS 1 6 6 0
11/23 SF 6 18 8 0
11/27 SEA 11 57 27 0
12/07 PIT 23 88 22 0
12/14 NYG 9 91 38 1
12/20 BAL 17 90 29 1

I'm no rocket scientist but it seems to me he is a RB built to carry the load... and he gets hotter when given more opportunities to make a play... So you feed him until he proves you wrong. He had 17 runs from scrimmage against the Ravens. I would prefer to have seen that up around 25 to help balance out the ridiculously predictably passing we were doing and keep the Ravens guessing.

I don't think Choice can carry the load. There aren't many back in the NFL that carry the load by themselves. Maybe Tomlinson and some others but most teams use two back. I just don't think you can run Choice like that when you only have one healthy back. If he gets hurt because of overuse then you are down to nothing. They ran him the right amount of times against the Ravens. 17 carries is good enough for the situation we were in. My problem(as I said in an earlier post) is the type of pass plays called or the ones Romo attempted that got us in trouble.

 

[Bleu Star]

I don't think Choice can carry the load. There aren't many back in the NFL that carry the load by themselves. Maybe Tomlinson and some others but most teams use two back. I just don't think you can run Choice like that when you only have one healthy back. If he gets hurt because of overuse then you are down to nothing. They ran him the right amount of times against the Ravens. 17 carries is good enough for the situation we were in. My problem(as I said in an earlier post) is the type of pass plays called or the ones Romo attempted that got us in trouble.

I'll agree to disagree then. I feel he could have used a few more carries.

 

[kramskoi]

There's a lot of hate being spread around these forums against our offense in general, and Tony Romo and Jason Garrett specifically. One thing that keeps sticking in my head is this: Think about who we've played in the last three weeks.

Pittsburgh is the unquestioned number one defense in the land. A friend of mine is big Steelers homer and loves to point out that opposing QBs always seem to have a "bad day" when they play his favorite team. Romo had a bad day. Could it be that he played a very good defense?

The Giants have another of the top defenses in the land -- number 7 in the league as I write this. They also know our team very well. Romo didn't have a great game. On top of playing a tough defense, he was also playing hurt.

The Ravens currently have the number two defense in the league. Romo, again, had a bad day against them.

Are you starting to see the pattern here? Could it be that instead of our offense just sucking and our offense just sucking ... our offensive woes could be blamed on the fact that in three weeks we've played three of the top defenses in the NFL?

How many INT's did Romo have in the New York game? What about Arizona and Washington? Dallas lost to Baltimore the same way they did against those two teams, sputtering on offense until the final minutes of the fourth quarter.

This offense is'nt right...not enough running, too many pre-snap penalties, too many INT's, too many 2nd/3rd and longs, too many miscommunications, etc. etc.

They are not sustaining many clock-eating drives. This hurts the defense late in the game.

They should be playing their best ball right now. You don't get to play Seattle and San Francisco every sunday.

Judging by the rankings, Dallas needs to run more and score more turnovers...TOP and Turnover differential...the Giants hold the ball more than three minutes longer than the Cowboys and are +8 while Dallas is -7...run more, less INT's and fumbles by the offense, more by the defense.

 

[percyhoward]

I don't fault running only 10 times. We were down to one running back, a rookie running back at that.

I'm with you that we threw deep way too much, but I don't buy the idea that Choice's reduced carries had anything to do with injury fears. Romo is the only QB we have who gives us any chance of winning, and we had him drop back 18 times in the first half.

 

[bootsy]

I'm with you that we threw deep way too much, but I don't buy the idea that Choice's reduced carries had anything to do with injury fears. Romo is the only QB we have who gives us any chance of winning, and we had him drop back 18 times in the first half.

That's why I was saying we should have used short routes, quick slants and we did use screens. That's how you don't risk anything with Romo throwing 18 times.

 

[kramskoi]

Like what has been said, he didn't turn the ball over. He gave us a chance to win it. He was off quite a bit in that game as well, I thought he was being overly cautious with his throws but he may have just been inaccurate. If he had done the same against the Ravens, then the 10 minutes of the game where he was really on might have been enough to win it for us.

The reason Romo is taking so much heat is that we could be 3-0 over this last stretch pretty easily, but his turnovers and inaccuracy lately have killed us in both those games we lost.

and this is how he will be judged, by what he does in Dec/Jan. Not saying it's totally fair but it's the nature of the beast.

 

[percyhoward]

That's why I was saying we should have used short routes, quick slants and we did use screens. That's how you don't risk anything with Romo throwing 18 times.

Passing 18 times out of 28 plays is not how you beat the Ravens. No team has done it this year.

 

[kramskoi]

How exactly do you know this? It's not like he has played all season for us... You feed the hot hand and you keep feeding it until it cools off... then you kill em with a play fake...

Choice had 297 attempts from scrimmage as a Junior and 261 as a senior... That breaks down to about 25 per game over a 10-12 game season depending on whether or not they go to a bowl game.

The guy is fresh and ready. Let's look at his last 7 games...

Date Opp. Att Yds Lg TD
11/02 NYG 5 27 12 0
11/16 WAS 1 6 6 0
11/23 SF 6 18 8 0
11/27 SEA 11 57 27 0
12/07 PIT 23 88 22 0
12/14 NYG 9 91 38 1
12/20 BAL 17 90 29 1

I'm no rocket scientist but it seems to me he is a RB built to carry the load... and he gets hotter when given more opportunities to make a play... So you feed him until he proves you wrong. He had 17 runs from scrimmage against the Ravens. I would prefer to have seen that up around 25 to help balance out the ridiculously predictably passing we were doing and keep the Ravens guessing.

nice observation. Offensive balance. The monkey in that wrench was Garrett thinking he had to discard the run because Dallas was trailing from the end of the second quarter...might Garrett's approach been different if Dallas was up 7-6, 14-6 or 10-6 in the third, figuring without the Reed INT that Dallas gets at least a FG before half? Who knows but the overthrow to Austin really hurt the offense and running the ball after that probably soured on Garrett. It seems the Romo/Garrett defecit reflex is to go for the big play when maybe staying patient and holding the balance might be the order of the day.

One thing's for sure...they had better feed Choice sunday or it could be a long day.

 

[alancdc]

In theory I would agree with this. However, we have too much offensive tallent so, to me, they are great defenses but Dallas should be the number one rated offense so we need to play like it. There is not another team, maybe Indy that has the offensive weapons we have.

 

[bootsy]

Passing 18 times out of 28 plays is not how you beat the Ravens. No team has done it this year.

You can most certainly beat the Ravens that way. Like I said it is the type of passing plays that did us in. We didn't have that luxury to run it down their throats with one healthy running back.

 

[percyhoward]

You can most certainly beat the Ravens that way. Like I said it is the type of passing plays that did us in. We didn't have that luxury to run it down their throats with one healthy running back.

Name one team that has come out throwing and beaten the Ravens.

 

[zeromaster]

If the arguments are going to be that "we went against three top defenses" and "Romo is still learning", I guess we shouldn't be talking about Super Bowl, right?

 

[dcfanatic]

No what he is saying is that you people seem to forget that there are other teams in a game. Teams of professionals who want to win too. Sometimes those teams possess great defenses and play better on a given day.

Each loss doesn't mean someone on Dallas' team sucks and needs to be fired/cut. I mean, at least to people over age 7.

You are all about that loser mentality stuff Wade.

Constantly finding ways to excuse poor play and saying things can be fixed.

Wake up. It's Week 17 and we have one more game left to make it happen or else.

The days of laying back and hoping and praying things will work themselves out are long gone.

It's time to walk the walk.

 

[5Countem5]

You are all about that loser mentality stuff Wade.

Constantly finding ways to excuse poor play and saying things can be fixed.

Wake up. It's Week 17 and we have one more game left to make it happen or else.

The days of laying back and hoping and praying things will work themselves out are long gone.

It's time to walk the walk.

Far be it for me to take a YOU to task about what constitutes what a loser is BUT:

I guess in your world Dallas controls every outcome. They play well and win or if they lose it's only because they sucked. I guess it has nothing to do with the other team that, to you, ONLY plays a specific and standard game each and every week with no variations. It Dallas' greatness or suckiness that determines the outcome...

 

[dcfanatic]

Far be it for me to take a YOU to task about what constitutes what a loser is BUT:

I guess in your world Dallas controls every outcome. They play well and win or if they lose it's only because they sucked. I guess it has nothing to do with the other team that, to you, ONLY plays a specific and standard game each and every week with no variations. It Dallas' greatness or suckiness that determines the outcome...

You are the only one laughing at what you wrote Wade.

I am sorry I haven't lowered my expectations because the team is dumb and makes far too many mistakes which leads to stupid losses.

I will go your route and just be happy the team actually plays in the games.

:bang2: :bang2: :bang2: :bang2:

Might as well root for the Lions with that attitude.

And about controling the game. Who in their right mind would want a team that can't try to control whether it wins or loses the games? Isn't that the point of keeping score? They aren't just playing for fun ya know.

 

[5Countem5]

You are the only one laughing at what you wrote Wade.

I am sorry I haven't lowered my expectations because the team is dumb and makes far too many mistakes which leads to stupid losses.

I will go your route and just be happy the team actually plays in the games.

:bang2: :bang2: :bang2: :bang2:

Might as well root for the Lions with that attitude.

And about controling the game. Who in their right mind would want a team that can't try to control whether it wins or loses the games? Isn't that the point of keeping score? They aren't just playing for fun ya know.

So in your whine - world, you do not see a situation in which another team comes into Texas Stadium and wins a game because they play a better game, over their heads, and simply just had their s*** together better on that day and won?

That situation, to you, would still be Dallas sucking and blowing it?


LOL...... You're pathetic

 

[TheCount]

So in your whine - world, you do not see a situation in which another team comes into Texas Stadium and wins a game because they play a better game, over their heads, and simply just had their s*** together better on that day and won?

That situation, to you, would still be Dallas sucking and blowing it?


LOL...... You're pathetic

What professional athlete goes into a game thinking, "Well I prepared, but hey, they may just play better and beat us. Oh well." before the game even starts? You're calling him pathetic? That type of mentality is pathetic.

 

[5Countem5]

What professional athlete goes into a game thinking, "Well I prepared, but hey, they may just play better and beat us. Oh well." before the game even starts? You're calling him pathetic? That type of mentality is pathetic.

No, that's not even close...

Let me ask you, Count, is it possible for a team to lose- without sucking? Or is every loss, by every team come down to sucking?