The Myth of the Bell Cow

[5Stars]

So humor me here. If the defense is better (as we expect) and we are not passing regularly to keep up, who will we be giving the ball to regularly to control the clock? If we find that we can't hand the ball off reliably to someone, what do you think will happen next?

Romo will lose the game.

 

[Bleu Star]

Stupid Romo.

I love your sarcasm. It cracks me up regularly.

That said, Romo is a really good QB but when asked to go win games (even close low scoring ones where our defense has played manly) his brain freezes. Last year during the playoffs was the first time I have seen him keep it together in clutch moments. I personally was proud to see it and thought Dez easily caught that pass. Calling it a catch would have been vindication in so many ways for Tony. I'm still not going to be for reverting back to anything that requires placing the load back on his shoulders. It's unfair to him and anyone sitting around me when things go sour.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

The Seattle reference was tongue-in-cheek.

Example. Two offenses play the same defense.
Offense A
100 yards rushing
300 yards passing
65% completion ratio
35 passing attempts
20 rushing attempts
Win 24-21
Defense plays 7 men in the box.

Offense B
100 yards rushing
300 yards passing
65% completion ratio
35 passing attempts
20 rushing attempts
Win 24-21
Defense plays 8 men in the box.

The stats are going to look exactly the same, but the running game was more important to Offense B than to Offense A.

The correlation on passing efficiency would be exactly the same for both offenses.

The correlation on rushing efficiency would be exactly the same for both offenses.

Passing and Rushing are dependent variables and the simple statistics that are available don't define the exact dependence. The 8 men in the box vs 7 men in the box stat does not exist. Obviously, it is more complicated that just 7 vs 8 men in the box, but I'm just using that as an example; however, that stat would be much more informative that just rushing yardage.

It is the threat of the rush that caused the defense in the example to play 8 men in the box. If that offense gained the same yardage as the offense that played against 7 in the box, then it obviously is a better rushing offense, but the stats do not show it. The stronger rushing team probably also caused the defensive line to play run 1st more often which would limit their pass rush. There are several ways that a stronger rushing attack can help passing, but that won't show up in the simple stats.

If passing effectively was the only determining factor in winning and there was no dependence between passing and rushing, then LBs would cease to exist. All players would either be CBs or pass rushers.

And why in Offense B did the offense not have better passing yardage on fewer attempts? These are the questions we should be asking.

 

[Bleu Star]

Romo will lose the game.

The probability is high that he will win some and he will lose some ala 8-8 again which I have no desire to see anytime soon.

 

[5Stars]

The probability is high that he will win some and he will lose some ala 8-8 again which I have no desire to see anytime soon.

If ufcrules does not have you on "ignore" then I am not going to discuss anything Romo with you.

Let me know if or when he puts you on "ignore" then we will talk.

 

[pancakeman]

Problem is..we have tried the running by committe approach before and it just never worked.

We tried it with Julius Jones and then Felix Jones.

We tried it with MBIII and that didn't settle at all...

We have tried drafting the main horse and the complementary back and it never meshes.

Is that true? Weren't MBIII's best days as a "committee member" rather than starter, and weren't those the most effective rushing attacks the team had in recent years (before last year)?

 

[xwalker]

And why in Offense B did the offense not have better passing yardage on fewer attempts? These are the questions we should be asking.

Offense A had a to have a better passing attack to put up the same stats with 1 less defender in coverage or with a slowed pass rush.

It is just an example. The point is the stats don't show the difference. There is no way to know from the stats if the defense played 8 in the box or 7 in the box.

 

[Bleu Star]

If ufcrules does not have you on "ignore" then I am not going to discuss anything Romo with you.

Let me know if or when he puts you on "ignore" then we will talk.

lol.. ok

I guess we'll never talk Romo because I couldn't give two poops who has me on ignore.

 

[xwalker]

Fair enough.

It should have been:

I don't even what want to address...

I do agree with your other point.

 

[5Stars]

lol.. ok

I guess we'll never talk Romo because I couldn't give two poops who has me on ignore.

I'm just lumping you in with him...he could be your brother from another mother.

How embarrassing....

 

[Bleu Star]

I'm just lumping you in with him...he could be your brother from another mother.

How embarrassing....

You just never know... You and I could be cousins.

 

[5Stars]

You just never know... You and I could be cousins.

I love you, bro. And I get what you are saying.

Last season every win was because of Murray and every loss was because of Romo. I got your game, dog! lol

 

[Bleu Star]

I love you, bro. And I get what you are saying.

Last season every win was because of Murray and every loss was because of Romo. I got your game, dog! lol

You and I both know the real truth always lies somewhere in between two extremes.

 

[5Stars]

You and I both know the real truth always lies somewhere in between two extremes.

Right, the defense has been extremely bad while the offense has been extremely bad trying to cover up, or keep up, in the game. But, now that Senior Murray left the scene the Cowboys are doomed!

 

[Bleu Star]

Right, the defense has been extremely bad while the offense has been extremely bad trying to cover up, or keep up, in the game. But, now that Senior Murray left the scene the Cowboys are doomed!

Nah. They're not doomed sir sarcasm. They just have may questions at RB that weren't there going into last year's TC. I'm excited to see what sort of product we field defensively this year with the infusion of talent but I am equally interested in seeing us continue to control the clock on O.

 

[5Stars]

Nah. They're not doomed sir sarcasm. They just have may questions at RB that weren't there going into last year's TC. I'm excited to see what sort of product we field defensively this year with the infusion of talent but I am equally interested in seeing us continue to control the clock on O.

Well, don't hold your breath. Since Murray left you just know that Romo is going to throw a pick that loses the game.

Question about your question about going into last years TC? Did you, the Pope, Stevie Wonder, or Hillary Clinton know that Murray was going to do what he did this past season?

 

[blindzebra]

In my mind, the ideal offense fits into a template that looks something like this:

• 4000+ yard, 30+ TD passer
• 2 1000+ yard WRs (or a 1000 yard WR and a nice mix of WR2, WR3, and TE1)
• 1200 yard rusher who rushes for at least 4.5ypc

An offense like that means you have balance, that you can hurt teams any number of ways on any given down, etc

It also requires a defense that can stand on its own. We overran last year and anyone expecting a repeat of that amount of running after the pieces added on defense is in for a rude awakening.

 

[Bleu Star]

Well, don't hold your breath. Since Murray left you just know that Romo is going to throw a pick that loses the game.

Question about your question about going into last years TC? Did you, the Pope, Stevie Wonder, or Hillary Clinton know that Murray was going to do what he did this past season?

I knew 3 years ago. It just took you, the coaching staff, and every other Tom Dick & Harry to figure it out. You don't remember my frustrated over utilization of the word "balance" dating back a few years?

 

[Stash]

Quite the contrary, first it was 6/10 not 7 out of 10.

Sorry, 6 out of 10, my bad. And two more who were right at or easily approaching 1,000 yards.

And 1000 is an arbitrary goal line in the first place. I don't think anyone considers a runner necessarily elite just because they get 1000 yards.

One which you mentioned. And bell cow now means 'elite'? I think you need to post your disclaimers, because the terms are getting more and more ambiguous.

The point is that at least 4 teams in the top 10 didn't have someone who even reached that level, and yet they were still clearly productive. You shift the goal to 1100 or 1200, and the numbers drop off significantly...

One of those 4 had a guy who missed time that was less than 50 yards shy of 1,000 and the other a guy who was late to the party as an injury replacement who would have easily reached that goal given enough time. Your examples do more to damage your position than to support it here.

 

[Bleu Star]

It also requires a defense that can stand on its own. We overran last year and anyone expecting a repeat of that amount of running after the pieces added on defense is in for a rude awakening.

I'm pretty sure no one was realistically expecting 1800+ again but 1500+ from Demarco was very likely behind this line.