This is so comical

[Kevinicus]

How are you attacking a defense if you don't give your qb multiple option to attack a defense? Otherwise the defense just sits on one concept. ...the 3 options carried they're own concept. One was a handoff to the Rb, one was a run by the qb, and one was a pitch to Beasley. You had options to attack both sides of the field. Lol maybe you should be quiet you look real foolish right now. It often said to be quiet and be thought to be a fool, then open your mouth and remove all doubt....lol

3 options - bad design:

Option a: Zeke runs right of center
Option b: Beasely runs right of center
Option c: Dak runs right of center

That's a play with 3-options but terrible design. All plays have options (do you understand this?). It's how you use those options and give them the best chance to succeed that determimes good play design. So for the 10th time, what about this design makes it good?

 

[Dre11]

3 options - bad design:

Option a: Zeke runs right of center
Option b: Beasely runs right of center
Option c: Dak runs right of center

That's a play with 3-options but terrible design. All plays have options (do you understand this?). It's how you use those options and give them the best chance to succeed that determimes good play design. So for the 10th time, what about this design makes it good?

You're showing your ignorance...lol ,it's like I'm talking to Barney about football...lol

 

[HungryLion]

Lost in all this arguing over details.

Did the cowboys win? Nope? Then the coaching failed.

Pretty simple.

At the end of the day, the head coach has one ultimate responsibility. Win football games.

Garret doesn’t do it often enough.

No BS. No excuses. He needs to go.

 

[Sydla]

I was pointing out if Dak sold the handoff to Zeke, the LB standing at the line probably would have bit for a second, thus Dak drawing in the DB. That play has to be executed perfectly in order for it to work. Most ends crash if the fake is executed properly. The ball was just handed to Zeke routinely, if I am not mistaken. There was no fake or intention in the execution.

Most properly coached LBs, in that situation, don't crash. In fact, the DE does crash on the run but the Texans had the proper call and the LB filled the spot to take Prescott. If the Texans follow their fundamentals there, the play fake to Elliott likely won't matter. It takes a mistake from the Texans to leave Dak in a situation where the then has to choose between the DB trying to take him (which he was too far away to make a play anyway) or pitch it.

So as much as you guys want to call it a brilliant play, it would seem the Texans called a brilliant play to defend what we were doing. Or in simpler terms, our play design didn't fool the Texans.

As soon as they motion Beasley into the backfield and Zeke is lined up off formation like he is, the Texans probably had a good idea that the Cowboys were going to run a read option or something like that. You can see as soon as the ball is snapped, the LB moves into the area where Dak would run a keeper and the DB starts following Beasley.

 

[Kevinicus]

You're showing your ignorance...lol ,it's like I'm talking to Barney about football...lol

Further deflection. Typical.

Your entire argument boils down to - look, options! Ignoring that all plays have options. You need more, much more, than that for good play design.

 

[Sydla]

He's not wrong, he called the lb a DB,( you know what he meant too)but he isn't wrong about the design. If you weren't so agenda driven, you would figure what he meant.

Read him again. He absolutely did not mix up the DB and LB. He confirmed that in his next post. But you already knew that. His premise is the LB crashes on Elliott and then the DB has to make a choice. So yes, his claim was the DB would be the one making a choice on taking Dak or Beasley.

The problem is the Texans had the right D called and they defended it properly as the LB filled the edge to take the Dak keeper and the DB then was responsible for Beasley only.

In other words, the play call fooled no one on the Texans.

 

[Dre11]

Further deflection. Typical.

Even my coaches got a good laugh out you just before we hit the field..lol..thanks.

 

[Kevinicus]

Even my coaches got a good laugh out you just before we hit the field..lol..thanks.

Sure...

We're all getting a laugh out of you in this thread, though.

 

[Dre11]

Read him again. He absolutely did not mix up the DB and LB. He confirmed that in his next post. But you already knew that. His premise is the LB crashes on Elliott and then the DB has to make a choice. So yes, his claim was the DB would be the one making a choice on taking Dak or Beasley.

The problem is the Texans had the right D called and they defended it properly as the LB filled the edge to take the Dak keeper and the DB then was responsible for Beasley only.

In other words, the play call fooled no one on the Texans.

Lol, that's why he liked my interpretation of what he meant....lol

 

[Dre11]

Sure...

We're all getting a laugh out of you in this thread, though.

Come with some more. Maybe we'll use it as an example of what's wrong with fans to our players....lol

 

[Kevinicus]

Come with some more. Maybe we'll use it as an example of what's wrong with fans to our players....lol

All this time and you still can't answer the question.

 

[Sydla]

Lol, that's why he liked my interpretation of what he meant....lol

Here's what he said. This is a direct quote:

the LB standing at the line probably would have bit for a second, thus Dak drawing in the DB

So no, he didn't confuse the LB and DB. He basically claimed (made the assumption) the LB would bite (when he actually didn't bite at all and kept his edge responsibility). So no, the only thing Dak has to do is not draw in the DB. He has to read the OLB and see what he does. The OLB never even makes a move to follow Elliott............ he's reading Dak only.

The DB has sole responsibility for Beasley. That's obvious as you watch the play unfold. The DL take Elliott, the LB takes the Dak keeper and the DB takes Beasley.

 

[DandyDon52]

Or, put in the FB to clear the hole out.

Question: Why did we even sign Olazawally?

JG liked his name lol
Who knows, good way to waste a roster spot.

 

[McKDaddy]

there is this other dude, names Austin i believe. He in the backfield w Zeke might present a more difficult dilema for the defense seeing as he has this thing called speed which you may have heard before "kills". Do we really commit everything to center of the line when a toss to him might go to the house?

Its all good though. If it takes utter implosion to get the necessary people out of the organization, all you can ask at this time.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I'm talking about the 3-1 call and 4-1. Folks are going crazy about the call. I heard the guys on 105.3 and some here who say the 3-1 call was dumb because they motioned Beasley into the backfield. Then say run read option, which is dumb because it was read option that Dak gave instead of keeping, Beasley was there as another option if Dak kept it. The play actually had 3 options to it and most think it was a simple dive to Zeke. If you're going to criticize, at least know what you're criticizing

Three options or not, I think it was stupid. No motion which means Dak doesn't get a read on what they are going to do defensively. That ball, that situation and that play call was never going to go to Beasly. What does that mean? That means that you have another guy in the box in the short yardage game. Texans played the run with Zeke all the way. They never even payed much attention to Beasley and they ignored the keeper with Dak. If Dak keeps that, he probably would have been running till he bumps his head on the goal post.

To me, bottom line, you made it way to easy for the Houston Defense to play Zeke in the run there. You played right into their hands with that formation and you played the very predictable, very easily defensible call.

I don't really have a problem with the 4th down call. I mean I see that as a damned if you do, damned if you don't kind of thing. If you go for it and you come up short, Texans probably assure themselves of a FG. If you kick it away and pin them back, which they did, you make Watson make plays and that kid was clearly hurting. We have them deep on there own 11, 2nd and 9 and our LBs and safety are playing way off the ball. Texans only send two Receivers out in the pattern. Why in the world would your Safeties and our LBs be playing so far off in that situation? They complete a pass to the RB right up the middle for a first down. That's on the D right there and I have no idea what the officials were watching because there was clearly a hold on the RT against Taco which allowed the play to happen. The catch down field, which was really the game, to Hopkins was just a nice catch and run. If there is a problem on that play, its the reactions of the LBs. They didn't know what they were seeing. The watched the the entire thing happen and didn't react. If you rewatch that play, you will see Gregory off the right side get doubled up by the back and the TE. Both DTs and Lawrence rush to their left but, for whatever reason, Lawrence (our best pass rusher) peels off into coverage. The pocket moves to Watson's Right side and he has clear vision with no blockers between all three LBs and Lawrence but they don't rush him. They just watch him and he has a stupid amount of time to find Hopkins. Essentially, it's a three man rush with only two WRs in the pattern and we get no pressure. That is a combination of poor calls from the Coaching Staff and poor execution by our Defense. If there is nobody between you and the QB and there are only two receivers in the pattern, you better rush the QB but that didn't happen. That was just a really bad play at the worst time and it's unfortunate because our Defense played pretty well all night, I thought.

 

[Sydla]

Three options or not, I think it was stupid. No motion which means Dak doesn't get a read on what they are going to do defensively. That ball, that situation and that play call was never going to go to Beasly. What does that mean? That means that you have another guy in the box in the short yardage game. Texans played the run with Zeke all the way. They never even payed much attention to Beasley and they ignored the keeper with Dak. If Dak keeps that, he probably would have been running till he bumps his head on the goal post.

To me, bottom line, you made it way to easy for the Houston Defense to play Zeke in the run there. You played right into their hands with that formation and you played the very predictable, very easily defensible call.

I don't really have a problem with the 4th down call. I mean I see that as a damned if you do, damned if you don't kind of thing. If you go for it and you come up short, Texans probably assure themselves of a FG. If you kick it away and pin them back, which they did, you make Watson make plays and that kid was clearly hurting. We have them deep on there own 11, 2nd and 9 and our LBs and safety are playing way off the ball. Texans only send two Receivers out in the pattern. Why in the world would your Safeties and our LBs be playing so far off in that situation? They complete a pass to the RB right up the middle for a first down. That's on the D right there and I have no idea what the officials were watching because there was clearly a hold on the RT against Taco which allowed the play to happen. The catch down field, which was really the game, to Hopkins was just a nice catch and run. If there is a problem on that play, its the reactions of the LBs. They didn't know what they were seeing. The watched the the entire thing happen and didn't react. If you rewatch that play, you will see Gregory off the right side get doubled up by the back and the TE. Both DTs and Lawrence rush to their left but, for whatever reason, Lawrence (our best pass rusher) peels off into coverage. The pocket moves to Watson's Right side and he has clear vision with no blockers between all three LBs and Lawrence but they don't rush him. They just watch him and he has a stupid amount of time to find Hopkins. Essentially, it's a three man rush with only two WRs in the pattern and we get no pressure. That is a combination of poor calls from the Coaching Staff and poor execution by our Defense. If there is nobody between you and the QB and there are only two receivers in the pattern, you better rush the QB but that didn't happen. That was just a really bad play at the worst time and it's unfortunate because our Defense played pretty well all night, I thought.

The Texans attack the dive with their DL and MLB, the outside LB fills the edge and basically stands there. He's reading the Dak keeper. The S, who starts in the middle of the field is spying Beasley. As soon as Beasley breaks, the S starts running with him.

The Texans had the play defended and weren't fooled by it. Now whether or not Beasley can get the first down if Dak were to have kept it and then pitched it is up for debate.

More than likely, Beasley was nothing more than a decoy there.

 

[texbumthelife]

Honestly, I don't even trust Dak to make the right read in time anyway.

 

[Nightman]

3 options - bad design:

Option a: Zeke runs right of center
Option b: Beasely runs right of center
Option c: Dak runs right of center

That's a play with 3-options but terrible design. All plays have options (do you understand this?). It's how you use those options and give them the best chance to succeed that determimes good play design. So for the 10th time, what about this design makes it good?

Option Dive- Zeke runs into 6 vs 5 .....one DL is unblocked and Zeke has no room to manuver
Option Keeper- 59 is standing his ground ready to blow Dak up
Option Pitch- DB is closing fast and lights up Beasley 3 yards behind the line and the LB and FS can also get there unblocked

Poorly designed play for such an important conversion

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

The Texans attack the dive with their DL and MLB, the outside LB fills the edge and basically stands there. He's reading the Dak keeper. The S, who starts in the middle of the field is spying Beasley. As soon as Beasley breaks, the S starts running with him.

The Texans had the play defended and weren't fooled by it. Now whether or not Beasley can get the first down if Dak were to have kept it and then pitched it is up for debate.

More than likely, Beasley was nothing more than a decoy there.

The safety does have Beasley but as I said, he was never going to get the ball but even so, he's still another man in the box that you have to account for and he's still in great position to make a play in the run game. Nobody has Dak. 59 is on the outside to the left side of the defense but watch him, he bites in on the run once the action to Zeke shows. Prescott could have kept and ran a two man game with Beasley who was in space, he could have elected to keep and run to the left of the formation and there was nobody out there or he could have just ran to the edge to the right side and kept. Chances are about 100 percent that he gets that first even if the LB is able to recover and get a hand on him. The safety has no chance because he likely gets blocked by Beasley and he's way too small. No, I think that's clearly a mistake there but it is what it is.

 

[Sydla]

The safety does have Beasley but as I said, he was never going to get the ball but even so, he's still another man in the box that you have to account for and he's still in great position to make a play in the run game. Nobody has Dak. 59 is on the outside to the left side of the defense but watch him, he bites in on the run once the action to Zeke shows. Prescott could have kept and ran a two man game with Beasley who was in space, he could have elected to keep and run to the left of the formation and there was nobody out there or he could have just ran to the edge to the right side and kept. Chances are about 100 percent that he gets that first even if the LB is able to recover and get a hand on him. The safety has no chance because he likely gets blocked by Beasley and he's way too small. No, I think that's clearly a mistake there but it is what it is.

Note I am not defending the play call by any stretch.

But the way the play unfolds, the Texans clearly had a good idea what was coming and had all the "options" defended. For that play to have succeeded, someone on the Cowboys would likely have to make an exceptional play against a Texans defender. The Texans had all three options defended.