TYS: Running game

[Rockport]

I've been preaching the benefits of the running game in the NFL for years now hoping the Cowboys would adopt that philosophy. I got lambasted by the majority of folks here which tells me alot about the posters here. Well, look what it's done for this team. All those who said it would never work because this is a passing league were wrong. I'm not sure we have the defense to make a push deep into the playoffs, but I do know we definitely have the offense. So all you running game naysayers can eat crow.

 

[Doc50]

I've been preaching the benefits of the running game in the NFL for years now hoping the Cowboys would adopt that philosophy. I got lambasted by the majority of folks here which tells me alot about the posters here. Well, look what it's done for this team. All those who said it would never work because this is a passing league were wrong. I'm not sure we have the defense to make a push deep into the playoffs, but I do know we definitely have the offense. So all you running game naysayers can eat crow.

Right -- some should go on over to the crow-eating thread, and spill your guts about how bad this team was going to be, and how this D might even be worse than last year. It was key injuries that did us in, kept us from controlling the ball and from stopping anybody.

If we can control the ball (and not turn it over), then we'll be competitive against anyone.

 

[Oh_Canada]

I've been preaching the benefits of the running game in the NFL for years now hoping the Cowboys would adopt that philosophy. I got lambasted by the majority of folks here which tells me alot about the posters here. Well, look what it's done for this team. All those who said it would never work because this is a passing league were wrong. I'm not sure we have the defense to make a push deep into the playoffs, but I do know we definitely have the offense. So all you running game naysayers can eat crow.

I'm eating crow and it tastes good!!!
It's not as if I disliked the idea of running the ball, just thought the strength of the team had always been throwing it so why pretend? However with this oline, that running back and a QB who looks more relaxed and in charge than I have ever seen I am all for running it down everyones throats all year long.

 

[khiladi]

We've run well in the past, but still never threw play-action. Now, play-action is our bread and butter in the passing game. Hell, I was hearing the first game, excuses that Romo doesn't throw well off play-action and maybe that's why we didn't do it before.

 

[Wolfpack]

It is amazing, this is like a new team.

 

[Rockport]

Right -- go on over to the crow-eating thread, and spill your guts about how bad this team was going to be, and how this D might even be worse than last year. It was key injuries that did us in, kept us from controlling the ball and from stopping anybody.

If we can control the ball (and not turn it over), then we'll be competitive against anyone.

I predicted a winning season so no need for crow eating at least so far. Turnovers are important, but having a physical running game is winning football. Being able to control the line of scrimmage is demoralizing for the other team. It's always been a winning formula and always will be unless the rules get drastically changed.

 

[Doc50]

I predicted a winning season so no need for crow eating at least so far. Turnovers are important, but having a physical running game is winning football. Being able to control the line of scrimmage is demoralizing for the other team. It's always been a winning formula and always will be unless the rules get drastically changed.

My post was meant for the nay-sayers.

Your optimism is refreshing, and I agree.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

I've been saying the same thing for a while and I work as a statistician. Most statisticians of football don't have a complete look at the game when it comes to running the ball. They just look at the numbers and say 'you pass to win and you run to close out the game', but there is far, far more to that. When you can run and make first downs in 1st and 2nd downs, it creates a lot of problems for the defense. Ryan ended up having to stack 8 in the box and play single man-on-man coverage to the outside where you have Dez and Williams...two tough WR's to cover one-on-one.

And the running game also preserves your defense. We can't afford to keep the defense on the field for very long.





YR

 

[Craig]

Ive been saying all along that you have a better chance to win when your defense isnt completely inept. Everyone chastised me for claiming a team would be better if their defense was better.

 

[PJTHEDOORS]

Start a thread attack posters (check) Never ends.

 

[Rockport]

Start a thread attack posters (check) Never ends.

I guess you were one of the pass happy proponents.

 

[PJTHEDOORS]

I guess you were one of the pass happy proponents.

No. I guess you are mistaken.

 

[kramskoi]

I've been preaching the benefits of the running game in the NFL for years now hoping the Cowboys would adopt that philosophy. I got lambasted by the majority of folks here which tells me alot about the posters here. Well, look what it's done for this team. All those who said it would never work because this is a passing league were wrong. I'm not sure we have the defense to make a push deep into the playoffs, but I do know we definitely have the offense. So all you running game naysayers can eat crow.

I think Seattle and San Francisco have brought the NFL back to a type of reality where offense is concerned. Seattle, in particular, has the right formula...the one that worked for the 90's team in Dallas. The current Dallas offense has four guys in Romo, Murray, Bryant and Williams (with Witten and Beasley) that will have a lot to say on how far the team goes this year. The defense still looks like a work in progress, but they handled New Orleans surprisingly well (even though I think that the Saints have had issues for weeks now). The return of Spencer and the continued re-integration of Melton may help them ramp up the quarterback pressure. My real concern is the linebacking corps, which just can't seem to stay healthy long enough to really congeal. Some real voodoo with that group it seems...

On the running game...the last time the Cowboys made the playoffs (2009), they had a shade over 2100 yards rushing, and the ease with which they dismantled the Eagles (twice), made you think that they would really do some damage in the playoffs...but then the neglect of the o-line really came back to haunt them in Minnesota. The not-so-sexy line picks went over well with some...not so well with others, but it was long overdue. The last time they really had good line play was the 2007 season, as evidenced by the way they "should" have beaten New York and it's "four horseman" three times, instead of just twice!

 

[Seven]

Start a thread attack posters (check) Never ends.

Another look at me thread...............perfect.

 

[Rockport]

I think Seattle and San Francisco have brought the NFL back to a type of reality where offense is concerned. Seattle, in particular, has the right formula...the one that worked for the 90's team in Dallas. The current Dallas offense has four guys in Romo, Murray, Bryant and Williams (with Witten and Beasley) that will have a lot to say on how far the team goes this year. The defense still looks like a work in progress, but they handled New Orleans surprisingly well (even though I think that the Saints have had issues for weeks now). The return of Spencer and the continued re-integration of Melton may help them ramp up the quarterback pressure. My real concern is the linebacking corps, which just can't seem to stay healthy long enough to really congeal. Some real voodoo with that group it seems...

On the running game...the last time the Cowboys made the playoffs (2009), they had a shade over 2100 yards rushing, and the ease with which they dismantled the Eagles (twice), made you think that they would really do some damage in the playoffs...but then the neglect of the o-line really came back to haunt them in Minnesota. The not-so-sexy line picks went over well with some...not so well with others, but it was long overdue. The last time they really had good line play was the 2007 season, as evidenced by the way they "should" have beaten New York and it's "four horseman" three times, instead of just twice!

Good observations and spot on.

 

[kramskoi]

I've been saying the same thing for a while and I work as a statistician. Most statisticians of football don't have a complete look at the game when it comes to running the ball. They just look at the numbers and say 'you pass to win and you run to close out the game', but there is far, far more to that. When you can run and make first downs in 1st and 2nd downs, it creates a lot of problems for the defense. Ryan ended up having to stack 8 in the box and play single man-on-man coverage to the outside where you have Dez and Williams...two tough WR's to cover one-on-one.

And the running game also preserves your defense. We can't afford to keep the defense on the field for very long.





YR

Yeah...there was an article posted last week questioning whether Murray was the Cowboys best defender. They certainly killed the first quarter quite quickly Sunday night...hard running, crisp play-action. This is the stuff of the 90's team. I know I keep harping on it but when you have seen its devastating effect on teams, you wonder how it is that teams have just abandoned good running for "chuck-ball", where your QB is throwing it up 40 - 50 times a game. Romo is not good enough to do this week in and week out, and even if he was, your defense ends up being the bottleneck when you face the really elite teams. The Falcons had this figured out, but then they decided that more Matt Ryan was better...it has not worked out so well. It is a lesson that Denver must learn as well. You will not beat Seattle at home, without good, tough running. Maybe on their bad day...but in the playoffs, for all the marbles...I don't think so.

 

[Seven]

I've been preaching the benefits of the running game in the NFL for years now hoping the Cowboys would adopt that philosophy. I got lambasted by the majority of folks here which tells me alot about the posters here. Well, look what it's done for this team. All those who said it would never work because this is a passing league were wrong. I'm not sure we have the defense to make a push deep into the playoffs, but I do know we definitely have the offense. So all you running game naysayers can eat crow.

And for the grand finale..............."So all you running game naysayers can eat crow."

Mm-k.

BTW - there were more clamoring for the OL to be attended to than not.

Which IS your running game.

 

[xwalker]

I've been saying the same thing for a while and I work as a statistician. Most statisticians of football don't have a complete look at the game when it comes to running the ball. They just look at the numbers and say 'you pass to win and you run to close out the game', but there is far, far more to that. When you can run and make first downs in 1st and 2nd downs, it creates a lot of problems for the defense. Ryan ended up having to stack 8 in the box and play single man-on-man coverage to the outside where you have Dez and Williams...two tough WR's to cover one-on-one.

And the running game also preserves your defense. We can't afford to keep the defense on the field for very long.

YR

Yes, there has been a lot of misinformation spread around by amateur statistical analysts about the lack of importance of the running game. They keep exclaiming that passing efficiency wins games and therefore conclude that running is of minimal importance. In reality, they just don't have the skills to show the importance of the running game statistically.

Sometimes it is just the threat of the running game that allows the passing offense to have success. It was the Cowboys success in previous games that caused the Saints to over-play the run which opened up the passing game.

 

[WV Cowboy]

I love running the football.

Our running game, and our commitment to the running game FORCED the Saints into single coverage on Bryant and Williams. I will take that all day long!

Meanwhile our defense is resting and the other teams offensive stars are on the bench.

It is a great combination and is a formula for winning. Does it mean we will always win? .. heavens no.

But we all saw last night that a running game does many things in a football game, ... all good.

I am happy, .. I loved watching the game and I loved the outcome.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

Yeah...there was an article posted last week questioning whether Murray was the Cowboys best defender. They certainly killed the first quarter quite quickly Sunday night...hard running, crisp play-action. This is the stuff of the 90's team. I know I keep harping on it but when you have seen its devastating effect on teams, you wonder how it is that teams have just abandoned good running for "chuck-ball", where your QB is throwing it up 40 - 50 times a game. Romo is not good enough to do this week in and week out, and even if he was, your defense ends up being the bottleneck when you face the really elite teams. The Falcons had this figured out, but then they decided that more Matt Ryan was better...it has not worked out so well. It is a lesson that Denver must learn as well. You will not beat Seattle at home, without good, tough running. Maybe on their bad day...but in the playoffs, for all the marbles...I don't think so.

I discussed this with Pat Kirwan a few years ago.

He told me that ALL of the QB's he talked to (Rodgers, Brady, Brees, etc) said they would rather have more receivers than blockers when facing the blitz. They didn't like having less options of players to throw to. So, I think a lot of these pass happy offenses are due to the QB's telling the coaches and owners that is what they prefer.

What I have seen from the Cowboys, ironically, is that they are more like a Joe Gibbs offense. They run the ball and gain first downs with the running game. Then they have added extra blockers and when the opponent blitzes, Romo has all day to throw the ball. And because the defense is blitzing, it is leaving single man-to-man coverage on the outside. I personally prefer protecting my QB and having Williams and Dez winning one-on-one battles (particularly in today's Pass Interference happy league).

The big thing about this game (and the Rams game as well) is that we kept running the ball even against 8-man fronts. It's apparent that defenses are really concerned about us establishing the stretch running play. So even if they have an 8-man front and we only gain 1-yard, it sets up for more plays later on because you're telling the defense that we may run or pass the ball against an 8-man front instead of throwing it every time we see an 8-man front.

We are protecting the QB, not only from pass rushers and pass defenders, but from himself. In the pass-happy, 4 WR set happy league and defenses geared to stop that, we are dominating on offense by running the ball and adding extra blockers to protect Romo and show threat of a run. Defenses are not designed to stop that at this time.






YR