USAToday: How Dak Prescott's limitations hindered Moore's play-calling

[superonyx]

Usually, when your dropping back, more responsibility is in diagnosing the defense and going through progressions. On play-action, your expecting a bite and a decisive, defined read you are going to from the get go. Look at the play actions that Dak throws to Jarwin or Witten in his first years in scoring distance, Dak is throwing right away because that’s the defined read.

Dak isn’tthe traditional progression, pocket QB.

Apparently no one is. Even Tom Brady.

Daks throws from the shotgun vs under center lines up right in the middle of the pack....almost identical to Brady.

https://www.sharpfootballstats.com/snap-rates--shotgun-v-under-center--off-.html

 

[loublue22]

I'd like to know how that compares to other teams/QBs

 

[superonyx]

I'd like to know how that compares to other teams/QBs

https://www.sharpfootballstats.com/snap-rates--shotgun-v-under-center--off-.html

 

[khiladi]

Apparently no one is. Even Tom Brady.

Daks throws from the shotgun vs under center lines up right in the middle of the pack....almost identical to Brady.

https://www.sharpfootballstats.com/snap-rates--shotgun-v-under-center--off-.html

1. What does that have to do with Dak not really being a drop-back passer, especially since they run basically a Coryell offense which is traditionally drop back and they run way more shot-gun and spread and get the ball out quickly?

2. Under center can refer to 3, 5 and 7 step drops also. Dallas when they run drop backs with Dak, they are primarily things like five yard slants, again decisive reads. Brady is traditionally ranked top of the league in five step drops. Does the negate the fact that even the elite QBs throw better decidedly and if there first reads are wide open? Obviously not..

Plus guys like Brady and Manning in past in their Erhardt-Perkins are and were doing plenty of pre-read and calling plays on their own, including via their shotgun.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Usually, when your dropping back, more responsibility is in diagnosing the defense and going through progressions. On play-action, your expecting a bite and a decisive, defined read you are going to from the get go. Look at the play actions that Dak throws to Jarwin or Witten in his first years in scoring distance, Dak is throwing right away because that’s the defined read.

Dak isn’tthe traditional progression, pocket QB.

I think this can be said for the majority of the young QBs we see today. Most, if not all, are run option type QBs. The Passing game is driving this. The NFL has adopted the pass first narrative and the result is what we see today. Even when you get a more traditional "Pro Style" QB, they are devalued by the NFL. There are a lot of QBs in today's NFL that probably could have been more successful in another era of the NFL. They are not RPO QBs but they do have better skills sets that lend themselves to more traditional Offensive schemes. The NFL is a copy cat league. The teams that are successful are the teams that are in front of the curve and not following it.

Ever wonder why Brady and the Pats have been dominant for so long? Tell you what I think. I think that a couple of things are in play here, that you really don't see in today's NFL much, but you used to see them in the NFL years ago. One, they don't fit the trend of what you see with most NFL teams anymore. They don't use mobile QBs and adopt a run and shoot principled scheme. They use a scheme that takes advantage of a QB who can read defenses and understands how scheme defeats talent. Offensively, NE is a team who has really only enjoyed continuous talent advantage at QB. WRs, TEs, RBs, they have never adopted the idea of superior talent over superior scheme. NE values other things in their players. This not to say that they haven't had talent at those positions in the past but they never relied on it. Only at QB and their QB doesn't fit the current NFL mold. The other thing that they have done over the years is that they have stuck together. Today, you watch what they can do year after year and people are amazed but that wasn't uncommon in the old days. Teams who stuck together, in the old days, before you had FA, they grew year over year. QBs and schemes were married for life and the longer a QB played, the more familiar they became with different aspects of the scheme they played in. You added things year over year. You worked on not only becoming a better QB but a more capable offense. Same with Defense BTW. You don't see that in the NFL anymore because you don't see that more traditional scheme much and players, coaches and schemes don't remain intact. You see them move on for whatever reason so that kind of skill doesn't materialize. I've said it many times over the years and most younger fans don't believe me but the QBs really were better back in the day and this is why. They didn't pass for the stats you see today, they weren't as physically capable but they really were better, in terms of mastering their crafts. What you see today with the Pats is uncommon in todays NFL but not in the older NFL.

 

[viman96]

Yes the Saints did and we did a very bad job of adjusting to it. The throw to Jarwin down the middle was a cover 2 beater that was also set up by the play action. We needed to run more curls and comeback routes off of the original play call. But if Cooper doesn’t drop the ball and doesn’t push off and Witten and Zeke doesn’t fumble and Cobb doesn’t let the third down pass go through his hands, we must likely score at least 10/13 more points and are talking about possibly going to 5-0 after beating this upcoming opponent.

I agree but that is a lot of ifs when the OL is getting their butt handed to them. Hard to apply adjustments when the person across from you is just better or performing better that day.

 

[khiladi]

I would say the passing era, which was a natural progression of the NFL changing the rules to facilitate the passing game.

Irrespective, ultimately it comes down to the QB being able to read the field quickly, no matter the pocket he is operating from, whether drop-back or shot-gun. In five step drops though, one has to be an elite passer to succeed.

Brady, while operating plenty out of shotgun, diagnoses the defense quickly and knows where he going from the beginning. But when he has to go through his progressions, he is successful. He has his weaknesses as well, because he drops to middle of the pack when he gets pressured. He has had great protection since forever, but part of that is also the ability to read what the defense is doing.

I don’t think many QBs of today could be successful in the past, because of how defenses were allowed to play. You had to be a traditional pocket passer that could throw the ball from anywhere, under pressure, make a decisions quickly and take a hit in the process. Even throwing the ball away to not take a bad play is a huge skill, particularly that era.

Romo said it best I think:

“People talk about potential for quarterbacks, and it is one of the most overrated comments. To me, when I look at a young quarterback and a GM asks me, ‘What do you think about his potential?’ I can’t answer until I see how fast he can get through progressions. And when I say that, I mean I need to see if he understands spatial awareness and his ability to go from his third to fourth to fifth even possible guy—and how fast and long that takes him when he doesn’t know the coverage. You can teach someone footwork and teach them how to throw a football but it is very difficult to teach someone how to see things quicker. That’s what separates the quarterbacks who are at the highest level.”


https://www.si.com/mmqb/2015/09/17/tony-romo-dallas-cowboys-week-2-nfl

I think this can be said for the majority of the young QBs we see today. Most, if not all, are run option type QBs. The Passing game is driving this. The NFL has adopted the pass first narrative and the result is what we see today. Even when you get a more traditional "Pro Style" QB, they are devalued by the NFL. There are a lot of QBs in today's NFL that probably could have been more successful in another era of the NFL. They are not RPO QBs but they do have better skills sets that lend themselves to more traditional Offensive schemes. The NFL is a copy cat league. The teams that are successful are the teams that are in front of the curve and not following it.

Ever wonder why Brady and the Pats have been dominant for so long? Tell you what I think. I think that a couple of things are in play here, that you really don't see in today's NFL much, but you used to see them in the NFL years ago. One, they don't fit the trend of what you see with most NFL teams anymore. They don't use mobile QBs and adopt a run and shoot principled scheme. They use a scheme that takes advantage of a QB who can read defenses and understands how scheme defeats talent. Offensively, NE is a team who has really only enjoyed continuous talent advantage at QB. WRs, TEs, RBs, they have never adopted the idea of superior talent over superior scheme. NE values other things in their players. This not to say that they haven't had talent at those positions in the past but they never relied on it. Only at QB and their QB doesn't fit the current NFL mold. The other thing that they have done over the years is that they have stuck together. Today, you watch what they can do year after year and people are amazed but that wasn't uncommon in the old days. Teams who stuck together, in the old days, before you had FA, they grew year over year. QBs and schemes were married for life and the longer a QB played, the more familiar they became with different aspects of the scheme they played in. You added things year over year. You worked on not only becoming a better QB but a more capable offense. Same with Defense BTW. You don't see that in the NFL anymore because you don't see that more traditional scheme much and players, coaches and schemes don't remain intact. You see them move on for whatever reason so that kind of skill doesn't materialize. I've said it many times over the years and most younger fans don't believe me but the QBs really were better back in the day and this is why. They didn't pass for the stats you see today, they weren't as physically capable but they really were better, in terms of mastering their crafts. What you see today with the Pats is uncommon in todays NFL but not in the older NFL.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I would say the passing era, which was a natural progression of the NFL changing the rules to facilitate the passing game.

Irrespective, ultimately it comes down to the QB being able to read the field quickly, no matter the pocket he is operating from, whether drop-back or shot-gun. In five step drops though, one has to be an elite passer to succeed.

Brady, while operating plenty out of shotgun, diagnoses the defense quickly and knows where he going from the beginning. But when he has to go through his progressions, he is successful. He has his weaknesses as well, because he drops to middle of the pack when he gets pressured. He has had great protection since forever, but part of that is also the ability to read what the defense is doing.

I don’t think many QBs of today could be successful in the past, because of how defenses were allowed to play. You had to be a traditional pocket passer that could throw the ball from anywhere, under pressure, make a decisions quickly and take a hit in the process. Even throwing the ball away to not take a bad play is a huge skill, particularly that era.

Romo said it best I think:

“People talk about potential for quarterbacks, and it is one of the most overrated comments. To me, when I look at a young quarterback and a GM asks me, ‘What do you think about his potential?’ I can’t answer until I see how fast he can get through progressions. And when I say that, I mean I need to see if he understands spatial awareness and his ability to go from his third to fourth to fifth even possible guy—and how fast and long that takes him when he doesn’t know the coverage. You can teach someone footwork and teach them how to throw a football but it is very difficult to teach someone how to see things quicker. That’s what separates the quarterbacks who are at the highest level.”


https://www.si.com/mmqb/2015/09/17/tony-romo-dallas-cowboys-week-2-nfl


https://www.si.com/mmqb/2015/09/17/tony-romo-dallas-cowboys-week-2-nfl

Yeah, I agree with this. Sucks thou...... He's a better golfer, he has way more money, my Wife likes him better and he is apparently much smarter then I and tells better stories. I gotta tell ya, these are the moments when the reality of "Life Aint Fair" really kinda smacks you right between the eyes..........

 

[CowboysLegends2]

What I get from this answers a lot of frustrations for fans. How many times do we get on a roll and get a streak snapped after looking totally inept on offense. I mean horrible! Like shut outs or close to it over 10 games in his career. That is even if the defense plays well. This answers why Dak and Moore/Linehan can’t beat top defenses. It seems to be true until proven otherwise IMO.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

Well, play action is only effective if you can run the ball.

That's not true.

Over the past three seasons, quarterbacks average a 103.5 passer rating on play-action, but only 90.1 the rest of the time. Over this span, passers attempted a play-action fake on just 19.9 percent of their total passes.

Over the past three seasons, passer rating had a 0.14 positive correlation to play-action pass attempts in games. A quarterback’s play-action passer rating was slightly impacted by the frequency of rushing attempts within a game (a 0.14 correlation), while yards per carry had a negligible effect (-0.02). Even when teams ran an especially high number of play-action passes within games (10 or more), the results were the same (93.5 on non-play-action passes vs. 109.3 on play-action passes). Even when a team’s running back carried the ball an especially small amount of the time (fewer than 20 times in one game), we see the same result (85.0 vs. 97.4). And even when rushing efficiency is poor (a team yards per carry is below 3.5), again we see the same thing (93.0 vs. 108.4).

Source: https://www.pff.com/news/fantasy-football-metrics-that-matter-quarterbacks-on-play-action

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

I haven’t seen Dak struggle with taking snaps u def center and passing. I think the mistake the writer makes is assuming because these coaches don’t do something is because they can’t. That’s just this staff being stubborn.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

What I get from this answers a lot of frustrations for fans. How many times do we get on a roll and get a streak snapped after looking totally inept on offense. I mean horrible! Like shut outs or close to it over 10 games in his career. That is even if the defense plays well. This answers why Dak and Moore/Linehan can’t beat top defenses. It seems to be true until proven otherwise IMO.

Well they haven’t played a top offense yet.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

I may not be understanding this article.
So we are to think that Dak can take the snap from center, fake the handoff, and then throw the ball but if you take the faking of the handoff away suddenly he can’t throw the ball?

this is beyond dumb. Unless I am missing it.

and why would a QB take the snap and not go play action when your RB will almost always freeze the defenders?

I’m not even sure if the writer knows his point.

 

[CWR]

Wow the vultures are out in force. No one was worried about limitations or predictability the first 3 weeks. In fact the talk was about Daks improved mechanics ect. We lose one game and all of the sudden our offense is hamstrung.

 

[CowboysLegends2]

Wow the vultures are out in force. No one was worried about limitations or predictability the first 3 weeks. In fact the talk was about Daks improved mechanics ect. We lose one game and all of the sudden our offense is hamstrung.

Before New Orleans we hadn’t seen Dak play a team with a good defense.

 

[Cowboysfan1975]

This is BS every QB has things they do well and things they don't. It's the coaches job to play to their strengths. That was happening the first three weeks and didn't last week.

Imagine the Pats stubbornly running the rpo or insisting Brady use his legs. You don't do that because its not in his skill set. If you decide someone is going to be your franchise QB you tailor the offense to his strenghts.

 

[superonyx]

1. What does that have to do with Dak not really being a drop-back passer, especially since they run basically a Coryell offense which is traditionally drop back and they run way more shot-gun and spread and get the ball out quickly?

2. Under center can refer to 3, 5 and 7 step drops also. Dallas when they run drop backs with Dak, they are primarily things like five yard slants, again decisive reads. Brady is traditionally ranked top of the league in five step drops. Does the negate the fact that even the elite QBs throw better decidedly and if there first reads are wide open? Obviously not..

Plus guys like Brady and Manning in past in their Erhardt-Perkins are and were doing plenty of pre-read and calling plays on their own, including via their shotgun.

It shows that this shotgun vs under center stat is absolutely meaningless. In order to make your point you have to bring a whole ton of opinions into this while speaking about stuff you couldn’t possibly know by being a fan.

 

[CWR]

Before New Orleans we hadn’t seen Dak play a team with a good defense.

Yes Dak should've scheduled better. Its what he gets for tearing it up against sawft teams.

 

[khiladi]

It shows that this shotgun vs under center stat is absolutely meaningless. In order to make your point you have to bring a whole ton of opinions into this while speaking about stuff you couldn’t possibly know by being a fan.

maybe you should have read the article better, because it clearly stated:

The real issue with how the formations are utilized is not so much whether they are in the shotgun more than under center, or vice-versa, but whether it becomes obvious that the offense is going to run from under center and pass from the shotgun.

The most glaring trend detected is that Prescott is rarely asked to drop back and pass after taking the snap from under center.

In 44 games, he has never dropped back and passed after taking the snap from under center more than three or four times in game. When he was a rookie, it was sometimes never and often only once a game.

Moreover, many of the infrequent pass attempts from under center are not traditional five-step drops; they are often quick screens to the wide receiver or something similar, which requires the quarterback just to get his feet planted and fire the ball.

Thus, the writers contention is that even when Dak drops back, they aren’t traditional five step drops, they are quick screens, or like I said five yard slants.

Dak is not a progression QB, irrespective of shot-gun or traditional drop backs.

Further, percentage is ultimately limited when talking about Dak, as far as the whole body of work, because his volume was traditionally less than everybody else, meaning Dallas was run-heavy.

 

[Typhus]

I may not be understanding this article.
So we are to think that Dak can take the snap from center, fake the handoff, and then throw the ball but if you take the faking of the handoff away suddenly he can’t throw the ball?

this is beyond dumb. Unless I am missing it.

and why would a QB take the snap and not go play action when your RB will almost always freeze the defenders?

Because all that takes a second out of the play.
If your OL is doing their job, its a privilege, not a right to just be able to go play action.
We can point the finger in whatever direction we feel is most deserving, but this OL despite how much this franchise has invested, just isn't getting the job done.
There is no time for play action.