When exactly was Dallas supposed to run the clock out?

[Fritsch_the_cat]

The point (that you missed) is that fans will complain about anything that doesn't work. Even if they're contradicting an earlier complaint from a previous game.

Either strategy could have worked if the players executed. That's what fans like you have a tough time grasping.

I think what you are missing is that running the ball, as long as you don't go out of bounds, steadily takes time off the clock and will eventually wear the defense down even when they are stacking against the run. You can go on thinking you know more than everyone else, but just because you want to buck conventional wisdom does not mean you are right.

This ain't my first rodeo, commitment to running the ball in that second half situation is just smart football. Putting a guy who is prone to making bad decisions on throws in those situations in a position to do it again is not.

 

[Nav22]

I think what you are missing is that running the ball, as long as you don't go out of bounds, steadily takes time off the clock and will eventually wear the defense down even when they are stacking against the run. You can go on thinking you know more than everyone else, but just because you want to buck conventional wisdom does not mean you are right.

This ain't my first rodeo, commitment to running the ball in that second half situation is just smart football. Putting a guy who is prone to making bad decisions on throws in those situations in a position to do it again is not.

I have said numerous times now that we should have run the ball more overall.

And guess what? Completions keep the clock moving too! We had FOUR incompletions in the 2nd half. If you think it would have been a sound strategy to do nothing BUT run in the 2nd half, you must not know this Cowboys defense very well. You don't move the chains and score points JUST by running the ball, you have to pass some too. And we were effective in doing so until the last 2 drives.

Romo has come through FAR more often in those situations than he has failed (remember the Giants game last month?), and the numbers back it up. But the media perception is a tricky one for some fans to overcome.

 

[Nightman]

People act like running the ball means you can't be a high scoring offense. Foolishness. You don't run exclusively, but you mix in run and pass. With that formula, I promise you that you keep scoring. Even a ton of 3's would've been enough at that point. They mixed in the run and caught up. How could that possibly be? Let me add, if you stacked the line with 10 men and Murray gets pass that, it's a home run.

Everyone is missing the entire point of the thread. Dallas had very little time with the ball in the second half. GB had drives of 80yds, 80yds, 22yds, 80yds and 50yds, ALL FOR TDs. Dallas had 2 long scoring drives before getting the ball with 4:17 left leading 36-31. The Defense lost this game, AGAIN.

All this complaining about play-calling is just re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. This will go down as one of the worst Defenses of ALL-TIME. Romo is very good, but not good enough to overcome this Defense.

 

[DABOYZ]

Jason Garrett's seems to think that he should try to trick opposing teams rather than run plays which he truly believes his offense can convert. The sad thing is so many of our fans believe the same thing. How's that working out? If yesterday's game was Garrett's first mistake not much would be said by the media. The fact that there are actually people on here defending his bad decisions, is comical. Maybe Garret needs a card that shows him what to do under 5 minutes left in the game when playing with the lead. As so many others have stated nothing else needs to be said.

 

[Clove]

Everyone is missing the entire point of the thread. Dallas had very little time with the ball in the second half. GB had drives of 80yds, 80yds, 22yds, 80yds and 50yds, ALL FOR TDs. Dallas had 2 long scoring drives before getting the ball with 4:17 left leading 36-31. The Defense lost this game, AGAIN.

All this complaining about play-calling is just re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. This will go down as one of the worst Defenses of ALL-TIME. Romo is very good, but not good enough to overcome this Defense.

They had more drives because they mixed in the pass and run. If the run isn't working, then you turn to the pass temporarily. Why pass when running works?

 

[Fritsch_the_cat]

I have said numerous times now that we should have run the ball more overall.

Then we both agree.

And guess what? Completions keep the clock moving too! We had FOUR incompletions in the 2nd half. If you think it would have been a sound strategy to do nothing BUT run in the 2nd half, you must not know this Cowboys defense very well. You don't move the chains and score points JUST by running the ball, you have to pass some too. And we were effective in doing so until the last 2 drives.

Saying anyone is suggesting they do nothing BUT run the ball in the second half is a strawman fallacy. And nothing opens up the passing game better than the run game.

Romo has come through FAR more often in those situations than he has failed (remember the Giants game last month?), and the numbers back it up. But the media perception is a tricky one for some fans to overcome.

Sorry but I'm not one of those who believes what the media spoon feeds me. If that make you feel better however, continue to believe so. We have seen Romo put in a position to fail many times already, and he has failed. All I'm saying is he didn't have to be put in that situation. We do have more than Tony. We have a decent Oline and a pretty good running back in Murray. Would it kill us just once to see if he can get the job done? Right now, we don't know, because they never give him the chance.

 

[Fritsch_the_cat]

Romo is very good, but not good enough to overcome this Defense.

But how do we know Murray and the Oline running the ball isn't?

 

[Chuck 54]

48 passes....18 runs.

STOP

I don't care how you word it, I don't care how you try to spin it, I don't care how you ask it.

NO!

Preach on, brother. Again, we had a 7.4 rush average, but even if you only get 2 yards per carry, you have to run the ball around 25 times just to control the pass rush and give the receivers a chance to get behind someone and the OL a chance to fire off.

We were ahead the entire game and wouldn't run...GB was behind the whole game but they kept running.
You picked up 4 yards on first down when they knew you were going to run. You have to run on second down even if they have 12 men in the box to make them use their final TO. Then you try to finish the game on 3rd down.

 

[Brooksey]

Your problem is that you're assuming we would be able to keep grinding out 1st downs on the ground even though Green Bay was selling out to stop the run. I don't have any data in front of me (AdamJT13?) but my guess is that NFL teams are generally pretty good at stopping the run in those sort of late-game situations where the offense is trying to end the game and the D is looking for a stop. They're stacking the box and selling out hard.

I'd honestly have been fine with either strategy because there's inherent pros and cons that come with each. Again, the PLAYERS need to execute the plays.

If we ran the ball and moved the chains, everyone's happy. If we ran the ball and DIDN'T move the chains, we give Green Bay the ball back and lose. Then everyone's blasting Garrett/Callahan for "going into a shell" or "not letting Romo win the game".


Yes, I was talking about the next-to-last drive only. The INT to Miles that everyone's 2nd guessing with the benefit of hindsight.

I agree that we should have been more balanced overall. This thread was only supposed to be about "running out the clock" in the late 3rd-4th, or at least that's what I've been referring to.

It's easy to 2nd guess a play-call AFTER we see that it didn't work. But it would have worked if the players (Romo in this case) executed better.

The objective is ALWAYS to "get 1st downs and keep the clock moving" when you have a lead, so I find it comical that people are saying that's what we should have done.

As for the Detroit game in 2011...

The first pick-6 in the 3rd quarter came on the 1st play of the drive. There was still over 10 minutes left in the 3rd. Unless you're of the belief that you MUST ALWAYS run on 1st down when you have a big lead, even with PLENTY of time left on the clock, I don't see how you could really 2nd guess the call there. Sometimes you mix it up and throw it on 1st to keep the D honest.

The next pick-6 came on our next drive, on the 7th play of the drive. For the first 6 plays of that drive, we ran it 5 times and passed ONCE (6-yard completion), but people STILL complained (and still complain to this day) that we "got pass-happy" and "should have been running out the clock".

It's silly. We were only up 17 at that point and there was still something like 23 minutes of football left. Far too early to go into "run on every single down" mode. But those complains speak to my point that fans just love 2nd-guessing anything that doesn't work and blaming the coaches for bad strategy.

Your theory is funny, are you a big JG guy? You want to talk about the play calling when the game was a 5 point game? That's funny. Talk to me about how we got there, about the opening drive we had in the 3rd quarter, do some HW and come back to me about that chief. Then look at the next 20 plays and ask yourself one very simple question, what would the score have been if we chewed another 5-7 minutes off the clock with one good 2nd half running drive? Keep in mind we were averaging 7.4 yds per carry and all we need is 3.4 yds per carry to keep a drive going. So let 'em stack the box, it really didn't matter they weren't stopping the run. They hadn't proved that with any defensive front.

 

[Nightman]

Preach on, brother. Again, we had a 7.4 rush average, but even if you only get 2 yards per carry, you have to run the ball around 25 times just to control the pass rush and give the receivers a chance to get behind someone and the OL a chance to fire off.

We were ahead the entire game and wouldn't run...GB was behind the whole game but they kept running.
You picked up 4 yards on first down when they knew you were going to run. You have to run on second down even if they have 12 men in the box to make them use their final TO. Then you try to finish the game on 3rd down.

The better plan is to keep getting first downs and never punt it back to them. Sometimes that means throwing the ball, especially when they overload the box to stop the run. Trying accomplish both running out the clock with hand-offs and trying to get first downs on third and long is what gets Garrett into trouble. Either run off tackle and rely on your defense or use your entire offense to keep getting first downs. Neither is a very good option with this team, but I prefer the aggressive option that includes the entire playbook and keeping our Defense off the field. You can always second guess the results, but it's still up to the players to execute.

 

[tm1119]

7.4 yards per carry
14 of 18 attempts went for 4+ yards.
You have the lead in the 4th quarter

Not really that much to think about....when something seems incredibly obvious to Joe Buck and not your head coach you have problems.

 

[Big D]

Which part are you talking about? The first quote or the second quote?

the op. I accidentally pasted it twice.

 

[Nav22]

Your theory is funny, are you a big JG guy? You want to talk about the play calling when the game was a 5 point game? That's funny. Talk to me about how we got there, about the opening drive we had in the 3rd quarter, do some HW and come back to me about that chief. Then look at the next 20 plays and ask yourself one very simple question, what would the score have been if we chewed another 5-7 minutes off the clock with one good 2nd half running drive? Keep in mind we were averaging 7.4 yds per carry and all we need is 3.4 yds per carry to keep a drive going. So let 'em stack the box, it really didn't matter they weren't stopping the run. They hadn't proved that with any defensive front.

Actually, Genius, I've said MANY times in this thread that we should have run the ball more overall. Learn how to read before you address me.

 

[Nightman]

Your theory is funny, are you a big JG guy? You want to talk about the play calling when the game was a 5 point game? That's funny. Talk to me about how we got there, about the opening drive we had in the 3rd quarter, do some HW and come back to me about that chief. Then look at the next 20 plays and ask yourself one very simple question, what would the score have been if we chewed another 5-7 minutes off the clock with one good 2nd half running drive? Keep in mind we were averaging 7.4 yds per carry and all we need is 3.4 yds per carry to keep a drive going. So let 'em stack the box, it really didn't matter they weren't stopping the run. They hadn't proved that with any defensive front.

What are you even talking about? Dallas ran it 4 times on their 11 play FG drive, with one incompletion. They ran it 2 times on their 10 play TD drive that had 2 GB penalties and 2 incompletions. If the margin for error for this team is ZERO incompletions then their problems are much bigger than play calling. It was still a 5 point lead with 4:17 left because Dallas keep trying to score and did so successfully. Dropped passes, missed throws by Romo and overall pathetic defense is why Dallas lost.

 

[landroverking]

To start with first time they got the ball in the 3rd. Three and out no time off the clock.

 

[WPBCowboysFan]

48 passes....18 runs.

That says it all.

And if Herm Edwards was correct we had more pass attempts in the 2nd half than the Packers did.

 

[Nightman]

To look at it in simplistic terms, I think you have to come out of the half thinking, "They need 4 touchdowns to come back and take the lead." So that means they'll get 4 drives and you'll get 4 drives. Even if you don't get a 1st down once in the whole second half, you can burn up about 4 minutes per drive if you don't stop the clock. That's 16 minutes of a 30 minute half. That leaves them with 14 minutes to score 4 touchdowns. I know this math doesn't account for uncontrollable circumstances, but you have to come out of the half with some kind of plan to use up the clock and maintain a 4 TD lead.

Your math is way off. You only run off 2+ minutes per drive if you get zero first downs. That's only 9 minutes out of 30. GB only needed 14:23 for all 5 of their TD drives that covered 312 yards. Terrible plan.

 

[Nightman]

To start with first time they got the ball in the 3rd. Three and out no time off the clock.

The first time they got the ball, they went 11 plays and got a FG, rushing 4 times.

The second time they got the in second half was with 1:09 left in the third. GB had just gone 80yds again to make it 29-17 and showed no signs of slowing down. On first down Romo hit Murray on a 4 yd pass that he flat out dropped. They could've run on second down and wasted 45 secs. That must be the difference between winning and losing that you are talking about. Third down they got sacked, but at least the clock runs after the play.

 

[Brooksey]

What are you even talking about? Dallas ran it 4 times on their 11 play FG drive, with one incompletion. They ran it 2 times on their 10 play TD drive that had 2 GB penalties and 2 incompletions. If the margin for error for this team is ZERO incompletions then their problems are much bigger than play calling. It was still a 5 point lead with 4:17 left because Dallas keep trying to score and did so successfully. Dropped passes, missed throws by Romo and overall pathetic defense is why Dallas lost.

Excuse me the second possession of the 3rd quarter when went three and out with 3 straight passes after greenbay just scored two td's. the score was 29-17. The big sack led to another quick td. We should have been running the football and some clock.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Two first downs running with a 10 man box, I don't think so. Matthews blows up either the run or the pass on that second down play. Escobar was nowhere near him to make the block.

The issue is they didn't even try. Running provides a tactical benefit whether or not it is a 1 yard or 7 yard gain. Down like that and as well as we had been running the ball and we don't even try to break those fronts? You saw how well our OL was run blocking. It's been the best part of our offense for the past month.

I would be fine with trying and failing but to not try at all is inexcusable