Video: Why Dak is the most accurate. NFL Network

[School]

I think the problem with the WRs/TEs arises when Dak does make the right read, but the play is dependent on the receiver getting open, and they can't.

There was a play against Washington where we had several receivers on one side and Witten by himself on the other side. After the snap, the defense rolled the linebacker and deep safety to the side of the field with the receivers.

Dak looks back across the field to Witten, who is one on one with a safety and has tons of room to work with, but he simply can't get open. The saftey sits on his route, because he had zero fear of getting beat deep. By this time, the rush has arrived, and it's up to Dak to create a play.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

You said they didn't use All-22. They do. Who cares if it's during the first analysis or a review. And do you know for a fact that none of the 300-plus staff doing the preliminary analysis or any of the Senior analysts who review those or any of current and former NFL coaches who review those - don't use it?

And I work with QA on a daily basis.

Well then you would know that not everything is reviewed.

They don't use all-22 in making their grades. They use it to review.

 

[BlindFaith]

Well then you would know that not everything is reviewed.

They don't use all-22 in making their grades. They use it to review.

Prove it.

We have yahoo's here who get the all-22 that just use it for their own amusement and self-aggrandising.

Saying that not a single analyst uses it is baseless and not realistic.

And not sure what area of QA you're referencing, but in my line of business, EVERYTHING that is supposed to be reviewed is reviewed. And then it's added to a larger suite to be reviewed again. And then it's reviewed again in production. And we use the best tools to analyze all of that.

It's OK to be wrong. No one's going to think less of you. Heck, someone may actually decide to like you.

 

[Hennessy_King]

Sometimes sure. Just like sometimes Dak failed to read open receivers and get them the ball.

As for PFF grades, you know they don't have all-22 for doing their grading right? IOW they cannot see many routes.

I believe blindfaith answered for me

 

[Hennessy_King]

I think the problem with the WRs/TEs arises when Dak does make the right read, but the play is dependent on the receiver getting open, and they can't.

There was a play against Washington where we had several receivers on one side and Witten by himself on the other side. After the snap, the defense rolled the linebacker and deep safety to the side of the field with the receivers.

Dak looks back across the field to Witten, who is one on one with a safety and has tons of room to work with, but he simply can't get open. The saftey sits on his route, because he had zero fear of getting beat deep. By this time, the rush has arrived, and it's up to Dak to create a play.

Shannon Sharpe was talking about this the other day. If coverage leaves a wr or te in a 1 on 1 the qb should be going that direction. If the receiver can't get open consistently it's putting the qb and offense in a bad spot.

 

[erod]

Shannon Sharpe was talking about this the other day. If coverage leaves a wr or te in a 1 on 1 the qb should be going that direction. If the receiver can't get open consistently it's putting the qb and offense in a bad spot.

You have to throw people open in the NFL. You can't double clutch in the pocket all the time. Dak reads everything so slowly, and he's got to overcome that.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Prove it.

We have yahoo's here who get the all-22 that just use it for their own amusement and self-aggrandising.

Saying that not a single analyst uses it is baseless and not realistic.

And not sure what area of QA you're referencing, but in my line of business, EVERYTHING that is supposed to be reviewed is reviewed. And then it's added to a larger suite to be reviewed again. And then it's reviewed again in production. And we use the best tools to analyze all of that.

It's OK to be wrong. No one's going to think less of you. Heck, someone may actually decide to like you.

So they do the work twice in your line of work? Define "supposed to be reviewed? If that is not everything produced then my point has been made.

Is it is statistically justified sample or every unit? You think they grade the 2k or so weekly plays twice?

And this is not about "tools." It's about various guys watching a screen and giving their opinion on a play ranking it from -2 to 2 in increments of .5.

And I am fine admitting I am wrong. I could accuse you of being pigheaded just the same. And if your standard for liking someone is them agreeing with you then I have no interest in being your friend.

 

[School]

You have to throw people open in the NFL. You can't double clutch in the pocket all the time. Dak reads everything so slowly, and he's got to overcome that.

Relying on a quarterback to consistently throw receivers open is needlessly placing too much burden on the quarterback. Most top offenses use things like unpredictable play calling and route combinations to create separation for receivers and clearly defined reads for quarterbacks.

Why base your offense on isolated routes and and tight window intermediate throws that required timing and anticipation when there are far better alternatives out there being used with great success?

If you have Aaron Rodgers then you can get away with an offense like that, but even he will have slumps, as we have seen.

 

[DakBringMeBack]

I'm not saying that they are open. I'm saying Dak tends to lock on to to those 2 guys and decides to make those throws. Witten in particular has really good hands and catches everything in his vicinity. But go look at the video this guy is using to prove his point. Wide open Rod Smith crossing under the middle and Dak chooses to throw to Witten with a LB draped on him. Play results in a TD but it was not the smart throw.

Reminds me of Madden "Drive Goals". You take it 80 yards to the house but fail the drive goal because you didn't dump one off to the tight end. Stupid

 

[Haimerej]

Relying on a quarterback to consistently throw receivers open is needlessly placing too much burden on the quarterback. Most top offenses use things like unpredictable play calling and route combinations to create separation for receivers and clearly defined reads for quarterbacks.

Why base your offense on isolated routes and and tight window intermediate throws that required timing and anticipation when there are far better alternatives out there being used with great success?

If you have Aaron Rodgers then you can get away with an offense like that, but even he will have slumps, as we have seen.

Throwing someone open is simply putting the ball where it's supposed to be. If a guy gets separation on a dig route but has to slow down because the QB didn't lead him then it's not the WR who erred. It's not, "too much [of a] burden," to expect an NFL QB to throw the ball where only his receiver can get it. That's his job.

I also don't see CBs jumping every route as you would expect if the plays are so, "predictable." To pretend like DAL doesn't use playcalling and route trees similar to every other team in the league is oversimplifying the struggles from the offense last year. It's a shifting of burden from the players and their execution. The same staff has consistently produced above average (arguably elite) offenses throughout the years. Hard to imagine that track record if all they're doing is running isolated routes and relying on tight window throws.

 

[School]

Throwing someone open is simply putting the ball where it's supposed to be. If a guy gets separation on a dig route but has to slow down because the QB didn't lead him then it's not the WR who erred. It's not, "too much [of a] burden," to expect an NFL QB to throw the ball where only his receiver can get it. That's his job.

I also don't see CBs jumping every route as you would expect if the plays are so, "predictable." To pretend like DAL doesn't use playcalling and route trees similar to every other team in the league is oversimplifying the struggles from the offense last year. It's a shifting of burden from the players and their execution. The same staff has consistently produced above average (arguably elite) offenses throughout the years. Hard to imagine that track record if all they're doing is running isolated routes and relying on tight window throws.

I'm not speaking in absolutes like you appear to be implying.

I agree that a quarterback should be able to throw the ball where only his receiver can get it. But I don't think he should have to do this at a rate higher than nearly every other quarterback. Some of that is on Dak making the wrong read (although Dak seems to be generally good at reading defenses), but some of that is also on the receivers and the scheme.

I don't think cornerbacks jump routes on every play. But I do think they have an easier time covering our receivers because, among other things, our receivers do not threaten them deep and because they are not schemed open as often as you see in other offenses.

This is about a quarterback playing in an offense that is more demanding of a quarterback than most other offenses. Me acknowledging that does not mean I'm absolving Dak of wrongdoing.

If you're suggesting Dallas uses play calling similar to every other team in the league, then I have to disagree. Play calling is hugely important and can vary widely among teams, and even between coaching staffs on the same team. Do you think the Rams employed similar offenses in 2016 and 2017? What about the Cowboys and the Eagles in 2017?

I will give the coaching staff credit for orchestrating some high performing offenses. But I liken those offenses to impressive structures with poor foundations. Take away one or two foundation pieces, and the whole thing tends to falls apart.

 

[Haimerej]

I'm not speaking in absolutes like you appear to be implying.

You said the offense was based on isolated routes and tight window throws. Perhaps you could expound on that. I used to hear how Dez never runs slants or crossing patterns, too. I see him run those pretty much every game. Needless to say, I'm skeptical of these kind of generalizations fans make.

I agree that a quarterback should be able to throw the ball where only his receiver can get it. But I don't think he should have to do this at a rate higher than nearly every other quarterback. Some of that is on Dak making the wrong read (although Dak seems to be generally good at reading defenses), but some of that is also on the receivers and the scheme.

If you're referring to the stat, it can literally take a poor throw and call it an accurate tight window throw if the WR makes the catch. That video clearly showed numerous plays where the WR had his man beat but had to adjust to an underthrown ball. They called those, "tight windows," when they were clearly just poorly placed balls.

Before any distilled wine drinkers bring up Romo again- the above is a criticism of the stat, not Dak. I don't believe the stat properly reflects any QB is accurately throwing into tight windows.

I don't think cornerbacks jump routes on every play. But I do think they have an easier time covering our receivers because, among other things, our receivers do not threaten them deep and because they are not schemed open as often as you see in other offenses.

How do they get open? What route combinations are they using? What did they do differently with their routes in 2017 compared to 2016?

This is about a quarterback playing in an offense that is more demanding of a quarterback than most other offenses. Me acknowledging that does not mean I'm absolving Dak of wrongdoing.

Why do you believe that?

If you're suggesting Dallas uses play calling similar to every other team in the league, then I have to disagree. Play calling is hugely important and can vary widely among teams, and even between coaching staffs on the same team. Do you think the Rams employed similar offenses in 2016 and 2017? What about the Cowboys and the Eagles in 2017?

This is just fanspeak. What are they doing, specifically, that makes you draw these conclusions? You say you disagree, then say playcalling is important (okay...) and then ask about other teams. Offenses on every team change year to year in little ways. How does that address whether or not DAL's playcalling is specifically different than others?

I will give the coaching staff credit for orchestrating some high performing offenses. But I liken those offenses to impressive structures with poor foundations. Take away one or two foundation pieces, and the whole thing tends to falls apart.

Most teams will struggle when they lose pieces- especially foundational pieces. Sure, there are those occasional exceptions, but the rule is generally losing good players makes things more difficult.

I just have a peccadillo with this whole, "predictable," complaint fans like to make. So far, I've never seen a fan predict a play. They like to refer to some former opponents speaking about knowing some plays, but many people see announcers do it every week to teams from around the league. Even the good teams are predictable to professionals who study film.

 

[School]

You said the offense was based on isolated routes and tight window throws. Perhaps you could expound on that. I used to hear how Dez never runs slants or crossing patterns, too. I see him run those pretty much every game. Needless to say, I'm skeptical of these kind of generalizations fans make.

I said tight window intermediate throws. More than three quarters of Dak's passes were thrown into tight coverage. He was number one in terms of percent of passes thrown in the 6-10 yard range.

He had the luxury of being able to turn down tight window throws last year because he had more time to find open options.

See my post about the play to Witten a little ways back for an example of a failed isolated route, pressure, and subsequently a tight window throw (he completed the pass on that play).

If you're referring to the stat, it can literally take a poor throw and call it an accurate tight window throw if the WR makes the catch. That video clearly showed numerous plays where the WR had his man beat but had to adjust to an underthrown ball. They called those, "tight windows," when they were clearly just poorly placed balls.


Before any distilled wine drinkers bring up Romo again- the above is a criticism of the stat, not Dak. I don't believe the stat properly reflects any QB is accurately throwing into tight windows.

I'm not talking about the stat in the video. Like you, I don't give much credence to it and think it's poorly formulated, and already mentioned that earlier in the thread.

How do they get open? What route combinations are they using? What did they do differently with their routes in 2017 compared to 2016?

The offense in 2017 was similar to 2016. In both years, a huge percentage of Dak's passes traveled further than 5 yards downfield compared to his peers. That was a big challenge as rookie, but that year he also had significantly better pass protection and Zeke's presence in the backfield.

Why do you believe that?

31 quarterbacks threw more of their passes behind the line of scrimmage than Dak in 2017.
26 threw more of their passes in the 1-5 yard range.
29 quarterbacks threw more of their passes To 5 yards.

So, how about creating more easy throws for him closer to the line of scrimmage, like most of the league's offenses do for their quarterbacks?

By extension, this also means they underutilized the most effective 1st and 2nd down play in the NFL in terms of success rate - passes to rbs out of the backfield. (A play is counted as a success if it gains 40% of yards-to-go on first down, 60% of yards-to-go on second down and 100% of yards-to-go on third or fourth down.)

Which teams do throw it often to rbs on first on and second downs? Teams like Philly, LAR, NE, and NO.

This is just fanspeak. What are they doing, specifically, that makes you draw these conclusions? You say you disagree, then say playcalling is important (okay...) and then ask about other teams. Offenses on every team change year to year in little ways. How does that address whether or not DAL's playcalling is specifically different than others?

I think there's some misunderstanding here. When you said "To pretend like DAL doesn't use play calling and route trees similar to every other team in the league...", it sounded to me like you were saying that every team in the league has similar play calling. That is what I was disagreeing with. I wasn't claiming Dallas has a unique offense unto its own.

Most teams will struggle when they lose pieces- especially foundational pieces. Sure, there are those occasional exceptions, but the rule is generally losing good players makes things more difficult.

Of course some drop off in production is expected, and I'm not suggesting otherwise, but to what degree? When teams like Dallas and Green Bay lose a key piece like their quarterback, there is a large drop off in the offense. When teams like Minnesota or Philly lose their quarterback or key pieces, their offense can still perform at a reasonably high level.

So far, I've never seen a fan predict a play.

It's not about predicting a play. It's about predicting which type of play will be most effective given the situation. People are developing systems that can help accomplish this, and teams can use this information to their advantage.

Even the good teams are predictable to professionals who study film.

If this was true, it's becoming less true in today's game.

This was a pretty demanding list of items to be answered. I'd like to hear your thoughts on the offense in return. No fanspeak please

 

[LACowboysFan1]

Even in the pros, there is limited time to practice new plays, new formations, etc. And you have to practice a play or route or whatever more than a couple of times to get it right.
It's not possible to have a bunch of new plays every week, every team has their bread and butter plays they run, if they're run correctly, it will usually work.

Everybody and their dog knew Emmitt would get the ball in most critical cases, but he still got long runs and tds, because the execution of the play, backed up by quality personnel, was done like they practiced it.

I just think folks are too hard on Dak, who had little camp work before he became the starter, remember he was third string behind Romo and Moore, and as such he would get precious little time with Dez, etc. until Romo and Moore went down. And he was a fourth round pick, meaning he had flaws that pushed him down the rankings. But it doesn't mean he can't fix those flaws, or of course than he can, either. Being a great NFL quarterback requires physical ability and intelligence, but also practice and game reps. And some take a bit longer to develop than others. Getting to come in and play with a 1,600 yard rusher your first year, and your opponents having precious little game film to study the first year makes playing as a rookie a bit easier.

NFL quarterbacks aren't like a bag of microwave popcorn, some see somebody like Brady or Wentz and think that's the way it always is, but those guys are an aberration...

 

[gjkoeppen]

That's what I said, so we don't disagree on that. On Aikman it's a matter of degree, no salary cap back then so the team could re-build quicker, but that also meant a lot of new people, takes time to get an offense in sync so that might account for some of Aikman's high int rate his second year...

Aikman had Irvin, Novacek,

The irony of a guy calling me out for my lack of comprehension by claiming something I never said. How pathetic. Maybe you should bone up on your comprehension skills before you accuse me of mine.

So to help you here is what I said:

"Amazing how in your mind Aikman was less accurate than Dak."

Here is your lack of comprehension:

"CLEARLY stated that I DON'T THINK Prescott is better than Aikman."

Nowhere in my post appears the word better. So, i never said you claimed Dak better just more accurate. They are not one in the same.

Next time slow down when reading a post and let it sink in a bit before you respond. It will help your comprehension improve.

Class dismissed

OK we'll continue the reading lesson. Yes I did say that Prescott was more accurate than Aikman, BUT not the Aikman of his later accurate years, BUT comparing both he and Prescott to THEIR 1ST 2 SEASONS. Maybe it's you who should slow down when reading comments and let it sink in a little bit before responding.

Now class is dismissed.
.

 

[gjkoeppen]

Stats tell only part of the story. They have their place. But on the stat sheet a 3 yard carry where the back chose the wrong hole is the same as a 3 yard carry where the center was blown up and a guy was hit 2 yards deep yet pushes/jukes his way to 3 yards.

I see now. When talking about passing stats you use rushing examples. Now try to explain away when the ball hits a receiver (Bryant) in the hands and he drops it and how that stat has risen the past couple of years. Now keep in mind if you want to say contested that Bryant made those catches prior to the past couple of seasons. Also why is it that just about every national sportswriter, analyst and announcer who use STATS to state that Bryant needs to take a significant pay cut or be released.
.

 

[gjkoeppen]

That's fine. Nothing to be sorry about.

People have different views. The world is a crazy place bro.

Thanks for being truthful.
.

 

[Haimerej]

@School

Thanks for the well thought out response. Got a busy day ahead so probably won't get back to you until tonight.

 

[gjkoeppen]

The irony of a guy calling me out for my lack of comprehension by claiming something I never said. How pathetic. Maybe you should bone up on your comprehension skills before you accuse me of mine.

So to help you here is what I said:

"Amazing how in your mind Aikman was less accurate than Dak."

Here is your lack of comprehension:

"CLEARLY stated that I DON'T THINK Prescott is better than Aikman."

Nowhere in my post appears the word better. So, i never said you claimed Dak better just more accurate. They are not one in the same.

Next time slow down when reading a post and let it sink in a bit before you respond. It will help your comprehension improve.

Class dismissed

OK we'll continue the reading lesson. Yes I did say that Prescott was more accurate than Aikman, BUT not the Aikman of his later accurate years, BUT comparing both he and Prescott to THEIR 1ST 2 SEASONS. Maybe it's you who should slow down when reading comments and let it sink in a little bit before responding.

Now class is dismissed.

 

[Haimerej]

I see now. When talking about passing stats you use rushing examples. Now try to explain away when the ball hits a receiver (Bryant) in the hands and he drops it and how that stat has risen the past couple of years. Now keep in mind if you want to say contested that Bryant made those catches prior to the past couple of seasons. Also why is it that just about every national sportswriter, analyst and announcer who use STATS to state that Bryant needs to take a significant pay cut or be released.
.

I used an example of two plays with the same result but very different circumstances. You mentioned stats, I gave an example of how they don't tell the whole story. Not sure what drops or Dez has to do with that discussion.