Why does Moore hate the run game?

MountaineerCowboy

Well-Known Member
Messages
20,820
Reaction score
43,569
There are reports he doesnt even understand the playbook. So no.

However. He should have reigned in boy wonder in the 4th and told him to run the ball. If they ran consistently in the 4th there wouldn't have been enough time for the come back.
I don't see how some can just dog Moore about the runs when we don't know what he was calling or what Dak was changing at the line.
 

khiladi

Well-Known Member
Messages
33,423
Reaction score
29,731
I don't think he hates the run game.... Don't forget, Moore's coaching is a product of Jason Garrett.. They call the same vanilla plays, they would rather pass than run and will pass at every chance he (Moore) gets. I don't think Moore knows how to use the run game. Jason didn't teach him..

No it’s not. He’s a Linehan disciple bright from Detroit, with flavors of Boise State. Garrett in NY was the worst play caller in history and was running 2 WR sets as their based when most of the league was running 3. Just because they ran the Coryell doesn’t make them the same.

If you want to watch play-calling similar to a Garrett offense, watch Lombardi in San Diego.
 

khiladi

Well-Known Member
Messages
33,423
Reaction score
29,731
The OC gives the QB plays to work with.

it’s easy to fool Dak. Last year, from Denver onward, teams just stopped blitzing and often showed run, but dropped men back into coverage. Mr “Slow Processing” didn’t know what to do as he checked out if run plays.
 

khiladi

Well-Known Member
Messages
33,423
Reaction score
29,731
Yeah, it is.

Prescott has a lot of leeway to make play calls at the LOS. It's even been admitted by the coaches.

Nobody has any idea how many pass calls get changed to run or vice versa, or how many of the line calls are decoy calls just trying to throw the defense off. But he IS making line calls.

Romo did the same thing and all people anted to do was blame the "pass happy play caller Garrett". It wasn't until our own defensive players called him out for doing it that anyone knew about it.

That’s actually not what happened as far as Garrett was concerned. Romo wasn’t even part of game planning meetings until Jerry forced it on top with the new contract and gave more power to Romo, with Peyton-like responsibilities, stripping power from Garrett to call plays.

Garrett was even worse in NY with the worst running attack and the deterioration of Daniel Jones into a hot mess of TO nightmares. The difference between Dallas and NY is even though Garrett had Mara connections, like he did with the Jones family, the NY press and fans are brutal. So Garrett lasted only a year and a half, even though Columbo was fired five games into coaching.
 

DalFan75

Member
Messages
76
Reaction score
58
That’s actually not what happened as far as Garrett was concerned. Romo wasn’t even part of game planning meetings until Jerry forced it on top with the new contract and gave more power to Romo, with Peyton-like responsibilities, stripping power from Garrett to call plays.

Garrett was even worse in NY with the worst running attack and the deterioration of Daniel Jones into a hot mess of TO nightmares. The difference between Dallas and NY is even though Garrett had Mara connections, like he did with the Jones family, the NY press and fans are brutal. So Garrett lasted only a year and a half, even though Columbo was fired five games into coaching.

Romo was changing plays left and right at the LOS as soon as 2007. The longer he was the starter the more he did it, so much so that his own teammates started calling him out for it and complaining that he bailed on far too many run calls.

Garrett sux, but he had far more talent in Dallas to work with than that joke of a team they had in NY.
 

IceStar-D7

Well-Known Member
Messages
5,503
Reaction score
5,306
Kellen Moore SUCKS!!!! Can't wait till Payton gets rid of Jason Garrett 2.0
 

DuceizBak

Well-Known Member
Messages
972
Reaction score
761
Dal Offense since dak return:

Game 1: 24
Game 2: 42
Game 3: 28


Defense since Dak return:
Game 1: 6...should have been more
Game 2: 29
Game 3: 31
 

Brax

Well-Known Member
Messages
5,428
Reaction score
5,577
There are reports he doesnt even understand the playbook. So no.

However. He should have reigned in boy wonder in the 4th and told him to run the ball. If they ran consistently in the 4th there wouldn't have been enough time for the come back.
You are correct in MM doesn’t know the playbook or the the terminology but I think standing there he can say run the ball, we don’t and never will know if KM is calling run and Dak is checking out to a pass, kill kill kill.
 

khiladi

Well-Known Member
Messages
33,423
Reaction score
29,731
Romo was changing plays left and right at the LOS as soon as 2007. The longer he was the starter the more he did it, so much so that his own teammates started calling him out for it and complaining that he bailed on far too many run calls.

Garrett sux, but he had far more talent in Dallas to work with than that joke of a team they had in NY.

You have zero basis for making your claims and the talent Garrett had was Romo. Romo wasn’t involved in game planning until he got the new contract, meaning he ran the trash plays Garrett called and gave him. That’s also why guys like Steve McGee and Kyle Orton threw the ball in playoff qualifying games in December 40 plus times a game with Garrett calling plays.

And you missed the point, which is Garrett had the same talent in NY that the previous coach did and does now, but Garrett almost single handed it destroyed the run game as well as Daniel Jones. Jones regressed by leaps and bounds with Garrett. It got so bad in NY in the first season, rumors were that Joe Judge had to take over the running game from Garrett after the firing of Columbo, because Garrett was so incompetent at fielding one.

And Julius Jones sucked. The RG and blocking schemes were rebuilt by Callahan in 2012 onwards.
 

plasticman

Well-Known Member
Messages
7,268
Reaction score
12,139
No they didnt.

They lost because they had a two TD lead in the 4th qtr and the defense melted down. We scored 28 pts against a team that coming in was averaging 17 and had managed 57 total points in their previous 4 games. If every team the Packers played the first 9 games had scored 28 pts, the Packers would have been 0-9.

Our defense is supposed to be good, the last two games it hasn't been and it has nothing to do with how many times we run or pass.

I don't know why people obsess over number of pass plays vs run plays, the object is to score points. I don't care if they pass 100 times and run 0 if they score touchdowns, and neither should anyone else. We scored 28 pts against a team coming in that had no offense, we should not have lost.

Also as pointed out in another post, we had 6 possessions where we ran only 3 plays. On every single one of them we did run the ball at least once. If you don't get 3rd down conversions it's hard to run up play counts. Had we done that there would have been more running plays. We had 31 rushes as it was, so it isnt like they gave up on the run. There was only one series in the game where they passed it way more than they ran it, and it was right before the end of the first half when they had to throw to get into scoring range.
The defense wouldn't have been given the opportunity to melt down if they were sitting on the bench at the same time Rodgers and the Packers offense was sitting on the bench.

Running the ball takes time off the clock at the same time that drive is being extended. Again, the Cowboys running attack was averaging over 5 yards a carry. The Packers defense would have been fatigued and Pollard could have very possibly broke one,

The Cowboys had a 4th quarter drive that lasted 51 seconds, three and out. it started with a three yard gain on a running play followed by two incomplete passes.

Previous to the Packers last TD, the Cowboys had a drive in which Pollard was running all over them. The drive started on eh Cowboys 12 yard line. There was ten and a half minutes left in the game. Then, the Cowboys suddenly went with the passing game. The drive fizzled and they were forced to punt.

Aaron Rodgers got the ball back with 9 minutes left in the game. They took six and a half minutes to score the tying TD. That six and a half minutes shouldn't have been there and wouldn't have been there if the Cowboys continued to run with the ball

That Cowboys defense that everybody claims let us down, spent over ten and a half minutes of the 4th quarter on the field as a direct result of the Cowboys offense not running the ball and taking time off the clock.

Even in overtime, 3rd and 3 on the Packers 35 yard line, they passed. They passed again on 4th down. And it was the defense that let us down?

With two plays to get 3 yards, I believe Polard would have gotten it. Quite possibly, Rodgers would have never entered the field during overtime.
 

DalFan75

Member
Messages
76
Reaction score
58
The defense wouldn't have been given the opportunity to melt down if they were sitting on the bench at the same time Rodgers and the Packers offense was sitting on the bench.

So your answer to preventing the defense from melting down is for the offense to possess the ball the entire 4th qtr?

Previous to the Packers last TD, the Cowboys had a drive in which Pollard was running all over them. The drive started on eh Cowboys 12 yard line. There was ten and a half minutes left in the game. Then, the Cowboys suddenly went with the passing game. The drive fizzled and they were forced to punt.

You mean the 8 play 25 yd drive we had? In which they ran 4 times and passed 4 times? And does "running all over them" now equate to 4 caries for 16 yards? Pollard's last gain was for 1 yd and set up a 3rd and 9, so we "suddenly went with the passing game" to try and covnert a 3rd and 9?

That Cowboys defense that everybody claims let us down, spent over ten and a half minutes of the 4th quarter on the field as a direct result of the Cowboys offense not running the ball and taking time off the clock.

Well the defense did let us down.

And they were out there for 10 and a half minutes because they gave up two length of the field TD drives. You do understand the Cowboys had a TOP edge the first 3 quarters right?

There are definitely games where it's easy to point the finger at Prescott and/or the offense and say they let the team down or failed to do their job, but Sunday vs Green Bay was not one of those games.
 

calicowboy54

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,245
Reaction score
912
Dallas was killing it in run game but yet Moore like to air it out. Face it Dak is a Jag qb. Moore thinks Dak is Marino. I guess money talks.
i watched dak check to at least 10 plays yesterday. who’s to say it’s not him picking a pass over a run.
 

Dak_Attack_09

Benched
Messages
5,222
Reaction score
3,603
Dallas was killing it in run game but yet Moore like to air it out. Face it Dak is a Jag qb. Moore thinks Dak is Marino. I guess money talks.

Idk what it is, but Dak should have audible to a run play at the goal line before the interception.
 

Dak_Attack_09

Benched
Messages
5,222
Reaction score
3,603
i watched dak check to at least 10 plays yesterday. who’s to say it’s not him picking a pass over a run.

Didn’t Rodger get mad at his coach for not calling a run play? Coaches probably over-rules the QB on play calling all the time.
 
Top