Why is our offense dictated by opposing defenses?

[Brooksey]

We have all heard this but I wanted to discuss it a little more. I understand the idea of "Least Path of Resistance" and if the defense is going to leave something open then hey let's exploit it, I get that. What I don't understand is where do we draw the line?

When Romo and Garrett talk on their pressers they say "We know the play and the receivers know the play based on the defensive alignment." Ok so let me get this straight we are going to the line with two plays, probably a pass and run, Tony kills one if needed and the receivers know who should get the ball based on coverage and then progressions from there. It sounds good in theory but what happens if the defense is ONLY giving man coverage on a rookie like T.Williams? We are supposed keep forcing him the ball based on this "Least path of resistance Theory" and forget Dez Bryant and Jason Witten? That's what were doing folks. Dez Bryant has a safety over the top, ok can we get him involved with some hooks and slants? Can we force the issue on the defense? Why can't we run the hurry-up without audibles and dictate the playmaker, the defensive personnel and the tempo? We did not run a play yesterday with more then 10 secs on the play clock and most were snapped with 1-2 seconds on the clock.

I like taking what the defense gives but I'm not sold on letting this dictate our whole game plan and our tempo. We are letting the opposing defense substitute, slow down our tempo and take our biggest weapons out of the game for just two long. Obviously they are not going to give us favorable matchups all day, that's their job, "They give us are weakest parts", I don't think we can settle for that. T Williams is not good enough yet to take over a game, either is Beasley. They are great complimenary recievers that are getting better but Romo has to draw a line somewhere. If anyone is wondering why we look lathargic on offense sometimes and other times so explosive, this is one of the reasons.

Where do we draw the Line? Can this be successful? Why does NE do the opposite? What does Peyton Manning do besides not have a weak link? What are other successful teams doing like Sea and SF?

 

[rags747]

I agree, not sure where this comes from. In the Jimmy days everyone knew what we were going to run and we still did it. For once why don't we just say this is who we are and this is what we are going to do. So fed up with this team...since damn 2007 and counting.

 

[cml750]

Because instead of playing to win we play to not to lose. Typical Garrett.

 

[Gameover]

Teams don't fear our QB.

 

[Zman5]

That's how RKG is supposed to play. They don't want to be rude and dictate or impose anything on anyone else.

 

[dragon_mikal]

Because the offense isn't designed to take advantage of our playmakers. Because Garrett doesn't attack an opposing team's weaknesses or alter his game plan to take advantage of a defense's aggressiveness.

No draws. No roll outs. One week running slants while not calling a single one for a month. Continually attacking the sidelines while ignoring the middle of the field. Calling dives on 2nd and long.

This offensive scheme is really an offensive player's worst enemy.

 

[Doomsday]

Because the coach is in over his head. I would love to see some actual game day adjustments as well.

 

[Ender]

Because of Jason Garretts offence

 

[ConstantReboot]

We have all heard this but I wanted to discuss it a little more. I understand the idea of "Least Path of Resistance" and if the defense is going to leave something open then hey let's exploit it, I get that. What I don't understand is where do we draw the line?

When Romo and Garrett talk on their pressers they say "We know the play and the receivers know the play based on the defensive alignment." Ok so let me get this straight we are going to the line with two plays, probably a pass and run, Tony kills one if needed and the receivers know who should get the ball based on coverage and then progressions from there. It sounds good in theory but what happens if the defense is ONLY giving man coverage on a rookie like T.Williams? We are supposed keep forcing him the ball based on this "Least path of resistance Theory" and forget Dez Bryant and Jason Witten? That's what were doing folks. Dez Bryant has a safety over the top, ok can we get him involved with some hooks and slants? Can we force the issue on the defense? Why can't we run the hurry-up without audibles and dictate the playmaker, the defensive personnel and the tempo? We did not run a play yesterday with more then 10 secs on the play clock and most were snapped with 1-2 seconds on the clock.

I like taking what the defense gives but I'm not sold on letting this dictate our whole game plan and our tempo. We are letting the opposing defense substitute, slow down our tempo and take our biggest weapons out of the game for just two long. Obviously they are not going to give us favorable matchups all day, that's their job, "They give us are weakest parts", I don't think we can settle for that. T Williams is not good enough yet to take over a game, either is Beasley. They are great complimenary recievers that are getting better but Romo has to draw a line somewhere. If anyone is wondering why we look lathargic on offense sometimes and other times so explosive, this is one of the reasons.

Where do we draw the Line? Can this be successful? Why does NE do the opposite? What does Peyton Manning do besides not have a weak link? What are other successful teams doing like Sea and SF?

What I don't like about our offense is that its can easily be manipulated to play into the hands of the defense.

All that the defense has to do is show a certain formation to force Romo to call an audible. Then right before the snap, go back or the original defensive scheme. This is why Romo gets confused so easily and rattled early. Its the blue print in beating the Cowboys.

A defense can watch what the Cowboys do on film for a week and know exactly who were going to go to on certain formations and situations. This makes our offense predictable.

What we should do is use a spread formation as Beasley as the slot reciever. Spreading the offense forces the defense to move their rushers away from the LOS and play nickle defense. Romo should have 2-3 options or checkdowns before hiking the ball based on what he see's in the defense. If there is a breakdown pass protection, all the recievers break away from their pass routes and start finding openings in the defense. This happens within two secs. from when the ball is hiked. Green Bay runs a similar style of offense with Rogers. When Romo gets out of the pocket our recievers stand around waiting to see what Romo is going to do. We should utilize Romo's mobility out of pocket as a advantage. Unfortunately, this offense doesn't have those plays in the playbook.

 

[dstovall5]

Teams don't fear our QB.

Any proof to back up that claim or are you just talking out of your *** like usual?

 

[nalam]

Where do we draw the Line? Can this be successful? Why does NE do the opposite? What does Peyton Manning do besides not have a weak link? What are other successful teams doing like Sea and SF?

This has been going for too long, we never impose our will on the opposite team, Garrett's offense never is the type " we are going to do our things , you try to stop us if you can" .

I know you can't be stupid , but it's gutless.

 

[mrmojo]

I just wish once we would run the play thats called....I know that would shock the heck out of me......

 

[Gameover]

Any proof to back up that claim or are you just talking out of your *** like usual?

Watch the game. Pedistrian offense everyweek. Been going downhill since 2007.

 

[TheCount]

Because the offense has no identity, so they "take what the defense gives". Which I've always thought was a stupid way to go about playing offense in a league that favors offense.

 

[dstovall5]

Watch the game. Pedistrian offense everyweek. Been going downhill since 2007.

Like I thought, no proof.

 

[ConstantReboot]

I remember when we had Owens in motion to beat the double team. It actually worked. I also remember we used play action quite frequently back then. That also worked pretty well also. Now the question you have to ask is why have we abandoned plays that used to work?

 

[AKATheRake]

Because Garrett's nobody when it comes to being on record of developing an offensive system and the last time teams feared Tony Romo outside of thinking they can force him into mistakes, Tony Sparano was still here. 1 year after Parcells left.

Que the Garrett defenders the 2 years he was O Coordinator for Wade.

I'll smash any of you up with that if you come to me with that joke.

A couple will challenge just for the sake of it but won't have a substantial point after my first rebuttal so just eat this once and for all.

 

[Dday22t]

If we could RUN the ball we could dictate everything. When a team can't run AT ALL and the D knows your favorite pass plays it makes it tough to have a consistent offense. And Garrtet/Callahan are really bad at being creative or making in-game adjustments.

 

[ConstantReboot]

If we could RUN the ball we could dictate everything. When a team can't run AT ALL and the D knows your favorite pass plays it makes it tough to have a consistent offense. And Garrtet/Callahan are really bad at being creative or making in-game adjustments.

People say that having a run game will help. I think your right but we are what we are - which is a passing team. Its a passing league so were in good company aand many teams are successful passing the ball. The bad part is the one calling the plays and our playbook is designed for offenses of the 90s. It doesn't belong in today's NFL.

What I wish the Cowboys would do is run the play thats been called. We just need to stop with these audibles. Use audibles only when its needed. Other teams have caught on and teams switch back once Romo calls an audible. Thus causing havoc in everything we do.