Will Linehan go more no huddle?

[khiladi]

Points per series accounts for the number of possessions.

What's your point? That doesn't address starting field position as a result of TOs. It does not address whether that score is based upon a deadly-accurate kicker whose money even from 50 yards out after an offense has stalled or an actual TD score, because Sean Lee happens to take an INT down to the 7 yard line.

 

[Idgit]

What's your point? That doesn't address starting field position as a result of TOs nor does it address whether that score is based upon a deadly-accurate kicker whose money even from 50 yards out after an offense has stalled or an actual TD score, because Sean Lee happens to take an INT down to the 7 yard line.

Check out the average starting field position then. That point has already been discussed and dismissed in previous threads.

As to having a good fg kicker...hooray? Those points count, same way touchdown points do. I'm not sure why we'd omit them from our estimation of the team's ability to score.

 

[khiladi]

Check out the average starting field position then. That point has already been discussed and dismissed in previous threads.

As to having a good fg kicker...hooray? Those points count, same way touchdown points do. I'm not sure why we'd omit them from our estimation of the team's ability to score.

In your view it has been 'dismissed'. Average starting field position has no bearing on when points were scored for a team. It simply points to the average a team started on offense, whether they scored or not. This is nothing but obfuscation. You tend to blow away any and everything like it's nothing when it comes to Garrett, while he continues to get pushed farther and farther away from the offense. Even Jerry sees it, despite the fact he's the 'golden boy'.

As far as field goal kicking, it has everything to do with the point. If Dallas defense gets a TO at the 50 yard line and runs it back five yards and Dallas moves the ball only ten yards and totally sputters, our FG simply kicks 3 points and hurray, the offense gets credit. And you blame the defense as sucking, and give praise to the offense. That's what your argument amounts to and if you can't see that has bearing on how our offense sputters, Id like to say "your argument is dismissed".

 

[morasp]

Third down efficiency is a pretty good measure of the offenses ability to move the chains. When I looked at it last year before Garrett started relaying the plays it was down significantly.

 

[khiladi]

This statement "Average starting field position has no bearing on when points were scored for a team" should actually read "The average starting field position doesn't tell us when points were scored for a team."

 

[Idgit]

In your view it has been 'dismissed'. Average starting field position has no bearing on when points were scored for a team. It simply points to the average a team started on offense, whether they scored or not. This is nothing but obfuscation. You tend to blow away any and everything like it's nothing when it comes to Garrett, while he continues to get pushed farther and farther away from the offense. Even Jerry sees it, despite the fact he's the 'golden boy'.

As far as field goal kicking, it has everything to do with the point. If Dallas defense gets a TO at the 50 yard line and runs it back five yards and Dallas moves the ball only ten yards and totally sputters, our FG simply kicks 3 points and hurray, the offense gets credit. And you blame the defense as sucking, and give praise to the offense. That's what your argument amounts to and if you can't see that has bearing on how our offense sputters, Id like to say "your argument is dismissed".

So....you've established something is technically possible. I'll play along. Is there anything to suggest what you're claiming is actually happening? Because if points/offensive series and average starting field position don't back you up, certainly something does, right?

As to backing Jason Garrett, as I've said many, many times: he's the head coach and not the OC. An historically bad defense does him no rhetorical favors. It's his job to field a good overall team. I just want us to address what actually gets us beat, rather than some fantasy based mostly on unsupported offensive suppositions.

 

[Doomsday101]

In your view it has been 'dismissed'. Average starting field position has no bearing on when points were scored for a team. It simply points to the average a team started on offense, whether they scored or not. This is nothing but obfuscation. You tend to blow away any and everything like it's nothing when it comes to Garrett, while he continues to get pushed farther and farther away from the offense. Even Jerry sees it, despite the fact he's the 'golden boy'.

As far as field goal kicking, it has everything to do with the point. If Dallas defense gets a TO at the 50 yard line and runs it back five yards and Dallas moves the ball only ten yards and totally sputters, our FG simply kicks 3 points and hurray, the offense gets credit. And you blame the defense as sucking, and give praise to the offense. That's what your argument amounts to and if you can't see that has bearing on how our offense sputters, Id like to say "your argument is dismissed".

Dallas avg starting Field position was 31 yard line middle of the pack and yet TD per drive Dallas ranked 6th in redzone an area that in the past people said was a big stat that Garrett failed we ranked 3rd. There is room for improvement but this anti Garrett crap evidently blinds his critics of any good that has taken place Your too busy bashing. Defense on the other hand ranked at the bottom in almost every fricken category that is why it was historically one of the worst defense in franchise history.

 

[Idgit]

Third down efficiency is a pretty good measure of the offenses ability to move the chains. When I looked at it last year before Garrett started relaying the plays it was down significantly.

It actually isn't, since teams convert on first and second downs, too, and there are a lot more of those downs for the obvious reasons.

 

[khiladi]

So....you've established something is technically possible. I'll play along. Is there anything to suggest what you're claiming is actually happening? Because if points/offensive series and average starting field position don't back you up, certainly something does, right?

As to backing Jason Garrett, as I've said many, many times: he's the head coach and not the OC. An historically bad defense does him no rhetorical favors. It's his job to field a good overall team. I just want us to address what actually gets us beat, rather than some fantasy based mostly on unsupported offensive suppositions.

LOL.. You made a claim that average starting field position is what dictates scoring. I actually rejected this point by saying it tells us nothing about when Dallas scored on what drive. The onus is on you to establish that our defense did not hing for the offense. I can surely attest to Sean Lee's INT giving Dallas a score in the Detroit game, but according to you our defense lost that game despite 3 other TOs because of the 'last drive'.

 

[khiladi]

Dallas avg starting Field position was 31 yard line middle of the pack and yet TD per drive Dallas ranked 6th in redzone an area that in the past people said was a big stat that Garrett failed we ranked 3rd. There is room for improvement but this anti Garrett crap evidently blinds his critics of any good that has taken place Your too busy bashing. Defense on the other hand ranked at the bottom in almost every fricken category that is why it was historically one of the worst defense in franchise history.

So Garrett was demoted and red-zone scoring went up. And that too, with an OC that doesn't even run a Coryell. How does that prove anything other than Garrett sucks and can't even run his own offense?

Again, the defense wasn't the worst in TOs. We by far out-bested two years ago for example and after that year, Garrett was saying TOs were the key to helping out the offense. But now, he gets a pass because the defense gets all the blame.

 

[morasp]

It actually isn't, since teams convert on first and second downs, too, and there are a lot more of those downs for the obvious reasons.

It actually is since it only is measured when the team gets to third down. It's independent of the first and second downs that got converted.

 

[Doomsday101]

So Garrett was demoted and red-zone scoring went up. And that too, with an OC that doesn't even run a Coryell. How does that prove anything other than Garrett sucks and can't even run his own offense?

Again, the defense wasn't the worst in TOs. We by far out-bested two years ago for example and after that year, Garrett was saying TOs were the key to helping out the offense. But now, he gets a pass because the defense gets all the blame.

He is demoted when it feed your argument yet his fault that the offense was not as sharpe? LOL

Defense we did get some turnover and that helped they also had games last year were the opposing punter never set foot on the field outside of warm ups they gave up points and they failed in most areas.
I think there are things this offense can improve on but acting as if the offense was so bad is a fricken joke, the offense was put under a lot of pressure because the defense could not stop anyone. Seattle offense damn well knows there defense will to out and shut teams down they don't have to risk as much on offense. It damn well matters

as for a pass I'm on record here of saying I would have fired Garrett at the end of the season not because of offense but because the team as a whole had failed.

 

[TheCount]

How are you measuring offensive consistency here?

I watch the games? You watched them too, you thought they were consistent?

Yes offense can do better they were not horrible, you don't put up those points being a bad offense. Sorry we will not score every time we get the ball.

I never said they were bad, I just think "The Numbers" don't tell the whole story, in fact I'd say they're downright misleading.

 

[BigStar]

Exactly. We need a bit of deception as well.

Im sick and tired of defenses knowing that when you play Dallas you don't have to worry much about misdirection or playaction or anything that is remotely deceptive.


Our offense needs to start dictating games instead of always taking what the defense gives.

Yes, and this is accomplished by imposing your will with offensive scheme (even pass heavy schemes). You want to throw all day? Throw to your rbs! Pick routes, bunch formations, hard slants, crossing patterns, MOTIONING WRs, etc. Not a timed out/in/post/hook that requires perfect execution AND the player beating the man across from him. What does JG do all week?

 

[Doomsday101]

I watch the games? You watched them too, you thought they were consistent?



I never said they were bad, I just think "The Numbers" don't tell the whole story, in fact I'd say they're downright misleading.

I think one area that really hurt the offense was 3rd down conversions where Dallas ranked poorly. Overall I think offense did a lot of good things and there is room for this offense to improve

 

[Doomsday101]

I watch the games? You watched them too, you thought they were consistent?



I never said they were bad, I just think "The Numbers" don't tell the whole story, in fact I'd say they're downright misleading.

I think the numbers do tell a lot of truth, as I mentioned on offense an area that did hurt us was 3rd down conversions. I'm not claiming offense to be without any faults but overall the offense had to carry a very poor defensive unit.

 

[Galian Beast]

Going up tempo means more time on the clock, more possessions, more chances to score. So yes, if the defense can't get off the field; it definitely "suggests were going to lose significant TOP".

For example, the eagles no huddle offense ranked dead last in TOP.
Denver ranked 15th.
Dallas 26th

There is a difference between a no huddle offense and a hurry up offense. Also if the no huddle leads to a higher conversion rate, and thus more on field time for the offense it also won't result in a lack of possession.

 

[khiladi]

He is demoted when it feed your argument yet his fault that the offense was not as sharpe? LOL

Defense we did get some turnover and that helped they also had games last year were the opposing punter never set foot on the field outside of warm ups they gave up points and they failed in most areas.
I think there are things this offense can improve on but acting as if the offense was so bad is a fricken joke, the offense was put under a lot of pressure because the defense could not stop anyone. Seattle offense damn well knows there defense will to out and shut teams down they don't have to risk as much on offense. It damn well matters

as for a pass I'm on record here of saying I would have fired Garrett at the end of the season not because of offense but because the team as a whole had failed.

I've never sad the offense was so freaking bad, I said Garrett was bad. Our offense compensates for Garrett's ineptness, particularly Romo.

Garrett was demoted from the offense and that's the reality. Not because he was great, not because he was good, but because he failed. It is what it is. I know, it's hard to accept. Jerry even said he was still not keeping away last year from the offense and he's not having it, and he is going to make him stand around the defense more. In fact, in order to improve the offense, Jerry found it better that instead of just having Callahan fully control the offense with a system that he doesn't coach, he'll get Linehan because he suddenly became available for the pass offense. It clearly indicates Dallas still believes the offensive passing game is bad and Callahan improved what he was suppose to, which was the running game.

And I just find the irony laughable. The defense has no bearing on how the offense plays, but the offense has no bearing on how the defense plays for the Garrett homers. When Wade was around, Garrett's 3 and outs between the 2nd and 3rd had no bearing on the defense 'folding' and how it played the game, but when Garrett is responsible, the offense has to bear all the pressure.

 

[Doomsday101]

I've never sad the offense was so freaking bad, I said Garrett was bad. Our offense compensates for Garrett's ineptness, particularly Romo.

Garrett was demoted from the offense and that's the reality. Not because he was great, not because he was good, but because he failed. It is what it is. I know, it's hard to accept. Jerry even said he was still not keeping away last year from the offense and he's not having it, and he is going to make him stand around the defense more. In fact, in order to improve the offense, Jerry found it better that instead of just having Callahan fully control the offense with a system that he doesn't coach, he'll get Linehan because he suddenly became available for the pass offense. It clearly indicates Dallas still believes the offensive passing game is bad and Callahan improved what he was suppose to, which was the running game.

And I just find the irony laughable. The defense has no bearing on how the offense plays, but the offense has no bearing on how the defense plays for the Garrett homers. When Wade was around, Garrett's 3 and outs between the 2nd and 3rd had no bearing on the defense 'folding' and how it played the game, but when Garrett is responsible, the offense has to bear all the pressure.

Linehan improved the detriot running game, this notion that he is all pass? According to the RB in Det they would disagree and have. Yes he did pass quite a bit in Det, why to get the best offensive weapon in the game the ball but none the less the run game improved in Det.

 

[khiladi]

BTW, one of our most successful reasons for scoring going up on the red-zone was because we used Dez more. Jerry wasn't forcing Garrett to call plays to Dez in the end-zone the year prior when he was in control. We weren't trying to make Kevin Ogletree a superstar because he was Jason Garrett's brothers pet project. Additionally, one of our successful plays last year as opposed to when Garrett was running the offense was the drag route for Dez, which was rarely used. We also ran more 5 WR sets and were a little better in play-action.

It's clear that with Linehan we can look forward to attacking Dez more, as well as having our primary receiver attacking the middle of the zone more.