Am I Being Realistic

[Cotton]

There are very slight differences between Garrett's design and Linehan's.

I think you guys are getting a little too carried away with the Linehan anointing.

I disagree with that as far as the game plan design. I have also seen some flashes of differences in play design as well.

 

[boozeman]

I disagree with that as far as the game plan design. I have also seen some flashes of differences in play design as well.

You are just turning into a homer.

 

[Cotton]

You are just turning into a homer.

Maybe, but I see a big difference in the game plans and even some of the play design. that little fake reverse quick pitch was sweet. As was the crossing route to Williams across picks by the other two WRs on that side. I will admit that last game does have me homering out a little bit, but I see what I see.

 

[boozeman]

Maybe, but I see a big difference in the game plans and even some of the play design. that little fake reverse quick pitch was sweet. As was the crossing route to Williams across picks by the other two WRs on that side. I will admit that last game does have me homering out a little bit, but I see what I see.

I just think people are looking at this too hard.

The ability to run the football makes a huge difference.

Is that Linehan? Maybe. But his history with that kind of a philosophy is not conclusive. Callahan had a much better track record with committing to the run.

At this stage, not really sure I even give a shit.

I just want them to continue, no matter who miraculously decided that running is a good thing.

 

[Rev]

/DFDC

 

[Cotton]

I just think people are looking at this too hard.

The ability to run the football makes a huge difference.

Is that Linehan? Maybe. But his history with that kind of a philosophy is not conclusive. Callahan had a much better track record with committing to the run.

At this stage, not really sure I even give a shit.

I just want them to continue, no matter who miraculously decided that running is a good thing.

We had the ability to run the ball last year. Murray was plus 5 in average. Garrett just wouldn't because he has no fucking clue how to call a game nor prepare for it. Linehan seems to be miles ahead of him in that respect.

 

[Cotton]

/DFDC

No doubt. I'm not sure you can find a more negative fan than me, and I'm having to argue like a homer at the zone.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

If Randle turns out to be a gem I'd gladly change my stance.

I don't think he will be a "gem" but I think he is a far cry from the waste of space some make him sound like. He is certainly capable of being a #2 back in the NFL. He just isn't going to be the next Murray. Then again most NFL teams don't have a back like Murray right now.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

I disagree with that as far as the game plan design. I have also seen some flashes of differences in play design as well.

Some guys are just better play callers then others. When you watch our offense this year one play seems to set up another. There is just more of a flow to what we are doing. Another offensive coordinator can take the same exact set of plays and look like shit.

 

[skidadl]

I don't think he will be a "gem" but I think he is a far cry from the waste of space some make him sound like. He is certainly capable of being a #2 back in the NFL. He just isn't going to be the next Murray. Then again most NFL teams don't have a back like Murray right now.

It sounds like you are saying he is a mediocre/average back?

 

[Smitty]

There are very slight differences between Garrett's design and Linehan's.

I think you guys are getting a little too carried away with the Linehan anointing.

I very much agree, Linehan and Garrett run the very same styles, right down to many of the same "cute" plays that everyone complains about when they don't work, except they've been working so far, for Linehan.

I'm sure some of it is the feel for situational playcalling, but a lot of it is also the fact that Linehan has the luxury of calling the same exact play 20 times against the Titans and they can't fucking stop it because of the OL.

 

[Smitty]

I just think people are looking at this too hard.

The ability to run the football makes a huge difference.

Is that Linehan? Maybe. But his history with that kind of a philosophy is not conclusive. Callahan had a much better track record with committing to the run.

At this stage, not really sure I even give a shit.

I just want them to continue, no matter who miraculously decided that running is a good thing.

Whoever it was, they decided it because our OL is dominating in run blocking.

I said over and over again that if we fixed the line, we'd see the running results follow. Linehan was no ground and pound proponent previously in Detroit; it's heavily personnel related.

And the argument that "we could run the ball last year" doesn't hold much water. For one.... not like this, we couldn't. For two, we are leaning on three 23 year olds with this approach right now. I don't fault it for taking a year for the philosophy to catch up with the personnel.

 

[boozeman]

And the argument that "we could run the ball last year" doesn't hold much water. For one.... not like this, we couldn't. For two, we are leaning on three 23 year olds with this approach right now. I don't fault it for taking a year for the philosophy to catch up with the personnel.

This is bullshit.

We could run late last year. The Packers were ripe to be run on just as much as we are doing now.

But your boyfriend would have none of that.

 

[Smitty]

This is bullshit.

We could run late last year. The Packers were ripe to be run on just as much as we are doing now.

But your boyfriend would have none of that.

He's having some of it right now. Maybe Linehan is giving him titty twisters or atomic wedgies in the back halls of Valley Ranch and forcing him?

Like I said, I think it took time for them to come to the realization that they could lean on the run, maybe even needing an offseason to implement it.

It should be obvious, by the way, I am not trying to use this as an excuse for the complete meltdown that was ignoring the run in the Packers game, because even in that situation, running it three times for nothing and punting would have been smart, comparatively.

Just saying that if you (the general "you", not you personally, booze) had any sense, you'd realize which thing is following the other here.

 

[Clay_Allison]

He's having some of it right now. Maybe Linehan is giving him titty twisters or atomic wedgies in the back halls of Valley Ranch and forcing him?

Like I said, I think it took time for them to come to the realization that they could lean on the run, maybe even needing an offseason to implement it.

It should be obvious, by the way, I am not trying to use this as an excuse for the complete meltdown that was ignoring the run in the Packers game, because even in that situation, running it three times for nothing and punting would have been smart, comparatively.

Just saying that if you (the general "you", not you personally, booze) had any sense, you'd realize which thing is following the other here.

Garrett's not philosophically opposed to the run, he is just a terrible play caller who doesn't think of running while he's actually in the game. He'll get in a playcalling rut and call pass after pass leading to a run of quick 3 and outs. Linehan is just a lot more able to stick to the game plan when calling plays.

 

[Smitty]

Garrett's not philosophically opposed to the run

That statement is the direct opposite of what I've heard time after fucking time on this board.

And then when I'd point out "Um, no, that's not true" I'd be called a Garrett apologist.

So congratulations, fellow apologist.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

It sounds like you are saying he is a mediocre/average back?

He is an average RB. He can make plays but there isn't anything special about him. Welcome to most NFL RBs. He has plenty of talent to spell Murray.

 

[Clay_Allison]

That statement is the direct opposite of what I've heard time after fucking time on this board.

And then when I'd point out "Um, no, that's not true" I'd be called a Garrett apologist.

So congratulations, fellow apologist.

If he was philosophically uninterested in the run we'd be rolling out a spread offense like NO or GB. I'm sure he intended to get back to the run every time he abandoned it, the way some people intend to get back on their diet after Christmas/New Years. We just needed a play caller with the discipline to actually do it.

 

[data]

Just saying that if one had any sense, they'd realize which thing is following the other here.

For future reference.

 

[Cotton]

Some guys are just better play callers then others. When you watch our offense this year one play seems to set up another. There is just more of a flow to what we are doing. Another offensive coordinator can take the same exact set of plays and look like shit.

Exactly. Hence why I said game play design. And play calls in-game.