DC.COM: Mammoth Tackle Fluker Could Anchor Right Side

VA Cowboy

Brand New Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
4,710
2nd and goal from 1....pass
3rd and goal from 1....pass

Statement = true
 

Cowboysrock55

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
52,454
I have my complaints with Garrett but I agree with you here. You can't bitch that the guy didn't stick to the run game when you average 3.6 yards per pop. Why the hell would you run if the defense is easily stopping it. It's easy to say run the ball more, but if you aren't getting yards doing it, running the ball more isn't going to get you any better.
 

boozeman

28 Years And Counting...
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
121,735
I have my complaints with Garrett but I agree with you here. You can't bitch that the guy didn't stick to the run game when you average 3.6 yards per pop. Why the hell would you run if the defense is easily stopping it. It's easy to say run the ball more, but if you aren't getting yards doing it, running the ball more isn't going to get you any better.
He's been pass first since forever. I don't buy this idea he wants balance now.
 

Jiggyfly

Banned
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
9,220
I have my complaints with Garrett but I agree with you here. You can't bitch that the guy didn't stick to the run game when you average 3.6 yards per pop. Why the hell would you run if the defense is easily stopping it. It's easy to say run the ball more, but if you aren't getting yards doing it, running the ball more isn't going to get you any better.
Its kind of a chicken and egg thing does the running game suffer from lack of emphasis or is there no emphasis because it sucks?

IMO we have gone always looked at the running game as an afterthought to close out games instead of a key component.
 

Cowboysrock55

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
52,454
He's been pass first since forever. I don't buy this idea he wants balance now.
He may never be a run first guy, but if you look at the games last year where we averaged a respectable amount of yards per carry we ran the ball a lot. I think if the run game is effective Garrett will at least stick to it and use it to set up the pass. Romo is great with the play action pass and Garrett loves using it as well. Hell he uses it even when our run game is sucking.
 

boozeman

28 Years And Counting...
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
121,735
He may never be a run first guy, but if you look at the games last year where we averaged a respectable amount of yards per carry we ran the ball a lot. I think if the run game is effective Garrett will at least stick to it and use it to set up the pass. Romo is great with the play action pass and Garrett loves using it as well. Hell he uses it even when our run game is sucking.
Yeah. He even designs plays where Romo fakes it...to air.
 

Smitty

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
22,488
He's been pass first since forever. I don't buy this idea he wants balance now.
Oh, I'm sure he will never balance. He's pass happy.

But that doesn't mean we can't have a legit running game.
 

Smitty

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
22,488
I have my complaints with Garrett but I agree with you here. You can't bitch that the guy didn't stick to the run game when you average 3.6 yards per pop. Why the hell would you run if the defense is easily stopping it. It's easy to say run the ball more, but if you aren't getting yards doing it, running the ball more isn't going to get you any better.
I said this all season and was told that it was our failure to stick with the run that was the bigger problem (which is nonsense). That if we'd only stick with it and continue to pound our heads against a wall, the ypc would improve.

I don't buy it for a second. Garrett got away from the run because it was struggling (and has been struggling for years). Not vice versa.

If there is a fault of Garrett regarding the running game, it's that he hasn't had either the clout or the foresight to bring in better run blockers to date, but that's ultimately the GM's responsibility.
 

Smitty

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
22,488
Its kind of a chicken and egg thing does the running game suffer from lack of emphasis or is there no emphasis because it sucks?

IMO we have gone always looked at the running game as an afterthought to close out games instead of a key component.
It's not a chicken and egg thing.

We go away from it because it makes no sense to try when it's a guaranteed failure. We lose yards on the run as often as we gain them, in some games.

That's not a lack of repetition. NFL caliber talent should be able to prevent themselves from getting whipped that bad. We just don't have enough NFL caliber run blockers on our roster.
 

Cowboysrock55

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
52,454
If there is a fault of Garrett regarding the running game, it's that he hasn't had either the clout or the foresight to bring in better run blockers to date, but that's ultimately the GM's responsibility.
This has been my main problem. We seem to value athletic ability and versatility over guys that are physically dominating. This has been a problem for awhile but Garrett has also been here on offense for awhile now.

Of course along with this O-line that can't run block Garrett likes to run multiple TEs as though he is a running team. If you're going to be pass happy commit to it and put 3 to 4 WRs out there and have some speed on the field. Instead we seem so reluctant to have more then 1 or 2 WRs on the field.
 
Last edited:

boozeman

28 Years And Counting...
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
121,735
This has been my main problem. We seem to value athletic ability and versatility over guys that are physically dominating. This has been a problem for awhile but Garrett has also been here on offense for awhile now.
I will take it a step further. We value athletic ability over if they can play football. It is almost at Al Davis levels where we have templates on size, height (esp. at WR) etc.
 

Plan9Misfit

Appreciate The Hate
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
5,834
I will take it a step further. We value athletic ability over if they can play football. It is almost at Al Davis levels where we have templates on size, height (esp. at WR) etc.
That's because when your front office is too incompetent to recognize talent, they fall back on athleticism. It's easier to recognize whether a guy is a good athlete or not rather than being able to tell if he can actually play.
 

Clay_Allison

Old Bastard
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
5,488
It's not a chicken and egg thing.

We go away from it because it makes no sense to try when it's a guaranteed failure. We lose yards on the run as often as we gain them, in some games.

That's not a lack of repetition. NFL caliber talent should be able to prevent themselves from getting whipped that bad. We just don't have enough NFL caliber run blockers on our roster.
Jimmy Johnson once said that if he couldn't average 3.5 per carry he'd retire from football. I don't think our averages are that low but if he can't make the running game useful Garrett should give up on pretending to coach offense.
 

Cowboysrock55

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
52,454
Jimmy Johnson once said that if he couldn't average 3.5 per carry he'd retire from football. I don't think our averages are that low but if he can't make the running game useful Garrett should give up on pretending to coach offense.
We were 31st in the NFL last year in YPC with 3.6. That's pretty horrendous. Not sure you can really put that on coaching. It's a talent problem.
 

Clay_Allison

Old Bastard
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
5,488
We were 31st in the NFL last year in YPC with 3.6. That's pretty horrendous. Not sure you can really put that on coaching. It's a talent problem.
Since we are a long way into Garrett having a large say in offensive personnel, maybe we need a coach with an eye for the talent he needs to run "his offense". Garrett clearly doesn't have a clue because we never even get a consistent type of lineman, much less consistent quality.
 

Smitty

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
22,488
Jimmy Johnson once said that if he couldn't average 3.5 per carry he'd retire from football. I don't think our averages are that low but if he can't make the running game useful Garrett should give up on pretending to coach offense.
Yeah, we also averaged 2 yards per carry once against Seattle and he blamed it on the players. You're confusing his boasts of valuing the running game with reality.

There is no way to scheme around Phil Costa, Doug Free, and McKenzie Bernadeau not being NFL-caliber run blockers. You can practice it all you want, it will never change.
 

Smitty

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
22,488
This has been my main problem. We seem to value athletic ability and versatility over guys that are physically dominating. This has been a problem for awhile but Garrett has also been here on offense for awhile now.

Of course along with this O-line that can't run block Garrett likes to run multiple TEs as though he is a running team. If you're going to be pass happy commit to it and put 3 to 4 WRs out there and have some speed on the field. Instead we seem so reluctant to have more then 1 or 2 WRs on the field.
Yeah, but I think his 2 TE fetish is proof that he would like to be more balanced than he is.

We run 2 TE sets to be able to do either. If you go spread you pretty much abandon the premise of a balanced running attack.

I think Garrett would like to have the running game be effective enough that he can trot out that 2 TE offense and keep teams guessing. Plus, as of last season or so, our best and most reliable pass catcher was Jason Witten and has been for a decade, so you kinda can't take the TE out of the offense. Witten probably isn't as effective lining up as a WR than he is coming out as a TE, so you can't go spread without reducing Witten's effectiveness. So if you have to have at least a 1 TE set, he probably figures that it makes sense to go with the 2 TE set for matchup advantages.

There is no question at all that the ineffectiveness of the run game has skewed his playcalling towards the pass more than he'd like. Not saying he'll ever be a "3 yards and a cloud of dust" coach but he can't call what he wants, and that is where people like Clay lose sight of the facts. Garrett is hamstrung by personnel and we don't know what he'd call if he had a legit OL.
 
Last edited:

Smitty

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
22,488
Since we are a long way into Garrett having a large say in offensive personnel, maybe we need a coach with an eye for the talent he needs to run "his offense". Garrett clearly doesn't have a clue because we never even get a consistent type of lineman, much less consistent quality.
Well this brings it all the way back around to "What coach would force Jerry to take a back seat and stop fricking things up in terms of personnel"?

And thus I return to my list of maybe a small handful of coaches in the game today who are "elite" who could do this who I would fire Garrett for.

Then I'll be met with some idiotic mocking about how "Garrett is not better than X" but that's not the point, the point is we'd have the same personnel problems and thus the same handicapping of a coach with almost any hire we make.

Lovie Smith may be a better gameday coach than Garrett but he's not gonna get this team over the hump with that OL either. Lovie Smith will have his own problems that we'll quickly grow to hate here, that get constantly exposed on a team with deep talent flaws that he can do nothing about.

And then we can run him off too.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom