Sturm - Issues In Oxnard: Running The Ball

boozeman

28 Years And Counting...
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
121,759
[h=2]Saturday, August 02, 2014[/h] [h=3]Issues In Oxnard: Running The Ball [/h]

Back in January, when Scott Linehan was being hired by the Cowboys, I wrote the following:

Linehan is a coach who has his plusses and minuses of course. Every coach - especially those who are easily available at this time of year - are not going to have such a glowing resume that we run to his arms in January and he comes in and fixes everything. Rob Ryan had a list of doubters who said he had never won anything. Monte Kiffin's doubts were based on his last several years of work. Bill Callahan still had to answer for Super Bowl 37 and his very odd relationship with players. Rod Marinelli coached a team that went 0-16. The list goes on and on.

Well, in Linehan's case, my initial concerns are based completely on my over-riding issues with the offense. I have long thought that the Cowboys offense is too finesse and does not value the ability to (at times) bully the defense into submission with clock-controlling, demoralizing, and punishing football that shows the opponent that this is going to be a very long day. I think that it seldom hurts to defend against the Cowboys and that they run only as an afterthought.
Now, I do not believe in the wishbone, the veer, or any ridiculous running to extreme that is sure to anger any advanced metrics folks. In fact, I consider myself one of them. But, we cannot lose sight of the fact that the sport of football is one of disposition and attitude at its core. You cannot watch the Seahawks and 49ers take over the NFC with this bully-football and ignore it. There has to be some recognition that physicality is still alive and well in the NFL and it is still a blocking and tackling league.
I am sorry, but dropping back into shotgun and pass protection play after play is like a boxer who is never allowed to attack. He must simply accept punishment as an offensive lineman and never dish it out. I don't like that and I never have. I also don't believe that many great coaches believe in it either. Yes, this is a passing league and the numbers have never been higher. So, why then, did Seattle and San Francisco take over the conference without a QB who can throw for 200 yards on a regular basis?
Smash-Mouth-Football. Offensively and Defensively. They are going to make you cry.
Can the Cowboys mimic this?
Or should they do just the opposite?
Here is the run/pass balance for the last 5 season for Scott Linehan in Detroit, Jason Garrett in Dallas, and the NFL average for playoff teams. We should obviously dig deeper on this topic, but here are just broad, general numbers based on the question, does this team run the ball?
Well, by rankings, many of them between 30th-32nd in the league, Linehan might be one of the few NFL coaches that values the run less than even Garrett. Now, there, of course, are personnel considerations and you can see how Reggie Bush being brought into Detroit affected their conviction level substantially, but overall, you can see that these guys feel like the running game is an overall nuisance as it pertains to their ideal view of football.


YearLinehan - DetGarrett - DalNFL Playoff Avg
200939.4% Run42.7% Run44.3% Run
201038.0% Run41.4% Run43.9% Run
201133.6% Run40.1% Run43.5% Run
201233.7% Run33.8% Run45.2% Run
201340.4% Run35.1% Run44.3% Run

My dreams of smash-mouth football with Travis Frederick, Tyron Smith, and even Doug Free capable of dishing out running game punishment looks unlikely, to be honest.

On the other hand, if you consider the lack of creativity and insistence on getting the ball to Dez Bryant, we can look on the bright side and imagine Linehan bringing all of his tricks on how to use Megatron and his mates to create match ups around the field and get his monster the ball at any and all times.

Also, unlike Callahan, there is reason to believe that Garrett and Linehan consider themselves friends and share agendas and loyalty and even football philosophy. So, from that standpoint, I can sell this idea to myself quite easily.

But, overall, if you, like me, consider the Cowboys finesse approach to offense to be one of the consistent weaknesses that you would like addressed, just know that Linehan wants to pass even more than Garrett and did not really harness Matthew Stafford's impulse throws very well.
=====
I wanted you to read that (perhaps for the first time) to capture my over-view of frustration as it pertains to what has won the NFC the last few years, versus how the Cowboys brain trust might see the sport.

An easy counter to that discussion, however, is this: If the Cowboys do really want to pass the ball 2 of every 3 plays (65%+), then why did they spend so much on an offensive line? In other words, maybe the coaching philosophies of Mr Garrett and Mr Linehan are based on what they had rather than what they wished they had. Now, if the Cowboys have invested in physicality, can we hope that they are ready to attempt to blow teams off the ball like the Seahawks and 49ers have been doing? Can we expect the Cowboys to attempt to dominate an opponent physically at the point of attack? And most importantly, can we hope that Dallas is finally ready to kill off a game that they are leading in late in the 4th Quarter because they are finally equipped to run a proper 4-minute drill?

So, were the Cowboys a good running team in 2013? In many respects, no.


* 29th in the NFL in 10 play drives
* 24th in the NFL in 5 minute drives
* 24th in the NFL in 10 yard rushes
* 24th in the NFL in rushing Yards per game
* 31st in the NFL in rushing attempts


And yet, they were 8th in the NFL in Yards per carry. What gives?


Well, in a nutshell, they ran the ball well only in 2 games before November. St Louis and San Diego. Then, after the New Orleans game - when the play calling changed as well as the right guard, combined with the return to full strength of DeMarco Murray - they ran like one of the best teams in football. In fact, from Week 11-Week 16, do you know who the best rushing team in football was in 2013?


Your Dallas Cowboys. 137 carries for 734 yards, or 5.36 yards every single time they tried. That, after 10 weeks of 3.87 yards per carry.


Look at the week-by-week for yards per carry from 2013:​


Now, let's review the 2013 factors that may or may not have entered into evidence:

1) - DeMarco Murray missed action from the Washington Game in Week 6 until the Minnesota Game in Week 9. Those games were Joseph Randle doing pedestrian work in Philadelphia and Detroit and then the Cowboys electing to run almost no rushing plays against Minnesota at all.

2) - Tony Romo threw so many passes - 127 in 3 games - that the team was pushing its defense right back onto the field and of course, exposing them to horrid situations where they spent the majority of the game trying to defend. If the best defense is a good offense, then the Cowboys were not getting the memo. Yes, they beat Philadelphia, but the loss to Detroit was inexcusable. Then, they barely beat a horrible Minnesota team in the final seconds at home, only to be humiliated in New Orleans.

3) - This led to big issues in the offensive brain-trust after the New Orleans debacle and during the bye week. Many of us believe the play-calling went back to Jason Garrett and the removal of Bill Callahan from any sort of authority (making it even more puzzling after learning about the friction between Garrett/Callahan was Jerry insisting that Callahan stay in Dallas during the offseason and honor his contract).

4) - For whatever it is worth, Brian Waters was lost in Detroit at Right Guard, and Mackenzy Bernadeau graded quite well for the remainder of the season in the wide-zone game and being on the scene for many of those big performances.

Now, this, below, is the important chart for me. A physical team has a few attributes that are key for me. The most significant is separating the runs down to those that are not tricks. I think shotgun runs are finesse runs and work primarily because in pre-snap you have the defense thinking pass. So, below, I separated out the under center runs by week and show you all runs from 11, 12, 13, 21, and 22 personnel. Look at these results - especially after New Orleans:


As you can see they could line it up and grind it. It was a beautiful thing in those final weeks. Then, in the final week with no Romo, the Eagles brought it to a stop. But, I assume if he had been there, the results likely would have been there, too.

So, now, after 2013, they invested again by taking Zack Martin in the 1st Round. Now, 3 offensive linemen in the 1st round (not to mention dropping $100 million on Tyron)! They simply cannot be sitting at 65% pass anymore. The league says physical football wins in January and actually gets you there. If playoff teams are around 55%, you have to be pretty stubborn to convince yourself to ignore that and keep doing what you are doing. And, to lose two games at least because you had no plan in the 4th Quarter of a game you had the lead - At Detroit and Green Bay - has to shake you out of your delusions.

This week at camp, I visited with Jason Witten on this very topic and he seemed to agree with my premise:


So, will they pick up where they left off and become that physical team that their purchases seem to indicate they aspire to? If not, the next coaching staff certainly will see these assets and demand that this team becomes more like the Seahawks, 49ers, or even the 1990s Cowboys and pound the rock to set up shorter passing situations, dish out punishment to opponents, and protect a fragile defense.

It all makes too much sense.
 

1bigfan13

Your favorite player's favorite player
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
27,123
So, will they pick up where they left off and become that physical team that their purchases seem to indicate they aspire to? If not, the next coaching staff certainly will see these assets and demand that this team becomes more like the Seahawks, 49ers, or even the 1990s Cowboys and pound the rock to set up shorter passing situations, dish out punishment to opponents, and protect a fragile defense.
I honestly think it will be up to the next coaching staff. As Sturm pointed out, the "masterminds" of our offense all view running the football as an afterthought and an annoyance.

Then on top of that, no one has the balls to step up and demand that Romo stop killing run plays at the line.
 

UncleMilti

This seemed like a good idea at the time.
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
17,981
They can write 1000 articles like this, and it won't change a thing.

Without a dedicated coach to implement a run based offense, its going to be the same old, same old in Dallas again.
 

p1_

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 10, 2013
Messages
26,462
Despite these guys' tendencies, I can't help but think that this major investment in line talent isn't solely to keep Romo from harm. You
don't need a bludgeon for that. It makes me believe we will run more; how much more, wtf knows.
 

Clay_Allison

Old Bastard
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
5,488
We tend to flip flop sides of the ball when we change head coaches so we'll probably get a more defensive oriented and therefore more run oriented coach after Garrett is shown the door.
 

Smitty

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
22,488
0% chance we ever become like SF or Seattle under this administration but it wouldn't shock me to see that number bounce back to 40-42%.
 

L.T. Fan

I'm Easy If You Are
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
21,689
0% chance we ever become like SF or Seattle under this administration but it wouldn't shock me to see that number bounce back to 40-42%.
Dallas will run more now that they have an OL that can process and execute run plays. They have the running backs with the passing threat. All they have been lacking is the line. Now that it is in place they have all the tools.
 
Last edited:

Rev

Good, bad, I'm the guy with the gun
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
19,337
Dallas will run more now that they have an OL that can process and execute run plays. They have the running backs with the passing threat. All they have been lacking is the line. Now that it is in place they have all the tools.
They were running well several times last year and abandoned it. The line has nothing to do with them not running it.
 

Smitty

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
22,488
They were running well several times last year and abandoned it. The line has nothing to do with them not running it.
Pretty sure it has SOMETHING to do with it; it's just that's not the only thing that makes them lean pass heavy.
 

Rev

Good, bad, I'm the guy with the gun
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
19,337
Pretty sure it has SOMETHING to do with it; it's just that's not the only thing that makes them lean pass heavy.
So tell me what went wrong with Green Bay. If we were getting shut down (and I'm not expecting 7 ypc) then yeah let's look at what's going on. It wasn't for a lot of games in then past couple of years so yeah see below.

Its all on Garrett, OC, and Romo as far as I'm concerned. Might as well throw Jerry in there as well.
 
Last edited:

L.T. Fan

I'm Easy If You Are
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
21,689
So tell me what went wrong with Green Bay. If we were getting shut down (and I'm not expecting 7 ypc) then yeah let's look at what's going on. It wasn't for a lot of games in then past couple of years so yeah see below.

Its all on Garrett, OC, and Romo as far as I'm concerned. Might as well throw Jerry in there as well.
I still think you will see the running game more this season. Surely Garrett has been exposed enough to the criticism he will not risk ignoring it any longer.
 

Rev

Good, bad, I'm the guy with the gun
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
19,337
I thought would have been the case at the end of last season. Any normal person would react to that but not sure Garrett is able to process that.
 

Clay_Allison

Old Bastard
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
5,488
I still think you will see the running game more this season. Surely Garrett has been exposed enough to the criticism he will not risk ignoring it any longer.
Garrett's as stubborn as Jerry. He wants to do it "his way" more than he wants to win. The only difference is it will eventually get him fired, unlike Jerry.
 

Smitty

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
22,488
So tell me what went wrong with Green Bay.
They inexcusably ignored the run. What other answer is there?

That doesn't mean the line's struggles in the not too distant past have "nothing" to do with them not running the ball. Frankly for a good chunk of last year, as Sturm pointed out, they were not great either, until the 2nd half of the season elevated them. That's an outlier when taken in context with the past 3-4 seasons before that, though.

In any case, this line, which just a few years ago was legitimately one of the worst ever, is now poised to be a legit strength with first round picks invested in Smith, Frederick and Martin. I don't think it will be "the best unit in the league" like some are saying -- I'm obviously not as high on Free and Leary/Bernadeau as others, but if they play as well or better than last year, the OL will not be a weakness. Obviously I agree that the running percentage should be back up there in the low 40% range.
 

Cotton

One-armed Knife Sharpener
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
119,736
They inexcusably ignored the run. What other answer is there?

That doesn't mean the line's struggles in the not too distant past have "nothing" to do with them not running the ball. Frankly for a good chunk of last year, as Sturm pointed out, they were not great either, until the 2nd half of the season elevated them. That's an outlier when taken in context with the past 3-4 seasons before that, though.

In any case, this line, which just a few years ago was legitimately one of the worst ever, is now poised to be a legit strength with first round picks invested in Smith, Frederick and Martin. I don't think it will be "the best unit in the league" like some are saying -- I'm obviously not as high on Free and Leary/Bernadeau as others, but if they play as well or better than last year, the OL will not be a weakness. Obviously I agree that the running percentage should be back up there in the low 40% range.
Dude, Murray was averaging something silly like 5.7 YPC and Garrett still abandoned it. Seems like the line and Murray were doing their jobs. Only one other factor to be considered.
 

Smitty

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
22,488
Dude, Murray was averaging something silly like 5.7 YPC and Garrett still abandoned it. Seems like the line and Murray were doing their jobs. Only one other factor to be considered.
Murray was averaging high ypc on the basis of mid to late season running game resurgence. Early in the year -- and oh, in every other year Garrett has been here -- the run blocking has been poor.

Not adapting to the sudden increase in run block efficiency is a flaw you can pin on Garrett without ignoring that the OLs struggles in the past have most definitely contributed to Garrett's increasing reluctance to run the ball over the years as well as Romo's insistence on audibling out of a run every time he sees a remotely challenging defensive front.

It's not even a question. The fact that we spent years being terrible run blocking definitely has contributed (not caused, just contributed) to our offenses pass happiness. Which means it has more than "nothing" to do with our reluctance to run the ball.

Perhaps the point you and Rev are trying to make is that the run blocking struggles are not the most important factor in abandoning the run, but to say it's "nothing" is simply wrong. The past 3.5 years of struggles in that area from a personnel standpoint have contributed to Garrett's increasing aversion to the running game. He has no faith in it anymore; Sturm has said that many times. It's something he has to do anyway, though, and for that he should be blamed.

There is hope though, if the line is thriving this year, that we could see those run numbers tick back up. That wouldn't be the case if run blocking success did not factor in to the playcalling at all.
 

Cotton

One-armed Knife Sharpener
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
119,736
Murray was averaging high ypc on the basis of mid to late season running game resurgence. Early in the year -- and oh, in every other year Garrett has been here -- the run blocking has been poor.

Not adapting to the sudden increase in run block efficiency is a flaw you can pin on Garrett without ignoring that the OLs struggles in the past have most definitely contributed to Garrett's increasing reluctance to run the ball over the years as well as Romo's insistence on audibling out of a run every time he sees a remotely challenging defensive front.

It's not even a question. The fact that we spent years being terrible run blocking definitely has contributed (not caused, just contributed) to our offenses pass happiness. Which means it has more than "nothing" to do with our reluctance to run the ball.

Perhaps the point you and Rev are trying to make is that the run blocking struggles are not the most important factor in abandoning the run, but to say it's "nothing" is simply wrong. The past 3.5 years of struggles in that area from a personnel standpoint have contributed to Garrett's increasing aversion to the running game. He has no faith in it anymore; Sturm has said that many times. It's something he has to do anyway, though, and for that he should be blamed.

There is hope though, if the line is thriving this year, that we could see those run numbers tick back up. That wouldn't be the case if run blocking success did not factor in to the playcalling at all.
5.7 in that game. Up 23 at half. Ran the ball 7 time in the second half. Go ahead and try to excuse that with your almost Hostile level Garrett love. You can't.
 

Clay_Allison

Old Bastard
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
5,488
Murray was averaging high ypc on the basis of mid to late season running game resurgence. Early in the year -- and oh, in every other year Garrett has been here -- the run blocking has been poor.

Not adapting to the sudden increase in run block efficiency is a flaw you can pin on Garrett without ignoring that the OLs struggles in the past have most definitely contributed to Garrett's increasing reluctance to run the ball over the years as well as Romo's insistence on audibling out of a run every time he sees a remotely challenging defensive front.

It's not even a question. The fact that we spent years being terrible run blocking definitely has contributed (not caused, just contributed) to our offenses pass happiness. Which means it has more than "nothing" to do with our reluctance to run the ball.

Perhaps the point you and Rev are trying to make is that the run blocking struggles are not the most important factor in abandoning the run, but to say it's "nothing" is simply wrong. The past 3.5 years of struggles in that area from a personnel standpoint have contributed to Garrett's increasing aversion to the running game. He has no faith in it anymore; Sturm has said that many times. It's something he has to do anyway, though, and for that he should be blamed.

There is hope though, if the line is thriving this year, that we could see those run numbers tick back up. That wouldn't be the case if run blocking success did not factor in to the playcalling at all.
So Garrett needs how many years of sustained running success before he becomes a real football coach? Sorry, the NFL's learning curve isn't that easy.
 

Smitty

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
22,488
5.7 in that game. Up 23 at half. Ran the ball 7 time in the second half. Go ahead and try to excuse that with your almost Hostile level Garrett love. You can't.
I'm not trying to excuse that game.

I'm saying the GENERAL lack of commitment to running the ball definitely has more than "nothing" to do with the line's history of run blocking struggles.
 

Smitty

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
22,488
So Garrett needs how many years of sustained running success before he becomes a real football coach? Sorry, the NFL's learning curve isn't that easy.
Pretty clearly stated in numerous posts that if he can't adapt to the increased run blocking efficiency, then that's on him (and he may very well have had a hand in contributing to the poor run blocking at some level).

But to pretend that this situation hasn't been impacted by historically bad run blocking in the past is just putting on blinders. Of course it has.

I think people sense that if the personnel was part of the problem for a long time, then that's a mini excuse for him, so they won't admit to it, because they want him fired, but again, that's just not reality.

You can blame him (and fire him) for failing to adapt to the new personnel for sure, without ignoring the personnel's culpability in it.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom