Debunking the myth that the Cowboys abandoned the run

I keep hearing Cowboys fans on the radio, on social media, and a few here at DCC still complaining about the lack of a rush attempts in the 2nd half. It’s like all they’re seeing are the 5 rushing attempts and not understanding the circumstances that prevented us from running it more.

Anyone who watched the game objectively would agree that 5 rush attempts is about right given the circumstances.

Here’s the link to the Cowboys drive charts to prove that the Cowboys didn’t *abandon* the run.

Link to Cowboys vs Falcons drive chart

First possession of the 2nd half Witten False starts so it’s now 1st and 15 yet the Cowboys still run on first down and lose a yard. It’s now 2nd and 16. Very next play there’s a holding penalty so now it’s 2nd and 26. Are we supposed to run it on 2nd and 26 just for the sake of running the ball? Cowboys go 3 and out.

Second possession we run on 1st down resulting in -4 yards. It’s now 2nd and 14. So are we supposed to run it again on an obvious passing down? The drive gets extended thanks to a roughing the passer penalty. After the new set of downs we run for 2 yards on 1st down. Weeden completes a pass to Witten for a first down. On the ensuing set of downs we run again on 1st down, this time for a 2 yard loss setting up 2nd and 12. So we’re behind the sticks again. So again I ask, are we supposed to keeping slamming it in there on 2nd and 3rd and longs just for the sake of running? Cowboys end up punting.

Third possession We open with another run play, this time gaining a single yard setting up 2nd and 9. We go three and out on this series with the 1st down run being our only run play.

Fourth possession the Cowboys were down 2 possessions with approx. 3 minutes to play so running the ball made no sense in that situation.

So considering all that, I don’t see how anyone can complain about the Cowboys only having 5 rush attempts in the 2nd half. They didn’t abandon the run. As the facts clearly show, they tried to stick with the run, it wasn’t working so they had to pass on 2nd and 3rd down because their rush attempts were repeatedly putting them in 2nd and 3rd and long situations.

There is plenty to gripe about regarding Sunday’s loss but not running the ball more in the second half should not be on anyone’s list of complaints.

Have to agree with this. Hard to run in those situations.

I agree with this. The OL performance(or lack thereof) kept Dallas in a hole for the entire second half. I am seriously beginning to question the coaching methodology. Same folks a last season but they are just not as effective. Where else can you look except the coach?

In the game thread, I asked someone to give us the play by showing precisely what you just provided. All second half running plays were either losses or very small gain. Creating the need for passing.

p1_ said:

In the game thread, I asked someone to give us the play by showing precisely what you just provided. All second half running plays were either losses or very small gain. Creating the need for passing.

Click to expand...

It wasn't the RBs faults either, there just was nowhere to go on those plays. The defense adjusted. Hell why should they respect anything past 10 yards. We weren't even going to attempt it. The whole point of having a running game working as well as it did in the first half is that as the defense starts to suck in all kinds of passing lanes open up. Hell it's what the Falcons did to our defense.

Props

I still do not buy this. I see 3 of those drives where it still called for the run. The run has to be an emphasis/attitude. I look back to last year in the first game against SF and we were down big, normally a call for a pass-a-thon, but we hung in with the run and I think set a tone for the entire year.

One thing that they definitely should have done on offense is mixed up when they ran the ball.

I thought their pattern of play calling was too predictable. They always ran on 1st down. Probably would have helped if they threw some on 1st down and ran some on 2nd down just to mix things up a bit.

I agree.

I'm always one of the first to bitch about this team not running enough, but I just don't see where they had the opportunity to do so in the 2nd half.

We couldn't get anything going and we kept getting in long down and distance situations so we had to throw the ball.

I have no complaints about the supposed lack of running attempts in the 2nd half.

Last year we ran quite a bit on 2 and long type situations...granted it was Murray and Romo, but we kept at it.

I didn't see a single snap of the game but pretty much everything I'm reading says the OL and DL basically didn't show up.

mschmidt64 said:

I didn't see a single snap of the game but pretty much everything I'm reading says the OL and DL basically didn't show up.

Click to expand...

OL showed up for awhile but then when they refused to go deep they just crammed the line.

You are leading in the second half of the game with a backup QB whom you don't trust throwing downfield. Of course you can run in 2nd or 3rd and long.

Carp said:

Last year we ran quite a bit on 2 and long type situations...granted it was Murray and Romo, but we kept at it.

Click to expand...

You keep referring to what happened last year but this is the key point. Also throw in the fact that we didn't have Dez. It's a HUGE difference.

The Falcons didn't have a single reason in the world to respect our passing game. That's why they sold out to stop the run.

Continuing to run in 2nd and 15 situations would have been pointless, IMO. They sold out to take away the one strength that we had and dared Weeden to beat us with his arm and he couldn't.

1bigfan13 said:

You keep referring to what happened last year but this is the key point. Also throw in the fact that we didn't have Dez. It's a HUGE difference.

The Falcons didn't have a single reason in the world to respect our passing game. That's why they sold out to stop the run.

Continuing to run in 2nd and 15 situations would have been pointless, IMO. They sold out to take away the one strength that we had and dared Weeden to beat us with his arm and he couldn't.

Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more.

1bigfan13 said:

You keep referring to what happened last year but this is the key point. Also throw in the fact that we didn't have Dez. It's a HUGE difference.

The Falcons didn't have a single reason in the world to respect our passing game. That's why they sold out to stop the run.

Continuing to run in 2nd and 15 situations would have been pointless, IMO. They sold out to take away the one strength that we had and dared Weeden to beat us with his arm and he couldn't.

Click to expand...

Were they actually selling out against the run on 2nd and 15s though? I don't know the answer to that but even with Weeden I'd find it surprising.

1bigfan13 said:

You keep referring to what happened last year but this is the key point. Also throw in the fact that we didn't have Dez. It's a HUGE difference.

The Falcons didn't have a single reason in the world to respect our passing game. That's why they sold out to stop the run.

Continuing to run in 2nd and 15 situations would have been pointless, IMO. They sold out to take away the one strength that we had and dared Weeden to beat us with his arm and he couldn't.

Click to expand...

They didn't have a reason to respect our run game on our first drive, yet somehow we completely ran it up their ass.

I reference last year because the run game and emphasis on the run game is an attitude...a culture. Does not matter who is there. Our offensive line is talent laden...so you utilize your best unit and run it into the ground.

Carp said:

They didn't have a reason to respect our run game on our first drive, yet somehow we completely ran it up their ass.

I reference last year because the run game and emphasis on the run game is an attitude...a culture. Does not matter who is there. Our offensive line is talent laden...so you utilize your best unit and run it into the ground.

Click to expand...

In the first half Atlanta was using a different scheme. They were trying to cover both running and pass patterns. In the second half the stacked for the run and short pass. They didn't even bother with any alignment beyond 8 to 10 yards. About the only time anyone on the Dallas team went beyond 10 yards was the scramble Weedin threw the interception. At least that is the way I saw it.

L.T. Fan said:

In the first half Atlanta was using a different scheme. They were trying to cover both running and pass patterns. In the second half the stacked for the run and short pass. They didn't even bother with any alignment beyond 8 to 10 yards. About the only time anyone on the Dallas team went beyond 10 yards was the scramble Weedin threw the interception. At least that is the way I saw it.

Click to expand...

When you have am emphasis on the run you run and don't let other teams dictate your style.

1bigfan13 said:

You keep referring to what happened last year but this is the key point. Also throw in the fact that we didn't have Dez. It's a HUGE difference.

The Falcons didn't have a single reason in the world to respect our passing game. That's why they sold out to stop the run.

Continuing to run in 2nd and 15 situations would have been pointless, IMO. They sold out to take away the one strength that we had and dared Weeden to beat us with his arm and he couldn't.

Click to expand...

did you read Sturm today? a lot of our futility on the ground was due to missed blocks, not Atlanta stuffing the box.