2020 Random Cowboys Stuff Thread...

[Chocolate Lab]

It is a complete coincidence actually. The eagles made the playoffs based on our incompetence, not through their own dominance or anything

Plus they wouldn't have used as much 2 TE if their entire WR corps hadn't been on the IR...

But isn't this exactly the kind of thing Garrett would chase if he were still here. Whatever is on-trend must be adopted not because it's the best thing to do, but because it is more defensible to media and fans when everyone else is doing it.

It's great to have coaching that won't bow to that kind of shallow thinking. That's what happens when you have a coach with actual convictions who knows what he's doing.

 

[ravidubey]

Yea and in 2018 the Rams led the league in 11 personnel I believe as well as play-action. There's no reason you can't do both and I'd argue that if you have a dominant trio of WR's that play-action is even more effective out of 11 personnel given how effective the running game should be with a spread out defense worried about the passing game.

I get it puts our most talented people on the field. , but RPO is the right answer, as Lamb won't be ready to be dominant but we know Zeke is.

My concerns are that 70% 11 also puts their most talented cover folks on the field and it forces Lamb into a role he probably won't be ready for right away.

What might be interesting is some no-huddle + 11. When they put in the cover guys, you run multiple times in a row not allowing them to substitute.

12 lets is take advantage of many quick-hitting plays and is awesome in the redzone.

As far as the Rams go, they are almost a weird exception. They were in 11 personnel 90% and even 95% at times. New England showed everyone how to beat it by relentlessly pressuring up the middle.

 

[Simpleton]

I get it puts our most talented people on the field. , but RPO is the right answer, as Lamb won't be ready to be dominant but we know Zeke is.

My concerns are that 70% 11 also puts their most talented cover folks on the field and it forces Lamb into a role he probably won't be ready for right away.

What might be interesting is some no-huddle + 11. When they put in the cover guys, you run multiple times in a row not allowing them to substitute.

12 lets is take advantage of many quick-hitting plays and is awesome in the redzone.

As far as the Rams go, they are almost a weird exception. They were in 11 personnel 90% and even 95% at times.

You can easily run RPO's out of 3 WR sets, you don't need 2 TE's on the field for that. If we're going 4 and 5-wide with regularity that's one thing but I don't think it's very likely.

And who cares what sort of DB's come on the field to match our 11 personnel, that's the point, you make them go small then run it, and when we pass it there isn't a team in the league with 3 DB's who can stay with our 3 WR's without doubling. Teams are going to be forced to leaving their CB2/3 in single coverage on Gallup or Lamb, if not even Cooper, and they're going to get roasted more often than not.

Going no huddle and not allowing defenses to substitute should be standard operating procedure these days, given how often Rodgers did it in Green Bay I'm sure we'll see plenty of it.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

And who cares what sort of DB's come on the field to match our 11 personnel, that's the point, you make them go small then run it, and when we pass it there isn't a team in the league with 3 DB's who can stay with our 3 WR's without doubling.

Yep, spreading the field and making them use their smaller cover guys seems like the perfect scenario for an explosive power back like Zeke to run wild.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

My guess we will be in 11 personnel upwards of 70% of our plays this year.

You don't want to always try to be catching up with the current fad.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

I think this philosophy burned McCarthy more than almost any other factor during his time in GB to tell the truth.

He'd go 01 or 00 at times that boggled the mind, trusting his QB alone to beat the entire defense in critical situations. I mean good as Rodgers has been, great NFL defenses get paid too. Passing at the wrong time really hurt the Packers and especially against the best teams. Hey-- let's go empty backfield!-- Ridiculous -- No way in Hell should they have lost that NFC Championship vs Seattle.

I hope McCarthy really has grown during his time off, as all these articles have implied.

When you all but tell them you're passing the ball, you go against their nickel and dime corners. From 12, you are likely facing LB's instead, and passing from that formation is hugely productive.

Granted we don't have a Kelce or even an Ertz, but I think bailing on 12 is a mistake.

You can run from 11 personal.

 

[ravidubey]

You can easily run RPO's out of 3 WR sets, you don't need 2 TE's on the field for that. If we're going 4 and 5-wide with regularity that's one thing but I don't think it's very likely.

Yeah, I was riffing off your post, that 11 was best for us for RPO vs pure pass offense

 

[p1_]

Granted we don't have a Kelce or even an Ertz, but I think bailing on 12 is a mistake.

there's a good reason we signed Blake Bell, and it ain't because he's a Travis Kelce.

 

[Genghis Khan]

I don't think anyone is suggesting we should bail on 12. We should use 11 at least 60 or 65% of the time. We should obviously mix in 12 personnel situationally where appropriate.

 

[Cotton]

New England showed everyone how to beat it by relentlessly pressuring up the middle.

Yes, they did, but a good offensive mind smacks that defense with 20 personnel with pre-snap movement. You set up in 11 with a RB as one of your splitouts and motion him inside and secondary motion the TE across the field to the slot. Not a pure 20 personnel grouping, but it damn sure would work, IMO. You would fuck the LB'ers up in that scenario. That would, in theory, stop the interior rush, and still allow for threats from the outside and backfield.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

As far as the Rams go, they are almost a weird exception. They were in 11 personnel 90% and even 95% at times. New England showed everyone how to beat it by relentlessly pressuring up the middle.

I think that was more about Belichick schooling the young offensive genius and his one-trick pony offense that called plays from the sideline.

 

[Cotton]

You don't want to always try to be catching up with the current fad.

I don't understand what you're saying. Are you saying we shouldn't run too much 11? Because, I think the vast majority of our offense should at least line up in 11. If pre-snap reads call for something different, you can motion out of it, or even design plays to motion out of it if your opponent has been beating your 11 personnel all day. Or, just to keep the defense off balance.

 

[Cotton]

I don't think anyone is suggesting we should bail on 12. We should use 11 at least 60 or 65% of the time. We should obviously mix in 12 personnel situationally where appropriate.

I think people are confusing at-the-snap personnel grouping with base set lineup groupings. You can motion into other sets. Of course, this is in theory since you don't see many teams consider that a TE like Kelce is basically a WR and not classified as a WR in an 11 set. I think that's a mistake in playbooks. I think Jarwin is essentially a big WR. Why would you not consider him a WR if you motioned him out to slot and basically consider that an 11 grouping if you started in a 12?

 

[ravidubey]

Going no huddle and not allowing defenses to substitute should be standard operating procedure these days, given how often Rodgers did it in Green Bay I'm sure we'll see plenty of it.

It would be a welcome shock to see it in Dallas after all this time with Garrett

 

[Cowboysrock55]

I don't understand what you're saying. Are you saying we shouldn't run too much 11? Because, I think the vast majority of our offense should at least line up in 11. If pre-snap reads call for something different, you can motion out of it, or even design plays to motion out of it if your opponent has been beating your 11 personnel all day. Or, just to keep the defense off balance.

What I'm saying is that we shouldn't try to force 12 personnel just because it worked last year for a lot of teams.

 

[Cotton]

What I'm saying is that we shouldn't try to force 12 personnel just because it worked last year for a lot of teams.

Oh, yeah I agree with that completely.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

I think people are confusing at-the-snap personnel grouping with base set lineup groupings. You can motion into other sets. Of course, this is in theory since you don't see many teams consider that a TE like Kelce is basically a WR and not classified as a WR in an 11 set. I think that's a mistake in playbooks. I think Jarwin is essentially a big WR. Why would you not consider him a WR if you motioned him out to slot and basically consider that an 11 grouping if you started in a 12?

This is absolutely true. And frankly we have good sized WRs who should all be able to block. We aren't hampered with a 5'9" 180 pound slot reciever who can't help as a blocker. But these guys should be able to block smaller corners without too much trouble.

I think where we struggled was when we tried to split a guy like Witten out as a WR. He was just big and slow. Teams weren't threatened by him or confused on how to cover him when he did that.

 

[ravidubey]

Ironically the Rams’ were more successful in the Superbowl per play out of 12 formation than their normal 11. They also had a dropped TD out of 12.

Bottom line you need to not only mix things up but admit this will never stop being a physical game and 12 can source much more physical play than 11.

I want to see some 20 and 21 too. Don’t know about 30 like we did with Dorsett, Walker, and Newsome, but why not. We have the personnel to play all of it and really well.

If your most effective plays always came with five WRs on the field, you still wouldn’t call five wide 95% of the time.

I believe in multiple formations as powerful tools for throwing off and figuring out defenses .

And physical football.

 

[boozeman]

 

[boozeman]

Why do people always assume this was a sure touchdown? Hell, Murray's fumble in Green Bay looked like it had a better chance of scoring.