Sturm: Why Cowboys’ offense can win the Super Bowl this season

[Smitty]

Did Dallas have that many rushes in the seasons in question? I haven't looked it up.

Yes. We're talking a difference from worst in the league of like 350 to best in the league at 450-500.

It's like 20% variance. It's really bad, but you can't say it wasn't enough to know.

 

[Smitty]

He just used that number to show that they were #1 in the NFL in rushing since that point.

And before that, they weren't good.

Or maybe he just said the year before that you start fixing the offense by fixing the line for shits and giggles.

 

[Smitty]

Of course it did.

If you don't believe in the run, you don't practice the run, you don't make it a point of emphasis that kind of stuff happens.

As far as I can tell there's not much if any evidence that we didn't practice the run at least on average with every other team.

Jason Garrett was full of shit all along about wanting to run. He said it because it was political.

When it came down to it, he refused to back it up as he had more trust issues than an abandoned orphan.

Trusting his OL... yes.

 

[L.T. Fan]

Yes. We're talking a difference from worst in the league of like 350 to best in the league at 450-500.

It's like 20% variance. It's really bad, but you can't say it wasn't enough to know.

Well it take about 35 % more runs for Dallas to obtain a balanced attack.

 

[L.T. Fan]

As far as I can tell there's not much if any evidence that we didn't practice the run at least on average with every other team.



Trusting his OL... yes.

You keep saying this but you don't know it for a fact. Mot everyone who has been reporting on the team over the year say Garrett didn't like to run the ball. How can you say he would have if only thing were different.

 

[Smitty]

Well it take about 35 % more runs for Dallas to obtain a balanced attack.

Rushing more than that was ineffective and a waste of time.

Clay tried to argue the other day that we should have run it 400 times just for balance, ie, to keep the defense off the field and the pressure off the QB, but compared to 2003, another year where the run game sucked, the 2012 offense was superior in points per drive, time per drive, and yards per drive.

So running for the sake of running into a brick wall isn't necessarily better.

 

[Smitty]

You keep saying this but you don't know it for a fact.

You keep saying I don't know it for a fact but I do know it for a fact.

I know for a fact that Bill Nagy, Phil Costa, Nate Livings, and a couple seasons of Doug Free were simply abysmal. The worst OL I've ever seen in my life, period.

Mot everyone who has been reporting on the team over the year say Garrett didn't like to run the ball. How can you say he would have if only thing were different.

Cause when things were different, he did run the ball. In 2007 and 2008.

Then when our OL sucked from 2010-2012, he didn't run the ball.

Now that it's good, we're running it again. Like I told everyone for years would happen once we invested in the line. I guess I just got lucky.

 

[boozeman]

I may just shut this thread down. It has reached its usefulness.

I will say this...Schmitty, I admire your tenacity, but eventually, it makes you look like a jackass.

 

[L.T. Fan]

I may just shut this thread down. It has reached its usefulness.

I will say this...Schmitty, I admire your tenacity, but eventually, it makes you look like a jackass.

I vote Aye.

 

[Cotton]

I may just shut this thread down. It has reached its usefulness.

I will say this...Schmitty, I admire your tenacity, but eventually, it makes you look like a jackass.

You might as well be prepared to shut many other threads down moving forward, because he isn't going to stop arguing this idiocy.

 

[Smitty]

I may just shut this thread down. It has reached its usefulness.

I will say this...Schmitty, I admire your tenacity, but eventually, it makes you look like a jackass.

FWIW, people say this is about Garrett, but it's really about my intransigence regarding the OL.

I can't possibly agree that you can run with the OL we had. I am a firm believer in making it top shelf and then watching how everything else follows.

 

[jsmith6919]

You keep saying I don't know it for a fact but I do know it for a fact.

I know for a fact that Bill Nagy, Phil Costa, Nate Livings, and a couple seasons of Doug Free were simply abysmal. The worst OL I've ever seen in my life, period.



Cause when things were different, he did run the ball. In 2007 and 2008.

Then when our OL sucked from 2010-2012, he didn't run the ball.

Now that it's good, we're running it again. Like I told everyone for years would happen once we invested in the line. I guess I just got lucky.

Well the first half of 2010 he was busy running the same basic offense as in preseason so I don't think we should count that...he did finally start gameplanning better though I fail to recollect what changed that made him do that

 

[Genghis Khan]

LA LA LA LA LA.

He can't hear you.

 

[boozeman]

FWIW, people say this is about Garrett, but it's really about my intransigence regarding the OL.

I can't possibly agree that you can run with the OL we had. I am a firm believer in making it top shelf and then watching how everything else follows.

Props for intransigence.

But yeah, the OL we had in 2013 was good enough because it demonstrated it.

 

[Clay_Allison]

The line was run blocking well throughout the second half of 2013. Garrett refused to run the ball in the second half of 2013. Sturm has stated both of those things. It can't be more black and white than that. If Garrett was calling the plays now, he'd call it the same way he called plays in 2013. The improvement in the line didn't affect him in 2013, it wouldn't affect him now.

 

[Carl]

Linehan is getting a lot of credit here for calling running plays; yet as the Lions OC in 2011-2013, his offenses ranked 1st, 1st and 3rd in passing attempts. Apparently he likes to pass too. Just saying.

 

[fortsbest]

And....Given a chance with a good offensive line and a better than good RB he ran the ball. The only change form last year is 1 O-lineman, a good one mind you, but only one. And...Linehan. My vote is Garrett wouldn't have done what has been done had he still been calling plays. just one man's humble opinion, but thankfully, we don't have to find out.;.

 

[Smitty]

The line was run blocking well throughout the second half of 2013. Garrett refused to run the ball in the second half of 2013. Sturm has stated both of those things.

Yes, down the stretch in 2013 the line was improved, and Garrett did not run the ball heavily. Sturm has said that, and I have said as well that failing to notice the run blocking was working at times like in the Green Bay game was a really bad coaching error.

It can't be more black and white than that. If Garrett was calling the plays now, he'd call it the same way he called plays in 2013. The improvement in the line didn't affect him in 2013, it wouldn't affect him now.

No, this conclusion does not logically follow. You act as if a couple games of increase performance would have been enough to convince him to throw out what he had planned on doing all season.

It is logical to say "he should have realized and adjusted better" but it is NOT logical to say "this is proof he didn't want to run." Coaches are going to re-evaluate where they are and what they are doing in the offseason. After watching the tape of 2013, it would have made sense that they'd say, as a staff, "Whoa... Look at this line down the stretch. Now that we have Martin and growth from Frederick and Leary, we're gonna be even better this year. Let's work this into our game plans for the coming season."

This especially seems the more likely case when you figure

1) Garrett clearly is not philosophically opposed to running as evidenced by his allowing it to happen within the frame of his offense this year as well as his commitment to running it in 2007-08 in his offense as well, and

2) The fact that Linehan was not someone who you can honestly sell as a run-heavy playcaller, so for me to believe that it's "all him" instead of a collaboration and product of circumstances (the line personnel) would be absurd.

 

[Smitty]

And....Given a chance with a good offensive line and a better than good RB he ran the ball. The only change form last year is 1 O-lineman, a good one mind you, but only one. And...Linehan. My vote is Garrett wouldn't have done what has been done had he still been calling plays. just one man's humble opinion, but thankfully, we don't have to find out.;.

I don't think he would have done "what has been done" either. Garrett is pass happy for sure.

But he'd be running more than he did from 2011-13, which is the origin of this moronic debate. He ran it over 400 times in 2007 when we had a decent OL. It'd be on par with that.

 

[ravidubey]

But yeah, the OL we had in 2013 was good enough because it demonstrated it.

Yep. The Green Bay game says it all. 7.7 yards per Murray rush, yet they refused to run the ball in the second half. My daughters were screaming at the TV "RUN THE BALL!!".

Against Denver, Dallas called 17 straight passes to end the game with a pick. No one calls 17 straight passes. The Callahan-Garrett-Romo combination was broken, plain and simple, and Garrett must take full responsibility for it especially since he inserted himself into the chain specifically to oversee things.

Props to Linehan and Garrett (and Romo) for adapting a run-first approach (finally) this season. I even suspect Jerry Jones may have told Garrett to run the ball more before the season. Garrett has done 180's in the past in response to Jerry directives of one kind or another.

The mandate must have come from somewhere, and after those Denver and Green Bay games it's hard to imagine it was Garrett.

IT DOESN'T MATTER.

I like the coaching we're getting now, however we got here. May it continue.