Jason Garrett talks to Greg Hardy about 9/11 tweet

[townsend]

Quit putting words in my mouth you cherry picking little bitch. Nowhere did I say Romo was dogshit or we wouldn't make the playoffs. Right after the draft I even said I see around 11-5 but have doubts we could make a deep run in the playoffs without a bellcow back so go throw your "we are too as good as the Patriots" tantrum on someone else "true fan"

You're the one who flew by with your bullshit "Not the same QB/HC" shit like some preteen writing a Willy Wonka meme. Clay said we couldn't make the playoffs without a great RB. I responded that the Pats won the SB without one. You said I was somehow manipulating the numbers, because apparently they had a haus back whose stats weren't listed.

Yeah I get mad when people are intentionally glib and thoughtless. I called you a little bitch because that's what you acted like. If you had said something that made you sound like an astronaut I would have made that comparison instead.

This "true fan" garbage is a perfect example. Hurling insults without any reason or purpose. I'm a "true fan" when I point out a 12-4 team that has made multiple upgrades might be comparable to a SB team? This is not a huge stretch. This team was very successful, acknowledging that isn't strange or unreasonable. You might as well tell me to go to the zone, because either it's 2004 again or you're incapable of an original thought.

 

[jsmith6919]

You're the one who flew by with your bullshit "Not the same QB/HC" shit like some preteen writing a Willy Wonka meme. Clay said we couldn't make the playoffs without a great RB. I responded that the Pats won the SB without one. You said I was somehow manipulating the numbers, because apparently they had a haus back whose stats weren't listed.

Yeah I get mad when people are intentionally glib and thoughtless. I called you a little bitch because that's what you acted like. If you had said something that made you sound like an astronaut I would have made that comparison instead.

This "true fan" garbage is a perfect example. Hurling insults without any reason or purpose. I'm a "true fan" when I point out a 12-4 team that has made multiple upgrades might be comparable to a SB team? This is not a huge stretch. This team was very successful, acknowledging that isn't strange or unreasonable. You might as well tell me to go to the zone, because either it's 2004 again or you're incapable of an original thought.

Don't get mad at me for your half ass research everyone that watched the games knew Gray was a non-factor in the playoffs. But hey you keep with the "but the Patriots!!" even though the only reason they got past the Ravens in the playoffs without a dominant run game is by Belichick having Hoomananui(sp?) line up as LT and run routes getting Harbaugh so mad he was running out on the field. But hey we are just as good and I have no doubt Opie/Linehan can be just as clever.

and hey you don't like it well MEET ME IN TEMECULA!

 

[Jiggyfly]

 

[townsend]

Don't get mad at me for your half ass research everyone that watched the games knew Gray was a non-factor in the playoffs. But hey you keep with the "but the Patriots!!" even though the only reason they got past the Ravens in the playoffs without a dominant run game is by Belichick having Hoomananui(sp?) line up as LT and run routes getting Harbaugh so mad he was running out on the field. But hey we are just as good and I have no doubt Opie/Linehan can be just as clever.

and hey you don't like it well MEET ME IN TEMECULA!

I agree that the Pats really shouldn't have been in the SB. That's why the "HC, QB" comment didn't make any sense to me. They weren't that stellar of a team, no better than Dallas. Romo's stats were a little better.

I mentioned Gray because he was their leading rusher, he compiled the most yards and it was a very small number. The point of that wasn't necessarily to point out which back was the best or had the most impact but contrast it to Murray's 1800 yard season. We had a productive Workhorse, they did not. They won the SB, we did not. Those two facts inherently contradict Clays assertion that we couldn't make the playoffs without a franchise back.

I'll admit to not knowing which Pat RB DID contribute the most in the playoffs, but it's moot because whoever they were they would have rushed for less yards than the Pats leading rusher.

 

[boozeman]

We have a better receiving core than them, the league's best O-line, and one of the best DCs in the league coordinating an unbelievably talented unit. You cherry picked two fucking things, and forgot that talent wise we're superior to the Pats almost everywhere else.

You ignored the ultimate equalizer, and that is Belichick.

He tailors his offense each and every week and can turn the run game on and off based on the opponent.

Garrett gets resistance early in the year, he will cave to his true nature.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

Garrett gets resistance early in the year, he will cave to his true nature.

I guess it's good that Garrett doesn't run our offense then.

 

[boozeman]

I guess it's good that Garrett doesn't run our offense then.

Linehan is not exactly Mr. Pound The Rock either.

I am not interested in diagnosing the responsibility. I guarantee you as soon as the run struggles,

 

[townsend]

You ignored the ultimate equalizer, and that is Belichick.

He tailors his offense each and every week and can turn the run game on and off based on the opponent.

Garrett gets resistance early in the year, he will cave to his true nature.

I readily admit that Belichick is a master game planner. In the conversation for the best HC of all time, by the time he retires, he may be unquestionably the best HC in football history.

But he still had a decade between SB wins. In the mean time 8 inferior HCs won SBs, Belichick was a handoff to Marshawn away from losing his 3rd (not that I wouldn't prefer to be in that position than Dallas's)

I feel like the Cowboys would have beat the Pats if we had played them in Arizona.

 

[boozeman]

I feel like the Cowboys would have beat the Pats if we had played them in Arizona.

We couldn't even beat a one legged Aaron Rodgers. Give Belichick a couple of weeks to prepare, he and Brady would have killed us.

 

[NoDak]

I guarantee you as soon as the run struggles,

Guarantee, eh? Same thing was said last year. And we had games that it struggled, yet we stuck with it. We even won games where it struggled, and we stuck with it.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

I am not interested in diagnosing the responsibility.

There is no diagnosing. Linehan came into Dallas and decided to run the ball more. There is zero evidence to suggest that he will suddenly abandon it next year. But hey, it's way more fun to pretend like the sky is falling.

 

[townsend]

I think we'll likely see some drop off in runs. There will be a little less Faith in the committee than in Murray. But Linehan ran the ball 450 times with Reggie Bush (a rehashed top draft pick who never lived up to his status, and couldn't stay healthy) and some scrubs. On the other hand Garrett had Murray for 3 seasons and failed to rush more than 350 times. So lack of Murray seems way less important than having Linehan.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

I think we'll likely see some drop off in runs. There will be a little less Faith in the committee than in Murray.

Our organization has shown repeatedly that their faith is in the O-line and not Murray. I don't foresee any significant drop off.

 

[Clay_Allison]

I agree that the Pats really shouldn't have been in the SB. That's why the "HC, QB" comment didn't make any sense to me. They weren't that stellar of a team, no better than Dallas. Romo's stats were a little better.

I mentioned Gray because he was their leading rusher, he compiled the most yards and it was a very small number. The point of that wasn't necessarily to point out which back was the best or had the most impact but contrast it to Murray's 1800 yard season. We had a productive Workhorse, they did not. They won the SB, we did not. Those two facts inherently contradict Clays assertion that we couldn't make the playoffs without a franchise back.

I'll admit to not knowing which Pat RB DID contribute the most in the playoffs, but it's moot because whoever they were they would have rushed for less yards than the Pats leading rusher.

I didn't say couldn't make it without a pro bowl RB, I said we wouldn't make it without a running game. The distinction is important.

That's because one season doesn't erase six seasons of being the most pass-happy team in the NFL, especially now that the formula has changed.

Most of Linehan's history as a coach he's fed the starting running back (like Steven Jackson) a good number of carries but never ran the ball other than that. Now we're supposed to expect him to channel Bill Parcells and spread the ball around 2003-style. I'll believe it when I see it.

 

[townsend]

I didn't say couldn't make it without a pro bowl RB, I said we wouldn't make it without a running game. The distinction is important.

That's because one season doesn't erase six seasons of being the most pass-happy team in the NFL, especially now that the formula has changed.

Most of Linehan's history as a coach he's fed the starting running back (like Steven Jackson) a good number of carries but never ran the ball other than that. Now we're supposed to expect him to channel Bill Parcells and spread the ball around 2003-style. I'll believe it when I see it.

Okay.
1.The addition of Linehan was the difference in us committing to the run. In 3 years previous with Murray, Garrett averaged about 350 rushes per game. Once Linehan was added we ran 500 times.
2. Linehan was in a similar situation in Detroit (at the same time as we were failing to run consistently with the future franchise season leading rusher) he ran 450 times with Reggie Bush as the lead back (a player with a similar résumé to McFadden)
3. If Linehan's addition made the difference (1) and he committed to the run with a committee of inferior backs (2). Then it's faulty to assume Garrett's secretly been controlling everything, or that Linehan will somehow mimic Garrett without a Steven Jackson like back. Not only are his RBs comparable to the 2013 Lions, we have an exponentially superior line, so we should see more success.

All of that aside there are huge differences in the 2011-2013 teams and present day. Marinelli led an amazing turnover making defense with scraps. Now he has two more pass rushers, an upgrade at DB, and Sean Lee returning. Those pass happy years were some of the worst defensively in team history. Imagine how much better our stats would be if we hadn't been fighting through huge 24 point deficits.

 

[Clay_Allison]

Okay.
1.The addition of Linehan was the difference in us committing to the run. In 3 years previous with Murray, Garrett averaged about 350 rushes per game. Once Linehan was added we ran 500 times.
2. Linehan was in a similar situation in Detroit (at the same time as we were failing to run consistently with the future franchise season leading rusher) he ran 450 times with Reggie Bush as the lead back (a player with a similar résumé to McFadden)
3. If Linehan's addition made the difference (1) and he committed to the run with a committee of inferior backs (2). Then it's faulty to assume Garrett's secretly been controlling everything, or that Linehan will somehow mimic Garrett without a Steven Jackson like back. Not only are his RBs comparable to the 2013 Lions, we have an exponentially superior line, so we should see more success.

All of that aside there are huge differences in the 2011-2013 teams and present day. Marinelli led an amazing turnover making defense with scraps. Now he has two more pass rushers, an upgrade at DB, and Sean Lee returning. Those pass happy years were some of the worst defensively in team history. Imagine how much better our stats would be if we hadn't been fighting through huge 24 point deficits.

Imagine how much better the defense would have been had we even attempted for a moment to control the clock. Also, Linehan's boss in Detroit in 2013 was Touch of Downs, a coach who went to the same Super Bowl as Eddie George. Maybe even the kind of guy who would ask Linehan to cut his defense a break and run the damned ball.

If it's 2nd and 8 and I need to choose which of two head coaches will say "run it here", do I put my money on Schwartz or Garrett?

 

[townsend]

Imagine how much better the defense would have been had we even attempted for a moment to control the clock. Also, Linehan's boss in Detroit in 2013 was Touch of Downs, a coach who went to the same Super Bowl as Eddie George. Maybe even the kind of guy who would ask Linehan to cut his defense a break and run the damned ball.

If it's 2nd and 8 and I need to choose which of two head coaches will say "run it here", do I put my money on Schwartz or Garrett?

We have 2 variables we can definitely nail down between the 2013-2015. Linehan who usually attempts to rush 400 or more times, and Murray who's top # of attempts was 217 times before 2014, Reggie Bush attempted 223 times the same year (there were another 228 attempts spread among a committee).

Also Jim Schwartz is a defensive coach. While the rushing game is an important part of defense, it'd be equivalent to say that Wade Phillips was somehow responsible for Schottenheimer's rushing offense in San Diego. If Jim Schwartz is the variable and Garrett is the pass happy true overlord of this offense, why did the 2014 Cowboys rush 50 times more than the 2013 Lions? If it was Murray's success that drove us to be less pass happy, overlord Garrett wouldn't have pooped his pants and abandoned the run vs. the Packers in 2013.

My current hypothesis is that Garrett believes in rushing the ball as much or more than all of the former Titans defensive coordinators. He also is a bit of a softy and lets his best pal Romo dictate to him playcalling (this would account for the more conservative offense in 2010). He needs another play caller to play bad cop.
Alternately in the heat of the moment, Garrett may not be able to control his QB tendencies, and default to pass plays under stress. Linehan was calling plays as an OC before Garrett was ever drafted, and is a more disciplined play-caller.

If Garrett was going to freakout and grab the reigns, forcing Romo to pass 55 times, it would have happened against St. Louis last year. In the midst of a blowout, we kept running and only passed 23 times. Would Garret ever have done that? What would have happened down 21-0 in that same situation in 2011-2013? Oh, it happened a bunch, we abandoned the run, and passed like f***ing crazy (Even though we had Murray in the lineup!)

 

[ravidubey]

If Garrett was going to freakout and grab the reigns, forcing Romo to pass 55 times, it would have happened against St. Louis last year. In the midst of a blowout, we kept running and only passed 23 times. Would Garret ever have done that? What would have happened down 21-0 in that same situation in 2011-2013? Oh, it happened a bunch, we abandoned the run, and passed like f***ing crazy (Even though we had Murray in the lineup!)

I think it comes down to Linehan basing his play selection on feeding star players and going with what's working.

If the RB's get stuffed and fail to make big plays, I know these guys will go back to passing.

The FAIL in that approach is defenses then know what's coming, which puts Romo at risk of injury.

Our ridiculous offensive balance near 50-50 made our offensive line play better and provided better opportunities for Romo and Murray. I also believe it kept everyone healthier, too, by taking away the defense's ability to sniff out a play and get the jump on Dallas players.

 

[L.T. Fan]

I think it comes down to Linehan basing his play selection on feeding star players and going with what's working.

If the RB's get stuffed and fail to make big plays, I know these guys will go back to passing.

The FAIL in that approach is defenses then know what's coming, which puts Romo at risk of injury.

Our ridiculous offensive balance near 50-50 made our offensive line play better and provided better opportunities for Romo and Murray. I also believe it kept everyone healthier, too, by taking away the defense's ability to sniff out a play and get the jump on Dallas players.

The things you pointed out are helpful no doubt but the greatest benefit of a balanced offense is that it keeps a defense honest. No cheating up or rolling back into pass coverage. Also no stacking of the lines etc. As long as an offense can keep the defense guessing the better chance for success they will have. That was the diffence in last years team . With Murray in the lineup no one could automatically pressure Romo. Thats the part this year that has to be engaged again. The question is whether the RBs can command the same respect.

 

[ravidubey]

The question is whether the RBs can command the same respect.

Not just from opposing defenses, but also from their own coaches and fellow players.