Packers happy Cowboys abandoned running game

[woodbuck27]

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000299618/article/packers-happy-cowboys-abandoned-running-game

Packers happy Cowboys abandoned running game

By Chris Wesseling ... Around the League Writer

Published: Dec. 16, 2013 at 05:18 p.m.

Updated: Dec. 16, 2013 at 07:49 p.m

" The victorious Packers were perplexed yet grateful for the Cowboys' much-derided, soap operatic play-calling. "

GO PACK GO !

[Fritz]

"We don't know why their coach is an idiot, but we humbly appreciate it."

[red]

they said on sports center last night that the boys actually threw the ball more in the second half then we did

thats insane, garrett should lose his job for that. he blames romo for changing that one call from a run to a pass when garrett calls for passes all half with a huge lead

[gbgary]

the only reason I can think of that they'd want to stay so aggressive is to run the score up on us for some past humiliation. the Packers did have the home (dallas) locker room at the superbowl. maybe they plugged all the toilets up or something worse.

[MadScientist]

they said on sports center last night that the boys actually threw the ball more in the second half then we did

thats insane, garrett should lose his job for that. he blames romo for changing that one call from a run to a pass when garrett calls for passes all half with a huge lead

And the thing is, the option to the pass was the right call by Romo, just very poor execution. There was an easy touchdown for Dallas with a decent pass. There should have been a lot more runs earlier in the half when the box was not being stacked.

[smuggler]

Part of the reason the box is vacated is because of how thoroughly they've abandoned the run in that game.

[Pugger]

I wonder if we had some D looks that enticed Romo to throw instead of run the ball?

[Patler]

The announcers went off on this, but I think you need to look at the situations.

Here is their 1st possession of the second half, with Dallas leading 26-10:
1/10 – Run
2/6 – Pass
1/10 – Pass
1/10 – Run
2/8 – Pass
1/10 – Run
2/5 – Pass
3/5 – Pass
1/10 – Run
2/4 – Run
2/14 – Pass
3/13 – Pass
Dallas kicked a field goal to end this possession. I'm not sure there is a lot to fault in this one. Fairly decent distribution in view of the down and distance situations.

The second possession, with Dallas leading 29-17 was the one that set Aikman off:
1/10 – Pass
2/10 – Pass
3/10 – Pass
In retrospect, it was bad; but the 1st down pass, when Aikman and everyone thought they would run, might have been a good cross-up. Wasn't this the one where Dez B. was open behind Shields, but the ball was underthrown. Good call, but bad execution maybe? I could be wrong on this, and it isn't worth going back to look at again, but I think on 2nd down it was another situation of bad execution.

3rd Possession, Dallas leading 29-24
1/10 – Run
2/5 – Pass
3/5 – penalty on GB
1/10 – Run
1/5 – Pass
1/10 – Pass
2/9 – Pass
1/10 – Pass
2/10 – Pass
3/4 - Pass for TD.

This was the drive kept alive by the overturned interception and a couple penalties, but the Cowboys took what was there to be taken and scored a TD. 11 plays, 80 yards.


The next possession seems the worst, in some ways. It came with Dallas leading 36-31:
1/10 - Pass
2/10 - Pass
3/12 - Pass
1/10 - Run
2/6 - Pass - intercepted.
This drive started with 4:17 remaining. Run - Run - Run, or at least high percentage passes intended to keep the clock running would have at least caused GB to burn timeouts. A single first down in three plays might have fairly well salted the game away.

I think there can be a lot of second guessing, but the only drives that really standout are the one that went 3-and-out and the one ending in the interception.

[channtheman]

Romo missed at least 2 TD's by under throwing guys in the 2nd half. I actually don't think the Cowboys did the wrong thing (though even against a stacked box, I could see our defense giving up a first down against 3 runs) but merely executed poorly. Romo is as noodle armed as Flynn with his under throws on deep balls that are easy TD's.

[red]

i don't know patler

that looks well and good if the game is close, but with a huge lead, should you still be playing like that? you gotta burn some clock

i know this for a fact, because some of us throw an absolute shit fits when M3 takes his foot off the gas and starts burning the clock when we take a lead in the 1st quarter. we are always bashed for being "stupid" and "wrong", and that the smart thing to do is to run the ball and burn the clock

[red]

Romo missed at least 2 TD's by under throwing guys in the 2nd half. I actually don't think the Cowboys did the wrong thing (though even against a stacked box, I could see our defense giving up a first down against 3 runs) but merely executed poorly. Romo is as noodle armed as Flynn with his under throws on deep balls that are easy TD's.

agreed, if romo makes the throws he's suppose to make, we get blown out. the shields int is a perfect example. that should have been a backbreaking dallas TD, but romo threw a horrible ball that got picked. the talk shouldn't be about why they called a pass play there instead of a run, it should be about how romo panicked when clay flew by him and threw a horrible pass behind austin who had nothing but open field in front of him

[Guiness]

Yes, it looks somewhat balanced with a bit of a lean towards pass...which normally you'd think was ok, except as the announcers pointed out so many times, the Cowboys were averaging 7yards/carry! Demarco had 18 rushes for 134 yards. I'd argue that their 3rd possession, although it resulted in a TD, was ill advised. It felt like they were on a wing and a prayer that drive, and if it wasn't for Free getting away with motion (drawing an offside penalty on Neale) and Bryant's circus catch, they come away from that set of downs with nothing.

From the plays you listed, there were 8 runs, 21 passes. Is that the playcalling you expect from a team up by a couple of TDs and gaining 7 yards/rush? In their first possession they ran for 4, 2, 5 and 6. Not what they averaged in the first half, but certainly not a disaster! I'm pretty sure if they'd kept pounding the ball, the Packers would just plain of run out of time.

[Patler]

i don't know patler

that looks well and good if the game is close, but with a huge lead, should you still be playing like that? you gotta burn some clock

i know this for a fact, because some of us throw an absolute shit fits when M3 takes his foot off the gas and starts burning the clock when we take a lead in the 1st quarter. we are always bashed for being "stupid" and "wrong", and that the smart thing to do is to run the ball and burn the clock

Generally, I agree. But when you breakdown each drive and the situation of each call, I don't think it is as far off as it might have felt at the time.

1st drive - pretty good mix, and it lead to 3 points. Safe passes kept the clock running. 12 plays, just 2 third downs and lead to a FG.

3rd drive - pass heavy, but even Aikman mentioned during this drive that it was mostly short stuff, easy to complete and not much different than runs. Heck, they went 80 yards in 11 plays. Can't hardly fault the play calling when the result is a TD.

The 2nd drive sent Aikman into tizzy fit, and it is hard to disagree with him. But calling a couple passes when everyone "knows" you have to run it would have been raved about as gutsy and a kill shot if Romo threw it better. But, I recognize that is precisely why convention calls for runs there.

The 4th drive is the one I think was horrible. Just over 4 minutes left. Three runs and/or short, safe passes would likely have lead to a 1st down and used up the Packers TO's. That was a very ill-advised time to go to the longer, more difficult throws, and it burned them.



Long & short of it, two of their drives I don't think were so bad. They took 23 plays and got 10 points from them. It wasn't an entire half of poor play calling.

One of the problems is that it is hard to burn the clock against the Packers, yardage is so easy to get against them.

[King Friday]

Why do you need to be "gutsy" by making some kind of genius playcall when you are already up by multiple scores and in control of the game?

Run the ball and get the W. With a defense like theirs, you don't play with fire.

[woodbuck27]

The announcers went off on this, but I think you need to look at the situations.

Here is their 1st possession of the second half, with Dallas leading 26-10:
1/10 – Run
2/6 – Pass
1/10 – Pass
1/10 – Run
2/8 – Pass
1/10 – Run
2/5 – Pass
3/5 – Pass
1/10 – Run
2/4 – Run
2/14 – Pass
3/13 – Pass
Dallas kicked a field goal to end this possession. I'm not sure there is a lot to fault in this one. Fairly decent distribution in view of the down and distance situations.

The second possession, with Dallas leading 29-17 was the one that set Aikman off:
1/10 – Pass
2/10 – Pass
3/10 – Pass
In retrospect, it was bad; but the 1st down pass, when Aikman and everyone thought they would run, might have been a good cross-up. Wasn't this the one where Dez B. was open behind Shields, but the ball was underthrown. Good call, but bad execution maybe? I could be wrong on this, and it isn't worth going back to look at again, but I think on 2nd down it was another situation of bad execution.

3rd Possession, Dallas leading 29-24
1/10 – Run
2/5 – Pass
3/5 – penalty on GB
1/10 – Run
1/5 – Pass
1/10 – Pass
2/9 – Pass
1/10 – Pass
2/10 – Pass
3/4 - Pass for TD.

This was the drive kept alive by the overturned interception and a couple penalties, but the Cowboys took what was there to be taken and scored a TD. 11 plays, 80 yards.


The next possession seems the worst, in some ways. It came with Dallas leading 36-31:
1/10 - Pass
2/10 - Pass
3/12 - Pass
1/10 - Run
2/6 - Pass - intercepted.
This drive started with 4:17 remaining. Run - Run - Run, or at least high percentage passes intended to keep the clock running would have at least caused GB to burn timeouts. A single first down in three plays might have fairly well salted the game away.

I think there can be a lot of second guessing, but the only drives that really standout are the one that went 3-and-out and the one ending in the interception.

Nice analysis Patler.

Yes it comes down to the last possession by the Dallas Cowboys:

A possession of certain emergency and as often happens in such cases something either goes just swell or there's a play made by the 'D' to snuff out any hope of a comeback.

The play ratio was in your analysis Patler :

Pass = 21 and Run = 8 or 72.41% pass plays (not necessarily intended pass plays from the sideline ie Dallas HC Jason Garrett or whomever was calling the Boys running plays at that time?). That percentage of pass plays might support an argument that the running game was neglected/aborted; but I would disagree looking at the downs and calls bases on need to move the chains. Evidently the Dallas Cowboys have done this in other games. Established a sounf running game and for some reason went more pass.

What we saw in the end for the Dallas Cowboys was an example of things simply going wrong. That based on some state of emergency to get in position for a FG....or say at or inside the Packers 35 yard line.

What we saw is commonly referred to as, 'shit happens' !

**The real story isn't what the Green Bay Packers claim as gratitude for the Cowboys seemingly abandoning the running game.

Certainly looking at the success that Demarco Murray had against our... 'NO' Run Defense'. Does call into question why did they abort on that?

Please read this Patler ... Packerrats:

Posted December 17, 2013

The All-22: Packers also surprised by Cowboys’ run-averse game plan

Dallas Cowboys, Green Bay Packers, The All-22

By: Doug Farrar

http://nfl.si.com/2013/12/17/the-all-22-cowboys-run-game-demarco-murray-packers/

That lays out a pretty convincing argument that the Cowboys might have run the ball more in the second half and leading by a score of 26-10.

Do we really know what's all going on or what's in the minds of the coach's?

I'll elect to simply let that rest and move forward.... and this has been a solid discussion.

** The real story is elsewhere. The rest of the story will take place at another time and place.