Odds we win it all the next two years?

[Dodger12]

You fags are still crying about Garrett? When we have another winning record, and make the playoffs, will you still be whining?

Well, you're still slurping his dick after 1 winning season. He can win me over but I need to see more than a guy who benefited from doing less.

 

[Dodger12]

Emmitt Smith played on another level in the playoffs. Murray came up small. I am not sure the Cowboys will be able to replace Murray’s leadership or what he was able to do catching the ball, but I do think Randle showed more explosiveness in the open field. He was able to pop 40, 50, 60 yard runs, something Murray was rarely able to do.

I hear you but the talk back then was our OL, just like it is today. I just don't think we can plug and play anyone and I just think we need a back that's tough and can get those tough yards. No doubt Murray and Randal both benefited from our OL. The runs Randal had were through wide open holes. I just think Murray is a better back.

I believe Garrett’s philosophy has always been to have a strong running game. Cowboys just didnt have the O-line to do it. I thought Garrett showed improvement last season. He has a great supporting cast and great players. I feel pretty good about next season.

I never bought the excuse of not having an OL. Garrett has always been pass happy. No team has the line we have but they still run. Even GB had 11 100 yard rushing games not including the playoffs and we only had 400 more rushing yards for the season which was a record breaking one for Murray. No one is going to confuse GB for a running team but they still run the ball.

 

[Everlastingxxx]

I hear you but the talk back then was our OL, just like it is today. I just don't think we can plug and play anyone and I just think we need a back that's tough and can get those tough yards. No doubt Murray and Randal both benefited from our OL. The runs Randal had were through wide open holes. I just think Murray is a better back.

Yea i agree, you can’t just plug anyone back there. Murray was great at getting the dirty yards. Instead of -2 yards, he would gain 2 yards. Both Randle and Murray had huge lanes at time, but Randle took it to the house when it was there. Instead of the longer time consuming drives, the Cowboys will be able to create bigger plays in the running game.

I never bought the excuse of not having an OL. Garrett has always been pass happy. No team has the line we have but they still run. Even GB had 11 100 yard rushing games not including the playoffs and we only had 400 more rushing yards for the season which was a record breaking one for Murray. No one is going to confuse GB for a running team but they still run the ball.

Garrett in the past did tend to abandon the running game too quickly. I think he had too much faith Romo and i think Romo had a lot to do with checking out of runs. It wasn’t maybe 3 seasons ago the Cowboys had one of the worst O-Lines in the NFL. Garrett has never had an O-line like this to work with.

Green Bay has a great O-line and Lacy is a good running back. I am not sure they are a good example.

 

[dbair1967]

I never bought the excuse of not having an OL. Garrett has always been pass happy.

Its not an excuse, it was pretty much a fact that for most of hsi time as OC, these guys were better pass blockers than run blockers. Then for a couple seasons the blocking was awful in general. That said, when all the best players are passing game people, it makes sense for an OC/play caller to take advantage of what a team does best. Romo, TO, Austin (for a couple yrs), Witten and Dez were elite players.

No team has the line we have but they still run. Even GB had 11 100 yard rushing games not including the playoffs and we only had 400 more rushing yards for the season which was a record breaking one for Murray. No one is going to confuse GB for a running team but they still run the ball.

Only two teams attempted more rushes than we did last yr. I dont care how many 100 yd games GB had, its irrelevent when deciding who runs the ball more. Dallas ran it 508 times and attempted 476 passes. Green Bay ran it 435 times and passed it 536. Thats a signficant difference, especially with the way the game is played today.

 

[Iamtdg]

Ask Mid, he knows I hear

He knows you hear what?

 

[Bob Sacamano]

lol

 

[Dodger12]

Its not an excuse, it was pretty much a fact that for most of hsi time as OC, these guys were better pass blockers than run blockers. Then for a couple seasons the blocking was awful in general. That said, when all the best players are passing game people, it makes sense for an OC/play caller to take advantage of what a team does best. Romo, TO, Austin (for a couple yrs), Witten and Dez were elite players.

Then why give Barber big money? Why draft Jones in the 1st round to compliment Barber? Why continue to draft TE's in the 2nd round to use the two TE set? So we sign a RB to a 40 million dollar contract and draft a RB in round 1 with the intent of not using them because we don't have an adequate OL.....brilliant. It's an excuse and Wade knew it was an excuse which is why he wanted to bring in Dan Reeves to help the fucking red headed dolt out.

Only two teams attempted more rushes than we did last yr. I dont care how many 100 yd games GB had, its irrelevent when deciding who runs the ball more. Dallas ran it 508 times and attempted 476 passes. Green Bay ran it 435 times and passed it 536. Thats a signficant difference, especially with the way the game is played today.

My point is that we routinely ran it less than just about anyone ion the NFL....near dead last in attempts for a couple of years running. That's Garrett's philosphy. It took someone taking away his play calling duties, coupled with Romo's bad back, for us to change.

 

[Doomsday]

My point is that we routinely ran it less than just about anyone ion the NFL....near dead last in attempts for a couple of years running. That's Garrett's philosophy. It took someone taking away his play calling duties, coupled with Romo's bad back, for us to change.

DING DING DING we have a winner. Been saying this for weeks.

The question now is, with Tony's back ostensibly better, do we return to previous philosophy and go away from 500 rushing attempts? Go back to 500+ dropback passes instead? Is this why they didn't feel the need to draft a RB?

I predicted they wouldn't take one early, and even allowed for a 4th rounder to count as "early." They picked exactly zero. Shocking everyone. Is it because as they say, they think they have a roster full of good backs? Or just that they don't plan on running it as much?

 

[Doomsday]

Of course, WHEN it becomes apparent we have indeed reverted to 500 pass, 300 run this next season, the excuse will be "But we lost Murrrrrrrrrrray!!!"

I can see it now, and I toldja so's will be dismissed.

 

[Dodger12]

DING DING DING we have a winner. Been saying this for weeks.

The question now is, with Tony's back ostensibly better, do we return to previous philosophy and go away from 500 rushing attempts? Go back to 500+ dropback passes instead? Is this why they didn't feel the need to draft a RB?

I predicted they wouldn't take one early, and even allowed for a 4th rounder to count as "early." They picked exactly zero. Shocking everyone. Is it because as they say, they think they have a roster full of good backs? Or just that they don't plan on running it as much?

It's a question of economics coupled by an overconfidence in the OL. I'm amazed at all the folks who claim anyone can run behind our OL. Murray was a workhorse and that type of back, coupled with a quality QB, leads to success. Par for the course, if the RB by committe approach doesn't work out, these folks will bring their excuses out of the woodwork.

 

[Doomsday]

It's a question of economics coupled by an overconfidence in the OL. I'm amazed at all the folks who claim anyone can run behind our OL. Murray was a workhorse and that type of back, coupled with a quality QB, leads to success. Par for the course, if the RB by committe approach doesn't work out, these folks will bring their excuses out of the woodwork.

Murray didn't see anything like 400 carries until after Romo's surgery.... Jus' sayin. Or even sniff at it.

YOU nailed it when you talked about Garret's philosophy. He really doesn't WANT to run the ball.

Now, of course with him no longer calling plays maybe that was the biggest reason for the change. We shall see if run-first continues with a ostensibly healthy Romo.

 

[ThoughtExperiment]

Dodger knocking it out of the park as usual.

 

[Dodger12]

Murray didn't see anything like 400 carries until after Romo's surgery.... Jus' sayin. Or even sniff at it.

YOU nailed it when you talked about Garret's philosophy. He really doesn't WANT to run the ball.

Now, of course with him no longer calling plays maybe that was the biggest reason for the change. We shall see if run-first continues with a ostensibly healthy Romo.

Oh how I miss those threads about how the NFL has changed. How it's a passing league. Or how running more doesn't lead to success. Or how Red Jesus is the new breed of HC. Now we run and it's been Garrett's plan all along. Fucking disgusting. At least stay consistent.

I'm with you on Romo's back. I think Jerry even put his foot down. He was pretty adament last off season that we were going to run the ball more especially after drafting Escobar.

 

[Dodger12]

Dodger knocking it out of the park as usual.

Thanks TE but it is Dbair we're debating with. It's not fair really, kind of like clubbing a helpless baby harp seal.......

 

[ThoughtExperiment]

Yeah, but a lot of people actually believe it was all part of the master plan that took eight years before it could be put into practice.

 

[Everlastingxxx]

Oh how I miss those threads about how the NFL has changed. How it's a passing league. Or how running more doesn't lead to success. Or how Red Jesus is the new breed of HC. Now we run and it's been Garrett's plan all along. Fucking disgusting. At least stay consistent.

I'm with you on Romo's back. I think Jerry even put his foot down. He was pretty adament last off season that we were going to run the ball more especially after drafting Escobar.

I think most coaches want to run the ball more. I don’t think it’s far fetched to say it was Garrett’s plan from the start. He saw first hand what a strong running game does while playing on the 90’s Cowboys teams.

I remember 2008 Hard Knocks, hearing Garrett stressing the need to run even if there are 8 man fronts. I remember when Garrett took over as interim HC said they the running game struggled because the practices were not physical enough under Wade Phillips. When the Cowboys couldn’t run the ball to save their life, he would stick with it for the first half. I’d spend much of that half screaming because the only thing that worked was Romo throwing the ball from shotgun.

When Linehan was hired, he says Garrett emphasized the need to run the ball. I don’t need to give Garrett all the credit for everything that happened the past few years with the running game, but i think he deserves “some” credit.

Some people defend their opinions in a way that can’t be proven wrong. If Garrett leads the team to the a Super Bowl victory, they would give others credit. If the team fails, they blame Garrett. Almost like the God complex. Everything good is God, everything bad is something else. No ability to think logically.

 

[Doomsday]

I think most coaches want to run the ball more. I don’t think it’s far fetched to say it was Garrett’s plan from the start. He saw first hand what a strong running game does while playing on the 90’s Cowboys teams.

I remember 2008 Hard Knocks, hearing Garrett stressing the need to run even if there are 8 man fronts. I remember when Garrett took over as interim HC said they the running game struggled because the practices were not physical enough under Wade Phillips. When the Cowboys couldn’t run the ball to save their life, he would stick with it for the first half. I’d spend much of that half screaming because the only thing that worked was Romo throwing the ball from shotgun.

When Linehan was hired, he says Garrett emphasized the need to run the ball. I don’t need to give Garrett all the credit for everything that happened the past few years with the running game, but i think he deserves “some” credit.

Some people defend their opinions in a way that can’t be proven wrong. If Garrett leads the team to the a Super Bowl victory, they would give others credit. If the team fails, they blame Garrett. Almost like the God complex. Everything good is God, everything bad is something else. No ability to think logically.

So..... Garrett thus guru of the run, gets his play calling duties stripped, then suddenly we have a 1,800 yard rusher.

 

[Everlastingxxx]

So..... Garrett thus guru of the run, gets his play calling duties stripped, then suddenly we have a 1,800 yard rusher.

You didn’t know Callahan called plays a season before? You didn’t know Murray had been injured his previous seasons? It wasn’t sudden, they actually ran better the season before after the Saints game. All this stuff has been talked about, but nobody listens.

 

[Dodger12]

I think most coaches want to run the ball more. I don’t think it’s far fetched to say it was Garrett’s plan from the start. He saw first hand what a strong running game does while playing on the 90’s Cowboys teams.

I don't agree. I think some coaches want an effective the running game to be part of their offense but that doesn't mean they want to necessarily run it more. Some teams are built that way thoughtand a running game is part of their identity. The Steelers want to run it and play good D. Same with Seattle and Baltimore. That's their persona and team identity. Chip Kelly wants to run it more "effectively" but that doesn't mean he wants to run it more. Jimmy Johnson, Parcells and Coughlin want to run it and play D. Those are their philosphies.

While Garrett may have wanted to run it more, he simply didn't. He was near the bottom of the NFL in attempts. he got away from the running game which is something we didn't do last year. Now, the question becomes if that's Garrett's philosophy or was it his inexperience? Bottom line is that nothing changed until the play caller changed. Does anyone doubt that if they go into the 4th quarter with a multiple TD lead that those coaches I mentioned were just going to grind the hell out of you?

I remember 2008 Hard Knocks, hearing Garrett stressing the need to run even if there are 8 man fronts. I remember when Garrett took over as interim HC said they the running game struggled because the practices were not physical enough under Wade Phillips.

Do you remember him saying we can't run without an OL consisting of Pro-Bowlers at every position? Because that's the excuse. We didn't have the line. Or maybe he just didn't see it at camp year after year.

When the Cowboys couldn’t run the ball to save their life, he would stick with it for the first half. I’d spend much of that half screaming because the only thing that worked was Romo throwing the ball from shotgun.

I was screaming when we'd run running plays out of the shotgun. I was screaming when we'd go shotgun on early downs in short yardage even near the goal line. Sotgun, shotgun, and more shotgun. That's what would drive me crazy. Please tell me that you saw a completely different offense in 2014 than the years prior?

When Linehan was hired, he says Garrett emphasized the need to run the ball. I don’t need to give Garrett all the credit for everything that happened the past few years with the running game, but i think he deserves “some” credit.

I have no doubt this was true if Garrett wanted to save his job in the final year of his contract. His owner called him out in the media relative to his inexperience and mistakes. Jerry also mentioned after drafting Escober that they better damn well use him. There's a reason Jerry made Garrett a walk around HC after Garrett swore he was still calling the plays the year prior which led to possible friction with Callahan. This can't be denied.

Some people defend their opinions in a way that can’t be proven wrong. If Garrett leads the team to the a Super Bowl victory, they would give others credit. If the team fails, they blame Garrett. Almost like the God complex. Everything good is God, everything bad is something else. No ability to think logically.

Let me ask you this and I'd like an honest answer. When's the last time you walked away from a game and thought to yourself, "damn, that Jason Garrett just outcoached so and so (insert opposing coach here)?" Even in the playoffs the fuckling dolt bungled the end of the half and gave the ball back to Rodgers. I mean, how many times do we have to see the same shit repeat itself over and over? I fucking hate Jerry but I give the man his due for the past two off-seasons. This year, he brought in 3 players with 1st round tallent. Yeah, I know, maybe he's listening to right people, maybe it's McKay, maybe it's Rowdy's ghost whispering in his ear but at the end of the day, he's the GM and is ultimately responsible. By the same token, I hold Garrett responsible for what I see on the field.

How about this, why doesn't Garrett lead the team to the SB and then see who gives him his due? This idea that we should give credit to Garrett for some mystical rebuild that has won 1 playoff game in 4 years is absurd. He'll get his due from me if he earns it.

 

[Dodger12]

You didn’t know Callahan called plays a season before? You didn’t know Murray had been injured his previous seasons? It wasn’t sudden, they actually ran better the season before after the Saints game. All this stuff has been talked about, but nobody listens.

So what? The Saints game was the 10th game of the season and we were 5 and 5 after that game. How is that any consolation or prove anything? And the GB debacle was after the Saints game and Garrett completely fucked the 2nd half. I may never see such a debacle in my lifetime.