Bob Sturm’s Decoding Linehan: Why I disagree with Cowboys’ 4th-and-2 throw to Dez Bryant in Green Bay | Dallas Morning News
More at link.So much in your memory about the Divisional loss at Lambeau Field will go back to the overturn. It should. It was somewhere between a improper ruling of a bad rule and a proper ruling of a bad rule. Either way, the NFL likely will take action and attempt to fix things moving forward, but there is no way to bring Sunday back.
Regardless, as we spent an awful amount of time on back on Monday morning, in a piece you might review here, there were missed opportunities all day. And to look at the job of Scott Linehan and the Cowboys offensive game-plan, it is fair to wonder if they would do things differently if they had the chance.
I think it is important to consider the game you are playing, rather than the game you planned to play. That means that you scout your opponent, anticipate situations and ideas, and then call the game accordingly. One thing this staff has done so well this year is, shortly into the game, they will see something that requires a reversal of ideas – positively or negatively. If the opponent has shown they are ready for your plan or incapable of dealing with it, then you attack that accordingly.
So, as I leave this final game of the year, I am still stuck in hypothetical parallel approaches to the end of both the 1st and 2nd half. This isn’t to say that what the Cowboys did was the worst idea ever, but was there a better opportunity?
1st Half: With :40 to play, the Cowboys receive a very favorable spot from the officials that gives them what we believe to be a 1st down at the Packers’ 26 yard line. They call timeout, because with a 1st down at the 26, they are now thinking “touchdown” on this drive (as they should).
During the timeout, the booth reviews the spot and sees that it was incorrect, which now means 3rd and 1. Here is where Romo kills out of a play (which we wonder about) and it is followed by the botched snap and the throw into the boundary of the end zone for an incomplete pass that stops the clock and forces a field goal attempt of 45 yards – which then becomes a 50-yarder with a false start.
For me, it comes back to that 3rd and 1. Green Bay had 7 in the box, Dallas had 6 up front and Murray. Regardless of what the play call was (EDIT 5:05pm: I asked Jason Witten today what the play call was and he confirmed it was a run/pass option that Tony opted into the pass when he didn’t like the numbers in the defensive box), I submit to you that this has to be a situation where I make Green Bay do something they really never did – stop Murray on a critical short yardage situation. Murray got the ball Sunday in 4 short yardage spots and easily converted all 4. There are no guarantees in football, but if during the timeout, the idea is to use 2 runs to move the chains and then reassess, then my field goal gets closer and closer, the touchdown remains in play – and most importantly, the Packers do not have time to respond.
That is the big takeaway from this game for me. The coaches seemed to understand all year that the best defense is to keep the ball away from the opposition. But Sunday, twice, in critical spots, they seemed to forget this idea – and both times it seemed that their win probabilities were hurt with strategic choices.
Now, you never plan for a field goal to suffer a false start and a block, but you do have to look at 3rd and 1 from the 26 and weigh the odds of throwing to the end zone versus doing something Green Bay has not given any indication they can stop. That was a chance to go in 17-7 that turned into 14-10. 6-point swings are massive, and play calling (and QB play-killing) are under review here.
2nd Half: This one is more controversial and will no doubt get people ready to comment below. REMEMBER: when a play is called, we don’t know the outcome. So, outcome based logic cannot be used when we discuss the choice on 4th and 2 with 4:42 left in the game. All we know is what we knew at the time. And what we knew at the time is that this feels like the NBA late game situation where neither defense looks capable of a stop and that whoever gets the ball last – Rodgers or Romo – is likely going to win.
If I may back up 2 plays, 2nd and 8 from the Green Bay 38 with 6:28 to go, the Cowboys are taking the entire play clock down. It seems that they know they are going in to take the lead and to not leave anytime left for Rodgers. But, they use S02, which has been their calling card for the last 2 months, but it also has been leaking sacks in the playoffs. Teams are now challenging the protection when the backfield is empty more than ever. And, in this critical spot, Romo – a QB being so careful about making dangerous throws in these playoffs – held the ball for 7 seconds before finally being sacked. You can tell he doesn’t want to throw the ball away and stop the clock, but he can’t take a sack there. More importantly, should 2nd and 8 be more Murray? 2 carries ago, he ran for 30 yards and remember the killshot drive in Seattle which was all Murray after midfield?
That is why on 4th and 2, that fateful play where Romo goes to Bryant, I understand the logic of taking a chance with your best receiver on 1-on-1 coverage. But, man, you have to know that a fade or go route on a day like Sunday where no downfield completions of 20+ yards in the air were happening for either QB, that the percentages argued that you move the chains with something short. Now, Green Bay knew that, too. And they were taking away Jason Witten, but Cole Beasley underneath is uncovered when his corner blitzes against a Cover 0 where if Beasley catches it, he may go all the way.
But, I prefer that he doesn’t. I prefer that he moves the chains and gets tackled by 42-Morgan Burnett at the 28. Why? Because if that happens, I submit that Green Bay never touches the ball again. 4:30 to play, 1st down at the Green Bay 28, and the Packers have just 1 timeout. Murray, Murray, and Murray until that tired defense stops him (which they only did on that Peppers forced fumble). They may not.
It is a matter of probabilities. If no passes have been completed downfield by either team all day, on 4th and 2, that is taking a real chance. It is a shot from deep behind the 3-point line when a lay-up may be available. I am not saying they can’t complete it (they did!), but we just need to know the best chances of extending the game might be elsewhere.
You are surely irate right now, because they “went for it” and scored a touchdown (that was not given), so there is no discussion to be had. I agree, to a point, but with 4:30 to play and the Cowboys up either 1 or 3 (depending on the 2 point conversion), what are the odds that A) Aaron Rodgers throws his first interception in 500 throws, B) the Cowboys don’t even allow a field goal, or C) there is enough time for Romo and the Cowboys to answer again? Not great. I believe once you crossed midfield, you had to start thinking that the game ends on this drive and if we can help it, there will be less than a minute left when the touchdown is scored.
Is this a cheap 2nd guess? You may think so, but the very nature of a weekly column about Scott Linehan’s performance each week is all about considering alternatives and solutions and offering a critical analysis of the offense.
