S. Jones says we will run more.

[scotsman1948]

this could be a sound argument.
but
I counter with this.
If we were running some of the clock out (not saying run every play making it uber predictable) It would have taken a lot longer for the Lions to come back from 3 scores.
Broncos game I think had to be a shootout.
But here is my thing.
When we are successfully running against the stacked box. Why all of a sudden abandon the whole running game & just start passing, like we have in the past for no reason. I think JG & Romo try to outsmart themselves sometimes.

My biggest gripe is how predictable our play calling on offense. Well & we should never abandon the running game when we are running it down their throats! Packers game was probably the most annoying loss we had.
It is like we can win any game at the end. Unless we get a 2 score lead on the team. Then it is like we are doomed to lose in the end. Sick of coaching not to lose. So when we do run the ball to try & run out the clock. It is like we are just saying we are planning on a 3 & out & let the defense stop you (yeah right)
So while I still want us to do some passing with a lead. I hate when we quit running when it is working. Well actually I hate when we quit running period. Whether it is working or not. Quit being so predictable I say.

One game though Murray had like a 5.2 yd avg or something. 2nd half. think he ran like 5 times. We for no reason just quit running.

except that the Lions expected that we would try and run and load the box on every play which literally force you into 3 plays and out running or try to throw over the box

 

[snookdad]

Every situation is different and even year to year it's different, so I don't think you can expect Linehan to pass more just because he did in the past. Reggie Bush is a nice player, but he isn't the kind of back that Murray is and neither were a lot of the other Det backs. Murray can be given the ball on 3rd and short and get those yards and while he has been injury prone he also has the skill set to "carry the load". Also Dez is great, but he's no Calvin when you need a first down and know he'll have two guys on him. Our OL this year will be MUCH better than Detroit's. So I think you need to look at his previous tendencies, but not necessarily assume that's what we'll get. My bigger concern than him is Romo and Garrett realizing that we are better off in the long run if we run the ball more. Time will tell...

I think this perfectly sums it up, but it also raises 2 questions/concerns. 1st with Romo's back being an unknown I believe we will almost need to run more just to protect him (it's a long season). 2nd Murray as you rightfully stated has been injury prone that's also a huge concern. No question the Cowboys are a better team when we run the ball because it creates more balance and more play action opportunities which Romo excels at. I think anything over 20 carries and say 5 pass targets put's Murray at risk so Dunbar's work load need to increase (that's a good thing IMO). This should also improve the defense.

 

[Otis B. Driftwood]

If he talks about anything ..., I tune him out.

I fixed this for you free of charge.

 

[Manster7588]

except that the Lions expected that we would try and run and load the box on every play which literally force you into 3 plays and out running or try to throw over the box

I still say 3 yards and a cloud of dust, thus running down the click, would have won the game. We damn sure know the picks didn't win it.

 

[scotsman1948]

I still say 3 yards and a cloud of dust, thus running down the click, would have won the game. We damn sure know the picks didn't win it.

and we also know that our defense couldn't have stopped a JV team. 80 yards in less than a minute

 

[Earl Stevens]

this could be a sound argument.
but
I counter with this.
If we were running some of the clock out (not saying run every play making it uber predictable) It would have taken a lot longer for the Lions to come back from 3 scores.

I don't really disagree with you, but let me stress the point that I was making above. How the coaches and players have handled the pressure in crucial situations on the field are more the reason why we've blown these games than simply the lack thereof of running the football more.

For example, Romo's first interception. In a crucial moment in the game:

-The offensive line allowed Clay Matthews to get a free release on Romo which made him rush his throw.

-Romo threw an ill-advised pass out of panic and fear. It was the fault of the offensive line to let Matthews get a free release but Romo still has to make better decisions and throws.

-The coaches allowed Romo to even change the play to begin with.

-The defense couldn't rise to the occasion with the game on the line when it was their fault that Romo and the offense were put in that position in the first place. And this doesn't include the critical play when Scandrick laughably misplayed a sure interception (in most cases) that turns into an incredible TD catch by Jordy Nelson that could have stopped GB from gaining any momentum to make such a comeback.

This is what I meant when I said that how our coaches and players handle pressure on the field are why we've blown many games, not simply because we didn't run the football enough. Offensive line failed under pressure, the quarterback failed under pressure, the defense failed under pressure while giving up an unheard-of 34 points in the 2nd half, and the coaches failed under pressure by never knowing when to step their foot down when running the ball needs to be stressed to the players (this has been a problem for years). It's not about just running the football. It's about knowing how to do it when you do it, and when it needs to be stressed.

Broncos game I think had to be a shootout.

I agree. But how we handled pressure in critical situations of that game was a big reason why we lost.

But here is my thing.
When we are successfully running against the stacked box. Why all of a sudden abandon the whole running game & just start passing, like we have in the past for no reason. I think JG & Romo try to outsmart themselves sometimes.

That's our game. This is our offense. This is how it has been in the Garrett-Romo era. There's no sense in complaining about it. We are a pass-first team period. I don't like it either but I've accepted it. What I'm more angry about is how Romo and Garrett have handled situations in key spots. R and G don't seem to handle pressure well in critical spots.

My biggest gripe is how predictable our play calling on offense. Well & we should never abandon the running game when we are running it down their throats! Packers game was probably the most annoying loss we had.
It is like we can win any game at the end. Unless we get a 2 score lead on the team. Then it is like we are doomed to lose in the end. Sick of coaching not to lose. So when we do run the ball to try & run out the clock. It is like we are just saying we are planning on a 3 & out & let the defense stop you (yeah right)
So while I still want us to do some passing with a lead. I hate when we quit running when it is working. Well actually I hate when we quit running period. Whether it is working or not. Quit being so predictable I say. One game though Murray had like a 5.2 yd avg or something. 2nd half. think he ran like 5 times. We for no reason just quit running.

EVERY OFFENSE IS PREDICTABLE TO A CERTAIN DEGREE. What you said is about what every fan base says about their team. What you should be angry about is how predictable our offense is in not executing when we need to, how predictable our offense is in committing untimely turnovers or penalties at the worst possible time, and how predictable our offense is with the decision-making by our coaches and players in high-pressure situations.

Abandoning the running game when it is working is annoying and I don't really disagree with you here, but our team doesn't possess an elite rushing attack yet. Many of us have complained about this, but the truth of the matter is we did not possess the type of rushing attack to continuously run the football down anyone's throat. Passing has always been our bread and butter.. This is not the 90s offensive line and Smith is not the RB. We need to stop with this pipe-dream that we would have won more of those close games by simply running the ball more. We couldn't even win in Baltimore a couple of years ago when we ran the ball 40 times for 200+. Murray rushed for nearly 150 against Chicago last year and we got blown out. We ran the ball well against Green Bay as well last year in the first half but left too many points on the field. Those games are three examples of us running the ball well, but not effectively. Running the ball well is one thing, running the ball effectively is another. We left too many points on the field and committed too many dumb penalties in those games because of our running game. Those reasons alone are why the rushing attack couldn't be trusted to ice games and why we shouldn't put so much emphasis on us needing to run the ball more in order to win games. Those were just three examples. I could provide many more.

I certainly want this team to run the ball more, but running the ball more won't make this team much better unless they become more effective at doing it. Let's hope that with a better and improving, young offensive line, we can become a more effective running team and can rely on it to put up points, keep the defense off the field, and close games.

 

[R.J. MacReady]

I don't really disagree with you, but let me stress the point that I was making above. How the coaches and players have handled the pressure in crucial situations on the field are more the reason why we've blown these games

Correct. It's almost like nobody expects the pressure. Which means there is no plan for it other that an int or Romo looking at the sky. When you send your guys ..there is supposed to be some risk involved. Instead it pays dividends every time.