Is Jason Garrett getting too much crap for being conservative?

[Metaphors]

Except you are not taking into effect that the Cowboys had a false start penalty making it 3rd and 18. I didn't think the pitch was the best call, but the only logical calls in that situation were conservative plays because the chances of converting 3rd and 18 is very low.

3rd-and-18 = Really, really bad situation
3rd-and-13 = Really bad situation
The only difference is 5 yards of field position on the punt, but I'm not sure the Cowboys get as many yards on the draw so it may not have mattered anyway.

Running on the first two downs is not a bad choice.

Unless you play to win the game. If your plan is to hope Tom Brady can't go 50 yards in 2:30 at home with a timeout in his pocket, then I agree it is a fine choice.

The Pats had more turnovers than points in the second half at that point. The drives for the Pats up to that pointed ended as follows - punt, fumble, interception, and three and out. You gotta trust your defense.

The Pats gained over 100 yds in 2 of those drives before committing uncharacteristic turnovers. Uncharacteristic meaning that you shouldn't expect them to happen again. So 50% of the time the Pats got into FG range but had their first lost offensive fumble of the year and a deflected pass that happened to bounce to a defender...sounds like leaving a lot of your fate to chance.

Again, the fact that in four possessions in the second half, the Cowboys defense held the Pats to zero points, it is reasonable to put the ball back in your defenses' hands.

Look at it another way...the Pats had 5 of 8 drives up to that point that ended in FG range. 3 scores and 2 turnovers. The point is that once the Pats get into FG range, they aren't going to take any chances since they are playing with house money at that point. So even only using this game as a meter (and ignoring Brady's history), the Cowboys couldn't have been overly optimistic with their chances after the punt. 50-50 chance for success at best.

Garrett didn't tell Tyron Smith to committ a false start penalty killing any shot of converting third down. People forget that happened.

"Listen Tony. If it were 3rd and 13, I would love to call a pass play and let you win the game. But now that it is 3rd and 18, well that is just too risky."

Yeah. I'm sure that is exactly what happened.

Also, they Pats had plenty of time in part because the Cowboys stupidly allowed the Pats to work the sidelines and pick up big yards. The Pats got three plays off before the half because the first two plays allowed the receiver to run out of bounds.

Those plays only gained 16 yards combined. The Pats never went hurry-up. Never spiked the ball. Didn't use their timeout until they were inside the 10. They got inside the Dallas 40 with 1:52 to play. They only needed a FG to tie. Left 27 seconds on the clock. Not sure what part of this says to you that the Cowboys could have funneled the receivers to the middle of the field, presumably giving up bigger yardage, and somehow that would have worked out better.

If the Cowboys had played better defense, there would have been a huge difference between 3:10 with 3 time outs and 2:31 and only one.

If you are saying that the Cowboys could have played better defense and run out the clock before the Pats gained 50 yards, you are crazy.

The problem is the Cowboys played a softer zone type coverage and allowed the Pats to pick up big chunks of yards and work the sidelines.

I see what the problem is. I was watching a different game. The game I was watching had 2 sideline routes to Gronk and Welker against man-to-man. The drive also had 3 passes to the middle of the field and a QB sneak.

If the Cowboys only allowed the Pats to get modest 5 yard gains and only complete passes over the center of the field those 40 or so extra seconds and time outs would have been huge.

The Pats only needed a FG to tie. Even at 5 yards a pop, the Pats would have only need 10 plays...which is exactly the number of plays they used and still left 27 seconds (3 more plays if they needed it).

Belichick probably would have done the same thing in that situation if Brady was struggling. You go with what is working. The Cowboys' defense was shutting down the Patriots offense or at least keeping them from scoring points. It was like Belichick going for it on 4th and 2. You try to win with what is working.

That is a hypothetical and so there is no way to prove it either way. Going on past evidence, I can't remember a time when Belichick would do this. Maybe when Brady when younger, but that isn't the situation with Romo.

As for going with what was working, that is exactly the point. Romo was having good success with short/safe passes on early downs. Add in the fact that the Pats were stacking the middle. I just think you play to win when you have the ball. Never leave rounds in the gun if there is a reasonable chance for the opposition to come back. The game it too slanted to the offensive side of the ball to trust your fate in an opposing offense failing. When that offense is lead by the GOAT...what do you expect to happen?

It is week six in the season. How does that work? Romo is an above average QB who is prone to make the big mistakes. At this point, the Cowboys gotta go and work around what they have. They can't go to the QB store and buy the next Tom Brady at this point.

They didn't just realize what they had in Romo this week. They have known for a while. They are trying to walk the "Romo is the guy/Please don't kill us" tightrope that inevitably leads to disappointment. My point was that Romo can't lead the team if you don't trust him. Might as well play Kitna and start thinking about the future during the offseason.

 

[Metaphors]

why obviously not? I'll grant you that it may not have been likely, but it was certainly possible.

Given the lack of success in the running game up to that point combined with the defense the Pats were showing and the results were fairly predictable. While it was possible to get 10 yards in that situation, they obviously should not have expected to get it. If the Cowboys were playing to run time and punt, kudos to them. Great job.

 

[Uncle Rico]

Just heard a good line on WFAN: "The only team afraid of Tony Romo is .. the Dallas Cowboys." Not bad.

 

[SVN]

if a coach is worried about public perception and does what is popular with everyone so that a loss in the end cannot be blamed on him its the coaches fault. numerous times coaches like dungy/garrett have played this the same way and lost and credit the opponent and what not because they are afraid of making the unconventional choice.
BB makes a call in a game and doesnt let the outcome of it +ve or -ve affect making the same call in the next game. I guess when you have 3 rings and owner backing you can do that but a good coach should always do what he thinks is right not what everyone does.

 

[kudzif]

Jason Garrett made the right decision. The criticism is just there because it did not work.The same people complaining that the cowboys were too conservative are probably the same people who were complaining after the lions game that they were too aggressive. Their

 

[PatsDeb]

Like some have said, the head scratcher was the 3rd down call on their 2nd to last drive (which produced the go-ahead figgie). I don't think at the end it was that bad a call to go conservative with runs, take time off the clock and think the D could get another stop. After all, they had gotten plenty in the game already. Too bad for them Brady & Co. saved the best for last!!

 

[goheels22002]

That was absolutely the correct call by Dallas. Run the clock and force the Patriots to drive the length of the field. Their defense was rocking all day and the Patriots were having a really rough time moving the ball.

Jerry Jones is a clown for second guessing the correct call.

All you people saying "play to win" are the ones who probably would lose more games by taking unnecessary risks.

Throw the ball and you can have three bad things happen...incomplete which stops the clock, interception, sack or sack+fumble.

I would have ra the ball 3 times and then trusted my 4th rated defense t make the stop like it had been doing al game long.o

Total agreement on Jerry Jones being a jerk second guessing his head coach. He selected Garrett and he should stand behind him. The decision to run the ball and challenge the Patriots to march 80 yards is defensible, and Jones should have made the case for his defense being trusted to win the game.

Jones' point was also valid. Do you hand Tom Brady the ball at home with 2:42 on the clock and expect your defense to a) stop him from getting a game-tying field goal? or b) getting the game-winning TD?

Uh, no.

The Cowboys have three elite receivers, one of whom did not get a catch in the second half - Dez Bryant. Three short passes to Jason Whitten would have been a better series and he probably would have ground out the first down the Cowboys needed to win the game.

If the coach cannot trust Tony Romo to execute a couple of quick slants or quick outs to one of those guys in long yardage, Dallas has a QB problem, not a coach problem.

 

[LivinLovin&Breathin_Brady]

Jason Garrett did what he did because he trusted in his defense and didn't want a dumb TO from Romo as usual. He was desperate to beat NE at home and make a statement.
The media claimed the Ryan's had Brady's number, so I know he was sure his D would make a stop. Brady and his offense was stinking up the joint all game and I'm sure he was expecting much of the same. I even saw the shock on Ryan's face from the sideline when he realized how cold Brady had got from the ice-water that was suddenly pumping in his veins.

All year long ESPN has been going on and on about how Romo shouldn't be passing the ball when Dallas has the lead. That they should be more conservative and run the time out. Garrett took their advice and got burned. Now they wanna complain about that too. You either want Romo to throw it in the 4th with the lead or you don't, you can't keep switching it up whenever Dallas lose.

'Analysts' thought Brady was no longer clutch. Even Troy Aikman said during the game, that he was sure alot of ppl didn't think Brady could do that anymore. I believe Dallas and the media were those ppl and that's why they are all pissed Garrett's coaching. They would've done the same thing too.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Jerry has apparently reconsidered his criticism of the HC he hand picked. Jerry should adopt a new policy and STFU or start coaching the team himself as well and see how that works out...