Dallas Cowboys Game Tape Review: Defense

Tripp...in your opinion, how are our d-linemen playing in the 3-4 scheme? In the offseason, I saw teams give a high priority to retain their NTs (Wilfork in NE, Hampton in Pittsburgh, and Franklin in San Fran) and honestly I feel like we don't have a good 3-4 NT. I feel that Haynesworth doesn't fit the 3-4 scheme in general, and Kemo is not a good player for such important position. Also, how do you see Carriker/Daniels/Holliday playing in this scheme?

What we're seeing now is the by-product of an important point that was made by some during the offseason. We really don't have the proper personell to effectively make a 3-4 defense work to the peak of effeciency. N/T is the key clog in a 3-4 and we don't have one. We have a player lining up at the position that cannot effectively play it. That fact could contribute to why so much emphasis has been placed on trying to get Haynesworth to play at the position. As it stands right now, we just don't have a lot going with the three players we're starting as down linemen.

Giving up 5 yds per run is what poor defenses do. It matters if a team is smart enough to keep doing it all the way down the field. What makes you think that if the D can't stop the run all the way down the field it will magically do so inside the 10? Plus running the ball keeps the ToP up for the O and keeps the D on the field, wearing them down.

Since the 2005 season there have been 23 teams that allowed over 4.5 yds/att. Only 5 of them finished over .500 (21.7%). Of those 5, one had Peyton Manning and led the league in Passing Yards, another the same year had Drew Brees and was 2nd in the NFL in Passing Yds.Football 101, running inside the ten requires better execution because there are more players in a confined area, holes are smaller, ballcarriers are reached quicker, etc.

I'm not saying there's no problem with the run defense, but it's not like we were whipped by Dallas in the rushing attack. They averaged like 4.8 YPC and never had a carry over 12 yards. That's an efficient day running the football, but hardly getting gashed like it seems some people are commenting on.

We're not going to give up 4.5 YPC for the season. It's just not going to happen. We might have a below average run defense overall (we did on Sunday, at least), but like I said above, if it doesn't affect the pass defense for the negative (because of schematic alterations to plug a leaky run defense), it won't matter.

Football 101, running inside the ten requires better execution because there are more players in a confined area, holes are smaller, ballcarriers are reached quicker, etc.

I'm not saying there's no problem with the run defense, but it's not like we were whipped by Dallas in the rushing attack. They averaged like 4.8 YPC and never had a carry over 12 yards. That's an efficient day running the football, but hardly getting gashed like it seems some people are commenting on.

We're not going to give up 4.5 YPC for the season. It's just not going to happen. We might have a below average run defense overall (we did on Sunday, at least), but like I said above, if it doesn't affect the pass defense for the negative (because of schematic alterations to plug a leaky run defense), it won't matter.Thanks for the Football 101. It's very unusual for a D giving up over 4.5 Yds/Att to suddenly become a monster inside the 10. Of course it's harder to run inside the 10 because your options are cut down. But the same guys on the DL are still on the field inside the 10. And they're going against the same OL that has been kicking their ass up and down the field. Fine, you can put 9 in the box, but now I've got an extra TE and a power run formation. Bottom line, the chances of a D giving up a huge yds/att number and stuffing the opponent consistently inside the 10 is slim.

We actually were whipped in the run game, but because of piss-poor coaching and Garrett being to much of a "genius" for his own good Dallas didn't take advantage.

Letting them get to the 10 is a problem as well.

Let's not forget about the LBs. In a 3-4 it's not always about which line pushes which. If the DL can hold blocks to free up the LBs, then it doesn't matter if they are "pushed around", within reason.

I'd also like to point out that the 3-4 was born out of necessity, because it's hard to find good pass rushing DEs. So, the idea is to get a few stiffs for the DL, and let all the LBs do the work. Of course your need switches from DE to NT, but in theory that is easier, because they don't need to be very athletic.

Thanks for the Football 101. It's very unusual for a D giving up over 4.5 Yds/Att to suddenly become a monster inside the 10. Of course it's harder to run inside the 10 because your options are cut down. But the same guys on the DL are still on the field inside the 10. And they're going against the same OL that has been kicking their ass up and down the field. Fine, you can put 9 in the box, but now I've got an extra TE and a power run formation. Bottom line, the chances of a D giving up a huge yds/att number and stuffing the opponent consistently inside the 10 is slim.

We actually were whipped in the run game, but because of piss-poor coaching and Garrett being to much of a "genius" for his own good Dallas didn't take advantage.You made a logical jump somewhere and I lost you. My bad.

We agree on the Cowboys' management of the game being a huge component in only getting 7 points. We didn't play "7 points" good on defense that day.

I have little concept of how you've interpreted what I've written about our run defense. I argued that:

1) We didn't give up big plays, runs or passes
2) Dallas can't play whole-field, slow-paced football the way we forced them to play
3) Other teams are going to throw on us frequently as well
4) If we can perform like we did against Dallas with just seven guys in the box, and play the run to the level we did, we'll be fine

I'm a little confused about why people are concerned about getting our run defense to post sub 4.0 YPC numbers. It'd be nice for sure to excel in all facets of the game, but if teams actually ran the ball 60% of the time against us because they thought they could sustain an offense that way, I'd be thrilled. That's good for us.

I don't remember saying anything about having a great red zone rushing defense one way or the other. I feel that if we put a lot of guys in the box to stop the run, teams are going to throw on us there too.

Letting them get to the 10 is a problem as well.Well, right, and the biggest thorn in our side on Sunday (both inside and outside of the ten) was clearly Miles Austin.

Giving up 5 yds per run is what poor defenses do. It matters if a team is smart enough to keep doing it all the way down the field. What makes you think that if the D can't stop the run all the way down the field it will magically do so inside the 10? Plus running the ball keeps the ToP up for the O and keeps the D on the field, wearing them down.

Since the 2005 season there have been 23 teams that allowed over 4.5 yds/att. Only 5 of them finished over .500 (21.7%). Of those 5, one had Peyton Manning and led the league in Passing Yards, another the same year had Drew Brees and was 2nd in the NFL in Passing Yds.

Exactly.
Football 101 on defense:
Rule # 1 stop the run.
Not to many Sb winning teams that were weak against the run. Just a fact.

Back to my point, we did not give 5 yards a carry last night because we wanted to. We were not weak against the run all in preseason and now in game 1 because of scheme or coaching decisions. We are not good against the run because some of our DL and LB's are not playing well yet.

The 2006 Colts and 2009 Saints were pretty weak versus the run. Those teams did other things well (passing offenses), but they were very good defenses overall.

I agree with you on this point.
Dallas has always been able to run the ball on us.
Thankfully Garrett is too fancy with his playcalling to stick to the run.
Our DL isn't playing well yet as unit.
I heard a stat during preseason that suggested that we were especially weak on the offensive left side.
Which would be solved if we just quit messing about and put #92 at RDE already!

-I think our ILB are on point but our OLB have to work on holding the edge.


The LB's except for good ol London Fletcher are having a tough time transitioning on the mental part. They are still learning. Even McIntosh was fooled and caught out of position a few times.
The one disadvantage we have is is our ILB's are smallish, so they can not make up physically when being walled off by a strong OL.
They have to make up for lack of size with speed and smart decision making.