The Cowboys’ Last Defensive Snap Deserves Its Share of the Blame

Lamar Jackson needed one completion to turn Dallas’ tie into Baltimore’s winning field-goal chance. After the Cowboys sent the tying kickoff through the end zone, Jackson found Zay Flowers for 27 yards, and the Ravens had the field position to finish a 34-31 victory with the decisive kick.

That pass should remain in the Cowboys’ accountability conversation. The goal-line sequence has understandably occupied most of the postgame oxygen, but Dallas did not lose control of the situation when Brandon Aubrey made his 23-yard field goal. It lost some of it on the next defensive snap, when communication and coverage alignment failed to prevent Baltimore’s best route to range.

Brian Schottenheimer’s Tuesday explanation, published as the Cowboys returned to work in the Dallas-Fort Worth football orbit, put a name to that failure: communication. The coach said the coverage did not force Jackson to take a shorter option and accepted responsibility for the breakdown. That is a useful admission because it places the final possession somewhere beyond the offense’s play calls.

Dallas had tied the score. Its defense still had to make one last sound decision.

The field position mattered. Baltimore began at its 35 after the touchback, rather than having to navigate a long field. Schottenheimer said he would choose a short kickoff if given the moment again.

That is hindsight, not a guarantee that a different kick would have stopped Jackson or kept Baltimore from winning. Still, it identifies the first decision in a chain that left the defense with little room for error.

Then came the pass. Jackson’s connection with Flowers was not a routine five-yard escape that merely nudged the Ravens forward. It covered 27 yards in one play and transformed the final sequence.

Baltimore still needed to execute the kick, and it did; the Ravens deserve credit for producing the completion under pressure. But Dallas’ alignment and communication, by the coach’s own account, did not make Jackson earn a shorter gain.

That is the defensive counterpart to the offensive criticism. At 23 seconds, Dallas had first and goal at the Baltimore two. Schottenheimer said the call included a run option and a pass option against one-on-one coverage, Dallas chose George Pickens on the pass option.

Luke Schoonmaker’s subsequent false start pushed the offense five yards farther from the goal. On second down, Baltimore covered the pass concept, Prescott scrambled and Dallas used a timeout while still seeking a touchdown.

The third-down discussion became more complicated when Terence Steele left and Broderick Jones replaced him with 14 seconds remaining. Schottenheimer said he overcoached Prescott at that moment. Aubrey then tied the game, preserving a chance that the offense had nearly squandered through the penalty and the stalled goal-line attempts.

Those choices deserve scrutiny. The false start erased valuable field position, the timeout consumed a precious resource, and the coach’s own description suggests the quarterback received too much instruction at the critical instant. Yet the fact that Dallas survived that sequence with a tie changes the question.

Once Aubrey’s kick went through, the Cowboys had moved from offensive rescue to defensive responsibility. The next play was not an inevitable epilogue to the goal-line confusion.

There is a reasonable counterpoint: asking a defense to defend a short field against Jackson and Flowers is a difficult assignment, especially with only seconds remaining. A 27-yard completion can reflect excellent quarterback-receiver execution as much as defensive error. Baltimore’s offense earned its opportunity, and the winning field goal was not handed over by a single decision alone.

But accountability is allowed to have more than one address. Schottenheimer’s willingness to own the kickoff choice and the communication problem is more precise than treating the loss as a simple play-call indictment. Dallas’ offense created the emergency; its special teams positioned Baltimore favorably; its defense then allowed the emergency to become a winning kick.

For the Cowboys, the practical question is less whether one different call would have changed the result than whether the final defensive unit can communicate clearly when the margin is one snap. In Rio, that snap belonged to Baltimore. The 27-yard completion is why Dallas’ last defensive mistake deserves to stand beside, rather than beneath, the goal-line controversy.

Sources

Source report