Sounds to me like the game planning worked despite Irvin's show boating - Aikman went away from the double on Irvin and got a single-covered Harper for a big play. To me, scripting is starting off a game with 10 (or so) pre-called plays to evaluate how the defense responds. That being said maybe we're just having a semantics difference.
I was writing from memory last night. The actual play is at 1:53:30 or so of this video. Listen to John Madden go on and on about Norv Turner's brilliance in play calling afterward - it's quite funny when you know what actually happened. Turner is standing up in the booth because he probably has no idea why Harper has the ball on the play he called. I was wrong on the specific of my memory, San Fran reacted to the different personnel alignment in the same formation with Irvin and Harper switched, with a safety blitz coming from Aikman's left side (which normally would have been Irvin's side), which was a deviation from the SF defensive game plan. Blitz should not have come from that side on that play call formation regardless of who was running the route, the SF defensive game plan called for a safety blitz on a different offensive play calling formation with the WR's lined up as they were. They failed to recognize that Irvin and Harper had simply switched spots in the same offensive play call formation, and by blitzing the safety from that side, they left Irvin's normal route on the play call in single coverage on a slant and go. WR gets leverage on running his route, and the ball comes properly and it's off to races, which is exactly what happened. Bill Romanowski was a defensive leader for that San Fran team.
Aikman read the safety blitz properly, and jumped all over it, thinking it was a mistake by the defense (which it was) and knowing that the route would be open, and fired the ball very fast after the snap to what should have been Irvin's route on the quick slant which was open with the safety up in blitz as I just noted. Harper catches the ball on a great accurate throw, and exploits what was actually a breakdown of the defense game plan.
Had Irvin not made the unpredictable switch to the right side of the formation coming out of the huddle, Harper lines up out on the normal right side of the formation, and SF players play their D, and Aikman goes to Harper on a quick hook, San Francisco doesn't blitz and stays within their game plan, and it's 2nd down and 6 or 7 to go, with almost no time off the clock at the 24 yard line. What's the next play call there?
The interesting thing about it all, other than the irony of it all, is that running the ball there, in that game situation, clock situation with a 4 point lead, Emmitt Smith and Cowboys offensive line of the early 90s and a 4 point lead with 4 minutes to go. But that wasn't the game plan, to run on first down against the D that was stacked to stop it, and that's not what the head coach wanted to do (play it safe like that) and they stuck with their game plan on first down and 10 to go to get to the sticks, and made a game changing and history making play - because the players themselves changed up the personnel alignment.
The entire situation is like the proverbial story of the guy everybody knows that was in a terrible car wreck, and only lived because he was NOT wearing a seat belt. It's not good practice for players to be switching things up on their own on the field, just like it isn't good to go driving without a seat belt. I just thought of it as a great example of what really matters in coaching.
It wasn't the play call, it was that the Dallas players knew everything about their offense inside out, knew their scouting of the opponent and what to do, and they were fundamentally sound in executing the blocking, route running, ball exchange and throw and catch. That's where the coaching matters.
I hope this has been interesting. It is for me!!!
