Detroit Lions @ Dallas Cowboys

[Farmersfan]

This.

With the youth in the OL, new defensive scheme, injuries, etc., I think the general feeling was that if we could get to the bye 2-2 and get healthy, we would be in good shape. Well, that happened. Granted, the two wins and two losses certainly didn't go the way anyone would expect, but I think we are in a good spot. I think the really positive story that is getting buried here is that the young OL is actually playing fairly well and they should get better as the season goes along.

The Giants are playing pretty well, but how long can they maintain this with their injury situation? The Eagles have issues that I think goes to the core and are not fixable during the season. The Skins have Grossman and I don't think over the long haul he will be able to keep them too much above .500. This division is very winnable.

Let's not forget that in 2009, Romo started out that season in a rough way against the Giants. He went on to only throw 6 INTs the rest of the year and have a very efficient season. I don't know if that will happen, but he has shown that he can go extended periods of time with relatively error free play.

Let's all take a deep breath and back away from the ledge. I know it's hard after the kick to the groin we just got, but the NFL season is long and lots of crazy stuff happens. Let's just let this think play out.


You are correct. If we simply took this season and the early expectations into account I think most of us would be happy with a 2-2 record right now. But I think most of us can't help but reflect on the past and react strongly anytime we see something that indicates we are destined to see a repeat of that past. I for one have given Romo all the mulligans I am willing to give him. I am sick and tired of hearing Romo and the Cowboy leadership talking about "learning from this" and improving. The FACTS are that Romo won't "learn" anything from this. After 20+ years of playing football I'm pretty sure Tony already knows what to do or what not to do. If Tony Romo doesn't know by this point in his career that throwing 2 ints for touchdowns will get his team beat then I honestly think he is incapable of learning it. Also we have to consider that the early on expectations for this team were based on a struggling new 0-line, a weak defensive backfield and a team learning a new system with a new head coach and new D-cordinator. All 3 of those things have proven to be WAY better than expected. Our franchise QB throwing away 2 games does not off-set the unexpected good play by the young O-line or the injury riddled defense playing better than expected. If everyone knew in the preseason that the defense would be playing this well and the O-line would start out playing this well everyone would have predicted a much better record right now. Anyone who claims a 2-2 record after these first 4 games is a good thing is really, really looking for a silver lining. I see two close games where they found tooth and nail to get wins and two losses that they snatched from the jaws of victory. I can find no silver lining in our 9 year veteran, franchise QB throwing away two games that they had in the bag. Sorry!

On a brighter note: I am ranked #201 out of over 500K people in the nation in my fantasy league and moving higher every week! :cheerl:

[Txbroadcaster]

You are correct. If we simply took this season and the early expectations into account I think most of us would be happy with a 2-2 record right now. But I think most of us can't help but reflect on the past and react strongly anytime we see something that indicates we are destined to see a repeat of that past. I for one have given Romo all the mulligans I am willing to give him. I am sick and tired of hearing Romo and the Cowboy leadership talking about "learning from this" and improving. The FACTS are that Romo won't "learn" anything from this. After 20+ years of playing football I'm pretty sure Tony already knows what to do or what not to do. If Tony Romo doesn't know by this point in his career that throwing 2 ints for touchdowns will get his team beat then I honestly think he is incapable of learning it. Also we have to consider that the early on expectations for this team were based on a struggling new 0-line, a weak defensive backfield and a team learning a new system with a new head coach and new D-cordinator. All 3 of those things have proven to be WAY better than expected. Our franchise QB throwing away 2 games does not off-set the unexpected good play by the young O-line or the injury riddled defense playing better than expected. If everyone knew in the preseason that the defense would be playing this well and the O-line would start out playing this well everyone would have predicted a much better record right now. Anyone who claims a 2-2 record after these first 4 games is a good thing is really, really looking for a silver lining. I see two close games where they found tooth and nail to get wins and two losses that they snatched from the jaws of victory. I can find no silver lining in our 9 year veteran, franchise QB throwing away two games that they had in the bag. Sorry!

On a brighter note: I am ranked #201 out of over 500K people in the nation in my fantasy league and moving higher every week! :cheerl:



You bring up a great point...ok so we all assume Romo just at times especially when ahead cant help himself...love his gunslinging when behind, but when ahead he just cant seem to help himself..So is this not where Garrett needs to step in with play calling?..Mike Holgrem admitted that is what he had to do with Brett..he even joked once we have our when we are behind offense, and we have our when we are ahead offense.

[Macarthur]

You are correct. If we simply took this season and the early expectations into account I think most of us would be happy with a 2-2 record right now. But I think most of us can't help but reflect on the past and react strongly anytime we see something that indicates we are destined to see a repeat of that past. I for one have given Romo all the mulligans I am willing to give him. I am sick and tired of hearing Romo and the Cowboy leadership talking about "learning from this" and improving. The FACTS are that Romo won't "learn" anything from this. After 20+ years of playing football I'm pretty sure Tony already knows what to do or what not to do. If Tony Romo doesn't know by this point in his career that throwing 2 ints for touchdowns will get his team beat then I honestly think he is incapable of learning it. Also we have to consider that the early on expectations for this team were based on a struggling new 0-line, a weak defensive backfield and a team learning a new system with a new head coach and new D-cordinator. All 3 of those things have proven to be WAY better than expected. Our franchise QB throwing away 2 games does not off-set the unexpected good play by the young O-line or the injury riddled defense playing better than expected. If everyone knew in the preseason that the defense would be playing this well and the O-line would start out playing this well everyone would have predicted a much better record right now. Anyone who claims a 2-2 record after these first 4 games is a good thing is really, really looking for a silver lining. I see two close games where they found tooth and nail to get wins and two losses that they snatched from the jaws of victory. I can find no silver lining in our 9 year veteran, franchise QB throwing away two games that they had in the bag. Sorry!

On a brighter note: I am ranked #201 out of over 500K people in the nation in my fantasy league and moving higher every week! :cheerl:

I agree with many of your points here. However, I will slightly disagree with one. Romo has shown the ability to learn and correct mistakes. As I said earlier, he starter the 2009 season very similar with a bad game against the Giants. He went on to take care of the ball better than any season he has had. They won the division and won the first playoff game in 14 years or something like that. He did get better that season.

I do not blame you for not wanting to give him anymore mulligans. However, based on many of our conversations on here, I do not recall you EVER giving Romo a mulligan. As long as I can remember, you have been a basher.

I do think there is an interesting dynamic with Romo nationally. He is the closest thing this league has seen to Favre since, well Favre. He makes plays that are amazing and then he can make a play that you can't believe a professional QB would make. However, Favre rarely took criticism for this and he never EVER took the vitrol that Romo has taken. Why is that? Is it because he's a Cowboy?

[Eagle 1]

Sorry about getting off topic.

I hate to sound like a pessimist, but the way the Cowboys look to me we will be lucky to end up 8-8.
I hope I'm wrong.
The game the other day reminded me of the movie "The Replacements" when they were talking about quicksand. One thing went wrong (pick 6) then another, then something else went wrong......etc. Pretty soon the Cowboys were in over their head.

[Farmersfan]

That is simply not true. I have heard no less than 5 football people on the TV and radio this week say that slant was on the WR for not crossing the face of the DB. That is the cardinal rule for the WR's on slant routes. His first INT was both a bad read and throw. The last was a good read, but a poor throw.

And if you want to include previous games, you putting the one against the 49ers on Romo or Ogletree?


And I have heard just as many (including Jason Garrett) say that it should not have been thrown and considering the "game-situation" it was a bad decision. Of course the receiver should have cut in front of the defender but again that is to prevent the int because the throw was made to a spot the defender was occupying. One does not cancel out the other. Are you trying to tell us that J. Garrett designed that play for Romo to throw the ball right at the defender with the intent of the receiver cutting in front and knocking down the interception??????? Seriously? That play is designed to be thrown where ONLY the receiver can get the ball. End of story! With the position the defender had the ONLY thing the receiver could have done was get a hand in there and knock the ball down. He didn't do that and that was a mistake on his part. But the throw was also a huge mistake. That throw is intercepted 9 out of every 10 attempts in the NFL....................

[Txbroadcaster]

Sorry about getting off topic.

I hate to sound like a pessimist, but the way the Cowboys look to me we will be lucky to end up 8-8.
I hope I'm wrong.
The game the other day reminded me of the movie "The Replacements" when they were talking about quicksand. One thing went wrong (pick 6) then another, then something else went wrong......etc. Pretty soon the Cowboys were in over their head.


haha love the replacments

I see 8-8 to 10-6...first of year I felt 7-9 to 9-7

I will for now assume they lose At NE...win agianst St Louis...lose at Philly...which would set them up at 3-4 with a 5 game stretch of
Seattle, Buffalo at Washington, the Fins and at Arizona...if they can go 5-0 or 4-1 it sets up the last month with them in decent shape

[Pendragon13]

This can be debated endlessly, and yes Romo throwing into coverage led to most of the int's...but the fact remains that two of the three picks were on first down. Unless Romo is now the OC...Garrett has to take at least half the blame. Anyway, one thing for sure is that when Miles Austin gets back in the lineup Ogletree will be riding the pine....Robinson is for real.

[Macarthur]

And I have heard just as many (including Jason Garrett) say that it should not have been thrown and considering the "game-situation" it was a bad decision. Of course the receiver should have cut in front of the defender but again that is to prevent the int because the throw was made to a spot the defender was occupying. One does not cancel out the other. Are you trying to tell us that J. Garrett designed that play for Romo to throw the ball right at the defender with the intent of the receiver cutting in front and knocking down the interception??????? Seriously? That play is designed to be thrown where ONLY the receiver can get the ball. End of story! With the position the defender had the ONLY thing the receiver could have done was get a hand in there and knock the ball down. He didn't do that and that was a mistake on his part. But the throw was also a huge mistake. That throw is intercepted 9 out of every 10 attempts in the NFL....................

I don't agree.

And I asked yesterday if there were a transcript of Garrett's press conference. I heard some of it, but did not get to listen to all of it. I did not hear him address that throw. IMO, it would be very out of character for Garrett to throw a player under the bus, much less his franchise QB.

[Macarthur]

This can be debated endlessly, and yes Romo throwing into coverage led to most of the int's...but the fact remains that two of the three picks were on first down. Unless Romo is now the OC...Garrett has to take at least half the blame. Anyway, one thing for sure is that when Miles Austin gets back in the lineup Ogletree will be riding the pine....Robinson is for real.

Agree. I love Garrett the HC, but I'm having some real issues with Garrett the OC.

[Farmersfan]

I agree with many of your points here. However, I will slightly disagree with one. Romo has shown the ability to learn and correct mistakes. As I said earlier, he starter the 2009 season very similar with a bad game against the Giants. He went on to take care of the ball better than any season he has had. They won the division and won the first playoff game in 14 years or something like that. He did get better that season.

I do not blame you for not wanting to give him anymore mulligans. However, based on many of our conversations on here, I do not recall you EVER giving Romo a mulligan. As long as I can remember, you have been a basher.

I do think there is an interesting dynamic with Romo nationally. He is the closest thing this league has seen to Favre since, well Favre. He makes plays that are amazing and then he can make a play that you can't believe a professional QB would make. However, Favre rarely took criticism for this and he never EVER took the vitrol that Romo has taken. Why is that? Is it because he's a Cowboy?

I completely disagree! Romo did make some very unbelieveable plays at first. His arm was questioned but his feet earned him the starting job and a 12 million a year contract. But seriously, what "great play" has he made recently? I can think of a hand full of very good plays in recent years but nothing Favre-like since 07 or 08. At his best he pin points passes and moves the offense with a profieciecy that is very impressive. But at his worse he throws pick 6s at the least opportune times that effectively kills his teams momentum. But comparing Romo to Brett Favre is a pretty big reach.

And I have not given Romo any mulligans since the first round beat down by the Giants after beating them twice in the regular season. Because of everything leading up to that point I suddenly became a "Show Me" follower of Tony Romo. And we all know what Romo has "shown me" since that time. I also resent the implications that all the Romo bashing is somehow related to where he is playing. That is nonsense that Romo apologists always say. I don't care where Romo was playing if the team was as talented (whether true or percieved doesn't matter) and he lead them to this many underachieving seasons he would be bashed just as much there. In fact I think because of the decade of suckage before Romo took over he is given more mulligans in Dallas than he would most other places. How long would Romo have kept his job if he were the QB of those Patriot teams that Brady lead to a Superbowl win if he had under achieved with that team? I say Bill Belichick benches Romo a long time ago...............................

[Macarthur]

I completely disagree! Romo did make some very unbelieveable plays at first. His arm was questioned but his feet earned him the starting job and a 12 million a year contract. But seriously, what "great play" has he made recently? I can think of a hand full of very good plays in recent years but nothing Favre-like since 07 or 08. At his best he pin points passes and moves the offense with a profieciecy that is very impressive. But at his worse he throws pick 6s at the least opportune times that effectively kills his teams momentum. But comparing Romo to Brett Favre is a pretty big reach.

You must watch different games than I. He pretty regularly makes some pretty amazing throws. And you combine that with his good feet and ability to make plays when things break down, he has a very unique skill set.



And I have not given Romo any mulligans since the first round beat down by the Giants after beating them twice in the regular season. Because of everything leading up to that point I suddenly became a "Show Me" follower of Tony Romo. And we all know what Romo has "shown me" since that time.

Wow. His first full year as a starter and a game in which he made two great throws that Patrick Crayton totally screwed the pooch.

I rest my case.


I also resent the implications that all the Romo bashing is somehow related to where he is playing. That is nonsense that Romo apologists always say. I don't care where Romo was playing if the team was as talented (whether true or percieved doesn't matter) and he lead them to this many underachieving seasons he would be bashed just as much there. In fact I think because of the decade of suckage before Romo took over he is given more mulligans in Dallas than he would most other places. How long would Romo have kept his job if he were the QB of those Patriot teams that Brady lead to a Superbowl win if he had under achieved with that team? I say Bill Belichick benches Romo a long time ago...............................

You and I are simply not going to see eye to eye on this. I think if you don't believe Romo is treated differently than other QBs, you are living in a dream world. What other QB has a segment almost every day dedicated to him on that 1st and 10 show or whatever the hell that is on ESPN?

[Farmersfan]

I don't agree.

And I asked yesterday if there were a transcript of Garrett's press conference. I heard some of it, but did not get to listen to all of it. I did not hear him address that throw. IMO, it would be very out of character for Garrett to throw a player under the bus, much less his franchise QB.



Jason Garrett would never throw his players under the bus and he didn't on this occasion either. It appears I misquoted Garrett during his press conference. He didn't like the other two interceptions but basically said you have to throw the ball on the slant pattern. I don't understand his logic on that and certainly disagree with it. But if he's happy with his QB throwing the ball to the defender then he will have to live with the results.

http://espn.go.com/blog/dallas/cowboys/post/_/id/4684790/jason-garrett-looks-back-at-the-picks

[Txbroadcaster]

[QUOTE=Farmersfan;1616749]I completely disagree! Romo did make some very unbelieveable plays at first. His arm was questioned but his feet earned him the starting job and a 12 million a year contract. But seriously, what "great play" has he made recently? I can think of a hand full of very good plays in recent years but nothing Favre-like since 07 or 08. At his best he pin points passes and moves the offense with a profieciecy that is very impressive. But at his worse he throws pick 6s at the least opportune times that effectively kills his teams momentum. But comparing Romo to Brett Favre is a pretty big reach.
QUOTE]

i guess you dont remember the game winning score agianst Washington in 09...or the game saving throw agianst Washington just last week...or the TD throw agianst Atlanta in 09 where he spun out of two sacks ( those just off the top of my head)

[Macarthur]

Jason Garrett would never throw his players under the bus and he didn't on this occasion either. It appears I misquoted Garrett during his press conference. He didn't like the other two interceptions but basically said you have to throw the ball on the slant pattern. I don't understand his logic on that and certainly disagree with it. But if he's happy with his QB throwing the ball to the defender then he will have to live with the results.

http://espn.go.com/blog/dallas/cowboys/post/_/id/4684790/jason-garrett-looks-back-at-the-picks

I think the point is Farmer that the QB, on that pattern, has to throw the ball to a spot well before the route and the defender have committed. In many cases, there is no way for the QB to know how the play will develop. He simply has to trust that the WR will get to the spot. Now, I think if the defender is up on the WR at the LOS and clearly has an inside position, like they do many times on the goalline, then there is a pre-snap read. That certainly falls into the category of no throw.

I did play QB above the HS level so I can relate to what Romo sees on that play. I'm not saying that I was anywhere close to the professional level, but I think actually playing the position of QB gives you a perspective on these things that most people can never have.

[Macarthur]

[QUOTE=Farmersfan;1616749]I completely disagree! Romo did make some very unbelieveable plays at first. His arm was questioned but his feet earned him the starting job and a 12 million a year contract. But seriously, what "great play" has he made recently? I can think of a hand full of very good plays in recent years but nothing Favre-like since 07 or 08. At his best he pin points passes and moves the offense with a profieciecy that is very impressive. But at his worse he throws pick 6s at the least opportune times that effectively kills his teams momentum. But comparing Romo to Brett Favre is a pretty big reach.
QUOTE]

i guess you dont remember the game winning score agianst Washington in 09...or the game saving throw agianst Washington just last week...or the TD throw agianst Atlanta in 09 where he spun out of two sacks ( those just off the top of my head)

Dont' forget that pass to Witten aginst the Giants in 09, I think. Incredible throw.

[Txbroadcaster]

Doug Gotlieb on ESPN radio brings up a point...Romo is a throwback QB to the 90's where turnovers are not as OMG big deal as now...interesting point

[Farmersfan]

You bring up a great point...ok so we all assume Romo just at times especially when ahead cant help himself...love his gunslinging when behind, but when ahead he just cant seem to help himself..So is this not where Garrett needs to step in with play calling?..Mike Holgrem admitted that is what he had to do with Brett..he even joked once we have our when we are behind offense, and we have our when we are ahead offense.



I think we all can agree with this. I don't understand why the Cowboys weren't running the ball more on Sunday. They averaged 4.2 yards a rush even after the Lions got all the momentum and started playing inspired ball. If they continue to run when the game is 27-3 I can guarantee they have more success running against a "Beat" team than they did once the Lions started playing inspired again. Once Romo gave the Lions some hope with the pick sixes then it became much tougher to run.............. They were their own worst enemy on Sunday.

[Macarthur]

I think we all can agree with this. I don't understand why the Cowboys weren't running the ball more on Sunday. They averaged 4.2 yards a rush even after the Lions got all the momentum and started playing inspired ball. If they continue to run when the game is 27-3 I can guarantee they have more success running against a "Beat" team than they did once the Lions started playing inspired again. Once Romo gave the Lions some hope with the pick sixes then it became much tougher to run.............. They were their own worst enemy on Sunday.

Yes. I'm more upset with the playcalling than I am the execution.

Even if you just run the ball 3 times and gain nothing, Detroit doesn't have enough time to win that game. Even if you don't want to run everytime, they seemingly worked very hard on screen passes in training camp. How about mixing in a screen pass?

[Farmersfan]

I think the point is Farmer that the QB, on that pattern, has to throw the ball to a spot well before the route and the defender have committed. In many cases, there is no way for the QB to know how the play will develop. He simply has to trust that the WR will get to the spot. Now, I think if the defender is up on the WR at the LOS and clearly has an inside position, like they do many times on the goalline, then there is a pre-snap read. That certainly falls into the category of no throw.

I did play QB above the HS level so I can relate to what Romo sees on that play. I'm not saying that I was anywhere close to the professional level, but I think actually playing the position of QB gives you a perspective on these things that most people can never have.


Yea, we will just have to disagree. I would not classify a 6 yard slant pass as a timing route. Where the receiver and the defender are positioned when the ball is thrown is where they will be when the ball is received. I don't think they have enough time to make any adjustments or decisions on a slant pass once the ball is thrown. You played QB. How far would you have to lead a receiver on a 6 yard slant? And how long do you think the ball is in the air on a 6 yard slant?

[Farmersfan]

[QUOTE=Farmersfan;1616749]I completely disagree! Romo did make some very unbelieveable plays at first. His arm was questioned but his feet earned him the starting job and a 12 million a year contract. But seriously, what "great play" has he made recently? I can think of a hand full of very good plays in recent years but nothing Favre-like since 07 or 08. At his best he pin points passes and moves the offense with a profieciecy that is very impressive. But at his worse he throws pick 6s at the least opportune times that effectively kills his teams momentum. But comparing Romo to Brett Favre is a pretty big reach.
QUOTE]

i guess you dont remember the game winning score agianst Washington in 09...or the game saving throw agianst Washington just last week...or the TD throw agianst Atlanta in 09 where he spun out of two sacks ( those just off the top of my head)


I claim I can think of "A hand full" and you counter with 3 plays in the last 3 years to try to prove me wrong???? Seriously?
Romo has played 4 games so far this season. I can remember a snap over his head that he retrieved and threw for a 1st down that would be "Favre Like". There might be more but I can't think of any. Romo has made some really good throws but we aren't talking about normal QB stuff. We are talking about plays that make people compare him to Brett Favre and make people say things like "you have to take the bad with the good" or "That's what you get with a gunslinger". See, I don't even consider Romo a gunslinger anymore. He has basically become a pocket passer with very little mobility who is prone to making some really, really boneheaded plays.

[Macarthur]

Yea, we will just have to disagree. I would not classify a 6 yard slant pass as a timing route.

Um, probably not a timing route in the sense that we commonly think of one. Where the QB makes a count in his head and releases the ball to a point before the WR has made a break. That's what we think of as a traditional timing route. However, on the slant, there is timing involved. For the most part, a QB has to take those three steps and let it fly, so in that sense, it involves timing, also.


Where the receiver and the defender are positioned when the ball is thrown is where they will be when the ball is received. I don't think they have enough time to make any adjustments or decisions on a slant pass once the ball is thrown.

I'm not sure I follow what you are saying here. There are different slants. There are some that the WR has to get a certain depth. There are some that as soon as they release off the LOS, they are slanting inside. So really, the defender and WR are not in the same position as the snap of the ball. And you are right that they generally do not have the same amount of time to make route adjustments on a quick slant as they would deeper routes, but they still adjust somewhat. In reference to that play, if Robinson had crashed down harder, he most likely would have gotten a pass interference call. The CB was battling for position and the WR as too passive on his route. It was a good play by the CB, but if the WR does his job, it's most likely an incompletion and quite possibly an interference call.


You played QB. How far would you have to lead a receiver on a 6 yard slant? And how long do you think the ball is in the air on a 6 yard slant?

Obviously, it depends on the speed of the WR but probably 2 to 2.5 strides. And to your last question, not long at all. As soon as Romo hits his back foot, the ball is gone. And many times (don't remember if Romo did this) the QB will look to the middle of the field to keep a S or LB out of the throwing lane and once he hits that back foot, the ball is gone. There is no read - He is simply trusting that the WR is going to beat the DB to the spot.

[Txbroadcaster]

[QUOTE=Txbroadcaster;1616754]


I claim I can think of "A hand full" and you counter with 3 plays in the last 3 years to try to prove me wrong???? Seriously?
Romo has played 4 games so far this season. I can remember a snap over his head that he retrieved and threw for a 1st down that would be "Favre Like". There might be more but I can't think of any. Romo has made some really good throws but we aren't talking about normal QB stuff. We are talking about plays that make people compare him to Brett Favre and make people say things like "you have to take the bad with the good" or "That's what you get with a gunslinger". See, I don't even consider Romo a gunslinger anymore. He has basically become a pocket passer with very little mobility who is prone to making some really, really boneheaded plays.

So for you Romo can only be a gunslinger if he is making those plays every game? I am sorry I dont see the very little mobility..if so he would have been sacked a 100 times last year alone..heck..even look at the last INT..a non mobile QB never makes that throw because Romo had to avoid the rush...I still think righ or wrong, you expect Romo to be superman ever play with no mistakes.

[Macarthur]

OK, just watched it on youtube.

Romo is in the shotgun (again, why hell are we in the shotgun and throwing on first down when we're up like that? :crying: )

Witten is on the same side as Robinson and runs a skinny post to hold the safety. Romo's shoulders are perpendicular to the LOS and looking right at Witten. The coverage is drawn to witten (safety) and romo quickly resets his feet and shoulders and fires the ball to Robinson. Robinson and the DB are battling, and frankly after seeing it again, the ref could have very easily called the DB for interference on that play. HE was all over Robinson. Robinson has to be stronger on his route. Romo basically made a 'blind' throw to where WR was supposed to be. After watching this a couple of times, I'm even more convinced that Romo was not at fault on this one. However, I still have to ask why we're in the shotgun and throwing on first down when we were up 17 points. :mad:

[Old Tiger]

Troy needs to quit being a wuss and get back on the field!

[Farmersfan]

[QUOTE=Farmersfan;1616774]

So for you Romo can only be a gunslinger if he is making those plays every game? I am sorry I dont see the very little mobility..if so he would have been sacked a 100 times last year alone..heck..even look at the last INT..a non mobile QB never makes that throw because Romo had to avoid the rush...I still think righ or wrong, you expect Romo to be superman ever play with no mistakes.



I guess this means Kitna is also a very mobile QB since he wasn't sacked 100 times last season, right? :crazy:

And I don't expect Romo to be Superman or perfect. But I do expect him to NOT be Chad Hutchinson!

[GrTigers6]

[QUOTE=Txbroadcaster;1616782]



I guess this means Kitna is also a very mobile QB since he wasn't sacked 100 times last season, right? :crazy:

And I don't expect Romo to be Superman or perfect. But I do expect him to NOT be Chad Hutchinson!WOW! Chad Hutchinson? Thats the worse insult you have come up with for Romo.:D:1omg!:
Why dont you throw , Leaf, Carter and Babe in there as well.:)

[Farmersfan]

OK, just watched it on youtube.

Romo is in the shotgun (again, why hell are we in the shotgun and throwing on first down when we're up like that? :crying: )

Witten is on the same side as Robinson and runs a skinny post to hold the safety. Romo's shoulders are perpendicular to the LOS and looking right at Witten. The coverage is drawn to witten (safety) and romo quickly resets his feet and shoulders and fires the ball to Robinson. Robinson and the DB are battling, and frankly after seeing it again, the ref could have very easily called the DB for interference on that play. HE was all over Robinson. Robinson has to be stronger on his route. Romo basically made a 'blind' throw to where WR was supposed to be. After watching this a couple of times, I'm even more convinced that Romo was not at fault on this one. However, I still have to ask why we're in the shotgun and throwing on first down when we were up 17 points. :mad:



Did Romo make a blind throw to where the receiver was "Supposed" to be or where he was? Because the defender was also there! Perhaps the term "Blind throw" indicates a mistake. I have a pretty strong hunch that a "blind throw" is not part of any NFL team's playbook. But that's just me. Fun discussion though...........

[Trashman]

This.

With the youth in the OL, new defensive scheme, injuries, etc., I think the general feeling was that if we could get to the bye 2-2 and get healthy, we would be in good shape. Well, that happened. Granted, the two wins and two losses certainly didn't go the way anyone would expect, but I think we are in a good spot. I think the really positive story that is getting buried here is that the young OL is actually playing fairly well and they should get better as the season goes along.

The Giants are playing pretty well, but how long can they maintain this with their injury situation? The Eagles have issues that I think goes to the core and are not fixable during the season. The Skins have Grossman and I don't think over the long haul he will be able to keep them too much above .500. This division is very winnable.

Let's not forget that in 2009, Romo started out that season in a rough way against the Giants. He went on to only throw 6 INTs the rest of the year and have a very efficient season. I don't know if that will happen, but he has shown that he can go extended periods of time with relatively error free play.

Let's all take a deep breath and back away from the ledge. I know it's hard after the kick to the groin we just got, but the NFL season is long and lots of crazy stuff happens. Let's just let this think play out.

:iagree::clap::clap::clap:

[LionFan72]

What choice do we really have? Dallas may win the East with Romo, but I see him out for the season again! 8-8 will be tough unless the defense wins a couple of games.

[Farmersfan]

OK, just watched it on youtube.

Romo is in the shotgun (again, why hell are we in the shotgun and throwing on first down when we're up like that? :crying: )

Witten is on the same side as Robinson and runs a skinny post to hold the safety. Romo's shoulders are perpendicular to the LOS and looking right at Witten. The coverage is drawn to witten (safety) and romo quickly resets his feet and shoulders and fires the ball to Robinson. Robinson and the DB are battling, and frankly after seeing it again, the ref could have very easily called the DB for interference on that play. HE was all over Robinson. Robinson has to be stronger on his route. Romo basically made a 'blind' throw to where WR was supposed to be. After watching this a couple of times, I'm even more convinced that Romo was not at fault on this one. However, I still have to ask why we're in the shotgun and throwing on first down when we were up 17 points. :mad:


Here is a link for everyone to watch it for themselves. Go to the right side column that says scoring summary and select "Watch highlight" for the C. Huston interception. I do agree this should have been called pass interference by the defender because he reaches out and grabs Robinson but it is also very obvious that Romo threw that pass while the receiver was completely cut off and covered and Romo was looking directly at this BEFORE he pulled the trigger. I'm thinking the receiver on this play was supposed to go 5 yards on the route and the defender cut him off at 4 yards. And the throw was made too far inside which put it out of the receiver's reach. But regardless the case the throw CANNOT be made with that kind of coverage.
Also it was a 3rd & 2 play, not a 1st down throw.

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2011100203/2011/REG4/lions@cowboys#menu=highlights%7CcontentId%3A09000d 5d822c071c&tab=analyze

[Txbroadcaster]

Here is a link for everyone to watch it for themselves. Go to the right side column that says scoring summary and select "Watch highlight" for the C. Huston interception. I do agree this should have been called pass interference by the defender because he reaches out and grabs Robinson but it is also very obvious that Romo threw that pass while the receiver was completely cut off and covered and Romo was looking directly at this BEFORE he pulled the trigger. I'm thinking the receiver on this play was supposed to go 5 yards on the route and the defender cut him off at 4 yards. And the throw was made too far inside which put it out of the receiver's reach. But regardless the case the throw CANNOT be made with that kind of coverage.
Also it was a 3rd & 2 play, not a 1st down throw.

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2011100203/2011/REG4/lions@cowboys#menu=highlights%7CcontentId%3A09000d 5d822c071c&tab=analyze


I know it is the offense..but the tackling on both ints are so bad it is just stupid.


I still see the slant int on the WR..if he just continues to go across the CB at worst it is incomplete

[Farmersfan]

I know it is the offense..but the tackling on both ints are so bad it is just stupid.


I still see the slant int on the WR..if he just continues to go across the CB at worst it is incomplete


yea I agree with that too TXB. The difference I guess is that I don't excuse the throw because of what the receiver does or doesn't do. Especially when it's obvious the QB was looking directly at the blanket coverage before he threw. Not just when it's Romo but any QB.

[Farmersfan]

I know it is the offense..but the tackling on both ints are so bad it is just stupid.




Yea the tackling was bad and I guess we could blame the other offensive players for the loss because they didn't tackle the guy that just got handed a pick 6 by our QB! But that's exactly like saying the fault belongs to the receiver because he didn't knock down the bad throw/decision by the QB or the blame goes on the defense for not completely shutting out a top 3 scoring offense for a full 60 minutes. (even though they did shut them out for 40 of those 60 mintues). Of course you have also maintained for a couple of years now that the #2 rated defense in 09' wasn't good enough to win it all because they didn't just give free points to the offense even though they prevented points by the other team better than any other Cowboy's defense has ever done. Just saying that at some point the "Buck" has to stop!

[regaleagle]

I love the football discussion going on here, agreement and disagreement of philosophy, semantics, and the like. However, in the grand scheme of things, it all doesn't really matter...it's spilled milk. What does matter is what options the Cowboys have going forward this season. Do you tank Romo and the season just to make a statement or change, or do you continue with the plan and allow Romo to try and right the ship? Is the ship sinking, or is it still afloat? Can Romo still lead the team, or is there a better leader on the bench? Will JJ make changes this early in the season? The answers seem pretty obvious to me. The best thing that can happen to this team right now is for Romo to recieve support from the loyal fan base, not destructive critiscism. It bodes well for none of us that are Cowboys supporters, and certainly not for the team either.

[Macarthur]

Here is a link for everyone to watch it for themselves. Go to the right side column that says scoring summary and select "Watch highlight" for the C. Huston interception. I do agree this should have been called pass interference by the defender because he reaches out and grabs Robinson but it is also very obvious that Romo threw that pass while the receiver was completely cut off and covered and Romo was looking directly at this BEFORE he pulled the trigger. I'm thinking the receiver on this play was supposed to go 5 yards on the route and the defender cut him off at 4 yards. And the throw was made too far inside which put it out of the receiver's reach. But regardless the case the throw CANNOT be made with that kind of coverage.
Also it was a 3rd & 2 play, not a 1st down throw.

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2011100203/2011/REG4/lions@cowboys#menu=highlights%7CcontentId%3A09000d 5d822c071c&tab=analyze

We'll just have to disagree. I think QB's in the NFL make throws all the time with that tight of coverage.

I remember hearing an interview with Aikman and he said the biggest adjustment for him going from college to the pros was the definition of what an open WR is in the NFL. EArly on, he would hold the ball because the WR was not 'open'. The coaches kept telling him that is open in the NFL, son! It doesn't get any better than that.

And the term 'blind throw' is something i made up and it's probably not a good one. what I meant by it was that he sets his feet and is already in the throwing motion and throwing to a spot and has probably not had time to 'analyze' who has greater position. He simply has faith that his WR is going to beat the DB to the spot.

[Macarthur]

For the record, Brian Broaddus says the WR was beaten by the CB and even Aikman said on the telecast that as a QB, you never expect that pass to get picked because you expect the WR to fight to get inside.

[4x100jackets]

Dallas sucks bottom line........next topic please.............

[Sweetwater Red]

http://espn.go.com/espn/page2/story/_/id/7056133/tmq-says-nfl-comebacks-losing-team-lost-lead

Victories, even comebacks, are earned

So far the season is a fabulous one if you like comebacks. On Sunday, the Detroit Lions came back from down 27-3 to the Dallas Cowboys, and the San Francisco 49ers came back from down 23-3 to the Philadelphia Eagles. The Jersey/A Giants came back from a 27-17 deficit with five minutes remaining, and the Cincinnati Bengals came back from a 17-3 margin at halftime. This, following a week in which the Buffalo Bills came back from a 21-point deficit to the mighty New England Patriots, and Detroit came back from a 20-point halftime deficit. Sunday made the Lions the first NFL team ever to rally from deficits of 20 points or more in consecutive weeks.


Comebacks are sheer excitement. But please don't say they happen because the vanquished team "blew the lead." A football game lasts 60 minutes. Who's ahead early, and by how much, is irrelevant to the outcome. All that matters is who's ahead on the final play.


Saying a team that lost after mounting a nice margin "blew the lead" is among the dumbest clichés in sports, failing to grant fair notice to the comeback side. Just because you're ahead early, even if by 20 points, does not confer some kind of mystical right to victory. Being ahead by a big margin certainly doesn't mean you are the better team! The assumption seems to be that if a team jumps to a big lead, then it deserves to win. The team that plays the best overall deserves to win.


In every one of these recent NFL instances -- or many other cases, such as Alabama losing to Auburn last season after taking a 24-0 lead -- the team that "blew" the lead was outplayed, and outcoached, overall by the victor. The loser didn't blow the game, the victor won.


Plus bear in mind -- often when a team jumps to a big lead, the opponent has just as much time available to reply. In the Detroit-Minnesota contest in Week 3, it took the Minnesota Vikings the first 30 minutes to build a 20-0 lead: meaning the Lions had 30 minutes to do something about it. Alabama was ahead 24-0 late in the second quarter; Auburn had as much time to come back as Alabama used to get ahead. Leads are not blown: victories are earned.


On Sunday, Dallas surged ahead of Detroit 27-3, and then the Cowboys performed poorly for the remainder of the game while the Lions performed well. That Detroit played well at the end means just as much as Dallas playing well early. Tony Romo threw three interceptions after the Cowboys built their big lead, two returned for touchdowns. And just why was he heave-hoeing the ball in the first place, with Dallas leading big and needing to grind the clock? Ahead 27-10 late in the third quarter, facing third-and-2, Romo threw a pick-six. He should have handed off -- and that's on the coach. In the second half, Jason Garrett was outcoached by Jim Schwartz.


As for the Eagles, they fumbled at the San Francisco 1-yard line, allowed a field-goal attempt to be blocked, and missed another field goal. In the second half, Philadelphia played poorly on defense. Initially, the Philadelphia Heat had a big lead. By the time 60 minutes had passed, San Francisco had been the better team.


Andy Reid and his assistants were significantly outcoached by Jim Harbaugh and his assistants. Philadelphia leading 23-3 midway through the third quarter, Eagles coaches called a seven-man blitz, including a safety. Easy 30-yard touchdown pass to a receiver in the space the safety vacated, and the 49ers' comeback was on. Less than a year ago, Philadelphia staged a monster comeback against Jersey/A, the comeback triggered when Giants' coaches began calling risky seven-man blitzes despite a big lead. Didn't Philadelphia coaches learn anything from that game? Apparently not.


As for the bizarre Ronnie Brown fumble at the 1, Brown says it was a called passing play. Reid challenged the fumble ruling, surely because he knew the play was supposed to be a pass, so was hoping the result was an incompletion. (The Game Book calls the result a fumble; to TMQ, it appeared a backward pass; referee Alberto Riveron simply announced San Francisco ball and didn't say why.) Philadelphia leads 10-3 and has third-and-goal on the Niners' 1. In comes a heavy package with two tight ends and an extra offensive lineman. Tight end Brent Celek went into the left flat. Brown was supposed to sweep left and throw to him. Instead San Francisco "blew up" the play: Brown was hit immediately, panicked, and lost the ball. But why call a trick play pass from the 1 with a lead? Rush, and if unsuccessful, rush again or kick for a field goal. Brown came into the game 4-for-12 passing on his career, and the play was only his second touch of the contest. Putting him cold into a high-pressure passing situation was a coaching error.


As for the Giants' comeback against the Arizona Cardinals, Jersey/B played significantly better than the hosts at the endgame. Afterward, Arizona players and coaches were blaming the zebras because they ruled Victor Cruz down, by virtue of not trying to advance, when he went to the ground, released the ball and jumped up to return to the huddle. TMQ thought Cruz was down and the officials correct. But don't blame the zebras, play better! Coach better!


Arizona leading 27-17 with four minutes remaining, the home team ran an all-out seven-man blitz led to an easy-26 yard completion to the Cactus Wrens' 2. (Note: the cardinal is not indigenous to Arizona, whose state bird is the cactus wren.) Now leading 27-24 with 2:46 remaining, Arizona had the Giants out of timeouts. Another seven-man blitz -- easy-looking touchdown pass. Arizona got deep into Jersey/A territory at the endgame, but gave up its fourth sack of the day -- Kevin Kolb was also hit numerous times -- and the drive petered out. The Cardinals didn't blow a lead, the Giants played better when it counted: especially in the fourth quarter when both Giants lines outperformed both Arizona lines.


Tuesday Morning Quarterback would be happy if every football game was a last-second comeback win, there's nothing more exciting in sports. Just don't say the loser "blew the lead."

[Macarthur]

Dallas sucks bottom line........next topic please.............

Don't click the thread.

[Farmersfan]

I love the football discussion going on here, agreement and disagreement of philosophy, semantics, and the like. However, in the grand scheme of things, it all doesn't really matter...it's spilled milk. What does matter is what options the Cowboys have going forward this season. Do you tank Romo and the season just to make a statement or change, or do you continue with the plan and allow Romo to try and right the ship? Is the ship sinking, or is it still afloat? Can Romo still lead the team, or is there a better leader on the bench? Will JJ make changes this early in the season? The answers seem pretty obvious to me. The best thing that can happen to this team right now is for Romo to recieve support from the loyal fan base, not destructive critiscism. It bodes well for none of us that are Cowboys supporters, and certainly not for the team either.



All very good points if your only concern is what's best for this team RIGHT NOW! I really don't see any better options than Romo at the moment. But some of us have long term expectations for this team. It's been mentioned before but I don't think Romo should have any more mulligans available to him. And a couple more games like Sundays I think you will see that most of the Cowboy nation feels the exact same way.

[Farmersfan]

http://espn.go.com/espn/page2/story/_/id/7056133/tmq-says-nfl-comebacks-losing-team-lost-lead

Victories, even comebacks, are earned

So far the season is a fabulous one if you like comebacks. On Sunday, the Detroit Lions came back from down 27-3 to the Dallas Cowboys, and the San Francisco 49ers came back from down 23-3 to the Philadelphia Eagles. The Jersey/A Giants came back from a 27-17 deficit with five minutes remaining, and the Cincinnati Bengals came back from a 17-3 margin at halftime. This, following a week in which the Buffalo Bills came back from a 21-point deficit to the mighty New England Patriots, and Detroit came back from a 20-point halftime deficit. Sunday made the Lions the first NFL team ever to rally from deficits of 20 points or more in consecutive weeks.


Comebacks are sheer excitement. But please don't say they happen because the vanquished team "blew the lead." A football game lasts 60 minutes. Who's ahead early, and by how much, is irrelevant to the outcome. All that matters is who's ahead on the final play.


Saying a team that lost after mounting a nice margin "blew the lead" is among the dumbest clichés in sports, failing to grant fair notice to the comeback side. Just because you're ahead early, even if by 20 points, does not confer some kind of mystical right to victory. Being ahead by a big margin certainly doesn't mean you are the better team! The assumption seems to be that if a team jumps to a big lead, then it deserves to win. The team that plays the best overall deserves to win.


In every one of these recent NFL instances -- or many other cases, such as Alabama losing to Auburn last season after taking a 24-0 lead -- the team that "blew" the lead was outplayed, and outcoached, overall by the victor. The loser didn't blow the game, the victor won.


Plus bear in mind -- often when a team jumps to a big lead, the opponent has just as much time available to reply. In the Detroit-Minnesota contest in Week 3, it took the Minnesota Vikings the first 30 minutes to build a 20-0 lead: meaning the Lions had 30 minutes to do something about it. Alabama was ahead 24-0 late in the second quarter; Auburn had as much time to come back as Alabama used to get ahead. Leads are not blown: victories are earned.


On Sunday, Dallas surged ahead of Detroit 27-3, and then the Cowboys performed poorly for the remainder of the game while the Lions performed well. That Detroit played well at the end means just as much as Dallas playing well early. Tony Romo threw three interceptions after the Cowboys built their big lead, two returned for touchdowns. And just why was he heave-hoeing the ball in the first place, with Dallas leading big and needing to grind the clock? Ahead 27-10 late in the third quarter, facing third-and-2, Romo threw a pick-six. He should have handed off -- and that's on the coach. In the second half, Jason Garrett was outcoached by Jim Schwartz.


As for the Eagles, they fumbled at the San Francisco 1-yard line, allowed a field-goal attempt to be blocked, and missed another field goal. In the second half, Philadelphia played poorly on defense. Initially, the Philadelphia Heat had a big lead. By the time 60 minutes had passed, San Francisco had been the better team.


Andy Reid and his assistants were significantly outcoached by Jim Harbaugh and his assistants. Philadelphia leading 23-3 midway through the third quarter, Eagles coaches called a seven-man blitz, including a safety. Easy 30-yard touchdown pass to a receiver in the space the safety vacated, and the 49ers' comeback was on. Less than a year ago, Philadelphia staged a monster comeback against Jersey/A, the comeback triggered when Giants' coaches began calling risky seven-man blitzes despite a big lead. Didn't Philadelphia coaches learn anything from that game? Apparently not.


As for the bizarre Ronnie Brown fumble at the 1, Brown says it was a called passing play. Reid challenged the fumble ruling, surely because he knew the play was supposed to be a pass, so was hoping the result was an incompletion. (The Game Book calls the result a fumble; to TMQ, it appeared a backward pass; referee Alberto Riveron simply announced San Francisco ball and didn't say why.) Philadelphia leads 10-3 and has third-and-goal on the Niners' 1. In comes a heavy package with two tight ends and an extra offensive lineman. Tight end Brent Celek went into the left flat. Brown was supposed to sweep left and throw to him. Instead San Francisco "blew up" the play: Brown was hit immediately, panicked, and lost the ball. But why call a trick play pass from the 1 with a lead? Rush, and if unsuccessful, rush again or kick for a field goal. Brown came into the game 4-for-12 passing on his career, and the play was only his second touch of the contest. Putting him cold into a high-pressure passing situation was a coaching error.


As for the Giants' comeback against the Arizona Cardinals, Jersey/B played significantly better than the hosts at the endgame. Afterward, Arizona players and coaches were blaming the zebras because they ruled Victor Cruz down, by virtue of not trying to advance, when he went to the ground, released the ball and jumped up to return to the huddle. TMQ thought Cruz was down and the officials correct. But don't blame the zebras, play better! Coach better!


Arizona leading 27-17 with four minutes remaining, the home team ran an all-out seven-man blitz led to an easy-26 yard completion to the Cactus Wrens' 2. (Note: the cardinal is not indigenous to Arizona, whose state bird is the cactus wren.) Now leading 27-24 with 2:46 remaining, Arizona had the Giants out of timeouts. Another seven-man blitz -- easy-looking touchdown pass. Arizona got deep into Jersey/A territory at the endgame, but gave up its fourth sack of the day -- Kevin Kolb was also hit numerous times -- and the drive petered out. The Cardinals didn't blow a lead, the Giants played better when it counted: especially in the fourth quarter when both Giants lines outperformed both Arizona lines.


Tuesday Morning Quarterback would be happy if every football game was a last-second comeback win, there's nothing more exciting in sports. Just don't say the loser "blew the lead."



What a great article! Now can we all sit and sing Kum ba yah and roast marshmallows? :sleeping:

The thing that this article is failing to take into consideration is momentum and intensity. Two teams start the game on a even keel. If one team gains a huge advantage it will kill the momentum of the other team. In MOST circumstances it takes something big to happen to give new life back to the team that essentually is already beat. On Sunday the Lions were toast. Without the Romo mistakes the Lions could have played their best football ever and they still don't beat the Cowboys. That's why it has always been referred to as "Putting them out of their misery" or "Going for the kill"!