- Thread starter Jon88
- Start date
- Messages
- 6,827
- Reaction score
- 1
another Romo leadership topic.
Good time to go take a dump.
Good time to go take a dump.
Then get gone!
- Messages
- 2,711
- Reaction score
- 0
Your avatar answers that question.
I guess so. It usually takes Jerry to fail at something at least four times before he learns.
- Messages
- 2,711
- Reaction score
- 0
15 years and counting....................
- Messages
- 57,895
- Reaction score
- 8,668
Bill Parcells led him to one of those playoff losses.
sbk92
2
- Messages
- 12,134
- Reaction score
- 6
He didn't even have a full year of starting under his belt.
He wasn't nearly the same QB as the guy who failed in 2007 and on.
But you have to reach to be as delusional as you are about the Cowboys. You're the same f'n dipshat who says Jerry has changed and hiring Wade Phillips was proof of it. A lifetime achievement award winning gem.
C
Cr122
Guest
Yep, because he thinks he's a quality GM.
Ridiculous. I just hope for JG's sake, he backs off.
- Messages
- 57,895
- Reaction score
- 8,668
He was a red hot passer entiering the postseason, with an incredible array of receiving talent around him. We line him up against a team trotting out several street free agents in the secondary, and the "genius" and his asswipe protege Sparano mastermind the worst game plan in the history of the NFL by choosing to throw nothing down the field the entire game.
How did he fail exactly in 2007? He got hurt at the end of the season that yr, as did Owens. If both of them were healthy we'd have never lost to the Giants, and we'd have probably beaten GB again the following week to go to the Super Bowl.
I never said any such thing. I said I understood the rationale for hiring Wade Phillips at the time. But just keep playing board ass clown and putting words into people's mouths to fit your dumbshit agenda.
- Messages
- 57,895
- Reaction score
- 8,668
JG's running the ship now, just like Parcells did.
- Messages
- 8,534
- Reaction score
- 0
you have been harping on this for years. There is a simple explanation, they were sitting in cover 4 all day and not allowing us to throw the ball, they were basically letting us run the ball.
and by the way, the passing would have looked alot different that day had witten not fumbled at the 50 and more importantly the game changing play....Terry Glenns fumble at the 1. Had glenn held onto the ball he might still be running, there was no one behind the corner and glenn had him beat but dropped the damn ball.
U have whined about this for years, I really don't understand why it doesnt sink in. We had usually 3 guys running routes with 6 defenders sittting in zone the whole game. That is why Julius had such a big game, it wasnt like jones miraculously became a great running back it was just that they had absolutely zero fear of him.
But for all the romo failed nonsense from people like in this thread, Glenn's fumble was the worst play of the game. Wittens fumble at the 50 when we had control of the game early and were driving didnt help either.
- Messages
- 57,895
- Reaction score
- 8,668
I've harped on it because it was true. Most all of the routes designed that day were short, we didnt even try to run people off downfield. And even if what you said were true (and it isnt) you still dont ignore it, Owens and Glenn were HUGE mismatches against ther secondary and we took them out of the game before the opening kickoff.
Neither of those things has anything to do with running 95% or more of the pass plays as short routes.
Jones didnt have a "big" game, he had an ok game. He ran for 112yds and had one run of almost 40. The rest of the game it was pretty much his usual.
We'd have still easily won the game had the coaches not lost their balls and coached with some nads. Parcells wanted to coach the game like it was 1990 with Jeff Hostetler against the Niners and Bills and thats why we lost. It was a lousy game plan, period.
As I have said numerous times, loved it when Jones hired Parcells, it was a HUGE move and Parcells did a good job adding alot of talen. But as the HC the guy was a failure here and that last game proved he was done as a coach.
Plymkr
2
- Messages
- 2,126
- Reaction score
- 0
And you are still the same douchebag that actually thinks the 2007 playoff loss was Romo's fault.
. Nevermind the fact that the defense stunk up the joint on what, two plays or so after the botched FG with giving up the long run by Alexander? Setting em up for more points? Naw, that was nothing, game was already over right? lol. It would of been possible for a comeback if the defense did their job. And , they didn't either.And, of course, parcells picks THE WORST time to leave his balls in his ol ladies purse and coachs/playcalls the most pussiest game known to the history of mankind. That same secondary made Grossman look like Aikman. Gimme a break.
Romo can lead this team to a SB victory. The TEAM needs to play better.
Last edited:
I'll say this about Romo being 1-3 in the playoffs - as if I haven't said it before.
As a quarterback, Romo lead us down the field for a potential game winning field goal against Seattle. And to this day, I don't think there was conclusive evidence for the refs to change the 1st down call to 4th and inches. Still... Romo lead us down the field as a QB and got us in position to win the game.
It was as a holder that he screwed up. And mind you, there was something so off about that ball that the NFL immediately made a
rule change. Even still, he still had the wherewithall to immediately pick up the ball and take off running. If we weren't employing a 120 pound kicker who could've at least gotten some semblence of a block on the safety (Babeneaux?), then Romo either runs for the first or even better, gets a touchdown.
I don't view that Seattle loss as a knock on Romo.
Against the Giants, some well thrown balls were dropped by receivers. That is documented.
On the last play of the game, the interception in the end zone, we were just outcoached. We ran two guys in routes, and went max protect (including keeping Witten in to block. Obviously, we were expecting an all out blitz.
The Giants on the other hand only rushed four, and dropped 7 into coverage. There was nowhere to go with the ball. 7 guys covering 2 receivers. There's not much of a play you can make there.
Now, the Minnesota game was just bad. We had no pass protection, and our defense didn't do their part. But Romo didn't have a good game either. I don't remember his statline, but I do know he started turning the ball over again.
The Minnesota game is the only loss that I think he played truely bad in.
As a quarterback, Romo lead us down the field for a potential game winning field goal against Seattle. And to this day, I don't think there was conclusive evidence for the refs to change the 1st down call to 4th and inches. Still... Romo lead us down the field as a QB and got us in position to win the game.
It was as a holder that he screwed up. And mind you, there was something so off about that ball that the NFL immediately made a
rule change. Even still, he still had the wherewithall to immediately pick up the ball and take off running. If we weren't employing a 120 pound kicker who could've at least gotten some semblence of a block on the safety (Babeneaux?), then Romo either runs for the first or even better, gets a touchdown.
I don't view that Seattle loss as a knock on Romo.
Against the Giants, some well thrown balls were dropped by receivers. That is documented.
On the last play of the game, the interception in the end zone, we were just outcoached. We ran two guys in routes, and went max protect (including keeping Witten in to block. Obviously, we were expecting an all out blitz.
The Giants on the other hand only rushed four, and dropped 7 into coverage. There was nowhere to go with the ball. 7 guys covering 2 receivers. There's not much of a play you can make there.
Now, the Minnesota game was just bad. We had no pass protection, and our defense didn't do their part. But Romo didn't have a good game either. I don't remember his statline, but I do know he started turning the ball over again.
The Minnesota game is the only loss that I think he played truely bad in.
- Messages
- 2,064
- Reaction score
- 0
I vote no, at least not with this team. Now if we had a defense like the '85 Bears or '00 Ravens and the rest of the supporting cast then I think he could be a good enough bus driver to get it done. But with the team we have now, he's not good enough of a leader to take charge and be the catalyst to us winning a SB.