Whether Romo can lead the team to a SB coming up

[Midswat]

You're going to send me a PM in early February 2012, asking me to delete that post, The VA. I'm not going to do it.

 

[Theebs]

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.

How is it not true? Watch the game again. They were determined not to get beat deep on the edges and not to give up a big run after catch to owens......even though he should have had one, romo hit him right in the hands and he dropped it.

The passing game totals would have been different had it not been for those two fumbles. We were rolling along and witten fumbled. Had glenn not fumbled he might have run for 50 yards. It would have changed the totals and the perception.

I never understand why you go crazy and blame sporano and parcells for the game plan. It was a good one. The players made mistakes and cost us the game. Take away a couple of those mistakes and its not a close game. Thats what happens. I dont get how you expect them to throw deep on those defensive looks, it would be asking them to do exactly what they want. Wait for romo to get jumpy and force the ball down the field.

The only times we went deep in 06 on that stretch with romo that I can remember were the games where teams were playing us man to man and blitzing, Atlanta, Washington and Arizona. Romo made those teams pay for doing that. Other than those few plays from those games I dont remember us throwing the ball down the field in 06 when romo took over, it was mostly short to intermediate stuff. The detroit flea flicker also....

We did have a huge advantage in skill at wr but if they have 5 or 6 defenders sitting waiting for you to throw them the ball, how is it wrong to not and take advantage of the openings in the zones in the middle and between the safeties and corners like they did?

 

[Theebs]

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.

The play that haunts me from the giants loss in 07 is austin running wide open for a walk in TD in the 4th qtr but columbo and barber couldnt hold their blocks.

Romo rolled right, the giants blitzed, pierce blew up barber and romo had to tuck the ball. Austin beat rw mcquarters instantly and was running down the middle of the field wide open.....He just had no time to set and throw.

Then of course the option route with crayton where crayton took a step to his right and screwed up. It would have been a game winner and it was in the same exact spot where staubach hit tony hill in 79 to beat the skins.

Oh well, I hope this group gets a crack at ny in the playoffs again before it is all over.

 

[superpunk]

How is it not true? Watch the game again. They were determined not to get beat deep on the edges and not to give up a big run after catch to owens......even though he should have had one, romo hit him right in the hands and he dropped it.

The passing game totals would have been different had it not been for those two fumbles. We were rolling along and witten fumbled. Had glenn not fumbled he might have run for 50 yards. It would have changed the totals and the perception.

I never understand why you go crazy and blame sporano and parcells for the game plan. It was a good one. The players made mistakes and cost us the game. Take away a couple of those mistakes and its not a close game. Thats what happens. I dont get how you expect them to throw deep on those defensive looks, it would be asking them to do exactly what they want. Wait for romo to get jumpy and force the ball down the field.

The only times we went deep in 06 on that stretch with romo that I can remember were the games where teams were playing us man to man and blitzing, Atlanta, Washington and Arizona. Romo made those teams pay for doing that. Other than those few plays from those games I dont remember us throwing the ball down the field in 06 when romo took over, it was mostly short to intermediate stuff. The detroit flea flicker also....

We did have a huge advantage in skill at wr but if they have 5 or 6 defenders sitting waiting for you to throw them the ball, how is it wrong to not and take advantage of the openings in the zones in the middle and between the safeties and corners like they did?

Fan gameplan. Pete Hunter is out there, you go deep, always.

 

[Midswat]

You have a great memory on these games, Theebs. Do you still put together videos?

 

[dbair1967]

How is it not true? Watch the game again. They were determined not to get beat deep on the edges and not to give up a big run after catch to owens......even though he should have had one, romo hit him right in the hands and he dropped it.

The passing game totals would have been different had it not been for those two fumbles. We were rolling along and witten fumbled. Had glenn not fumbled he might have run for 50 yards. It would have changed the totals and the perception.

I never understand why you go crazy and blame sporano and parcells for the game plan. It was a good one. The players made mistakes and cost us the game. Take away a couple of those mistakes and its not a close game. Thats what happens. I dont get how you expect them to throw deep on those defensive looks, it would be asking them to do exactly what they want. Wait for romo to get jumpy and force the ball down the field.

The only times we went deep in 06 on that stretch with romo that I can remember were the games where teams were playing us man to man and blitzing, Atlanta, Washington and Arizona. Romo made those teams pay for doing that. Other than those few plays from those games I dont remember us throwing the ball down the field in 06 when romo took over, it was mostly short to intermediate stuff. The detroit flea flicker also....

We did have a huge advantage in skill at wr but if they have 5 or 6 defenders sitting waiting for you to throw them the ball, how is it wrong to not and take advantage of the openings in the zones in the middle and between the safeties and corners like they did?

So lowly talented defensive teams should shut down explosive passing attacks all the time then, its a peice of cake.

It was an awful game plan, period and end of story. It doesnt mean his career is a flop, but that particular day he cost us a game by being too conservative.

 

[marionbarberthe4th]

Common thread in these games is the lack of talent around him really shines. Romo isnt in that elite Manning/Brady class of player where he can shrug it off and pull that shit out.

Hes good enough to continually get them there which is good enough to be satisfied. With a top 6 QB.

 

[Theebs]

So lowly talented defensive teams should shut down explosive passing attacks all the time then, its a peice of cake.

It was an awful game plan, period and end of story. It doesnt mean his career is a flop, but that particular day he cost us a game by being too conservative.

Well as always we are both to stubborn to agree!! no worries.

 

[Theebs]

You have a great memory on these games, Theebs. Do you still put together videos?

I havent in awhile, the last thing I did was last summer. I dont have the time like I used to.

I am hoping somewhere in the season to do something though.

I have watched those two playoff losses at least 25 times! That play to austin drives me crazy. Everything was perfect, they couldnt hold up on the line for one more second. Amazing how close winning and losing are.

 

[dbair1967]

Well as always we are both to stubborn to agree!! no worries.

lol

I was about to say the same thing

 

[Theebs]

lol

I was about to say the same thing

lol.

unfortunately its always going to be a loss no matter what we say!!

I really hope we get a shot at the giants again though.

 

[Clutch88]

Your avatar answers that question.

lol

 

[Plymkr]

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.

By all means. Please tell me who was the last QB that had maybe a shitty defense and no offensive players surrounding him that won the Super Bowl. Or, an NFC playoff game.? Almost EVERY team that goes all the way has one or the other. Dallas was just a middle of the pack team. Still is.

I'll wait.

 

[Cythim]

By all means. Please tell me who was the last QB that had maybe a shitty defense and no offensive players surrounding him that won the Super Bowl. Or, an NFC playoff game.? Almost EVERY team that goes all the way has one or the other. Dallas was just a middle of the pack team. Still is.

I'll wait.

Drew Brees and Peyton Manning

 

[superpunk]

actually IIRC that Saints defense under Gregg Williams was near the top of the league in turnovers and the Colts defense actually carried them in the playoffs when Manning was at his worst.

 

[Cythim]

actually IIRC that Saints defense under Gregg Williams was near the top of the league in turnovers and the Colts defense actually carried them in the playoffs when Manning was at his worst.

Stop with your logic, please. Plymkr never would've known that.

 

[Plymkr]

Drew Brees and Peyton Manning

lol.

Yep, "all by themselves" they did,

Try again.

Stop with your logic, please. Plymkr never would've known that.

lol, just proves my point.

 

[Clutch88]

Nobody here is questioning Romo's skill, agility, or knowledge of the game. All questions regarding Romo are basically about what goes on betwixt his ears. To date, there are valid reasons to suspect that he just doesn't have "It".

Bottom line fact is that he has shown so much promise and glimpses of all those things you want to see in a QB, but he has yet to "make it happen". And please don't bring defenses, coaching, stats, etc into the argument. Most of us here understand all that and are more than aware of the impact those components have on a team's success. We are taking all that into consideration, no need to waste your time trying to convince us of that.

Romo's doesn't have to "prove" himself as a player .... he has to prove himself as a player who can eclipse the game and propel a team (regardless of those other factors). He doesn't have to win a Super Bowl to become a great NFL player. He has to win a Super Bowl to cement a legacy.

 

[RoyTheHammer]

2009 we had one of the top defenses in the league and one of the best rushing attacks in the league as well and plenty of weapons for Tony on offense.

Please lets not make that excuse. He's had good teams around him.

 

[Plymkr]

2009 we had one of the top defenses in the league and one of the best rushing attacks in the league as well and plenty of weapons for Tony on offense.

Please lets not make that excuse. He's had good teams around him.

He has, Problem is the WHOLE TEAM can't put a good or great game together when it counts.