1. Welcome to CowboysZone!  Join us!  Come on!  You know you want to!

Shanahan comment about Romo

Discussion in 'Fan Zone' started by AmberBeer, Oct 9, 2013.

  1. Cebrin

    Cebrin Well-Known Member

    808 Messages
    468 Likes Received
    Int's turn in to points. Mannings turnover gave us points too. Doesn't matter when you turn it over, it still can cost you the game. They had more turnovers than we did and we still lost because our Defense is atrocious.
    Red Dragon likes this.
  2. Ring Leader

    Ring Leader Active Member

    870 Messages
    182 Likes Received
    Eli got it done? Wow. He went 6 straight series at the end of that game without points, the San Fran DBs dropped 1 or possibly two easy picks, and it took a SF special teams gaff deep in their own territory to set up the game winning field goal (which had nothing to do with Eli whatsoever). Everybody and everything "except" Eli got it done.
    Red Dragon likes this.
  3. ChldsPlay

    ChldsPlay Well-Known Member

    6,295 Messages
    396 Likes Received
    Did I say they never came at bad times? Can you tell me when there is a good time? Manning's INT was certainly no better than Romo's. I look at the game as a whole, not in small sample sizes.
    Red Dragon likes this.
  4. KJJ

    KJJ You Have an Axe to Grind

    11,339 Messages
    1,025 Likes Received
    Yes Eli got it done he had over 300 yards passing on the road against a great defense that was knocking him around like a pinball and he had 2 TD's and NO turnovers.
  5. KJJ

    KJJ You Have an Axe to Grind

    11,339 Messages
    1,025 Likes Received
    Dude Manning's int came late in the 3rd quarter how can that be no better than Romo's int that occurred with just over 2 minutes to play deep in Cowboys territory in a tie game? You still have no idea what an "ill-timed" turnover is. :rolleyes:
  6. KJJ

    KJJ You Have an Axe to Grind

    11,339 Messages
    1,025 Likes Received
    It does matter when you turn it over. Manning's turnover came late in the 3rd quarter but Denver had the entire 4th quarter to overcome the points it cost them. The points Romo's turnover cost the Cowboys couldn't be overcome because his turnover came so late in the game Denver was able to take the lead leaving the Cowboys with no time.
  7. Cebrin

    Cebrin Well-Known Member

    808 Messages
    468 Likes Received
  8. KJJ

    KJJ You Have an Axe to Grind

    11,339 Messages
    1,025 Likes Received
    Eli's studded defense ranked 27th in 2011. The Steelers had the #1 defense that season and got shredded by Tim Tebow for over 300 yards in the playoffs. Eli's studded defense had him behind in the final minutes in both SB's he won. There's a reason Eli was named the MVP in both those SB's and it's because when those games were on the line in the final minutes he made a couple of great plays in the most critical situation a QB can be in.

    The ones who are arguing with me claim Romo doesn't choke. :cool: There's not a turnover Romo has ever committed that some won't try and make excuses for or blame on other players. Are you saying Romo doesn't have a choker reputation? Is this something ESPN and others are just making up? There's no evidence to even slightly suggest that Romo chokes in critical situations in spotlighted games?
  9. Risen Star

    Risen Star Likes Collector Zone Supporter

    21,923 Messages
    9,009 Likes Received
    John Elway would have won zero Super Bowls playing for a hands on Jerry.

    Same with Montana, Brady, Aikman....any great QB you can think of.

    Romo should have accepted the Broncos' UDFA offer. He'd have had a better chance at having postseason success.
    Cebrin likes this.
  10. Red Dragon

    Red Dragon Well-Known Member

    4,066 Messages
    726 Likes Received
    I think the important thing was getting a chance to be a starting quarterback, not so much the chances of postseason success. Being a starting quarterback, no matter how good or bad your team, means a great opportunity for fame and millions of dollars.

    Technically, the 3rd-string quarterback on a Super Bowl winning team has a championship ring, but you don't think he'd trade places with a starting QB like Matthew Stafford, who gets paid many millions, in a heartbeat?
  11. Cebrin

    Cebrin Well-Known Member

    808 Messages
    468 Likes Received
    Since 1990, teams ranked 1st or 2nd in scoring defense are 10-2 in the Super Bowl. Both losses (2010 Packers over Steelers, 2004 Patriots over Eagles) came to a team that was also ranked 1st or 2nd in scoring defense. Overall, teams ranked 1st or 2nd in scoring defense are 22-11. 31 of 46 Super Bowl winners had a top 5 scoring defense. 30 Super Bowl winners had a top 5 total defense. - From earlier.

    I'll take those odds over being a team with only one Superbowl (Manning, Rodgers, Brees) . I'd rather be Brady or Aikman with 3. Hell, I'd take either at this point I suppose but, you still have to have SOME sort of D. I'm by no means saying Tony doesn't have some games where he vanishes. It happens to the best of them. I also am aware Tony isn't the best QB in the league. He's still a top 10 QB. A luxury a lot of teams would love to have.
  12. Red Dragon

    Red Dragon Well-Known Member

    4,066 Messages
    726 Likes Received
    Stop arguing with him. Some people don't like facts.
    Cebrin likes this.
  13. Cebrin

    Cebrin Well-Known Member

    808 Messages
    468 Likes Received
    [quote="KJJ, post: 5230554, member: 24819"]Eli's studded defense ranked 27th in 2011. The Steelers had the #1 defense that season and got shredded by Tim Tebow for over 300 yards in the playoffs. Eli's studded defense had him behind in the final minutes in both SB's he won. There's a reason Eli was named the MVP in both those SB's and it's because when those games were on the line in the final minutes he made a couple of great plays in the most critical situation a QB can be in.

    The ones who are arguing with me claim Romo doesn't choke. :cool: There's not a turnover Romo has ever committed that some won't try and make excuses for or blame on other players. Are you saying Romo doesn't have a choker reputation? Is this something ESPN and others are just making up? There's no evidence to even slightly suggest that Romo chokes in critical situations in spotlighted games?[/quote]

    They were plagued with injuries that year I recall as well. Most all of the players came back and they all started gelling at just the right time. Eli's a pretty good QB though. No arguing that. He's sucking the boob this year though, wow.
  14. brooksey1

    brooksey1 Well-Known Member

    1,474 Messages
    482 Likes Received
    Actually he made the right decision. It was 2nd and 16 and that was a 10 yd pass bringing up a manageable 3rd and 6. The 3 yard dump to Murray maybe only gains 5-6 yards. When Romo made his decision, Escobar had a step and was wide open, following that Escobar drifted upfield instead of downfield on a dig and smith was thrown into romo, causing him to trip into his release. Lastly the guy made a hell of a play. That's not a choker. Cursed maybe but not a choker. Watch last night how Eli played... That's a choke job.


    Lastly one thing you fail to realize is in these big moments, Romo is being heavily pressured. At these times we need protection, not jailbreak chaos... That's what I see. Just about everyone of those picks were desperate attempts to make something out of nothing with zero blocking or a bad wr route. Very few are Romo sitting in the pocket with time, throwing high or behind his receiver or just making bad decisions. If u think different post some vids, lets take a look.
    khiladi and Red Dragon like this.
  15. gbrittain

    gbrittain Well-Known Member

    5,095 Messages
    47 Likes Received
    It should not take somewhere between 550 to 580 yards 6 TDs and 0 INTs to win a game. I remember when Aaron Rodgers fumbled in the OT game against the Cardinals before he ever won the Super Bowl and nobody blamed him. As a matter of fact I remember pointing this out and some of the very people on this forum bashing Romo for his latest INT defend Aaron Rodgers because "You cant blame a guy because he was the reason Green Bay was even in the game".

    You can say whatever you want to say and even blame him for the INT as if the OL did not impact his throwing motion, but in the end the defense lost the game. Even after the INT they could have held Peyton to three and out and a FG and Romo would have had another crack it.
    khiladi and Red Dragon like this.
  16. Risen Star

    Risen Star Likes Collector Zone Supporter

    21,923 Messages
    9,009 Likes Received
    I'm trying to understand your point.

    If you have the talent, you're going to start. If you don't, you won't. Romo had the talent. He should have signed to a team without an insane owner. As much as I love this team, I would definitely have chosen another place to play for that reason. I want to win.
  17. brooksey1

    brooksey1 Well-Known Member

    1,474 Messages
    482 Likes Received
    That's because he took it to them the whole game. Every series matters the most in reality. For example if Dallas won last week, Peyton's int would have cost them the momentum of the game, its just as bad with 10 minutes as two minutes.

    You're a typical media bandwagon fan, I'm serious you should root for the Miami dolphins.
    Red Dragon likes this.
  18. ChldsPlay

    ChldsPlay Well-Known Member

    6,295 Messages
    396 Likes Received
    Does this make logical sense to you? So if Romo had thrown his INT in the 3rd and then scored TD's on every subsequent drive but still came up short, the INT wasn't as bad? Games are 60 minuted, not 2, not 5, not 30, but 60 and it is the entirety that matters. All of it comes together as a whole.
  19. Red Dragon

    Red Dragon Well-Known Member

    4,066 Messages
    726 Likes Received
    That's easy for you to say, typing behind a computer.

    If you were an undrafted player, trying to make a name for yourself among hundreds of other football players, knowing that you could be cut at any moment and that you might never get another chance to play in the NFL, you'd pick the opportunity - any opportunity - that gave you more of a chance at job security and career advancement. And for a quarterback, that means signing with a team with mediocre quarterbacking on its roster, rather than signing for a team that has good quarterbacking on the roster.

    You're judging based off of hindsight of a QB (Romo) who now has a secure career, rather than some undrafted player really, really, really trying just to find a place in the super-competitive NFL.
    khiladi likes this.
  20. KJJ

    KJJ You Have an Axe to Grind

    11,339 Messages
    1,025 Likes Received
    Nope, nothing you've posted makes logical sense.

Share This Page