"Win-or-go-home" from a team point of view

[jobberone]

It's funny how objectionable objectivity can be.

Yeah, I see my spelling checker led me into a unintended pun/joke/prod. I like it so I'll just leave it there as a fortunate happenstance.

 

[DejectedFan1996]

Sorry, but this cliche has got to be one of the dumbest in the history of mankind.

People perceived that the Earth was the center of the universe and that the Earth was flat. Did perception make these beliefs true? Many people have a negative opinion about Romo because, just like the flat Earth crowd, they don't have all of the facts or care to even be bothered to dig a bit deeper. Someone once said that the Earth was flat, and everyone ate it up like candy. The same sort of thought process is in play regarding Romo.

How is this for reality: 263 yards rushing, 4TDs. Do you think that if the Cowboys were able to generate even half of Washington's numbers on the ground that Romo would still have thrown three interceptions in that game?

Some will call this an excuse and simply point at the three interceptions. I call it watching the game and understanding WHY that actually happened.

Just because some say Romo is a choker and that belief becomes fashionable to parrot on TV doesn't mean that it's true.

That's not what I meant but again, when it comes to Romo, knee jerk reactions are super common around here.

What I am saying is that in order for Romo to shake this perception which is justified or not, he has to win a SB period. Is that fair? No. Is it reality? Maybe not. But it doesn't matter because that's the perception of him. He's considered a choker, choke artist whatever, you name it. In order for this to not be perceived outside of CowboysZone, he has to win a SB or carry the team deep into the playoffs. Regardless of fair or not, this is what it is.

The fact of the matter is that despite what some on here may say, you care about what the media says about Romo/Cowboys. The reason topics like this even exist is for that very reason. The only way you can see the media and all these other so called "idiots" say the things that you want them to say about Romo is for him to improve his playoff record.

To Percy, what I am trying to say was that in some cases, going 4-12 is better instead of always remaining dead center because 4-12 means "you have to change a lot." 8-8 means "we are right in the middle and we just have to get over the hump." The problem with this way of thinking is that "getting over the hump" is a lot more difficult because you only make a tweek here or there. A major overhaul means more years of 4-12 but the possible outcome of having a new nucleus with 1st/early round talent can lead to something similar to what the 49ers have acheived, which I believe is the youngest team in the NFL. The funny thing about all this is that our record over the past 17 years is mediocre/middle of the pack which the most necessary change can't happen. But that's for another topic.

 

[KJJ]

I do not remember all of Romo's turnovers. I am sure he has contributed some 'ill timed' turnovers by that criteria. Unfortunately, I cannot think of any off the top of my head.

You forgot his final int in the closing minutes vs Washington in week 17 last season with the game on the line? That's the classic example of an "ill-timed" turnover.

 

[jobberone]

That's not what I meant but again, when it comes to Romo, knee jerk reactions are super common around here.

What I am saying is that in order for Romo to shake this perception which is justified or not, he has to win a SB period. Is that fair? No. Is it reality? Maybe not. But it doesn't matter because that's the perception of him. He's considered a choker, choke artist whatever, you name it. In order for this to not be perceived outside of CowboysZone, he has to win a SB or carry the team deep into the playoffs. Regardless of fair or not, this is what it is.

The fact of the matter is that despite what some on here may say, you care about what the media says about Romo/Cowboys. The reason topics like this even exist is for that very reason. The only way you can see the media and all these other so called "idiots" say the things that you want them to say about Romo is for him to improve his playoff record.

To Percy, what I am trying to say was that in some cases, going 4-12 is better instead of always remaining dead center because 4-12 means "you have to change a lot." 8-8 means "we are right in the middle and we just have to get over the hump." The problem with this way of thinking is that "getting over the hump" is a lot more difficult because you only make a tweek here or there. A major overhaul means more years of 4-12 but the possible outcome of having a new nucleus with 1st/early round talent can lead to something similar to what the 49ers have acheived, which I believe is the youngest team in the NFL. The funny thing about all this is that our record over the past 17 years is mediocre/middle of the pack which the most necessary change can't happen. But that's for another topic.

I would look at what changes need to be made to get over the hump rather than just give up without investigating. The offense needs to score 3-7 more points per game and the defense needs to give up 5-8 less. We should be able to score more points IMO. I can point to specific areas but will leave this short.

The defense was crippled last year so I can't imagine it giving up 25 per this year. I won't be surprised to see us get below 20 maybe even the goal of 17.

We just need to stay healthy and make some turnovers for the biggest areas. The informed fan should be able to get into the details or just look at some older threads/posts.

 

[DanteEXT]

You forgot his final int in the closing minutes vs Washington in week 17 last season with the game on the line? That's the classic example of an "ill-timed" turnover.

That turnover still had time to be overcome though. I do not think it fits the criteria. The defense had the stop but an "ill-timed" roughing the passer penalty negated the 3rd down incomplete pass. Otherwise, Dalls would have got the ball back with about 2 and half left. That's enough time to have a chance to drive the field for a TD.

 

[KJJ]

It wasn't a great throw, but it was a great catch.
Hence the moniker.

It was thrown where only Clark could make the catch. It was the only throw Montana had in the face of a rush with the out stretched arms of a 6' 9" Too Tall Jones in his face. Bill Walsh told Montana just prior to the play that if he doesn't get what he wants to simply throw the ball away and it appears that's what Montana was doing but Clark went up and made the catch.

 

[KJJ]

That turnover still had time to be overcome though. I do not think it fits the criteria. The defense had the stop but an "ill-timed" roughing the passer penalty negated the 3rd down incomplete pass. Otherwise, Dalls would have got the ball back with about 2 and half left. That's enough time to have a chance to drive the field for a TD.

That turnover couldn't be overcome it came at the Cowboys 29 yard line with just over 3 minutes to play with the Cowboys down by 3 points. The turnover left the Cowboys struggling INJURED defense having to defend a short field down by 3 points and it resulted in Washington putting the game away with a TD. The Commanders were like sharks in the water tasting blood after Romo's final turnover put them deep in Cowboys territory. You're placing the blame on the defense for a roughing the passer penalty when they were desperately trying to make a stop after being left to defend a short field with time running out.

Romo and the offense had plenty of time to work the ball down the field with 3 1/2 minutes to play and at least get into FG range to tie the game and as usual when facing a do or die situation Romo made a critical mistake at the worst possible time. After Washington scored off Romo's turnover the Cowboys got the ball back with just over a minute to play down by 10 points....game over! Romo's last turnover was about as ill-timed as they get and some of you can't even admit it was an ill-timed turnover. So you honestly believe had the Cowboys got the ball back with 2 minutes to play Romo would have shaken off his 3rd pick and pulled the game out? LOL When the Cowboys got the ball back with a minute to play they couldn't move it.

 

[Dodger]

That's not what I meant but again, when it comes to Romo, knee jerk reactions are super common around here.

What I am saying is that in order for Romo to shake this perception which is justified or not, he has to win a SB period. Is that fair? No. Is it reality? Maybe not. But it doesn't matter because that's the perception of him. He's considered a choker, choke artist whatever, you name it. In order for this to not be perceived outside of CowboysZone, he has to win a SB or carry the team deep into the playoffs. Regardless of fair or not, this is what it is.

The fact of the matter is that despite what some on here may say, you care about what the media says about Romo/Cowboys. The reason topics like this even exist is for that very reason. The only way you can see the media and all these other so called "idiots" say the things that you want them to say about Romo is for him to improve his playoff record.

I'm not disagreeing with what you are saying here except for the part about caring what the media thinks. No, I don't care. I haven't cared in years. However, I think the media is mostly responsible for Romo's choker perception.

Romo has had his share of meltdowns...there is no denying that. However, what puzzles me is this increasingly prevalent mindset of quarterback=team. Everywhere you go...everything you see on TV, people repeat the same thing. Why can't ROMO win in the playoffs? Romo....like there's no one else even on the field. And it's not just Romo. I see it applied to every quarterback that hasn't been to the Super Bowl. Why can't HE get it done? Excuse me? The other 21 players on the field don't matter?

And it's getting worse...every year. Yes, that is the perception, but to be blunt, it's an ignorant perception used by those who don't want to be bothered with the details.

 

[Califan007]

That turnover still had time to be overcome though. I do not think it fits the criteria. The defense had the stop but an "ill-timed" roughing the passer penalty negated the 3rd down incomplete pass. Otherwise, Dalls would have got the ball back with about 2 and half left. That's enough time to have a chance to drive the field for a TD.

Let's say that actually happened...that the defense stopped the Skins and Romo & company got the ball back with 2 1/2 minutes left, down by six...

And let's say Romo throws another INT.

If the Cowboys defense gets the ball back for the offense without surrendering points and Romo and the Cowboys offense now has 1 1/2 minutes to go to score a TD, does that mean neither INT was an ill-timed turnover?

I always thought that "ill-timed" turnovers were turnovers that occurred at some of the worst times of a game...not simply that the turnover ended the game.

 

[KJJ]

That's not what I meant but again, when it comes to Romo, knee jerk reactions are super common around here.

You got that right there's so many knee jerkers on this board it's a wonder any of them can even walk without a brace. The reactions to Romo change from week to week depending on how he plays. Just go back to last season and see the reactions to his play immediately following his performance vs the Steelers in week 15 and compare it to the fan reaction he received immediately following his performance vs Washington in week 17.

 

[DanteEXT]

That turnover couldn't be overcome it came at the Cowboys 29 yard line with just over 3 minutes to play with the Cowboys down by 3 points. The turnover left the Cowboys struggling INJURED defense having to defend a short field down by 3 points and it resulted in Washington putting the game away with a TD. The Commanders were like sharks in the water tasting blood after Romo's final turnover put them deep in Cowboys territory. You're placing the blame on the defense for a roughing the passer penalty when they were desperately trying to make a stop after being left to defend a short field with time running out.

Romo and the offense had plenty of time to work the ball down the field with 3 1/2 minutes to play and at least get into FG range to tie the game and as usual when facing a do or die situation Romo made a critical mistake at the worst possible time. After Washington scored off Romo's turnover the Cowboys got the ball back with just over a minute to play down by 10 points....game over! Romo's last turnover was about as ill-timed as they get and some of you can't even admit it was an ill-timed turnover. So you honestly believe had the Cowboys got the ball back with 2 minutes to play Romo would have shaken off his 3rd pick and pulled the game out? LOL When the Cowboys got the ball back with a minute to play they couldn't move it.

1st off, it would have been just about 2:30 to play not 2:00.

2nd, why are you making excuses for the defense? No matter the score, the time, the situation they are paid to defend. Yes, they were put in a bad spot but had a golden opportunity to force a FG try (which Washington could have missed or got blocked) and Hatcher blew it. The same way I said Romo's last INT was on him due to bad technique, Hatcher screwed the pooch by swatting RG3 in the head for no good reason. Hatcher was just as culpable as Romo for making a mistake late in the game that cost the team. That being said....

3rd, why would I not believe in my team to win the game? I watched the Dallas offense drive the field to come within a finger tip of pulling out a game with only 44 seconds on the clock and no timeouts EVEN AFTER Romo tossed 4 picks in the game already that season. If you don't believe they could have done it with 2:30 on the clock had the situation arose then I see no reason you would logically think they could have done it with 3:30 on the clock.

 

[percyhoward]

To Percy, what I am trying to say was that in some cases, going 4-12 is better instead of always remaining dead center because 4-12 means "you have to change a lot." 8-8 means "we are right in the middle and we just have to get over the hump." The problem with this way of thinking is that "getting over the hump" is a lot more difficult because you only make a tweek here or there. A major overhaul means more years of 4-12 but the possible outcome of having a new nucleus with 1st/early round talent can lead to something similar to what the 49ers have acheived, which I believe is the youngest team in the NFL. The funny thing about all this is that our record over the past 17 years is mediocre/middle of the pack which the most necessary change can't happen. But that's for another topic.

Based on the last dozen years or so, I don't see much reason to like our chances in a "major overhaul" situation. And just in general, you don't scrap it all and go into rebuilding mode when you've already got Romo, Dez, and Witten on your offense. There are too many teams who don't have even one of those. Top 10 each of the last two seasons in scoring -- without a running game, no less.

And even as bad as we've been on defense, we're probably only one healthy year away from being at least average in that department, and with some takeaways, being a pretty good defense.

I appreciate the turn that this thread has taken toward intelligent discussion.

 

[KJJ]

1st off, it would have been just about 2:30 to play not 2:00.

2nd, why are you making excuses for the defense? No matter the score, the time, the situation they are paid to defend. Yes, they were put in a bad spot but had a golden opportunity to force a FG try (which Washington could have missed or got blocked) and Hatcher blew it. The same way I said Romo's last INT was on him due to bad technique, Hatcher screwed the pooch by swatting RG3 in the head for no good reason. Hatcher was just as culpable as Romo for making a mistake late in the game that cost the team. That being said....

3rd, why would I not believe in my team to win the game? I watched the Dallas offense drive the field to come within a finger tip of pulling out a game with only 44 seconds on the clock and no timeouts EVEN AFTER Romo tossed 4 picks in the game already that season. If you don't believe they could have done it with 2:30 on the clock had the situation arose then I see no reason you would logically think they could have done it with 3:30 on the clock.

Okay let's say Romo had 2:30 left down by 6 assuming all Washington got was a FG on that drive. Put your FANDOM aside for a second and be honest do you really believe Romo could have shaken off his 3rd int and drove the team down the field to score what might have been the winning TD? Can you point to one game in his career during a "do or die" game where he was faced with a similar situation and came through? With just over a minute to go in that game he only moved the offense 9 yards in 3 downs. The defense played HORRIBLE in that game but in their defense that unit was riddled with injuries and Romo's 3 turnovers kept putting them back on the field.

They had been brutalized by Washington's running game all night and were not only short manned due to all the injuries but worn down. Forcing a tired injured defense to have to defend a short field due to the 3rd turnover by their QB is a tough position for any defense to be in especially in a win or go home game on the road in front of a hostile crowd. The defense would have been getting a breather on the sidelines had Romo not turn the ball over. The Cowboys offense only had the ball for ONE play prior to the turnover giving the defense little time to rest. That game was lost due to the poor play of both Romo and the defense. Of Alfred Morris's 200 yards rushing 70 of those yards and the TD that sealed the win came after Romo's 3 turnovers.

 

[DanteEXT]

Okay let's say Romo had 2:30 left down by 6 assuming all Washington got was a FG on that drive. Put your FANDOM aside for a second and be honest do you really believe Romo could have shaken off his 3rd int and drove the team down the field to score what might have been the winning TD? Can you point to one game in his career during a "do or die" game where he was faced with a similar situation and came through? With just over a minute to go in that game he only moved the offense 9 yards in 3 downs. The defense played HORRIBLE in that game but in their defense that unit was riddled with injuries and Romo's 3 turnovers kept putting them back on the field.

They had been brutalized by Washington's running game all night and were not only short manned due to all the injuries but worn down. Forcing a tired injured defense to have to defend a short field due to the 3rd turnover by their QB is a tough position for any defense to be in especially in a win or go home game on the road in front of a hostile crowd. The defense would have been getting a breather on the sidelines had Romo not turn the ball over. The Cowboys offense only had the ball for ONE play prior to the turnover giving the defense little time to rest. That game was lost due to the poor play of both Romo and the defense. Of Alfred Morris's 200 yards rushing 70 of those yards and the TD that sealed the win came after Romo's 3 turnovers.

I REALLY believe he could have done so. No, I cannot point to a single "do or die" game. The sample size is rather small. You are talking about 7.2% of his games played. He has done it in the other 92.8% of his games played. That is why I believe he can whenever the scenario arises, whether it's opening day or the Superbowl. It has nothing to do with "FANDOM" and more to do with not being a negative nelly with a half empty cup all the time (that is not directed at you).

Yes the tired, injured defense was put in a bad spot after the INT and yet ten men still rose to the occasion only to have it cut out from underneath them by a stupid penalty. A penalty that had no affect on the outcome of the play. 10 guys on that defense sucked it up and did what they had to do. One did not. Your response leaves me with the impression you believe the penalty was excusable. Just because Romo's INT forced the defense to have to defend a short field in a win or go home game on the road?

Romo's INT shut the coffin door but their was still a chance for the team to kick it open and scream "I'M STILL ALIVE!" Hatcher said "**** that" and grabbed his hammer and nails.

 

[5Stars]

Yes the tired, injured defense was put in a bad spot after the INT and yet ten men still rose to the occasion only to have it cut out from underneath them by a stupid penalty. A penalty that had no affect on the outcome of the play. 10 guys on that defense sucked it up and did what they had to do. One did not. Your response leaves me with the impression you believe the penalty was excusable. Just because Romo's INT forced the defense to have to defend a short field in a win or go home game on the road?

Romo's INT shut the coffin door but their was still a chance for the team to kick it open and scream "I'M STILL ALIVE!" Hatcher said "**** that" and grabbed his hammer and nails.

lmao...that was good, bro!

 

[ufcrules1]

Romo was given plenty of chances in the Washington game and sank the team. Look at his 2 games before the win or go home game.. he played outstanding football.. threw for over 750 yards, ZERO interceptions, and 6 td's. Why did he all the sudden choke against the 30th ranked passing defense of the Commanders?

 

[KJJ]

I REALLY believe he could have done so. No, I cannot point to a single "do or die" game. The sample size is rather small. You are talking about 7.2% of his games played. He has done it in the other 92.8% of his games played. That is why I believe he can whenever the scenario arises, whether it's opening day or the Superbowl. It has nothing to do with "FANDOM" and more to do with not being a negative nelly with a half empty cup all the time (that is not directed at you).

This discussion is about Romo's win or go home games those are the ones that have mattered the most and have garnered him the most criticism. His reputation has been built on those games because those are the games in which QB's earn their stripes and build their legacy. It's his performances in those small percentage of games that's caused many to have the negative perception they have of him. Sure he's come through in a high percentage of his other games (regular season) which is why he gets dumped on for not being able to come through when the games are down to do or die. An opening day game isn't do or die you have 15 games left.

How many "do or die" games did Joe Montana have the opportunity to pull out in the final minutes? Most QB's have a rather small sample size in that situation. Romo has been in 7 do or die games and in 3 of them had an opportunity to possibly win the game in the final minutes but one of those drives ended with a fumbled snap on a FG attempt and 2 others were stopped with int's. Before anyone comes screaming I'm not faulting Romo for the int vs the Giants in the 07 playoffs on the Cowboys last ditch drive. He was in a desperation situation and had no choice but to force a throw into the end zone but he did have the opportunity to win the game on that drive.

Yes the tired, injured defense was put in a bad spot after the INT and yet ten men still rose to the occasion only to have it cut out from underneath them by a stupid penalty. A penalty that had no affect on the outcome of the play. 10 guys on that defense sucked it up and did what they had to do. One did not. Your response leaves me with the impression you believe the penalty was excusable. Just because Romo's INT forced the defense to have to defend a short field in a win or go home game on the road?

Your previous response left the impression you were putting it all on the defense. The defense and Romo lost that game agree or disagree? I don't excuse any penalty but the defense wouldn't have been on the field had Romo not turned the ball over.

Romo's INT shut the coffin door but their was still a chance for the team to kick it open and scream "I'M STILL ALIVE!" Hatcher said "**** that" and grabbed his hammer and nails.

Had that scenario played out the Cowboys 2012 team video would have been titled Return of the Living Dead.

 

[dstovall5]

Romo's INT shut the coffin door but their was still a chance for the team to kick it open and scream "I'M STILL ALIVE!" Hatcher said "**** that" and grabbed his hammer and nails.

Dang you! You just made be spit out my water , I was just casually scrolling down and seen that hilarious post.

 

[KJJ]

To have an intelligent discussion about the Cowboys you have to take off your FAN caps, be honest and come to grips with the issues that have been holding the team back the last 3 seasons.

 

[DanteEXT]

Dang you! You just made be spit out my water , I was just casually scrolling down and seen that hilarious post.

You're welcome!