Crayton didn't 'QUIT" on that route!

[hendog]

First off - I'm not the biggest Crayton apologist or anything.

Anybody that really follows NFL football knows that on any and every given play the WR's have several different routes that they run based on the defensive alignment and coverage.

Manning and Harrison do it best these days.

Crayton doesn't know if him and Romo are on the same page. He pulls up and looks back because he's not sure if Romo expects him to break off his route or keep heading to the corner.

We all know the result.

Crayton didn't quit on the route he just simply wasn't sure of the pattern Romo expected him to run based on the coverage.

That's not uncommon when you have an unexperienced QB throwing to an unexperienced #2 WR.

 

[theogt]

What's the difference? Either way he screwed up.

 

[adamknite]

He clearly has the man covering him beat.... what does he think Romo is going to throw when they need a TD?

Was Cryaton going to run a curl, taking him right back into the man he just got a step on? Is he gonna slant towards the guy who then would be in a perfect position to break up the pass?

I love Crayton too, but anybody would know to go towards the back of the endzone in that situation, it's comman sense when you play a reciever position. That way, Crayton is the only person on that field who could make a play on the ball if Romo put the right touch on it (which he did).

 

[Hostile]

Earlier this year there was an article where Crayton admitted that he did. He even went so far as to say someone close to him asking him why he let up had a profound effect on him.

 

[hendog]

He clearly has the man covering him beat.... what does he think Romo is going to throw when they need a TD?

Was Cryaton going to run a curl, taking him right back into the man he just got a step on? Is he gonna slant towards the guy who then would be in a perfect position to break up the pass?

I love Crayton too, but anybody would know to go towards the back of the endzone in that situation, it's comman sense when you play a reciever position.

I don't "love" Crayton. I know he screwed up but I don't think that he quit on the play. I just think he made a mistake. At the worst possible time.

 

[notherbob]

Explaining why he quit on a route doesn't mean he didn't quit on it. Even so, I can forgive that but the junior high trash talk was idiotic.

 

[Spectre]

All players make mistakes like these regularly. No one can be perfect all the time. His mistake just occurred at the worst possible time.

The real focus should be the fact that we should have never put ourselves in a position where one blown pass play would mean the difference between winning or losing to an inferior Giants team.

As far as Crayton goes, he's an above average #3 WR but I lost all respect for him when he started running his mouth instead of just playing football.

 

[Danny White]

Ladies and gentlemen, I'm just an unfrozen caveman lawyer.

I fell on some ice and later got thawed out by some of your scientists.

I don't understand complicated things like "routes" or "coverages" or "assignments." My primitive mind can't grasp these concepts.

But there is one thing I do know. If Patrick Crayton would have kept running, we'd have had a touchdown and won the game.

 

[Cajuncowboy]

How many months ago was this?????

Man, let it go and hope he learned from it.

I hope he has the best year of his career this year.

 

[speedkilz88]

First off - I'm not the biggest Crayton apologist or anything.

Anybody that really follows NFL football knows that on any and every given play the WR's have several different routes that they run based on the defensive alignment and coverage.

Manning and Harrison do it best these days.

Crayton doesn't know if him and Romo are on the same page. He pulls up and looks back because he's not sure if Romo expects him to break off his route or keep heading to the corner.

We all know the result.

Crayton didn't quit on the route he just simply wasn't sure of the pattern Romo expected him to run based on the coverage.

That's not uncommon when you have an unexperienced QB throwing to an unexperienced #2 WR.

Once you make a read you have to follow it through. Pulling up because of indecision is called quitting on the route.

 

[CanadianCowboysFan]

He eased up, that is obvious and it might have cost us a TD, but his drop in the third quarter was arguably as big a play.

 

[nathanlt]

Ladies and gentlemen, I'm just an unfrozen caveman lawyer.

I fell on some ice and later got thawed out by some of your scientists.

I don't understand complicated things like "routes" or "coverages" or "assignments." My primitive mind can't grasp these concepts.

But there is one thing I do know. If Patrick Crayton would have kept running, we'd have had a touchdown and won the game.

Ok, that was TRULY funny. You rehashed that very well, I will be laughing for a couple of days about this one.

 

[theebs]

First off - I'm not the biggest Crayton apologist or anything.

Anybody that really follows NFL football knows that on any and every given play the WR's have several different routes that they run based on the defensive alignment and coverage.

Manning and Harrison do it best these days.

Crayton doesn't know if him and Romo are on the same page. He pulls up and looks back because he's not sure if Romo expects him to break off his route or keep heading to the corner.

We all know the result.

Crayton didn't quit on the route he just simply wasn't sure of the pattern Romo expected him to run based on the coverage.

That's not uncommon when you have an unexperienced QB throwing to an unexperienced #2 WR.

the misread is on crayton. Not on romo. There was no safety. Crayton told michael irvin on his radio show that it was a dig route that was called with just enough to get a first down, but when there was no safety help it becomes a go route and crayton screwed it up.

Romo read it correctly and threw it perfectly, crayton hesitated slowed down and then couldnt catch up.

I like crayton, but that is on him 100%. To say anything else is incorrect, especially when he said it himself.

 

[FLASH]

Ladies and gentlemen, I'm just an unfrozen caveman lawyer.

I fell on some ice and later got thawed out by some of your scientists.

I don't understand complicated things like "routes" or "coverages" or "assignments." My primitive mind can't grasp these concepts.

But there is one thing I do know. If Patrick Crayton would have kept running, we'd have had a touchdown and won the game.

I don't care who you are, thats funny

 

[Seven]

Thanks alot pal. Just getting over that one. I picked a bad week to stop sniffin' glue..............

 

[iceberg]

First off - I'm not the biggest Crayton apologist or anything.

Anybody that really follows NFL football knows that on any and every given play the WR's have several different routes that they run based on the defensive alignment and coverage.

Manning and Harrison do it best these days.

Crayton doesn't know if him and Romo are on the same page. He pulls up and looks back because he's not sure if Romo expects him to break off his route or keep heading to the corner.

We all know the result.

Crayton didn't quit on the route he just simply wasn't sure of the pattern Romo expected him to run based on the coverage.

That's not uncommon when you have an unexperienced QB throwing to an unexperienced #2 WR.

well that fixes everything.

except that it's "inexperienced".

 

[DaBoys4Life]

First off - I'm not the biggest Crayton apologist or anything.

Anybody that really follows NFL football knows that on any and every given play the WR's have several different routes that they run based on the defensive alignment and coverage.

Manning and Harrison do it best these days.

Crayton doesn't know if him and Romo are on the same page. He pulls up and looks back because he's not sure if Romo expects him to break off his route or keep heading to the corner.

We all know the result.

Crayton didn't quit on the route he just simply wasn't sure of the pattern Romo expected him to run based on the coverage.

That's not uncommon when you have an unexperienced QB throwing to an unexperienced #2 WR.

Romo been thrown to Crayton for the past 4 season. I think they have some experience with each other.

 

[kristie]

Ladies and gentlemen, I'm just an unfrozen caveman lawyer.

I fell on some ice and later got thawed out by some of your scientists.

I don't understand complicated things like "routes" or "coverages" or "assignments." My primitive mind can't grasp these concepts.

But there is one thing I do know. If Patrick Crayton would have kept running, we'd have had a touchdown and won the game.

 

[DR.WARE]

What's the difference? Either way he screwed up.

EXACTLY.

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

First off - I'm not the biggest Crayton apologist or anything.

Anybody that really follows NFL football knows that on any and every given play the WR's have several different routes that they run based on the defensive alignment and coverage.

Manning and Harrison do it best these days.

Crayton doesn't know if him and Romo are on the same page. He pulls up and looks back because he's not sure if Romo expects him to break off his route or keep heading to the corner.

We all know the result.

Crayton didn't quit on the route he just simply wasn't sure of the pattern Romo expected him to run based on the coverage.

That's not uncommon when you have an unexperienced QB throwing to an unexperienced #2 WR.

No excuses.
He is human and he screwed up. Ok its over.

But... he needed to get into the endzone... it was the place to be.... he needed to run to it and run through it... he didnt.