Twitter: Dez documentary on the Cowboys 2014 season

[The Natural]

all time great play (throw + catch), robbed by bozo refs.

 

[fansince68]

Here's a better one. Same play, but with a happy ending (... that's what Robert Kraft said).

Thanks man....

 

[Praxit]

Just hang onto the ball moron.

....if that's all he did, it would have been 1st N goal. We probably score after.

 

[CT Dal Fan]

The 2014 season was Tony Romo's best- and last- chance at a Super Bowl. Had the Cowboys won at Green Bay they would have faced the Seahawks in the NFC Championship; a team they already defeated in Seattle earlier that season.

The loss still haunts me. That Cowboys team was on a hot streak (five wins in a row). And if you watch the entire game again, they outplayed Green Bay on their home turf. A forgotten play in that game was a DeMarco Murray fumble on a long run that would have at least set Dallas up in the redzone. That and the Dez non-catch means the Cowboys should have had 35 points on the board and won easily instead of losing 26-21.

 

[MarcusRock]

If you watch the replay from the angle where Dez and the defender are coming at the camera, the knee of Dez collides with the defender's leg.

The subsequent going to the ground then requires Dez hang onto the ball when it touches the ground. The ball moved - clearly shown in the video - thus he did not control the ball to the ground.

This site has argued against the rules since the play happened. This site has been wrong. I hated the results, but the truth is this was not a catch. You cannot argue the continuation because he got feet down. Those two steps were broken down as this. First step begins the football move. Second step is the collision, sending Dez toward the ground. His push-off to the endzone does not negate the continuation rule. Once continuation was in play, the ball hitting the ground and moving out of his cradled arm and control makes this not a catch.

It is there on the video.

What the? Am I in bizarro CowboysZone?

 

[MarcusRock]

The 2014 season was Tony Romo's best- and last- chance at a Super Bowl. Had the Cowboys won at Green Bay they would have faced the Seahawks in the NFC Championship; a team they already defeated in Seattle earlier that season.

The loss still haunts me. That Cowboys team was on a hot streak (five wins in a row). And if you watch the entire game again, they outplayed Green Bay on their home turf. A forgotten play in that game was a DeMarco Murray fumble on a long run that would have at least set Dallas up in the redzone. That and the Dez non-catch means the Cowboys should have had 35 points on the board and won easily instead of losing 26-21.

Forgotten play? People never cease to mention that play. What they forget is that we were only up 14-10 at that point and there was 11:00 to go in the 3rd. GB got a FG from it to cut it to 14-13. We would later go up 21-13 so it wasn't all that terrible. On the play itself, it's doubtful Murray would have scored with the safety in center field.

 

[TwoDeep3]

What the? Am I in bizarro CowboysZone?

No, you are in the part of the Zone where using the video, and breaking down each element, it proves this blustering about being a catch is blind homerism.

 

[Oz-of-Cowboy-Country]

There was a second gunman and Dez caught it. That's all I have to say.

 

[loublue22]

he only fumbled because he had control of the ball and reached for the goal line, the rule was written in a stupid way and it screwed us. we had the best team.

 

[DandyDon52]

Forgotten play? People never cease to mention that play. What they forget is that we were only up 14-10 at that point and there was 11:00 to go in the 3rd. GB got a FG from it to cut it to 14-13. We would later go up 21-13 so it wasn't all that terrible. On the play itself, it's doubtful Murray would have scored with the safety in center field.

yes and this pic also shows martin about to fall on his face lol which allows pepper to get to murray from behind.
Martin was supposed to block the old man peppers, but fell down in trying feebly.
I think at most murray could have run 20 yds to the 40, and no telling what happens then.
Also JG called a timeout when witten caught a pass for a first down, but it clearly wasnt a 1st down,and JG's
TO allowed refs time to look at the play in booth. That made it 4th down,and not sure if that is what led to the catch play
or in earlier drive.
Dallas player coaches, made too many mistakes to win that game. But that was the last really good dallas team.

 

[buybuydandavis]

The absurd NFL catch rule deemed it an incompletion, I was definitely upset by it but I'm over it now.

Even by the rule at the time it was a catch. Three steps and an arm. Plenty of "football move".

 

[buybuydandavis]

Dez caught it for sure. What’s not for sure is believing that avg Dallas defense could have stopped Aaron Rodgers with 4 min left on the clock. Assuming we score a TD there, it’s 28-26. All Rodgers has to do is get them in position for a FG. Wish we could have seen that play out. Maybe we win- but it was no guarantee.

That was the way I felt at the time. Once Tony *let go* of the ball, I thought we were toast, catch or no catch. Either we don't get it and lose, or we get it and leave way too much time on the clock for keep GB from scoring. I'm looking at the clock and wanting them to play for the last score.

I felt a similar thing, but the opposite, when Tony muffed the fg against the Seahawks. Once we lined up for a FG, I thought we were toast. The Seahawks would throw at The Biscuit until they were in fg position, run out the clock, and trot out The Kicking Mule for the win. When Tony muffed it, I had hope. A little help from Grammatica and we win that game. But not.

Year after year, giving the ball back to Rodgers with time on the clock. Garrett never learned.

 

[buybuydandavis]

7 years later......catch or no catch? Looking back, that game/loss stayed with me for a while. There was no doubt in my mind, beat the Packers, we're going to the Super Bowl. Still believe it.......

Glory days, they'll pass you by ...

 

[Aviano90]

Here is a link to another thread where the Dez catch - no catch debate was beaten to death. Maybe read this instead of typing out the same arguments since nobody is changing their minds.

https://cowboyszone.com/threads/mccarthy-says-dez-didn’t-catch-it.451005/

 

[MarcusRock]

Even by the rule at the time it was a catch. Three steps and an arm. Plenty of "football move".

3 steps wasn't even in the rules then, which is why it wasn't a catch. 3 steps is in the rules now which would make it a catch today.

 

[MarcusRock]

Here is a link to another thread where the Dez catch - no catch debate was beaten to death. Maybe read this instead of typing out the same arguments since nobody is changing their minds.

https://cowboyszone.com/threads/mccarthy-says-dez-didn’t-catch-it.451005/

Thanks! I was wonderful in that thread. Lol.

 

[bigdnlaca]

Whether it was a catch or no catch, it was a great play.

With that said, the Cowboys deserved to lose the game because Cowboys had their chances and couldn’t capitalize before and after the “catch”.

The GB fumble on a kickoff that could have extended Dallas’ lead if they have recovered, the Murray fumble, and the fact that defense couldn’t stop Rodgers in the 3rd and early 4th quarter were the reasons Cowboys were losing going into that possession.

Then when they ruled incomplete, GB went conservative for the first time in the 2nd half and the Cowboys still couldn’t stop them.

Don’t know why some fans think the refs blown call was the only reason why the Cowboys lost, when the defense couldn’t stop a “drain the clock” offense from getting first downs. If the Cowboys couldn’t stop Rodgers while being conservative, then the Cowboys wouldn’t have stopped GB from scoring if the Cowboys took the lead after the catch.

 

[Hawkeye0202]

BTW.......has anyone asked McCarthy if Dez caught it since he became our HC? (lol)

 

[Cowboy4ever]

Okay, Tinfoil. Here is where you did exactly what I said as you quoted my post. You don't know the rule. At that time, 3 steps was nowhere in the rule nor did it matter because once the Going to the Ground" rule was applied, none of that other catch stuff matters, except if he executed a proper lunge, and he has to maintain possession of the ball thru contacting the ground while the ball also doesn't touch the ground. If you also paid attention to what Steratore and the rest said about the overturn, they said that upon replay they clearly saw the ball touch the ground before it came loose and was repossessed, meaning it wasn't ruled it had touched by the ref. The ref on the field was shielded from seeing the ball touch the ground which is clearly seen on the below reverse angle picture. Replay had this too because I took this from my own video. Again, replay did its job.

And football move is a judgement call, just like applying the going to the ground rule. If people don't deem a lunge "enough" of one then it didn't meet the judgement standard and wasn't one. Same with holding or PI or roughing the passer. It's clear that was not like a proper lunge where someone is able to gather themselves and leap (which replay folks also said), especially since Dez' 3rd step was a slip on the turf. He was going down the entire time and he didn't execute a lunge to break that momentum so it's one motion and you gotta keep the ball off the ground and maintain possession. He didn't. This ain't rocket science unless you HAVE to see it the other way to get what you want. Life's not like that though. Either deal with reality or live in safe fantasyland. I choose the former.

The call on the field was a catch. There had to be clear and overwhelming evidence of a wrong call to overturn it. People disagreeing on what a lunge is or what if that was enough of a football move, etc is not clear and overwhelming evidence, its a subjective application of a rule, which is not how it is meant to be done. If the ruling on the field was a no catch, then I would be arguing the same thing, not enough evidence to overturn the call on the field. It's pretty simple really. There was possession, there were steps, there was the changing the ball from one hand to the other and there was a dive for the end zone. The Ref on the field thought all that was enough to satisfy the rule and thus he ruled it a catch. For Dean B to to use his own personal definition of what he considers a football move to over rule a ref on the field was just wrong. It was the wrong call then and it would be the wrong call now. The fact that they have had to change the rule about 50 times since 2014 tells me they got it wrong. But it doesn't matter, you will believe what you believe and I will believe what I believe. And if you think that call in Detroit had no bearing on the call in GB, then I have some ocean front property in AZ for you to buy. I know it shouldn't but after all the heat they took, they were not ruling in favor of Dallas on any close calls in GB, they just happened to pick a play that wasn't really all that close and that is why 6-7 years later people are still talking about it. It was a disgraceful call and act by the NFL.

 

[Cowboyny]

7 years later......catch or no catch? Looking back, that game/loss stayed with me for a while. There was no doubt in my mind, beat the Packers, we're going to the Super Bowl. Still believe it.......

Our defense was still not going to stop Rodgers. I actually think Murray's fumble was the bigger play why we lost that game.