ESPN says TO #3 most indispensable player in the NFL

sago1

Active Member
Messages
7,791
Reaction score
0
We Cowboy fans frequently discuss which player's loss would injury the Cowboys the most. The 5 players most frequently discussed include: TO, Romo, Witten, Newman & Ware. Frankly I'd have TO & Romo in a tie. We gotta have both. But ESPN's pick of TO points out the obvious weakness in our offense TO. It's not that he's just an elite WR, it's also because we've not nothing much in the way of WRs behind him. Yes, Witten is a top TE & Crayton is a pretty good #3, but if TO goes down we've got no #1, #2 or any other viable WR who can even began to get the job done. Our passing attack grinds to a halt because Romo would have to resort to dink and dunk 5 yard passes and invariably we get too many offensive penalties to score too often. Austin must step it up and show he's got the ability to really help our passing game, etc. Now if Glenn can give us 1 more year that would be a big help but Glenn can't carry the load if TO unable to play.

According to ESPN's Chadihi,

Owens is the #3 most indispensable player in the league behind Tom Brady and Peyton Manning. Just a few years ago he was one of the most hated players in the league, ostracized by the media and it was widely publicized that the Eagles would be a much better team without him. As BTB regular doomsday would say, the transformation is complete. After years of being thought of as a locker room cancer it has become painfully obvious how critical he is to the Cowboys' success. If he was healthy at the end of the year in 2007 who knows how things might have gone in January.
Chadiha says that without Owens life gets a whole lot tougher for Romo and Co.
Terrell Owens, WR, Dallas
Say what you will about T.O. and his controversial history, but you have to admit this much: He's the key to that high-powered offense in Dallas. We saw that much when a high ankle sprain made him ineffective in an NFC divisional playoff loss to the New York Giants. When Owens is healthy, he makes life easier on tight end Jason Witten, wide receiver Patrick Crayton and quarterback Tony Romo. When he's off the field, the Cowboys' passing game isn't nearly as scary ... and neither is the rest of that team.
 
Yeah, it would be tough if T.O. were to go down...but, let's all not even think of that.

Think positive thoughts....

;)
 
Funny, just a few weeks ago he was the guy that coaches didn't want.

And while he may not be the best player on the team, Romo is far more indispensable than Owens.




YAKUZA
 
Yeah have to say I would much rather loose TO then Romo. But the point is still valid. Players like Austin do need to step up and be ready should we call on them. To bad that guy can't catch
 
Locker room cancer at #3?

Quick, someone forward this to Skip "the village idiot" Bayless.
 
Yakuza Rich;2154091 said:
Funny, just a few weeks ago he was the guy that coaches didn't want.

And while he may not be the best player on the team, Romo is far more indispensable than Owens.
That's debatable. T.O. is one of the all-time great receivers and still in his prime. Id say we'd have a below average without either of them.
 
Others see this, don't know why we don't. Sure, we lose TO or Romo, it is a disaster, no other way to slice it. Saying we will be fine without either is just an excerise in nothingness.

But no matter how you look at it, they are equal. Romo isn't any more indispensable than TO, especially without a healthy Glenn. TO is just that much better than any other WR we have. You can look at when he was hurt, we were a disaster. Here is something for you, TO is better at his position than Romo is. That isn't saying Romo is bad, he is top 3 or 4, that is saying how good TO is in comparison to his competition, and I'm just tired of us underestimating that here.

Would him going down for us for an extended period of time have the same effect as it did for the Eagles when he left?? Denial would say not, but the answer is probably.
 
Deep_Freeze;2154167 said:
Others see this, don't know why we don't. Sure, we lose TO or Romo, it is a disaster, no other way to slice it. Saying we will be fine without either is just an excerise in nothingness.

But no matter how you look at it, they are equal. Romo isn't any more indispensable than TO, especially without a healthy Glenn. TO is just that much better than any other WR we have. You can look at when he was hurt, we were a disaster. Here is something for you, TO is better at his position than Romo is. That isn't saying Romo is bad, he is top 3 or 4, that is saying how good TO is in comparison to his competition, and I'm just tired of us underestimating that here.

Would him going down for us for an extended period of time have the same effect as it did for the Eagles when he left?? Denial would say not, but the answer is probably.

Agreed completely.
 
Yakuza Rich;2154091 said:
Funny, just a few weeks ago he was the guy that coaches didn't want.

And while he may not be the best player on the team, Romo is far more indispensable than Owens.




YAKUZA

You could say that about Flozell Adams and Jason Witten. Without Witten last year Owens would have been double and triple teamed all the time.

I think one of the main reasons Romo can make that claim is because he only has Brad Johnson behind him. Johnson was just a game manager his whole career, but today he isn't even as good as he was a few years ago. His arm is weaker among other things. That leaves Romo on a raft by himself out at sea as the Cowboys QB.
 
sago1;2154014 said:
We Cowboy fans frequently discuss which player's loss would injury the Cowboys the most. The 5 players most frequently discussed include: TO, Romo, Witten, Newman & Ware. Frankly I'd have TO & Romo in a tie. We gotta have both. But ESPN's pick of TO points out the obvious weakness in our offense TO. It's not that he's just an elite WR, it's also because we've not nothing much in the way of WRs behind him. Yes, Witten is a top TE & Crayton is a pretty good #3, but if TO goes down we've got no #1, #2 or any other viable WR who can even began to get the job done. Our passing attack grinds to a halt because Romo would have to resort to dink and dunk 5 yard passes and invariably we get too many offensive penalties to score too often. Austin must step it up and show he's got the ability to really help our passing game, etc. Now if Glenn can give us 1 more year that would be a big help but Glenn can't carry the load if TO unable to play.

According to ESPN's Chadihi,

Owens is the #3 most indispensable player in the league behind Tom Brady and Peyton Manning. Just a few years ago he was one of the most hated players in the league, ostracized by the media and it was widely publicized that the Eagles would be a much better team without him. As BTB regular doomsday would say, the transformation is complete. After years of being thought of as a locker room cancer it has become painfully obvious how critical he is to the Cowboys' success. If he was healthy at the end of the year in 2007 who knows how things might have gone in January.

Chadiha says that without Owens life gets a whole lot tougher for Romo and Co.
Terrell Owens, WR, Dallas

Say what you will about T.O. and his controversial history, but you have to admit this much: He's the key to that high-powered offense in Dallas. We saw that much when a high ankle sprain made him ineffective in an NFC divisional playoff loss to the New York Giants. When Owens is healthy, he makes life easier on tight end Jason Witten, wide receiver Patrick Crayton and quarterback Tony Romo. When he's off the field, the Cowboys' passing game isn't nearly as scary ... and neither is the rest of that team.​

Adrian Peterson better be in the top 5.....cause he is the Minnesota offense. I hope I get the top pick in the draft this year, cause he will be mine again.
 
TO is somewhat indispensable just because we don't a true #2 WR that can step into the #1 WR position and produce as a #1. Hopefully one day we will resolve that problem.

Our ship only floats because of Romo. With TO, our offense can be dominate but we should be able to survive if he went down. Romo is good at seeing the field and spreading the ball around. Our games will just be alot tighter.

Let's keep our fingers crossed and play ball.
 
The entire list from ESPN goes:

1. Brady
2. Manning
3. Owens
4. Peterson
5. Antonio Gates
6. Haynesworth
7. Westbrook
8. Thomas
9. Hasselbeck
10. E. Manning
 
Deep_Freeze;2154167 said:
Others see this, don't know why we don't. Sure, we lose TO or Romo, it is a disaster, no other way to slice it. Saying we will be fine without either is just an excerise in nothingness.

But no matter how you look at it, they are equal. Romo isn't any more indispensable than TO, especially without a healthy Glenn. TO is just that much better than any other WR we have. You can look at when he was hurt, we were a disaster. Here is something for you, TO is better at his position than Romo is. That isn't saying Romo is bad, he is top 3 or 4, that is saying how good TO is in comparison to his competition, and I'm just tired of us underestimating that here.

Would him going down for us for an extended period of time have the same effect as it did for the Eagles when he left?? Denial would say not, but the answer is probably.

Sorry, have to disagree.

I like TO and he is incredibly important to the success of our team, he has been a great acquisition. But QB is, and always wll be more important than WR, especially when you dont have a quality long term answer (and when I say long term, I mean more than a game or so) as his backup. If Romo goes down in game one and misses the season, we're probably a .500 team at best, and almost assuredly wont make the playoffs. If TO goes down in game one, we're still a playoff team, though maybe not a championship team.

David
 
gazmc_06;2154577 said:
The entire list from ESPN goes:

1. Brady
2. Manning
3. Owens
4. Peterson
5. Antonio Gates
6. Haynesworth
7. Westbrook
8. Thomas
9. Hasselbeck
10. E. Manning

pretty lousy list IMO...I agree with some but disagree on several

David
 
IMO he is the third on our team. 1 Romo 2 Witten(if it wasn't for Witten TO would be so covered it wouldn't be funny) 3 TO:)
 
^TO was covered like that in Philly and still put up numbers, Witten is important but not as important as TO IMO.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
465,920
Messages
13,905,436
Members
23,793
Latest member
Roger33
Back
Top