For The TO Fans... A Highlight Video

[bbgun]

There's nothing like a good old-fashioned Jason Garrett bashing to liven up the day. Say... pass the butter, will ya?

TO's gone, but his skeezy admirers remain. <sigh>

 

[Seven]

TO's gone, but his skeezy admirers remain. <sigh>

In and out of the locker room........... sigh

 

[Seven]

Somewhere, Bleu is curled up in the fetal position, sobbing hysterically.

Oh, BTW -

 

[Doomsday101]

I was more impressed with the throws by Romo than the catches by TO. In none of the highlight clips did TO have to lay out for the catch they were on the money.

 

[CATCH17]

No one is saying they will. No one expects them too. The point is that LF still seems to be able to on more occassions than most recievers in the NFL.

No one with any brains would expect a WR, even Jerry Rice in his prime, to beat double coverage all the time.

Because the players around him were being put in a position to succeed.

Im not blaming everything on Jason.

Im sure this whole thing is somewhere in the middle and not all 1 persons fault.

But when teams DID TAKE Fitzgerald out of the game the Cardinals made them pay by killing them in the flats.

When they finally decided to respect the flats..... Fitzgerald or Boldin for 6.


We never did that. We always kept throwing it into the teeth of the defense.

 

[ScipioCowboy]

"In fact, almost half of Witten's receiving yards for the game came during the last drive." It is the same point. That doesn't mean Witten wasn't targetted... He was in fact targetted about as much as TO. For example, on the first two drives, Witten was targetted at least once. Miles Austin was targetted as well. Owens was targetted twice the first drive, the first play him catching the ball for 7 yards. The second time he was targetted was a fly-pattern on first and ten, with man help on Owens. If anything, that is all on Garrett. On the SECOND DRIVE, TO wasn't targetted at all. Witten was and Miles Austin got his fare share.

Interesting theory. Let's test it.

According to NFL Game Center, Witten was targeted 10 times in the passing game, and snagged 7 passes. Owens was targeted 19 times in the passing game, and caught an identical 7 passes. Owens was also allotted two rushing carries (which would have been far better spent going to Felix Jones).

The final tally is 10 balls for Jason Witten versus 21 balls for Terrell Owens. Witten received less than half as many opportunities as Owens.

Your theory is incorrect: Witten was not targeted "about as much as TO."

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/playb...y_by_play&season=2008&week=REG4&override=true

 

[McCordsville Cowboy]

Because the players around him were being put in a position to succeed.

Im not blaming everything on Jason.

Im sure this whole thing is somewhere in the middle and not all 1 persons fault.

But when teams DID TAKE Fitzgerald out of the game the Cardinals made them pay by killing them in the flats.

When they finally decided to respect the flats..... Fitzgerald or Boldin for 6.


We never did that. We always kept throwing it into the teeth of the defense.

I blame 80% on JG. No creativity and lack of adjustments doomed us.

 

[SultanOfSix]

Once again, you're free to criticize the entire coaching staff for its handling of TO. It's a valid criticism. However, you should also understand this: Every coaching staff for which TO has ever played has had precisely the same set of problems with him, including the Philadelphia Eagles, who are widely regarded as one of the top coaching staffs in the NFL.

I'm more inclined to believe that TO's problems with Phili stemmed from his relationship with his lack of compensation monetarily, and not on the actual use of him in the offense.

TO has been problematic, but the reason he left three different teams was due partly to what can be described as his sometimes abrasive personality but for three different reasons.

 

[ScipioCowboy]

Your argument makes no sense. He caught the ball twice for two big strikes, I believe in the 2nd half. That is the exact opposite of you trying to demonstrate the point, especially in the context of you trying to argue Garrett wanted to appease TO. It is called CATCHING THE PACKERS OFF-GUARD.

Your entire point here can be summarized thusly: The Packers were forced to commit extra defenders to the run game; therefore, Miles Austin's 115 yards receiving and game-clinching TD should simply be attributed to "catching the Packers off-guard."

Silly me. I thought establishing the run, forcing your opponent to bring an eighth defender into the box, and then hitting him deep with play-action were some of the primary goals of football strategy.

But, as it turns out, it's really just "catching your opponent off-guard." In essence, Michael Irvin's entire hall of fame career can be attributed to "catching opponents off-guard" due to Emmit Smith.

And my argument "makes no sense"?

:laugh2:

Miles Austin GOT ALL HIS MINUTES against the Commanders, and he was targetted MORE, meaning THEY TRIED TO UTILIZE HIM MORE. He wasn't just targetted in that final drive, he was targetted multiple times and had plenty of time to make plays. On Dallas WORST offensive possessions, Miles Austin was targetted at least once. Miles Austin got his catches against the Commanders in GARBAGE TIME, and when he was called upon to make play in the 3rd, Romo threw an INT trying to GO TO HIM. What the argument demonstrates is that Garrett CONSISTENTLY HAD TO TRY AND GO BACK to TERRELL OWENS to make the offense MOVE. He RELIED on TO to make plays, because TO could make plays.

But they didn't utilize him as effectively because they were neither patient nor persistent with the run game, largely because they were trying to placate one vociferous and divisive wide receiver.

If the Cowboys are going to be successful on offense next year, they must be able to use all their offensive weapons. Unfortunately, TO was an obstacle to this, hence his departure.

 

[ScipioCowboy]

I'm more inclined to believe that TO's problems with Phili stemmed from his relationship with his lack of compensation monetarily, and not on the actual use of him in the offense.

TO has been problematic, but the reason he left three different teams was due partly to what can be described as his sometimes abrasive personality but for three different reasons.

His stated motivations may have been different in each situation, but the final result has been always the same: He's become a divisive force in every team for which he's ever played, and no coaching staff -- not SF, Philly, or Dallas -- has demonstrated an ability to handle him.

 

[bbgun]

His stated motivations may have been different in each situation, but the final result has been always the same: He's become a divisive force in every team for which he's ever played, and no coaching staff has demonstrated an ability to handle him.

Any money had nothing to do with him publicly stating that he'd rather catch passes from Brett Favre than McNabb. That was the ultimate knife in the back.

 

[ScipioCowboy]

Any money had nothing to do with him publicly stating that he'd rather catch passes from Brett Favre than McNabb. That was the ultimate knife in the back.

I agree.

 

[SultanOfSix]

His stated motivations may have been different in each situation, but the final result has been always the same: He's become a divisive force in every team for which he's ever played, and no coaching staff -- not SF, Philly, or Dallas -- has demonstrated an ability to handle him.

Well, he was ok in the first several years in SF, and he was fine for the first few years in Phili as well as Dallas.

It appears that TO becomes divisive when the teams are losing and there are fundamental problems with the team itself. He seems to be more like a noisy symptom, like pain is when there is something wrong with your body. Taking aspirin may solve the pain for a little while, but it's not going to cure it. Something fundamental must change.

 

[TellerMorrow34]

Mistake... Doesn't change the point... The Commanders controlled the TOP, rendering the situation between Green Bay and Commanders absurd. The Commanders scored 17 points in the second quarter. Dallas only TD came that half like it had all year long, with Tony Romo running the hurry-up. In the 3rd quarter, in which Dallas scored it's second TD, it was a FIVE play drive, and TO was thrown to THREE TIMES, SCORING THE TD. That was the first drive of the half, when a team comes with a plan to attack a defense. So I guess they were trying to force it to him? The play in the 3rd where Tony Romo threw the INT,NOT ONCE did they target TO, and the pass was actually intended for Miles Austin. Barber touched the ball that drive.

They did that TOP because they were running the ball effectively. I have to give you credit there where the play calling was a big part of our issue but so was the fact that our running game, when we did run it, wasn't effective. We still should have been trying it more than we did and certainly not only in 2nd and 3rd and long situations.

I do give Garrett his fair share of the blame. Without a doubt. As well as Wade and Romo. But you seem hell bent on making it seem like it was anyone, and everyone, except Owens that kept him from being effective. Those others are to blame for their parts in that, for certain, but it's not like Owens is this amazing, uncoverable, beast who only has bad games when everyone else screws him.

Because the players around him were being put in a position to succeed.

Im not blaming everything on Jason.

Im sure this whole thing is somewhere in the middle and not all 1 persons fault.

But when teams DID TAKE Fitzgerald out of the game the Cardinals made them pay by killing them in the flats.

When they finally decided to respect the flats..... Fitzgerald or Boldin for 6.


We never did that. We always kept throwing it into the teeth of the defense.

We didn't do that much because we couldn't. Our star receiver, who was a stud playmaker without question, would sulk, piss, moan, cry, and whine after any game when he didn't get enough touches or get to be the man. Even in games where we won he was upset if he wasn't getting enough touches.

TO no doubt wants to win, I believe that, but TO wants to win while being the main focal point of that winning, or he's not satisfied. So it's not like we could gameplan, or run our offense in that way, without worrying about him crying to the media, or pissing and moaning to Deion about how he doesn't get enough chances, or telling everyone that it's not his fault when things don't go right it's because the passes weren't good enough, or the OC didn't use him enough, or someone hated him.

 

[lqmac1]

[youtube]SwpLzNc4gj4[/youtube]

Just for some perspective.

t.o> fitz if both the same age

 

[khiladi]

Actually, the point is fairly self-evident.

Barber received only 8 carries for the entire game against Washington, and the Cowboys had a paltry total of 11 rushing attempts if we count a seven yard scramble by Romo and the two ridiculous hand offs to TO.

Meanwhile, Romo targeted Owens 19 times with the pass -- you can tally the total yourself if you doubt me (http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/playb..._by_play&season=2008&week=REG4&override=true). In my opinion, when one receiver is thrown to more times than the entire team has rushing attempts and that receiver is struggling to get open, the coaching staff is clearly trying to appease him.


Now, let's contrast the offensive approach against Washington with the offensive approach against Green Bay. The Cowboys ran 35 times against the Packers with Barber getting 28 carries. It should be obvious that Garrett was far more persistent with the run against Green Bay than Washington...probably because he wasn't intent on placating one malcontent receiver.

Actually, it isn't self-evident. Your whole argument is predicated on the fact that it was because of TO that Marion Barber got only 8 carries. Your facts ignore many things, among them:1. The Commanders dominated the TOP by over ten minutes in this game, while in Green Bay, Dallas was ahead from the get-go and they could afford to run more.2. You ignore the fact that Miles Austin was targetted way more in this game and played a hefty portion more than he even sniffed on the field at Green Bay.3. Your ignore the fact that Witten was targetted almost as much as TO and in fact Crayton caught the ball seven times, dhowing that Crayton became a primary target in this game.

 

[Joe Realist]

[youtube]F8QujGqvtkU[/youtube]

I thought you could not start T.O. threads in the Cowboys Fan Zone? hmmm.........

 

[khiladi]

Interesting theory. Let's test it.

According to NFL Game Center, Witten was targeted 10 times in the passing game, and snagged 7 passes. Owens was targeted 19 times in the passing game, and caught an identical 7 passes. Owens was also allotted two rushing carries (which would have been far better spent going to Felix Jones).

The final tally is 10 balls for Jason Witten versus 21 balls for Terrell Owens. Witten received less than half as many opportunities as Owens.

Your theory is incorrect: Witten was not targeted &quot;about as much as TO.&quot;


http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/playb...y_by_play&season=2008&week=REG4&override=true

It is obvious who is doing the analysis and who isn't. You keep making a series of assertions that aren't supported by a single shred of evidence. You first made the assertion that Dallas ignored Miles Austin in the Commanders game which was wrong. He was targetted plenty in this game and your IGNORING THIS REALITY. So if this is the case, your argument that they were trying to placate TO and not go to Miles Austin, is without any foundation. You said Dallas ignored Marion Barber to placate Owens, and that was shown to be wrong. Besides the fact that your not counting PASSES to Barber, you ignored the fact that the Commanders totally dominated the TOP, which made Dallas go pass first. Again, you were wrong. You also neglect the fact that CRAYTON CAUGHT THE BALL SEVEN TIMES THIS GAME, along with the fact they went to Miles Austin more often than not. You again, assert they were trying to placate Owens, yet Crayton got one of, if not the highest, amongt of passes all year in this game. You also include a series of passes that were just horrenous play-calls by Garrett in that number as 'targetted' as if it is TOs fault for calling a fade route on 3rd and 10 into double-coverage or it is TOs fault for the pass in the flat by Garrett, when the CB is playing press coverage.

 

[khiladi]

Actually, the Cowboys were down 23-17 during their first drive of the fourth quarter. They targeted Owens with three passes, and promptly went three and out -- which bolsters my entire argument.

It doesn't bolster any argument, because you ignore what I already stated. I was the one that brought the stat in the first place. Is it TOs fault for Garrett calling for a fade route to TO in double-coverage on 3rd in ten? Was it TOs fault for Garrett to be operating out of shot-gun the whole time? These were consistent staples of the Cowboys offense no matter who they were trying to go to. You also ignore the fact that the prior drive, coming out of the half, Dallas went to TO 3 times out of 5, scoring a TD. They used TO effectively in that drive. The reason they went to TO is because TO pretty much got them a TD the very first drive of the second half. The fact that Garrett went stupid and didn't take advanatge of this fact is Garrett's fault. Their offense couldn't get anything going. They tried mixing drives up with Barber, Witten and Miules Austin and it didn't work.You also ignore the fact that in the very next drive, they didn't go to Owens at all, and Romo threw a pick while trying to go to Miles Austin.

 

[khiladi]

What you attribute the lack of runing the ball more is because of trying to placate Owens, has everything to do with the fact that Garrett is impatient because that is how he draws up his plans. When the team is behind, he forces the issue. That is why you consistently see 3 and outs with this guy, because he is always putting the team in 3rd and long, unmanageable downs. Garrett runs a quick-strike offense and if things don't go his wah, he panics. In the very first drive of the second half, when TO caught the ball 3 TIMES for a TD, the two other plays were runs to BARBER. And people act as if TO somehow didn't want to run the ball...