Garrett Throws Romo under the bus

[Kevinicus]

There was no reason to checkdown...Escobar was open. Good call on Romo's part.

 

[ConstantReboot]

"Tony Romo's interception heard around the world never should have been thrown, according to Dallas Cowboys coach Jason Garett Speaking to reporters Monday, Garrett said Romo should have checked the ball down to running back Demarco Murray rather than try to squeeze it to tight end Gavin Escobar. After the game, which can be seen again at 9 p.m. ET Wednesday on NFL Network, Romo said he didn't put the ball where he wanted. But Garrett is right that the decision, not the accuracy, was the bigger problem. Of course, the defense was by far biggest issue on a day when the Cowboys gave up 51 points. Romo played fantastic overall although you wouldn't know it reading articles after the game"


LOL, Heres a clue sherlock. RUN THE BALL on first and 10? I cant believe this guy has the audacity to call out Romo. Am i the only one who believes we shouldnt have even been throwing in that situation?

If Garrett had any decency he would have taken the blame for what happen. He knew that Denver went into a zone. When the announcers stated that they went with 6 DBs most head coaches would have at least called a time out and maybe change the play. But no. Garrett does nothing at all during crunch time. He would rather just watch and see what happens rather take a proactive approach and run the ball, or design a play that is safe. Garrett did nothing. Thus Romo threw the INT.

Garrett is much to blame for the game as Romo. His the headcoach and can make changes to make sure things don't collapse during crunchtime. Sometimes the prevention is better than the cure.

 

[65fastback2plus2]

Way to throw your QB under the bus. Coughin did the same today with Eli.

theres a different in throwing 5 TD's and 5 INT's

LOL

 

[Miller]

Garrett would have been awesome running the ball more in a game where we scored 48 points? Crazy. The folks who are anti-Garrett can take any conceivable scenario and make it about the coach. I grant you that anti-Romo people can do the same with Romo. Why can't we call Sunday's game for what it was. I said it before. When you score 48 points you should win. Period. This past Sunday was about one thing at the end of the day. A 51 point surrender is putrid no matter who you are playing.

This is about a trend, not putting one game on Garrett. Our winning percentage is great when Murray runs 18 + times. You are playing a high powered offense where a shootout is tough to win and where having your QB have a full game on his shoulders can fail. I like Romo but don't love him. He is great for the line we have, etc. It is a matter of what your identity is going to be. I don't think scoring 48 and losing is something to be proud of and game plan for. We scored 48 because we HAD to. We knew we would have issues on D. How is that so hard to see. We lost almost every game last year where Romo had to throw a large amount and carry us and we scored in all of those. Do you see the trend now? If you want to just say the D failed I respect that but all off season all I heard was that Garrett had balls and brought in his D guy, not Jerry. If that's true then isn't that on Garrett too?

 

[rcaldw]

This is about a trend, not putting one game on Garrett. Our winning percentage is great when Murray runs 18 + times. You are playing a high powered offense where a shootout is tough to win and where having your QB have a full game on his shoulders can fail. I like Romo but don't love him. He is great for the line we have, etc. It is a matter of what your identity is going to be. I don't think scoring 48 and losing is something to be proud of and game plan for. We scored 48 because we HAD to. We knew we would have issues on D. How is that so hard to see. We lost almost every game last year where Romo had to throw a large amount and carry us and we scored in all of those. Do you see the trend now? If you want to just say the D failed I respect that but all off season all I heard was that Garrett had balls and brought in his D guy, not Jerry. If that's true then isn't that on Garrett too?

First of all, I hope Garrett brought in his own defense guy. I hope the head coach is getting to hire his staff. But I don't know what you were hearing this off season because that is NOT what I was hearing reported. What I was hearing reported was how Garrett had been emasculated. Jerry was large and in charge. Which is true? I have no idea.

 

[Deep_South]

After watching today's press conference, I can say with complete confidence RHG didn't throw Romo under the bus. At one point - responding to a direct question - he said Romo "probably" should have checked down to DeMarco, but repeated what he said earlier, that those decisions have to be made very quickly. He went on to say Romo has probably thrown that pass 250 times in his career. His delivery was matter-of-fact, not judgmental, IMO. He said later Tony would like to have that one back, and that's one thing we all can agree on.

The problem with picks is they all look bad, no matter who throws them. Peyton Manning looks no better than anyone else when he threw his pick. As a matter of fact, his throw wasn't even close to the receiver. Why did he throw it while being pressured? The same reason Romo threw his: He thought he could complete it, and things didn't work out.

 

[Bleu Star]

LOL, Heres a clue sherlock. RUN THE BALL on first and 10? I cant believe this guy has the audacity to call out Romo. Am i the only one who believes we shouldnt have even been throwing in that situation?

Nope.

 

[dart]

that was the safest play IMO

Escobar was covered

no brainer

he DID NOT THROW HIM UNDER THE BUS

that is what a good QB does how many bad decisions do we see him make

NICE TRY THO

 

[Kevinicus]

that was the safest play IMO

Escobar was covered

no brainer

he DID NOT THROW HIM UNDER THE BUS

that is what a good QB does how many bad decisions do we see him make

NICE TRY THO

He was open, not covered.

 

[Bleu Star]

Garrett is a clown for going there. How about setting the tone with a run play???

 

[dart]

He was open, not covered.

to me he covered - not open like Murray was

 

[jobberone]

I get why people say we should have run, but that feels like hindsight to me. We had been going up and down the field on them with the passing game to almost no resistance. If we run and gain nothing, everyone is yelling at Garrett for "not trusting" Tony in the game of his career.

and believe me, I am no Jason Garrett fan

I 'liked' this post and I agree with it. I do think the most important thing for Garrett to do there is to not lose the game while you're on that side of the field. You needed to run the clock down and either kick a FG to win, score a TD late in the game, or win it in OT if you can get the ball first. But first you don't give the game away. So I'd have been tempted to try running the ball there. But the other side of that coin is Romo was lighting it up with the passing game in a way never seen. Romo just has to not throw an INT there and that's on Romo. Whether Garrett/Callahan calls a running play or passing play, Romo has to protect the ball.

One ohhh **** wipes out 100 attaboys.

 

[Zekeats]

Bottom line is he buckles under pressure. On the first down play he TOOK a sack for a 6 yard loss, then he pressed to make up for the yardage and threw a pick. It's funny how a lot of people will sit there and say that Romo was under pressure the whole game too, but the truth is he holds onto the ball WAY TOO LONG. More than half of those sacks were on Tony, not the offensive line who blocked for 4+ seconds on most of the sacks.

 

[TNCowboy]

There was no reason to checkdown...Escobar was open. Good call on Romo's part.

No, he wasn't. NFLN had a breakdown of the play and Romo had almost no window to throw the ball in, not to mention a ref standing directly in his way. It was an ill advised throw that a veteran QB cannot make in that situation.

 

[Picksix]

You guys kill me. First, you blast Garrett repeatedly for not calling guys out in public, like Parcells did. Then, when you perceive that he did by taking him completely out of context, you rip him for (supposedly) calling someone out.

 

[Picksix]

No, he wasn't. NFLN had a breakdown of the play and Romo had almost no window to throw the ball in, not to mention a ref standing directly in his way. It was an ill advised throw that a veteran QB cannot make in that situation.

Well, you have to take NFLN with a grain of salt, especially when it comes to Romo. It was a tight window, and personally I thought he should have checked to Murray, but he had fitting it into tight windows all day. If he's able to step into the throw, and get it up high, he's got it. QB's complete passes like that all the time.

 

[Cebrin]

should have ran it on 1st down. the red headed genius was calling plays as if we were down two scores.

Leave us souless gingers alone!

 

[Idgit]

I'm not saying the offense is responsible. The name of this thread is "Garrett throws Romo under the bus." My point is, you know what you are getting with Romo. You know if he throws 45-50 times a game then you are getting a brain fart with it. Garrett should worry about limiting what he has to do to win a game. A track meet with the Broncos almost got you a win. ALMOST. Last season showed that throwing more doesn't equal wins. Plain and simple. Garrett should be looking in the mirror. There isn't an analyst out there that doesn't think the same. The defense has sucked for 2 weeks but we knew we weren't stopping Manning. If y'alls point is that we should throw 45-50 a game because we could score 48, well then expect failure. Romo was awesome. Garrett not so much. What is new. He shouldn't be throwing stones at Romo.

This is such an alien take to me, I hardly know how to respond to it. Last year showed you're not getting above 500 with a -13 turnover differential and a bottom-10 passing defense. It didn't show anything one way or another about passing more and winning. Passing more *effectively,*, yes.

It's beyond reason for me that anyone would criticize either Jason Garrett or Tony Romo for yesterdays game. Not beyond my expectation, mind you. Just beyond reason. Misguided thread topic notwithstanding, the reason we lost the game yesterday was that we could not effectively stop the Bronco passing offense at any point in the game. It really is not any more complicated than that.

 

[tico]

After watching today's press conference, I can say with complete confidence RHG didn't throw Romo under the bus. At one point - responding to a direct question - he said Romo "probably" should have checked down to DeMarco, but repeated what he said earlier, that those decisions have to be made very quickly. He went on to say Romo has probably thrown that pass 250 times in his career. His delivery was matter-of-fact, not judgmental, IMO. He said later Tony would like to have that one back, and that's one thing we all can agree on.

The problem with picks is they all look bad, no matter who throws them. Peyton Manning looks no better than anyone else when he threw his pick. As a matter of fact, his throw wasn't even close to the receiver. Why did he throw it while being pressured? The same reason Romo threw his: He thought he could complete it, and things didn't work out.

Because that ''shell of his former self'' D.Ware caused that pressure on Peyton & yes should of not of been thrown.

 

[DallasDomination]

People hating on Jason Garrett. Like he's not doing everything he can to win games. He shouldn't of said what he said per say, but damn when people find a scapegoat around here they get waaaaaay to over the top.