Greg Cosell: Romo's Two Interceptions

[percyhoward]

I've defended Romo on many occasions when I thought the WR had stiffed him. Both of those picks sure looked to be on Tony, to me. The first pick, I give him a *little* slack on, because he was avoiding a viscous rush, but even then, that was still a poor throw.

Beasley: “I just saw the corner and throttled down in the hole. I don’t have the option to do that on that play,” Beasley said. “I should have kept going. I felt it. I have a good feel for holes and I felt a little hole right there but on that play I can’t really read it like that. I just have to keep going. On other plays I can do that but on that one I couldn’t. If I would have kept running, he would have hit me right in stride.”

It was 2nd-and-1, and they needed the first down and stop the clock rather than maximize the yardage gained. Situational awareness. Ironically, the same thing that made the first INT Romo's fault.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

Really great writeup by Cosell because he explains everything going into his conclusions. With play analysis, there is a lot of interpretation involved and it helps the reader if the writer can explain everything that is going on and why they came up with the interpretation.

I think the Romo apologists have sour grapes because here's an unbiased look that says Romo was to blame and provides excellent evidence.

I think Beasley said that there was no option on that play because he's trying to take the heat off of Romo screwing up. From the get-go, I cannot see how Beasley could have screwed up given the coverage and Cosell backs it up quite well. I just think that this organization needs to stop trying to excuse the blame from Romo. There's no need to fingerpoint, but going out of your way to blame anybody but Romo sets a poor precedent and is counterproductive.





YR

 

[percyhoward]

I cannot see how Beasley could have screwed up given the coverage and Cosell backs it up quite well.

It's easy. You want the first down near the sideline in that situation, not the extra 5-10 yards inside.

 

[kramskoi]

It's Friday...and there's a new game on Sunday against the Commanders. I really hope the team has moved on more than the media and the fans.


How many more writeups,/threads/opinions do we really need about a game that we can't turn back the clock on?

Mr. Woody...obviously we need them up the wazoo ad nauseam until we as fans get the message that our quarterback is a choker, our defense is Division II, Jerry Jones is a meddling, michievous misfit, and Jason Garrett can't read the hands on a clock, let alone the numbers on a scoreboard. Maybe before all the stars burn out we will get the point!

 

[kramskoi]

I've defended Romo on many occasions when I thought the WR had stiffed him. Both of those picks sure looked to be on Tony, to me. The first pick, I give him a *little* slack on, because he was avoiding a viscous rush, but even then, that was still a poor throw.

That was the turning point, the one to Austin. He should have just eaten it because Matthews obviously did not do what he was supposed to do ... or he was left to do what pleased him. It was an avalanche after that and not unlike the game against New York in 2011, where they squandered a 12 point lead with barely over 5 minutes left in the game. It is clear that we can no longer give Romo and his scowls the benefit of the doubt. Got no problem with that at all.

 

[theebs]

That was the turning point, the one to Austin. He should have just eaten it because Matthews obviously did not do what he was supposed to do ... or he was left to do what pleased him. It was an avalanche after that and not unlike the game against New York in 2011, where they squandered a 12 point lead with barely over 5 minutes left in the game. It is clear that we can no longer give Romo and his scowls the benefit of the doubt. Got no problem with that at all.

The turning point was the pathetic showing by the defense to start the 3rd qtr. If they get off the field there its not the same game.

they made a couple of big plays and scored quick changing the entire game. That was the big one.

 

[Beast_from_East]

It's Friday...and there's a new game on Sunday against the Commanders. I really hope the team has moved on more than the media and the fans.


How many more writeups,/threads/opinions do we really need about a game that we can't turn back the clock on?

Hard to move on from one of the biggest collapses in franchise history, especially when the head coach played a significant role in that collapse due to "inexcusable game management" as Aikman said.

And for the cherry on top............440-1................we are the only team in NFL history to lose a game with a 23 point halftime lead and scoring at least 36 points overall...............440 other teams managed to win except us, primarily because of our head coach. You dont just sweep that under the rug.

When the head coach, not the players on the field, is the main reason you lose a game that nobody else in NFL history has ever lost and it quite possibly will cost you a division title...................that is a fireable offense..........24 hr rule doesnt apply here.

 

[percyhoward]

People still in doubt about the second INT need to think of why Beasley would have stopped his route just to catch the ball, and then started running again in the direction his route would have taken him anyway. He wouldn't have. There's no reason to stop unless you're planning on changing direction, i.e. turning it up field. If the plan is to get the first down and stop the clock, the last thing you would do is sit down and give the defenders time to get to you in bounds.

This is why Beasley says three times he doesn't have the option to stop on that play. That route, yes. Not when the route is run in that situation (2nd and 1, trailing, own side of the field, one timeout).

 

[johnson2]

percy is right, beasley should have kept running, whether the corner was sitting or not its an easy easy pitch and catch for the first down. romo knows if the corner goes with the wr beasley will have room to turn up the sideline, if the corner sits it will still be an easy safe first down giving beasley a chance to make a guy miss or get out of bounds. right read IMO

 

[Kevinicus]

It's not rocket science, and certainly not worth an article.

1st INT - Bad throw. Romo's fault. Should have sealed the game despite the defender.

2nd INT - Poorly ran *situational* route. Fine decision and throw by Tony.

Any questions?

 

[Idgit]

..It was 2nd-and-1, and they needed the first down and stop the clock rather than maximize the yardage gained. Situational awareness. Ironically, the same thing that made the first INT Romo's fault.

I'd read that quote, but actually skimmed over the last part of it b/c I'd already decided in my head that Beasley was just taking some heat off of Romo, but in the context of the game situation, yeah, i can buy Romo expecting him to go for the first down there.

 

[nalam]

I still can't understand why we didn't run the ball in the 2nd and one situation, first of all the refs didn't mark beastly down correctly, most of the times I have seen the crossing of marker like that is counted as first down. In any case it was a half a yard , either we can run the ball get 1st down and then spike or take the time out . We can work the the sideline for next 4 throws about 1:30 left in the clock , we needed a field goal only. Just the previous possession ended in a interception , so why the heck we throw in 2nd and one situation?

 

[Deep_South]

Really great writeup by Cosell because he explains everything going into his conclusions. With play analysis, there is a lot of interpretation involved and it helps the reader if the writer can explain everything that is going on and why they came up with the interpretation.

I think the Romo apologists have sour grapes because here's an unbiased look that says Romo was to blame and provides excellent evidence.

I think Beasley said that there was no option on that play because he's trying to take the heat off of Romo screwing up. From the get-go, I cannot see how Beasley could have screwed up given the coverage and Cosell backs it up quite well. I just think that this organization needs to stop trying to excuse the blame from Romo. There's no need to fingerpoint, but going out of your way to blame anybody but Romo sets a poor precedent and is counterproductive.





YR

I think it is more likely that those saying the 2nd pick was on Romo are just wrong. They won't let it drop despite a quote from the receiver on the play saying he blew it. This gets very tiresome - quoting an excellent source and having someone say the source is lying to protect the naysayer's own position. The article above is just one more person who didn't know what play was called and couldn't possibly know what Beasley was supposed to do. He says he knows from his years of experience that Beasley was apparently supposed to pull up on the route, which would mean catching the ball out on the field and getting tackled immediately, probably forcing the Cowboys to use their last time out with 3rd down coming up and a long way to go.

They didn't want to end up in that position, so they didn't call a play that would put them there. If Beasley is covered, throw it over his head and you still have two more plays to get the yard and the first down and get out of bounds.

 

[dupree89]

percy is right, beasley should have kept running

then the question needs to be asked...This was in game # 14. Why are we having players not understanding what they are supposed to do on a given play?
Is it dumb players?
Players not focused?
Bad coaching?

 

[Tusan_Homichi]

then the question needs to be asked...This was in game # 14. Why are we having players not understanding what they are supposed to do on a given play?
Is it dumb players?
Players not focused?
Bad coaching?

We've had problems with this on offense for the last few years. It's been LESS of an issue this year, but it's still an issue. I blame the coaching.

 

[beevomav]

This Cosell guy got his opinion from watching so many games, but he could have listened to the two people involved in the play. Romo and Beasley both said the route called for him to continue toward the sideline, not sit down. Cosell seems to be just another writer who. when in doubt, puts the blame on Romo.

 

[Kevinicus]

We've had problems with this on offense for the last few years. It's been LESS of an issue this year, but it's still an issue. I blame the coaching.

Yep, for as easy as it is for our opponents to figure the offense out, it has been just as difficult for our own guys to catch on. Nothing screams poor coaching more than that.

 

[zack]

Jesus Christ.

This is the main story on yahoo.com

why are they not breaking down brees horrible game? or mannings?

This is the main story on a news site? A crappy team loses and going after one guy is a national story? Why not go after eli manning then?

When the seahawks, saints and broncos get knocked out in a few weeks I hope they get this same treatment. I cant wait till seattle loses at home in the playoffs and continues the trend of the number 1 seed blowing it.

but for gods sake there is absolutely no reason for this to be the main story on yahoo.com....what a joke. Its like he threw an interception to lose the superbowl....

I am with babe at this point, I wish witten would ask for a trade and romo to. I would love to watch romo and witten go somewhere like Cleveland and win a superbowl.

up yours yahoo.

I thought the same thing as well. How come there isn't a lead story outlining how an ELite QB in the largest Media City has thrown for 25 ints, 5 last games!

 

[Oh_Canada]

Romo has no defense. Thankfully some people know enough not to blame his wr's every time the guy makes a dumb mistake.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

It's easy. You want the first down near the sideline in that situation, not the extra 5-10 yards inside.

Not when the DB is on the outside. Like Cosell said, Beasley read it correctly, Romo did not.




YR